Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Olon, Nov 6, 2019.
It might make it more accurate with a tighter frame/slide fit
Or a CH-47...
And not to mention tighter barrel to frame lock up.
But I love my Glocks capable of 2" groups at 25 yards.
I was being somewhat sarcastic but on the same token you never know!
Or a panhead Harley....or a shovelhead Harley....or a Harley Evolution......etc., etc., etc.
I understand the primary function, but I prefer some level of aesthetic in something if at all possible. A Glock (rhymes with block for a reason) just was clearly defined by function only with no regard to form IMHO.
Have you checked prices in NOLA lately?....LOL
My Shovel doesn't leak oil, it marks its spot like any male dawg. Or hawg.
Deuce and a quarter?
So your'e saying your tools look like crap too?
I never got that statement. Because the Glock is a tool (which every defensive pistol is, BTW) then it's OK for it to have a random manufacturing defect that some people notice.
You may view it as a tool that is OK to abuse and ignore visual defects on, but not everyone thinks that way.
It's not a tool, it's a $500 device that most of us trust our life with, so it damn well better be perfect and 100% in every way.
Glocks look better to me than a lot of the pistols with odd angles and weird contours and “grip zone” on them. None of which serve any purpose at all.
Why do people spend so much money on one of the more expensive polymer striker fired pistols on the market, and then complain about and try to alter/change the looks, gaps, flex, trigger, sights, grip texture, trigger undercut, plastic guide rod, ejector, so on and so forth instead of just buying something else...
I also don't know why someone would go through so much trouble over the appearance of a Glock or other polymer pistols. They aren't BBQ guns, they're already ugly compares to steel framed pistols, no one really cares how they look, and they're going to spend most their lives in a safe, in a holster, or otherwise concealed out of sight... Seems like something really silly to obsess over, but hey, it's not my gun.
Guess it works so good that the only things people can obsess over on it are the “silly things.”
For that matter, you could say admiring any gun for the aesthetic qualities is awfully silly. Doesn’t really add much to it’s effectiveness but I bet you’d say it still matters.
Not to offend your sensibilities, but I like the way my glock is supposed to look and I guess I don’t see the issue with wanting to preserve that.
Don't ever get a Chevy van.
From most accounts, it's normal and is the way it is supposed to look through. Like I said though and to state the obvious, it's your gun to do with as you please. If you wanted something aesthetically pleasing, you choose the wrong platform IMHO.
lol now I’m just confused
You're not alone, Olon.
Isn’t plastic wonderful. It isn’t made to last forever guys. Shoot it as long as it lasts.
Okay so tell me does my vintage Glock 17 Gen.1 have this "pig nose" you all are talking about...or not? After shooting it all these years I never even noticed this particular anomaly let alone seen any problem with it, at least in relation to how the gun functions.
why yes, yes it does...
We talking about $1,000,000 guns? $100,000+ figure guns? $10,000 dollar guns or 500 dollar production crap?
They all work as indended.
We're talking about talking about a dime a dozen, $500, mass produced, every one has one, not a collectable, not going to appreciate in value, ugly, utilitarian, production gun that does the job it's indented to do of which isn't to look pretty... Actually, most gun nuts find the finish wear and imperfections of a well used pistol makes the it that much more attractive.
I do find myself admiring and salivating over 1911s, CZs, Beretta's, etc. Polymer pistols, not so much.
I'm not sure I see it either or know what they are referring to. Anyone have a side by side comparison between the two?
My HKs are pretty. Just saying.
So your telling us you only own P7's M13's etc.
Separate names with a comma.