Two things about Glocks.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pro: No way I can narrow it down to just two things. I love everything about them except my two cons below.

Cons: (all inclusive):

1) No full ambi controls. I'm a lefty.
2) "Glock bite". It was never a problem for me until I starting working on my forearm strength with CoC grippers to increase recoil control, and within a month I could not shoot the pistol without bleeding. My initial fix was spot bandaids like you put on a shaving cut or something. These stuck and worked great in the winter when I was not sweating. Come summer time I went to a flexible cloth tape wrap all the way around my palm, that would press my skin down just enough to prevent any issues. And honestly it was not super-desirable, but worked fine.

I was hoping they would address both with the Gen4 but unfortunately did not. They could address #2 with a backstrap on the Gen4 if they wanted to and I'm sure they will eventually, but the lack of a right side slide catch button drove me to an M&P for competitive purposes. Were it not for that, I would still be shooting the Glock.
 
I take it you've not searched for 1911 after market goodies!
Click to expand...

The Beagle backplate puts the Glock over the top:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Beagle.jpg
    Beagle.jpg
    3.4 KB · Views: 170
1. they work
2. magazines are cheap

3. the sights are terrible
4. people expect you to have deep convictions about them and engage you in arguments over them when you just want at least one gun you don't have to futz with.
 
pros: 1. Reliable

2. Dependable


Cons: 1. Gen 4's not up to the the Gen 3's standards IMHO

2.Sights (Even a slight upgrade would be a huge improvement)
 
Robbins290 said:
Cant think of any pro, but cons.

1-they are plastic
2-sriker fired
Click to expand...
Striker fired pistols are rampant.
Polymer isn't plastic. Plastic melts. Polymer doesn't. It crystallizes, and has the possibility of further use well beyond the failure of even the stoutest plastic. Polymers recoill absorption capabilities, light weight, and resistance to deep scratches and marring make it noteworthy.
 
Glocks do not have a manually operated safety. Neither do revolvers and this is why you should not pull the trigger of a loaded weapon unintentionally. The Glock "safe action" design works well as designed but firearms require skilled operators in addition to engineering.
 
Pros:
1. Reliability
2. Ease of maintenance and DIY gunsmithing.

Cons:
1. Plastic sights.
2) A little thick in the grip.
 
otasan56 said:
Glocks do not come with external, manually-operated safeties. And no Glocks are issued with fully adjustable rear sights.
Click to expand...

You didn't say "external, manually-operated" in your initial post. ;) You said no safety, when Glocks in fact have multiple safeties.

Remember that what is said/typed in these threads is for the benefit of far more people than regular posters and knowledgeable gun folks who will know what you mean. Lots of complete noobs hit the internet for information, and a lot of people who don't know any better may actually believe that a gun without a manual lever on the side doesn't have a safety, but that would be incorrect. Better to say exactly what you mean. ;)
 
Meanmrmustard. My cons are just personal prefernce. I just dont like the "feel" of polymer pistols. And i just like the control of a hammer. (being able to decock and cock). And yes, i do own a glock.
 
Pros: Simple
Reliable

Cons: Ugly
Striker Fired

And you see the cons are personal preferences to say the least, the only striker fired pistols I have interest in are Springfield XD's

But without a doubt I would grab a glock to defend myself, my family, my country.....and trust that it would get the job done!

Have shot several owned by friends.....just not anywhere on my want list.
 
I don't like the Glock sights, but my 17L did come with adjustable rear sights.

They're kind of distracting though, the way they're made they let a little light in on either side of the rear notch.

I'll get around to putting Dawsons on it eventually.
 
They go bang all the time
they go bang all the time
They suck if you can't shoot
They won't make you a better shot if you suck
 
A never have been, and never will be a Glock owner's contribution:

Pros:
1. Reliability
2. Brand success

Cons:
1. Ergonomics
2. Aesthetics


Simply put, because of Glock, other makers are expected to maintain a very high standard for reliability. Everybody benefits from competition between brands, and Glock is a monster competitor. My beloved PPQ might not exist, without Glock.
 
pros: it's reliable as hell, great price(550 for Gen 4 23), it's lighter than my XD subcompact with 12 rounds(at least it feels lighter), the grip is shorter than most compact pistols so easier to conceal carry

cons:grip angle too much for what i'm used to so i reflexively aim high, cheapish sights, but for an extra fifty i could have gotten tritium sights so that's my own fault
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top