Flashpoint
Member
So everyone has heard of Glock's utter reliability, and Ruger's P series are suppose to built like tanks; so if a P95 and a G17 went head to head in a torture test who would come out ahead?
Last edited:
Several years ago my brother did much of the photography for the Glock Annual. Part of this entailed thinking up ways to seriously abuse a Glock 17 to show it's durability and reliablity. I recall that he immersed it in a few inches of water in a pan, then stuck the whole thing in the freezer until the pistol was encased in ice. He then took it outside and threw it down against some concrete steps to break it out, with no damage.
He then had his girlfriend's dad run it over with a tractor.
Another form of abuse was to immerse it in a mud bath, then rinse it off and shoot it.
Granted, not especially scientific, but it was fun.
I'd bet a Ruger would do as well
An honest question, if you please: Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability? They can hiccup just like any other gun, so what's the big deal?
Please, don't be offended, I seriously want to know...
I knew a guy years ago who traded M1911s. He had a trick, he'd set up a magazine to feed empty cases when you racked the slide.
Someone would want to see a gun under the glass, he'd pick up that trick magzaine, shove it in and start racking the slide. KA-CHING! And the guy'd walk out the door, convinced he had the most reliable pistol ever.
Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability?
Doubt it. Glock does everything better.The Ruger will make a better hammer than the Glock