If You Were Glock CEO....
- Thread starter Freudianfloyd
- Start date
TRACON
Member
No not quite. Glock made the 1st Gen model 17 (Long Slide) in 1987 with different prefixes and different grips as the one you have pictured. The G17L’s first used by the Brigada Antiterrorista were produced beginning in October 1996, a full 9 years after Glock made their first Gen1’s for competitive shooters and… the Brigada Antiterrorista unit used Gen2’s.
Your picture depicts a Gen2 variant by the way. The original Glock 17 (Long slide) Gen1’s were just labeled as a “17” (Long Slide) in 1987. Shortly thereafter, Glock stamped the guns with “17L” on the slide. Again, they were originally made at the request of competition shooters in the mid 80’s,
Some brief history links below.
https://glockhistory.com/g17lg1/
https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/brigada-antiterorista-glock-17ls.1893137/
Gen1 17L
Gen2 17L
Last edited:
SterlingBullet
Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2015
- Messages
- 305
Yes to the Glock 48 in 22 LR.
Yes to the Glock 48 in 22WMR.
Instead of 40S&W, how about the 43X in 5.7, say 17 rounds, with an available high capacity 30 round magazine.
Unfortunately 22WMR will not fit into any pistol designed for 9mm/40 S&W. 22WRM is too long and would require a pistol designed for cartridges that are the same length as 45ACP and 10MM. 22WMR is actually longer than both 45ACP and 10mm. The overall length of 45ACP is 1.275", 10mm is 1.260", and the overall length of 22WRM is 1.350".
5.7x28 is even longer than 22WRM. The overall length of 5.7x28 is 1.594". Again it will not fit into any pistol designed for the 9x19/40.
The next closest thing is the Armscor 22TCM and 22TCM9R. The 22TCM is 1.265" so it fits 45/10mm sized pistols while the 22TCM9R is 1.50" compared to 9x19 at 1.169". The problem with the 22TCM and 22 TCM9R is that the Glock conversion kits are very difficult to get them to run reliably. Most people that have tried the 22TCm conversions soon give up on them.
SterlingBullet
Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2015
- Messages
- 305
Thank you for sharing these dimensions.
So to use the 22 WMR, the Glock 48 would require the grip width to increase 0.181 inches (many hand sizes could adapt to the increased grip girth).
The barrel length would need 0.181 inches to accommodate a longer chamber, unless you give up a little barrel length.
It actually sounds like some design work could get you to a 22 WMR in a subcompact like the 48.
And a Glock sized to a Shield 9mm EZ might get you a 7 round 5.7.
You would be better off starting with one of the models actually designed for 45ACP/10mm versus trying to redesign the G48. Though the Glock magazines might be an issue. I haven't really looked into fitting 22WMR into a Glock 45ACP magazine.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,512
My personal take is a 22Mag Glock is a distraction (not to mention would require a whole new frame and magazine design) from what the company's main mission is, which is self defense be it civilians, military, police, etc. I think it's easy for Glock to focus attention on competition use of their firearms as that is a good R&D test bed at the consumers expense. Glock should be paying attention and purchasing (which they probably are) competition model Glocks to test for function and ability.
My bias' against the 5.7x28 lead me to think that is also a bad choice, who really uses 5.7x28 anymore for SD, market saturation is pitiful; and with Ruger, PSA, S&W and FN in the already small market, not a good business decision. But it is closer to their mission than a 22Mag.
The Glock 44 I can see it's fit in the mission of Glock as a trainer to the G19, but I'm not a fan. I would have matched the 15 round capacity in the G19 frame and would come out with a G43x/48 framed 22lr as well for training.
So often, companies start operating outside the mission of the company, and mission drift causes havoc if the company is truly set themselves up to service the mission. Others have pointed out the folly of trying to be everything to everyone, we already have that in Ruger especially, look how frequently Ruger's product line changes with additions, but more worriedly for the consumer discontinuations of product lines after a brief time in the market.
This is why in this thread I've stated a couple times I would focus on improvements in metallurgy, design and function of their existing product lines and look where the mission could be served further; which I think would be a delayed blowback PCC. This flatters Glock's already well represented pistol caliber product lines and serves both self defense and competition.
I could see Glock eventually getting to rifle carbines as it also serves their mission, but I would wade slowly into that mature and cut throat marketplace.
My bias' against the 5.7x28 lead me to think that is also a bad choice, who really uses 5.7x28 anymore for SD, market saturation is pitiful; and with Ruger, PSA, S&W and FN in the already small market, not a good business decision. But it is closer to their mission than a 22Mag.
The Glock 44 I can see it's fit in the mission of Glock as a trainer to the G19, but I'm not a fan. I would have matched the 15 round capacity in the G19 frame and would come out with a G43x/48 framed 22lr as well for training.
So often, companies start operating outside the mission of the company, and mission drift causes havoc if the company is truly set themselves up to service the mission. Others have pointed out the folly of trying to be everything to everyone, we already have that in Ruger especially, look how frequently Ruger's product line changes with additions, but more worriedly for the consumer discontinuations of product lines after a brief time in the market.
This is why in this thread I've stated a couple times I would focus on improvements in metallurgy, design and function of their existing product lines and look where the mission could be served further; which I think would be a delayed blowback PCC. This flatters Glock's already well represented pistol caliber product lines and serves both self defense and competition.
I could see Glock eventually getting to rifle carbines as it also serves their mission, but I would wade slowly into that mature and cut throat marketplace.
Last edited:
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,512
Forgot to mention in my previous post, I do think it prudent for Glock to be working on a modular FCU; which they I'm sure they already are/have.
A modular FCU would solve a lot of the issues that persons have with Glocks through Glock/aftermarket frame options.
A modular FCU would solve a lot of the issues that persons have with Glocks through Glock/aftermarket frame options.
Tinguely
Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2023
- Messages
- 9
One of the favorite guns I own is a B&T APC K PRO G (9 mm), simply amazing to shoot and extremely precise.
If I would buy another, I would not care much about Glock mags compatibility any longer. Even also owning Glock 34’s, I only use the high capacity magazines with the APC, and lower capacity magazines don’t really make a lot of sense with this gun.
The price for the APC is however not dependent on the caliber, they cost the same in Europe if chambered in 9 or 10 mm.
A Glock would probably compete with a CZ Scorpion in terms of price, not sure it would manage to convince, even if offered in a 10 mm.
dogtown tom
Member
I disagree completely.
While you may sell plenty of FCU's, you are giving up sales of complete pistols, spawning competitors and putting $$$ in their pockets.
When a company has built a reputation on arguably the most reliable semiautomatic pistol ever, that reputation can be ruined by third party vendors.
generic sportsshooter
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2023
- Messages
- 28
a lot of people replace every glock part with one from a 3rd party vendor:
barrel, slide, firing pin, springs, trigger mechanism, extractor, mag release, slide release.
and then they also stipple the frame.
so set up a custom gun department where people have several options for each part in their new glock.
grips for all models in several colours,
moulded in mag funnels.
things like replaceable side panels...too many people who don;t buy a glock because they dislike the grip shape.
a steel frame version, so people don't have to strap on all those brass weights for competition.
glock fans would go nuts for a factory built gucci gun or race gun.
or at some point it'll become the t ford. one design..long or short slide, long or short grip.
barrel, slide, firing pin, springs, trigger mechanism, extractor, mag release, slide release.
and then they also stipple the frame.
so set up a custom gun department where people have several options for each part in their new glock.
grips for all models in several colours,
moulded in mag funnels.
things like replaceable side panels...too many people who don;t buy a glock because they dislike the grip shape.
a steel frame version, so people don't have to strap on all those brass weights for competition.
glock fans would go nuts for a factory built gucci gun or race gun.
or at some point it'll become the t ford. one design..long or short slide, long or short grip.
Archie
Member
The word, seppuku, appeals to me in this case.
SwampWolf
Member
Especially this. Stuffing a typical striker-fired pistol sans having a manual safety into your pocket or iwb holster is akin to doing the same with a 1911 pistol having a round chambered and being cocked and unlocked. No thanks from my admittedly minority vantage point.
commygun
Member
I know it’s sacrilege but….thumb safety. Optional, of course.
SwampWolf
Member
Of course.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
I'd make something that didn't look butt-ugly.
Frankly, that's the biggest issue that I have against owning a Glock.
A manual safety option would be nice, too. That's the other big issue for me.
I like that it has no manual safety. However, on a safety-related note, I wish Glocks didn't have to pull the trigger to disassemble the slide. (Unless they've already updated that feature).
You still have to pull the trigger to disassemble a Glock. And a lot of striker fired pistols are the same way.
TheotherMikeG
Member
If I was Glock CEO...
I'd put out a line of Glock-branded alcoholic seltzers and advertise on TV.
I'd put out a line of Glock-branded alcoholic seltzers and advertise on TV.
dogtown tom
Member
And then sit back and listen to the internet experts telling you that your can is the wrong diameter, too many ounces, too few ounces, that it needs to be 8%ABV and not 5%ABV, that the ABV makes it unavailable in California, that custom flavors like Beef Mint should be available, that there's too much fizz, not enough fizz.
Bottom line for this thread is Glock makes what sells. Other than their .45GAP they really haven't had a dog sales wise. Can't say that for many other handgun manufacturers.
JeffG
Member
A Glock custom shoppe would be good. Certified , labelled models with stuff people are asking for. Camo colors, specific triggers, compensators, sight options, a Glock specific RMR. Custom features that could easily attributed to Glock factory, rather than some work bench Lego specialist. Obviously upcharges would apply.
OP
OP
Freudianfloyd
Member
Why is this such a problem for people? Genuinely asking, because many of my guns require this, and I never gave it a second thought, but I hear complaints about it often. Is it because of the off chance you have a round in the chamber?
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,512
I don’t understand it either. Know the status of your firearm and if one doesn’t than one should check. There shouldn’t be live ammo around when cleaning or working on a firearm anyways.
