It's a Glock. It'll work - it'll sell well.
George,It's fine if you don't already have a half dozen small guns, as many of us do. In my opinion, it gets to a point that it just becomes silly to try and upgrade to every new thing that comes out now.
It seems like there is a new gun every week. And unless it is really that much better in some way, it is an exercise in futility. They are going to do the same thing as last weeks did.
If you pocket carry and something comes out that is that much more efficient that what you are using, then wait 6 months until the bugs are known, and then if you still feel that yu have to have it, then buy one.
At the risk of coming across as a hate I'm not all that interested in buying one. So far I haven't liked any Glocks; the G19 is the closest to a good one (for me) that I've tried. I loathed my G22 and sold it after a few hundred rounds. The one thing they seem to retain from decade to decade and generation to generation is that horrible, spongy trigger!
I think it will be a big seller though. Glock is like Apple- no matter what they release there's about a million buyers standing in line with their wallet in hand. Good on 'em if that's what works for them. To me the Nano is a better version of what Glock should have made.
From my perspective there are just too many good single stacks out there for me to be interested:
Nano- Better trigger (unless Glock does a 180 and changes their entire mechanism), slimmer (a guess based on the photo), more streamlined, better sights.
PPS- Better trigger, better sights, better mag release.
LC9s Pro- Almost certainly a much better trigger, slimmer, better sights, easier takedown.
BP9CC- Better trigger, cheaper.
Shield- Slightly better trigger, better grip and ergos (again, unless the new Glock totally scraps the form and trade dress of all the other guns in the line).
Again, I expect it will sell a bazillion but it's likely too little too late for me. However, when the stores get them I'll dutifully check them out.
Well, the Keltec and Kahr's were around forever. Then the PPS. Then the LC9. Then the Nano. The Shield. You could have said the same thing about any number of them.
If there wasn't 5 or more companies already working on extended baseplates for this, I'd be surprised.Looks like a decent carry gun--wish they had made it a 7+1. Not just for the extra round but also for a little bit more grip length.
We are now entering the age where a department may need to limit their capacity. After all, it's what the Chief demands should happen to civilian guns.
This isn't about the consumer shooter, Glock sees major contracts on the horizon due to a shift in doctrine. And that does not exclude military use, either. It may not be our military, but a lot of others overseas in various countries don't care for large doublestack combat guns. Europe has always preferred smaller ones.
Wrong, the majority of single stack 9mms in this class are 7+1 with an optional 8+1 with an extended mag. I think Glock screwed up by not finding a way to fit an extra round in this gun. Nevertheless, I will still probably buy one in a year or so...6+1 is pretty standard in the world of single stack 9mm. The slide is still blocky but being narrower will probably print a bit less than the 26. I might have to see how it feels in my hand.
When carrying IWB, the thickness difference is substantial in regards to comfort, hence the huge popularity of the single stacks in the concealed carry market.Hmm, I think I can deal with the extra .18" of the Glock 26 in exchange for nearly double the capacity...
Opinions vary. The Shield, with 7+1, is almost exactly one 9mm round taller in the grip than the G43. To make the G43 a 7+1, they would have had to lengthen the grip, which would have made the G43 less pocketable.Wrong, the majority of single stack 9mms in this class are 7+1 with an optional 8+1 with an extended mag. I think Glock screwed up by not finding a way to fit an extra round in this gun. Nevertheless, I will still probably buy one in a year or so...