Glock Carbine

[MachIVshooter]

Okay, Sigmas, Keltek P11s, Ruger P85s, etc. All are significantly less than a new Glock.

Well, the P-11 isn't in the same class anyway, so let's omit that one.

P85 is a good gun, but I don't care for them. So-so ergoniomics, uglier than the Glock.

Nothing wrong with the Sigma, except it doesn't come in 10mm or .45 Auto.

That said, the Sigma is S&W's ecomonmy line, and they omit some features that are found on the XD or M&P to keep the cost down. They're plenty reliable, acceptably accurate, and actually fit the hand pretty well. If I wanted a 9mm poly gun, I wouldn't overlook the Sigma as a potential. But I'd still more likely buy the M&P, as I feel the extra features it offers at the +$200 price point are worth it.

If I were presently shopping for a plastic fantastic, the guns I'd look to would be the M&P, XD, FNP, HK45 and G21. Right off the bat, I'd omit the XD because I don't care for the high bore axis or the LCI. Then I'd nix the G21 because I prefer the grip angle of the others. Next off the list would be the HK45, because it doesn't do anything the others don't except cost more. So I'd be down to the FNP45 and M&P 45, and then just deciding whether I wanted a hammer or not.

Hopefully you can see through that example why HK's don't proliferate more. They price themselves right out of the market. Nothing wrong with the guns, it's jus that most folks aren't willing to pay that much for a name.

HK has earned a reputation for to hell and back reliability and durability. The only other pistol company with such a reputation is Glock and some Sigs. That's not to say others don't have the ability to perform under adverse conditions but the reputations have not been earned. Does this matter for a range gun, civilian CC gun or even LE gun? No, probably not. Its highly unlikely a civilian will carry his gun through mud and salt water just before needing it to fire. Some of us simply like having top of the line and the assurance that comes with it.

That's the same circular argument I always hear, but it's just not quantifiable. In point of fact, I seem to remember a G21 torture test that an HK USP was included in and failed miserably:

http://theprepared.com/content/view/90//administrator/

By the way, I'm no Glock fanboy. I only own the G20 so I can have a 10mm in the woods that I don't care about scratching up. My 1006 is a better gun, but it's a very clean specimen of an out of production gun, so I'd rather not trash it.

The other thing i find interesting is that people who love to complain about HKs pricing never object to prices of the more expensive 1911s which will never be as reliable as quite a few modern designs.

Ah, yes, the 1911 comparison. This one is nothing more than a failure to understand what people are paying for with the 1911. For starters, the way they're built dictates higher material and labor costs. But more importantly, you have your choice from $400 up with 1911s. Sometimes you're paying extra for enhancement and sometimes, like with HK, you're paying for a name. I'd no sooner buy a Nighthawk over a Colt than I would an HK over an M&P. There's plenty of elitism in the 1911 world, no argument there. But comparing 1911 pricing to HK pricing is apples to softballs. Only HK makes HK, while 1911's are made by more than 50 different companies and the pricing runs all the way up and down the spectrum.

 

[tech30528]

The SUB2000 in Glock 9mm is an interesting option, and relatively cheap. What I like about it is it is only 4 pounds, and with the 16" barrel muzzle velocities put that 9mm round in the .357 mag neighborhood. But it seems the SUB2000 was really built more as a readily "customizable" (you know, like buying a Harley and bolting all the same crap on it everybody else does ) platform that is more of a toy than a servicible weapon. But if you already have a Glock, this is interesting. Unfortunately it will not work with subcompacts (which means mine :banghead

http://www.mechtechsys.com/glock.php

 

[Motownfire]

I think it's due to be released on the same day as the Glock 1911 and revolver.

When is the Glock 1911 due to be released ??? I would love to purchase one.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Glock has essentially offered one design since it has existed. Adding a rail here or bigger mag release there doesn't cost quite as much as designing a completely new weapon like HK does on a regular basis.

Must be why the MK23 cost near 2 grand for the lifetime that it was made and it wasn't changed one bit! What about the USP? Why does that cost around $900 still despite being unchanged and been around since 1994? Why did it cost and still cost more then many other guns that are in the same level that came out at around the same time?

 

[greenlion]

Glock carbines, Mermaids, Unicorns... Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence..

 

[JustinJ]

Next off the list would be the HK45, because it doesn't do anything the others don't except cost more. So I'd be down to the FNP45 and M&P 45, and then just deciding whether I wanted a hammer or not.

Again, for the way you will probably use it won't likely do much different but that doesn't mean its not superior. If this doesn't clear up for you what sets HK apart then there ain't much more to say: http://pistol-training.com/archives/category/range-reports/hk45

Ah, yes, the 1911 comparison. This one is nothing more than a failure to understand what people are paying for with the 1911. For starters, the way they're built dictates higher material and labor costs.

DING DING DING! Now if you can only realize that principle applies to other guns as well.

Only HK makes HK, while 1911's are made by more than 50 different companies and the pricing runs all the way up and down the spectrum.

Thats backwards logic. Because there are competing makers of the same model the prices are higher? No, it doesnt work that way. And unlike companies making a 1911, HK actually designs guns instead of repeating a design over 100 years old. Not to mention your original, but misguided, arguement was the HK does nothing gun X doesnt. Ironic you fail to apply that to 1911 pricing given the expensive 1911s tend to be just as finicky and not durable as the cheaper ones if not more so.

Quote:
HK has earned a reputation for to hell and back reliability and durability. The only other pistol company with such a reputation is Glock and some Sigs. That's not to say others don't have the ability to perform under adverse conditions but the reputations have not been earned. Does this matter for a range gun, civilian CC gun or even LE gun? No, probably not. Its highly unlikely a civilian will carry his gun through mud and salt water just before needing it to fire. Some of us simply like having top of the line and the assurance that comes with it.

That's the same circular argument I always hear, but it's just not quantifiable. In point of fact, I seem to remember a G21 torture test that an HK USP was included in and failed miserably:

How exactly do my statements qualify as a circular arguement?

Must be why the MK23 cost near 2 grand for the lifetime that it was made and it wasn't changed one bit! What about the USP? Why does that cost around $900 still despite being unchanged and been around since 1994? Why did it cost and still cost more then many other guns that are in the same level that came out at around the same time?

Price is ultimately a function of demand so either they sell better than you realize or cost too much to make for them to lower the price to sell more.

I hate to dissapoint but all gun makers are out to make as much profit as possible. Given the reputation the USP has earned and its long history of useage by special forces around the world it commands a high price. However, the gun must have been doing something right to be selected by so many in the first place. Its a proven design.

 

[451 Detonics]

Considering how tough the Keltecs are to find right now I would say there must be a market. I have a Mech Tech with a dedicated Glock lower and it serves very well as a house/car carbine. In an urban environment the PCCs do very well and especially for civilians they make a lot of sense.

Would I consider buying a Glock Carbine? I am sure I would but sadly the decision makers in Austria do not understand the US market or the US shooter. That is what I was told by 2 of Glocks reps at a GSSF match. The guys in Austria just don't understand how much the American recreational shooter loves to play at the range. The told me many have asked for a 38 Super or 9X23 Glock for competition but the bosses don't believe it would sell. Same for the carbine for civilians.

 

[nipprdog]

the rumor I heard made it sound like a carbine that just excepted glock clips?

Happy with mine;



Added Troy fixed sights, and Magpul VFG.

They now come with threaded barells. I recently added an A2 flash hider, mostly for looks.

 

[greenlion]

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Going back to the original topic. I would imagine that any carbine made by Glock as this point would be a 5.56 chambered rifle using STANAG magazines.

Price is ultimately a function of demand so either they sell better than you realize or cost too much to make for them to lower the price to sell more.

It costs Glock $80 in materials to make a handgun, parts in the USP I'm assuming all drop in like a Glock so it's just assembly. Where do they get the extra $400? It doesn't cost that much for QC compared to a Glock. Up until the Gen 4 which just had teething problems but is fine now, Glocks haven't had issues.

I hate to dissapoint but all gun makers are out to make as much profit as possible.

They must be doing something wrong if I rarely see an HK in gunshops that are well stocked or even at the range. Can't be making too much profit if they rarely sell.

Given the reputation the USP has earned and its long history of useage by special forces around the world it commands a high price. However, the gun must have been doing something right to be selected by so many in the first place. Its a proven design

.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_&_Koch_USP#Users
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock#Users

Not as much as the less expensive Glock.

 

[dubya450]

+1 machIVshooter

Anyone who hasnt shot a FN fnp-45 oughtta do so. I have 7 glocks, an m&p, and the fnp45, IMHO, is the best pistol of all tupperware I've owned and listed
Just thought I'd throw that out there since I seen someone refer to it. Try it out, I bet you'll like it!

 

[Kiln]

Yeah I've shot and examined H&K pistols before and I don't see enough of a quality difference over other polymer guns on the market to justify a $400 price hike. Other companies deliver an equal product for less so I don't personally see why anyone would buy one.

The reason they sell for so much? It is kind of like the Volkswagon, fancy German engineering just costs more...nobody knows why but it just does.

 

[JustinJ]

It costs Glock $80 in materials to make a handgun, parts in the USP I'm assuming all drop in like a Glock so it's just assembly. Where do they get the extra $400? It doesn't cost that much for QC compared to a Glock. Up until the Gen 4 which just had teething problems but is fine now, Glocks haven't had issues.

Do you have a reference for the $80 dollar price point? I would have thought i much less for both guns. The cost of making any product entails far more than metal and plastic. There is facilities fees, utilities, machine bits, parts and maintenance, operators, QC, sells, taxes, patent attorneys, QC, RD, etc, etc, etc.

HK, like any manufacturer that makes more than one gun, uses the revenue from each product to run their entire business. So as i've explained, HK does extensive RD and funds for such come from sells of all their products. Regardless of how long the USP has been on the market those costs remain. If a company, like Glock, makes essentially one thing with minimal RD they need only to recoup the costs of the next so called generation. Also, QC can vary widely. The more different models a company has the more it will cost. Doing a HP/MIP test on each AR bolt and barrel is obviously far more expensive than doing one sample per batch.

They must be doing something wrong if I rarely see an HK in gunshops that are well stocked or even at the range. Can't be making too much profit if they rarely sell.

So what is your contention? That HK could make more money by selling their products for less money but they just choose not to out of spite? Or that you know more about their business model than they do? There area lot of high end ARs i've never seen at the range yet their makers somehow manage to make money. HK has tremendous international and LE sales which is what their primary focus is on.

 

[nipprdog]

It costs Glock $80 in materials to make a handgun

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

Going back to the original topic. I would imagine that any carbine made by Glock as this point would be a 5.56 chambered rifle using STANAG magazines.

Finally. Thank You!

The reason why pistol caliber carbines aren't generating law enforcement sales is because law enforcement has gone to 5.56/.223

 

[Carl N. Brown]

The pistol caliber semi-auto carbines I have seen selling have either been Hi-Points or semi-auto replicas of historically interesting SMGs (Thompsons and Sterlings mainly).

Pistol caliber semi-auto carbines a just a small niche market.

 

[M1key]

Y'all realize how many puppies are being killed while you discuss this topic? Strictly verboten on Glocktalk. Shame, shame...

repent

M

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

nipprdog, how about expanding on what I said in how it's wrong instead of excessively using emoticons? Materials don't cost a whole lot to buy when they are raw. Labor to turn those material into parts and assemble them into guns is what adds extra cost.

 

[greyling22]

I would have figured it cost glock more like $15 in actual materials to make a gun. Add to that that the R&D, factory and machinery costs should be long since paid for (I mean, they haven't really changed the gun in 25 years) and they don't really advertise, and I'm left with a $400+ markup on the gun. ok, so they probably have legal fees and operating costs etc, but the glock cost could easily be cut in half and still sell at a large profit. I guess they just sell it for what people will pay for it.
At that point, I guess ya'll should just be glad they haven't slashed prices and that there is room in the market for other pistols. I just can't see the XD or M&P coming to market freshly designed and high priced if they were competing with a $250 glock.

 

[Boomie]

Isn't this thread supposed to be about PCC carbines? Is it cool to go off on this tangent then?

Anyhoo, the largest cost for almost any company is people. Why the USP (which is just another short recoil Browning action style pistol) costs as much as the P7 it replaced (which required massive hand fitting and special machining) - I'll never know. Personally, since I'm not a super secret Navy SEAL I prefer the P7.

R&D isn't only for cutting edge designs. Every new Glock model would require R&D to make sure the tolerances were safe and to do testing and evaluation. Even for things as simple as a new caliber people are needed to set up the CNC machines and what-not.

So one reason HKs are so expensive is because German workers cost more than American ones. There are also importation costs. There is also the exchange rate (what finally killed the P7). The fact Glock hits the price point they do is pretty impressive.

Personally I get why people liked the P7. It is a fantastic pistol. I had a USP and was not sad to see it go. It was top heavy (even compared to my polymer SIG) with a mediocre trigger and an overly large grip. It was no more reliable or accurate than my Glock or Sig. It was clunky and a PITA to carry.

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

HK's cost more because you have to pay for their product placement in video games so teenagers can think owning a HK makes you a special ninja seal operator.

As to the OP's comment there are a couple SBR stock kits out there which will let you put a stock on your g17. If I could find one with a good check weld I'd go for it.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

As to the OP's comment there are a couple SBR stock kits out there which will let you put a stock on your g17. If I could find one with a good check weld I'd go for it.

Get a Long slide Glock like a G34 or G35. Maybe even a G17L.

So one reason HKs are so expensive is because German workers cost more than American ones.

The HK45 is made 200 yards from where I work in good ole America yet costs around a grand. Their American made AR rifles cost around 3 grand and are also made in New Hampshire.

 

[JustinJ]

R&D isn't only for cutting edge designs. Every new Glock model would require R&D to make sure the tolerances were safe and to do testing and evaluation. Even for things as simple as a new caliber people are needed to set up the CNC machines and what-not.

Yes, altering a model to accept different calibers involves RD and associated expesnes. However, the cost of altering an existing gun to take a different caliber or to shorten the slide and barrel length is minimal compared to designing an entirely new weapon or something like caseless ammo.

There is a glock conversion to make it fire the same round, 7.92, as the VBR PDW. The VBR also takes the same mags as the Glock 17. The VBR is however a PDW as opposed to a carbine.

 

[MachIVshooter]

minimal compared to designing an entirely new weapon or something like caseless ammo.

So you're OK with paying for the development of weapons & ammunition you can never own?

Don't you feel that pinch enough when you pay your taxes?

Why don't they generate the funds for development of military and LE weapons from military and LE sales, instead of fleecing the citizen buyer by convincing him their gun is worth more than any other in it's class?

 

[JustinJ]

Why don't they generate the funds for development of military and LE weapons from military and LE sales, instead of fleecing the citizen buyer by convincing him their gun is worth more than any other in it's class?

If they're fleecing the american consumer then they've been fleecing militiaries all over the world for a long time. The expenses they pay in RD result in high quality weapons which is why those of us who can are willing to will pay a higher cost for them. Not to mention the RD HK did to design the UMP benefited me as i now own a near identical copy in semi auto form.

Really though it just cracks me up to hear people who defend exorbitant fees for 1911s , a 101 year old design, complain about the cost of an HK firearm.