Why all the Glock hate?

[EVIL5LITER]

Just curious. Seems to be alot of people on internet forums that hate Glocks. Why?

It seems to be similar to the guys that hate AK47's. Both guns do what they were intended to do, shoot bullets under the most extreme conditions. Both guns are extremely reliable and have more than proven themselves time and time again. I'm just wondering why so many guys here don't like them?

 

[Bear Gulch]

I carried a Glock 22 as my duty weapon for years. I loved it. It is durable, accurate and fun. The trigger safety will get you very aware of the 3rd safety rule!

I think it is that they lack the finely machined beauty of a 1911 or a sig. But, frankly, if the poop is hitting the cooling unit I'll happily take a glock.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Because they're evil, have no soul, they're ugly, have no soul, they have no style, no verve, no elan, they have no soul, they're ubiquitous and obnoxious (much like their owners), they have the most stupid little dingus right in the middle of the trigger where it gives me a blister, and they have no soul.

And, from all reports, Gaston is an arrogant, pig-headed SOB that refuses to acknowledge that he, and his pistols, might not be God Almighty's greatest gift to mankind.

Did I mention they have no soul?

Where's that awsome (Jim March?) quote when you need it?

 

[Rockstar]

Ignorance.

 

[BryanP]

I don't hate them. I just don't have any particular interest in them. I've fired one once, a .45ACP model (I forget which one that is). It was a decent shooter.

There are plenty of people who idolize/demonize the Glock, just as there are those who idolize/demonize the 1911A1.

Besides, it's irrelevant as everyone knows SIG's are the Ultimate.

 

[Obiwan]

I blame fast food and violent television

 

[orangeninja]

I think Glocks are great. However, due to the grip angle it's hard to shoot a Glock and other types of pistols BOTH effectively. For instance, if I practice a lot with a Glock, I shoot high with my Sigs. Practice a lot with Sig, shoot low with a Glock.

Also those finger groove thingies don't fit everyone, or most people for that matter.

Aside from grip angle, plastic sights and the finger grooves, they're awsome.

 

[Standing Wolf]

They're too ugly for me, and the two I rented years ago both had horrendously creepy, mushy triggers.

I'll reconsider Glocks when they're made of real steel and top quality, hand-checkered walnut.

 

[Infidel]

About Glocks: What Snakeyes said. Plus they are UGLY! and have no soul.

About AKs and similar: ditto, plus I developed a very deepseated kneejerk reaction many years ago to shoot anyone carrying an AK before he shot me. My first reaction to this day upon seeing an AK is to want to blow it away.

 

[a454me]

I used to dislike Glocks because I thought a gun should be blued or stainless steel with handsome wood grips , I had even shot several Glocks but it wasn't until I decided I was ready for something different that I finally traded for one . I'm now a big fan of them , the G17/19 use about the least expensive centerfire round available and you can find the ammo just about anywhere , if you use good ammo they always go bang and if you do your part they are reasonably accurate .
I'll keep my 1911s and revolvers but I also can't imagine being without a Glock !

 

[lyricsdad]

I like them, the g17 is the gun I always wanted when i was in my late teens early twenties. I for some reason have tried other handguns and the glock feels like a space gun, although I would like to own one, I will wait on it.

 

[dev_null]

I don't hate them. I just don't like them. I have no problem with others shooting them.

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

Snake eyes, have you ever shot a Glock long enough to get a blister on your trigger finger? I ask because I've shot well over 1000 rounds through my Glock 21, and I have never noticed a problem with blistering. Either you have the softest skin of any male human ever or your imagination is running away with you.

Standing Wolf, if you want to experience a spongy, creepy trigger, you ought to shoot my stock CZ75B.

With rare exception I plan to purchase nothing but Glock autoloaders in the future.

 

[nico]

I don't hate them, but for some reason they don't really appeal to me. A friend of mine wants to try one the next time we go to the range, so I'll definitely try it out. I'm not too fond of the lack of a safety switch (I know it doesn't matter if you follow the 4 rules, but call me old fashioned) and I've heard enough mixed reviews about them that I've never been all that excited to spend the money on a range rental/ammo to try one.

 

[wally]

Hate is too strong a word. I dislike guns I don't shoot well, ergo I don't like Glocks.

If you can shoot them well, then they are easy to love. Just not by me.

--wally.

 

[KurtC]

I have owned a Glock 30 and have qualified with it and several other models. It is as reliable and accurate as most other pistols.

The problem is that it is one of the most under-engineered pistols of all time. It was designed from the bottom line upwards, with a goal of under bidding the more popular guns of the day. This meant molding instead of forging, and pressing instead of milling. The result is a handgun with poor ergonomics and aesthetics. The trigger, slide lock and sights are some of the poorest parts I have ever seen on a handgun.

The one area where Glock excels is marketing. They grossly underbid other police contracts, making them popular for budget minded departments. This popularity made them attractive to the civilian market, who is grossly over-paying for the same handgun.

Unfortunately, most Glock fans have little experience with top quality firearms. If you disassemble one and compare the parts to a S&W, Colt or Beretta, you will see the difference. You might even feel that your wallet has been violated by purchasing a Glock.

I feel that the Glock is as reliable and accurate as most other pistols. If issued one, I would certainly trust my life to it. However, I feel that my personal money can be better spent elsewhere.

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

KurtC wrote:

The trigger, slide lock and sights are some of the poorest parts I have ever seen on a handgun.

Have you actually seen any of these parts break on a Glock? If they are rugged and reliable, how can they be "the poorest parts" you have ever seen?

 

[dmallind]

I have one - bought it because it felt right in my hand. Still does. I'd give the Steyr I have - which I consider a cousin to the Glock and which is pretty close in grip angle, bore axis etc - a slight edge because of how it balances but I like both.

I shoot a 1911 better than either but it's twice the price and then some. I really don't see the vast problem between adjusting to the gun you have. If I - a new shooter - can adjust between a 1911 and a Glock in the same range session without being any less accurate than I am with just sticking to one gun then surely a good shooter can. I'm certainly not good - but it makes no difference to me whether I'm using multiple platforms or not.

To be honest I think a lot of the Glock bashing comes from the fact that they have the reputation in the mainstream. Ask any non-gun type you know what a Kimber is or heck even worse a Baer and 99.9% will give you blank stares. Ask em what a Glock is and they'll probably get it wrong but they'll at least know it's a gun!

What this means is that many collectors and enthusiasts don't want to be seen as liking the brand that the unwashed rabble like because that's supposedly a sign of an equal level of knowledge . I have or have had a few collecting hobbies and this is consistent throughout ALL of them. Fountain pens are my other hobby and you get exactly - even to the 50/50 approximate ratio and the same frankly silly "soul" statements (NOTHING has a soul!) - the same argument about Montblancs. They are decent pens - they are reliable and write well - but they are not the be all and end all of pens just like Glocks aren't the be all and end all of guns. But because in each case the non-connoisseur has that image in their minds because of their successful marketing as being superior, the brands are reviled by a good chunk of the cognoscenti. It's too consistent to be coincidence as no other brand in either case gets the same treatment.

For the super high end watch collectors Rolex has the same role - chances are most of us think they are great but the big time watch guys are either going to despise them or think they are OK and capable but nothing special depending, it seems to me at least, on how much they care about showing themselves to be purists - just like the big time gun guys will split for Glock and pen guys for MB. Personally I try to form an honest opinion of any brand regardless of their image in the market place. Glocks work for me but others work better. Same for MBs. I hope I never am so insecure that I have to hate something because it's popular with non-experts. That just seems way too much like those pseudo-intellectual teenagers who like obscure bands only until they get popular.

I'm pretty damn sure there are valid reasons not to like Glocks - they probably don't suit many people with huge hands for a start - but I respect the opinions of those who give definitive and meaningful answers using objective criteria about why they don't like ANY brand more than the windy prattle you often see about Glocks.

 

[Sam]

Don't hate Glocks at all, just don't care for them.
Don't care for most Europistols really. They just don't quite feel right.

Seen plenty that worked just fine but they are missing something. No art no soul

Sam

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

If you have any doubts about what guns are the most rugged, check out this thread (warning: this thread is addictive): http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=4&t=13658

Try that with your Kimber or Wilson.

 

[dmallind]

Ergonomics and aesthetics are entirely subjective. For example Sigs are widely admired and yet the ones I have tried feel uncomfortable to me. I can barely reach the trigger on a CZ. I find Rugers rough and clunmsy.

The trigger on Glocks is not ideal I confess but given the inherent compromise of a consistent pseudo-DA trigger (and for good reason - since it IS consistent and eschews the need for a manual safety) is functional and comfortable. Incidentally if you like Glocks other than the trigger try a Steyr - big improvement in that area with a similar platform.

I have had no problems with the other "poor parts" but it's possible I will have I'm sure. Same as it's plenty possible people have problems with parts on any brand of guns - just check this very board! Not a single company that hasn't had people complaining about bad parts and most of em sell a fraction as many as Glock do - and therefore have a fraction as many opportunities for complaint.

But think again - if they are accurate and reliable while still being cheaper to produce because of production efficiency and value engineering what does that say about the capability of the company? There isn't a design and manufacturing company on earth that would not love to have that same plaudit - yet it came from a detractor essentially saying "They do the job of a gun (being accurate and reliable) as well as anything else - but are much cheaper and simpler to make".

Take that idea to the benchmark engineering manufacturers like Toyota and see if they think it's a BAD thing!

 

[dmallind]

Define art and soul for me

This seems a consistent refrain.

Again the gun I shoot best is one of the oldest and most revered platforms (1911) from one of the oldest and engineering wise at least most revered makers - (S&W). It isn't even one of their cheaper versions of the same.

It seems well enough made. It's handsome enough in my eyes at least although the finish is less rugged than the Glock. It's newer and has been shot less but both outside parts and internals (esp the barrel lugs) are more worn. And yes I have been lubing it like a 1911 not like a Glock! It is indeed more accurate - or rather I am more accurate with it - than the Glock. It's also twice the price - I expect a superior product in that case.

But soul? Art? Can anybody say what gives it - or gives any gun or any machine - these attributes? It would be easy to just tell me I don't understand and don't know enough but heck - use examples from other products where I am more informed. Tell me a car that has soul or art or how it could have. I've heard the same thing from Maserati owners decrying faster and better handling BMWs. I've heard the same thing from BMW owners decrying more reliable, quieter and more practical Lexus and Acuras. None of them has been able to tell me what this "soul" is that some machines are supposed to have. What is it other than a preference or prejudice which gives an adherent a sense of pleasure and contentment that other brands do not?

By profession I am a QA Director for a manufacturing firm. Trust me I spend all my day trying to determine what customers want and how we can produce it reliably, effectively and efficiently. If there's a way to impart soul I'm not just asking for the sake of debate!

 

[Pilot]

I don't hate them. I think they're a fine firearm that does what is intended. I just never had the desire to own one. There are other pistols that do the same thing or better, but I am open to considering one.

 

[PCRCCW]

Just Because.........

Id love to give you more/other reasons than you have already...but I cant.
IMO, the Glockheads are either defensive about the criticism on the net about them and get uptight or they are arrogant about their guns.
The guns themselves are good.......reliable, accurate (for the most part) etc.....but some of the owners Ive met have turned me off of them...and the wierd ass grip angle doesnt help if you are a 1911/CZ/BHP guy.
Shoot well................

 

[EVIL5LITER]

Allow me to give a little background on my question here:

The G27 I own was the very first gun I ever purchased, approximately three years ago. I bought the gun because I wanted a carry gun that I could count on to go bang every single last damned time I pulled the trigger. I researched the subject for quite a while before I finally settled on the G27, as it had every feature I wanted (concealibility, lightweight, good caliber, reliability, etc.). I knew it was to be a carry gun, so I knew it was going to be neglected. I needed a gun that could handle not being cleaned every week, that I could hide easily, and this gun fit the bill.

I have another hobby, that may be obvious from my username. I collect/race late model Mustangs. I hear from every other fan of every other brand on earth how Mustangs are a dime a dozen, they have no soul, they don't do this well, they don't do that well, etc.

Granted, I haven't gotten a single one of those people who've wanted to line up and run the 1/4 mile against me, but that's beside the point. Who cares if you're faster if your car doesn't have soul? :banghead:

I appreciate the Glock and the AK for what they are: Simple designs that work. They don't have to be expensive, they don't have to be pretty, they just have to go bang every time.

I guess when I get ready to buy a toy that is high maintenance, that is always broke/worn out, but looks pretty and has soul, I'll trade my Mustang(s) in on a Ferrari and I'll trade my glock in on a Wilson Combat or Kimber. Until then, I'll just stick with stuff that works.