Glocks not as reliable as once thought.???

[wwace]

I bought a gen 4 G35 a few months ago. I think it is cheap and ugly. The grip is about as thick as a business card and easily bent. I hate the huge gaping hole behind the magwell. The snout pushes up so hard on the slide in front I had to boil it and bend it away from the slide. I called Glock customer service and they said I could send it in but what I got back would probably be the same. Just my experience.

 

[Tcruse]

There is not much to be gained by yet one more person saying that "Mine GEN4 17 is great", but mine is.
The early GEN4 problems did exist and have be resolved. The number of guns actually affected is a matter of debate, Glock official reports are very small, if you look at the fuss on the forums there were more broken ones than manufactured. My opinion is that Glock has shown that it will stand behind and fix any problems.

Glock sales are not just based on price but on performance. People that call a GLOCK cheap are correct in that the total cost of owner ship is probably much lower than its competitors. Mainly because service is needed less often and parts/upgrades are available at reasonable prices. Now, the street price for Glock vs M&P are about the same. Used M&Ps are priced lower than Used Glocks. Ruger SR series are a bit lower than Glock. Springfield XDm are priced higher but I do not really think of them as in the same market, XDm is more of a "got to have every feature possible, even if it does not add value" game.

Glocks are NOT CHEAP in terms of workmanship or performance. If you want a "work" gun that you can depend on, get a GLOCK. If you want a "brag to my friends" type of gun, get something else. Something that Tommy Lee Jones character said in the US Marshals movie comes to mind.

 

[Loosenock]

Gents your comments are very appreciated and just what I wanted to read.

Here is what I'm looking at. I have located what is know as a early Gen 3 G17, unfired, 2 mags, without box, mag loader and manual for $375.

Being on a retirement pension I dont classify Glocks as being cheap. At one time Baikal Makarovs were cheap. I paid $115 for mine. They are not cheap anymore but there still the same pistol.

I'll use the Glock for an open carry range gun, informal shooting, plinking and camp loafing. I'll be feeding it a commercially loaded standard pressure ammo diet. If I need a CCW it will probably be my Makarov.

I'll buy the Glock this morning, I enjoy reading your comments, you can keep the discussion going.

Thanks again

'loose

 

[alaskanativeson]

Good luck, it sounds like a good deal. Post some pics of it. Range pics would be great.

A Glock 17 was the first new pistol I bought (I had bought a few used ones that don't count - Bernardelli, Jennings, etc.) This was 1989. It was a great gun, never gave me a bit of trouble. Since then I've had a 19, a 20, a 21, a 22, a 30, and a 34. (I like to go through guns and try them out - and I usually make a profit on them when I get rid of them.) I haven't had a Glock I didn't like. No, they didn't have great triggers (although the 34 was close to great) but that was the only complaint I could have. The ergonomics were great for me with all but the Gen 1 model 20. I do have short fingers. My model 21 was the SF model and it fit fine. If I had a Glock for my protection gun I'd feel very well protected. Every bit as good as I do with my XD Tactical 45 I currently have.

The best trigger I've ever had on a pistol was a poly framed gun. It was my HK USP Tactical 45. Better than my Smiths. Better than my Browning. Better than my Springfield 1911. That's really the only gun I regret letting go of.

 

[miles1]

Glocks, like ANY machine WILL fail from time to time, especially if neglected or due to other user error.

Get past the idea of "perfection" because perfection is NOT mass produced as mass production calls for a certian amount of compromise, to speed the production process.

If you want a Glock, buy one.

Agree %10000000000.

 

[jmr40]

Kept reasonably clean and well maintained and most any pistol will be reliable enough for most intended purposes. Glocks biggest advantage is their ability to take much more abuse than any other gun and still keep functioning. CZ's as a group are the only guns I've found to be unacceptably reliable given normal care and cleaning.

There are several Glocks with near, or over 300,000 rounds through them. I think most of the plastic framed guns are capable of doing as well, but so far no one has pushed any others that far so it is hard to say. One thing is for sure, all the plastic framed guns are proving to be far,far, more durable than aluminum framed guns and at least equal to the steel framed guns.

 

[tonytuna]

I've shot the g23 and had the gun eject the casing to my head/face/ chest and even had afew roll into my shoes. I was told I was shooting wrong cause I'm a lefty. Then a couple of other people (right handed shooters) said they had the same problem.
Then I shot the g30 and loved it, no problems what so ever as u listed.
Both I've shot are gen3.
I would look at the gen4, glocks. They claimed to have fixed it. But you really can't go wrong with a glock. If there is a problem they should fix it

 

[sedona]

I love the idiots who say "I carry (insert brand/model here) 'cause it don't jam." Anything built by man can and will fail.
I will agree with you that anything mechanical will fail.I never said otherwise,but after 22,000 rounds my G17 hasn''t failed.So only an idiot would carry a gun that has had malfunctions when they have one that doesn't.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Kept reasonably clean and well maintained and most any pistol will be reliable enough for most intended purposes. Glocks biggest advantage is their ability to take much more abuse than any other gun and still keep functioning. CZ's as a group are the only guns I've found to be unacceptably reliable given normal care and cleaning.

There are several Glocks with near, or over 300,000 rounds through them. I think most of the plastic framed guns are capable of doing as well, but so far no one has pushed any others that far so it is hard to say. One thing is for sure, all the plastic framed guns are proving to be far,far, more durable than aluminum framed guns and at least equal to the steel framed guns.

Data to corroborate this?

 

[Jim K]

Name a gun, any gun, on a site like this and someone will tell you that it is total junk and will fail, blow up, or whatever. Sometimes the detractors have actually seen one of the guns they claim is no good, but mostly they will be repeating something they read on the internet.

Glocks are not perfect, and in fact I don't especially like them. But they are very reliable; if they were not, thousands of police departments wouldn't use them. Of course, the Glock haters say that is because Glock bribes the police to buy them or gives them away to departments free. If that were true, I think Glock would have been bankrupt long ago, but lies are always cheap.

Jim

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

My Browning have never malfunctioned. I bought a gen 3 19 that stovepiped, sent brass to my face. I sent it back to Glock twice. I know they replaced the ejector and most likely the extractor. It runs fine now.

 

[4thHorseman]

Loosenock, as a guy that carries issued Glocks in Iraq, I can tell without a doubt, Glocks dont like the sand. I can tell you for sure, Glocks are jam-o-matics in the sands of Iraq. Been there, seen that and have the tee shirt.
The Berretta which the other services carry, appears to work flawlessly and sand has little or no affect on them.
Sigs also seem to work well in Iraqi sand environments.
The good thing about the Glock in Iraq is it's nonmetal frame however. When temperatures reach 125 or above (almost daily in the summer) glocks can be handled without gloves except for the slide.
JMHO