Why Not Glock

[RonBernert]

So which is better, 9mm or .45?











I'll be ducking in the corner over here.....

 

[Boats]

I freely admit to being a "hater." I might as well since I'd be called one anyways for disagreeing with cultists.

I won't buy a Glock because:

They have those stupid finger bumpers, or grooves, or whatever they are, but they hit me wrong all over. Allegedly this is "my problem," and not a stupid "one size fits some" design shortcoming.

The trigger is too short reach for my tastes and there is nothing to effectively be done about that.

There's the hump at the bottom of the back strap that is rather unlike anything else I have ever fired. It's absolutely ridiculous that Gen 4 Glocks only change the level of annoyance at this "feature" but do nothing to eliminate it.

The trigger guard/front strap is unrelieved to any degree I'd call usable. Glocks rub me the wrong way literally on my middle finger.

The brake pedal on the bang switch is irritating. I won't own an XD or a SR9 due to this "feature" either.

The nearly non-existent slide release lever forces overhanding or sling shooting of the slide and I like having the option to use a real slide release.

The squarish magazine catch is tremendously annoying and not well blended into the frame. Now they've made it even bigger.

And none of the above even touches upon the idiotic grip angle. Oh, wait, the Still Fat and the Really Thick Founder, and the "Generation 4" of "perfection" are futilely trying to address many of these "non-issues."

Some shooters I respect like Glocks, because they apparently fit enough and they are fairly reliable. Lots of idjits I cannot respect are drool monkeys for their Fuhrerpistole all over the internet concerning these "combat weapons." Never mind that they were designed by a non-shooting curtain rod manufacturer for a non-shooting conscript filled army which hasn't been seen "fighting" anyone since it was last capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago. Yeah, compared to just about everyone else in the world, Austrians know what design characteristics best go into a combat pistol.

Poor ergonomics is issue 1a. Semi-retarded Glock evangelism is 1b. We're all supposed to be impressed by ol' Gaston basically giving away his misshaped lumps to gain domestic cop market share through currying favor with bean counters who couldn't say no to such cheap-ass deals.?

I guess I have higher standards than that.

 

[Fiv3r]

I like pretty much every other gun in my collection more than my Glock. They either have sentimental value or a neat milsurp history or feel so great in my hands.....but I'll be damned if a Glock isn't on my hip today as i type

It's a tool to me and nothing more. I'm not the kind of guy that gets too bent out of shape what kind of phone he carries or car he drives or what have you. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of days I switch my my carrying options based on mood However, my G36 simply works. Eats what I feed it, doesn't need to babied or tinkered with, doesn't seem to want to rust, and was inexpensive enough that if I should break it I won't cry too much. It's just a dependable part of my daily carry. I'm not a fanboi or kool aide drinker, it just works as a soulless product that serves my basic need of self protection.

Keys, phone, watch, wallet, knife...and my Glock.

 

[9mmepiphany]

On the basis of testing by Streamlight, we believe the problem is magazine related. It appears that the rounds are unable to rise fast enough for proper cycling. We have observed proper feeding for the first few rounds, consistent failures at mid-magazine capacity, and a return to proper feeding of the last few cartridges in the magazine.

We have tried both stronger and weaker recoil springs, and compound-action recoil buffers, all without success. Sometimes new magazine springs, either new Glock® or Wolff, will cure the problem. In one case of a pistol which was totally reliable when new but progressed to malfunctioning on every magazine, even with no light installed

I have to imagine that the impediment to function with the light attached is frame flex.

the physical result of having the light attached during firing would be to damp the pistols oscillation in the up/down directions. in a sufficiently stiff assembly, the slide/frame/magazine should all move as a unit, so the movement of the whole unit through space shouldn't affect the feeding mechanism. my suspicion is that a pistol with a less rigid frame might experience increased friction in the magazine as it is stressed from those flex loads, and that increased drag on the rounds would impede proper feeding

i don't think Streamlight had the facility to analyze frame flex and arrived at a cure for the effect, not the cause...as did Glock. my LE source told me that they were promised, by their glock rep, that Glock would address the flex problem in upcoming modifications.

apparently the flex affects the geometry of the feeding cycle by moving the flex point back toward the vertical grip frame, binding the magazine body...that's why the issue arises at mid-mag. stronger springs will "push though" the bind but it doesn't address the cause.

it reminds me of the story about the development of the M1 Abrams tank. drivers were finding that they could reverse direction faster...getting in and out of hides...by not waiting for the tank to completely stop before shifting the transmission between forward and reverse. this was hailed as great resourcefulness of the drivers and could save lives...the downside is that it was hard on transmissions...so they asked for a fix. the manufacturer decided to disable the ability rather than strengthen the transmission...so they stopped the problem rather than fix the flaw.

the Glock frame flex wouldn't even be such an issue, except for the marketing of the G22 to LE. these issues don't seem to come up with the Glocks chambered in 9mm..and surely there are more 9mm Glocks on the market than .40 Glocks

 

[Fishslayer]

No hate for the Glocks here. Never handled one, no real opinion.

But it IS an absolute fact that a pistol should be made of metal and it should have a hammer...

Other than that...

Then there's the Glock "image"

 

[Locnar]

Personally, I don't care for the grip angle of the Glock.

^ This

 

[easyg]

...Fuhrerpistole...

...for a non-shooting conscript filled army which hasn't been seen "fighting" anyone since it was last capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago...

...Yeah, compared to just about everyone else in the world, Austrians know what design characteristics best go into a combat pistol.

I think your hatred of Glocks goes way beyond the mere design of the pistols.
Remarks like these speak volumes about your mindset.

I guess you also hate Italian designed weapons too (Berettas for example).
After all, Italy really hasn't fought any more shooting wars than Austria.

And of course you probably hate those German made weapons as well (HK and Walther) being designed also by those "capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago".

And you must really hate FN and Browning pistols!
After all, Belgium couldn't even defeat the Austrians, Italians, and Germans.

And of course you must also hate the Swiss designed weapons (Sig), designed for non-shooting conscripts of a nation that did the banking for the Austrians and Germans about 60 years ago.

 

[navyretired 1]

This post took off faster then I thought it would but the answers were exactly as I expected. Several people listed things they didn't like about Glock and then said but they had and carried it. There are several things I don't like about the Glock also but I'm not going to foam at the mouth with instant dislike whenever Glock is mentioned as a couple of these on this post.
Some people think that they have to spend $X++++ like all the other sheep and have the guns that the magazines say the "operaters use", people I have a flash "Operators" in our Military can use any weapons they want individually. A very significant portion of them choose Glock, who the heck do you think proved they could be fired under water. A weapon which seldom if ever malfunctions and will fire anything stuffed in the magazine shouldn't be denigrated every time it's mentioned, But it happens all the time. I noticed several people said " I just don't like the feel of them", hell that's a good reason not to own but not to getting crazy with hate when talking about them.
What was funny was the guy's who list what they don't like about them and then admit they were on their hip most of the time and I admit I think it feels like a block of wood in my hand but I would carry it into combat any time any where.
BTW I love Colt's Government Model and own 9 of them. When I was in Combat I carried a 1911A1 and the damn magazines would malfuction if you didn't strip and clean every night or day.

 

[J Lazy H]

I must admit that I had a hand full (pun intended) of problems with the 1st few Glocks I have owned. My 2 favorite carry guns were the G30 and the G23. At first I was so discouraged with my ability to fire either one with any degree of accuracy I sold or traded both and kept searching for the perfect carry gun for myself. I own Sigs, Colts, XD's and so the list goes. I just couldn't find the one I felt I could bet my life on. All I knew was at this point I hated Glocks. About 2 years ago a shooting/trading buddy of mine had traded into a Glock that he said I had to try. But I'm a "Glock Hater". I gave it a run anyway and have carried it for almost 2 years now. Here's the deal. It is a G23 2ND Generation. What a difference it made for me. No finger groves, very little hump and no rail. I still can't believe the difference it made in my ability. Since, I have searched out a few other 2nd gen Glocks and like magic, I love the darn things.

 

[swampboy]

Boats wrote:

I freely admit to being a "hater." I might as well since I'd be called one anyways for disagreeing with cultists.

I won't buy a Glock because:

They have those stupid finger bumpers, or grooves, or whatever they are, but they hit me wrong all over. Allegedly this is "my problem," and not a stupid "one size fits some" design shortcoming.

The trigger is too short reach for my tastes and there is nothing to effectively be done about that.

There's the hump at the bottom of the back strap that is rather unlike anything else I have ever fired. It's absolutely ridiculous that Gen 4 Glocks only change the level of annoyance at this "feature" but do nothing to eliminate it.

The trigger guard/front strap is unrelieved to any degree I'd call usable. Glocks rub me the wrong way literally on my middle finger.

The brake pedal on the bang switch is irritating. I won't own an XD or a SR9 due to this "feature" either.

The nearly non-existent slide release lever forces overhanding or sling shooting of the slide and I like having the option to use a real slide release.

The squarish magazine catch is tremendously annoying and not well blended into the frame. Now they've made it even bigger.

And none of the above even touches upon the idiotic grip angle. Oh, wait, the Still Fat and the Really Thick Founder, and the "Generation 4" of "perfection" are futilely trying to address many of these "non-issues."

Some shooters I respect like Glocks, because they apparently fit enough and they are fairly reliable. Lots of idjits I cannot respect are drool monkeys for their Fuhrerpistole all over the internet concerning these "combat weapons." Never mind that they were designed by a non-shooting curtain rod manufacturer for a non-shooting conscript filled army which hasn't been seen "fighting" anyone since it was last capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago. Yeah, compared to just about everyone else in the world, Austrians know what design characteristics best go into a combat pistol.

Poor ergonomics is issue 1a. Semi-retarded Glock evangelism is 1b. We're all supposed to be impressed by ol' Gaston basically giving away his misshaped lumps to gain domestic cop market share through currying favor with bean counters who couldn't say no to such cheap-ass deals.?

I guess I have higher standards than that.

Well, Boats, I can't say that I agree with much of what you said, but I give you an A+ for sarcasm and hyperbole. I enjoyed the rant.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

The reasons I don't own Glocks anymore:

1. Ergos are terrible for me.
2. Sights are hard for me to use and... plastic.

The reasons I respect Glocks:

1. The vast majority of them are extremely reliable.
2. The design is simple and easy to use.

 

[christcorp]

I've shot 5 different glocks, from friends, multiple times. I don't like the way they feel. I don't like the trigger pull. I don't like that it feels like it was made by Mattel or Hasbro. I'd own one for target type shooting, but I'd never carry one for defensive purposes. I want a gun with a decocker. I want one that is SA/DA. Glock is neither a SA or a DA. And it doesn't have double strike capability. Yes, for a range gun or plinker; maybe. If my life depended on it? No way.

 

[Boats]

I guess you also hate Italian designed weapons too (Berettas for example).
After all, Italy really hasn't fought any more shooting wars than Austria.

Here's a key difference: Pietro Beretta, Nazi hostage between late 1943 until freed by Italian Partisans in 1945.

Gaston Glock? Just a Nazi 1944-45 and suspected Nazi sympathizer not too long ago.

And of course you probably hate those German made weapons as well (HK and Walther) being designed also by those "capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago".

Regardless of their stupidity for jumping in on World War One and becoming Nazis for WW2, there's no denying they actually participated in those wars.

]And you must really hate FN and Browning pistols!
After all, Belgium couldn't even defeat the Austrians, Italians, and Germans.

FN's BHP soldiered on for the good guys more than for the bad guys.

And of course you must also hate the Swiss designed weapons (Sig), designed for non-shooting conscripts of a nation that did the banking for the Austrians and Germans about 60 years ago.

Nah, the Swiss know a lot about shooting, unlike an old Nazi working in his basement.

I'd buy a Glock that fits. That isn't going to happen though. Nevertheless, you should be able to identify the gratuitous insults of Herr Glock that were heaped upon totally legitimate design criticisms for what they are. Someone got that they were hyperbole.

 

[Skillet]

I dont HATE glocks, I just am uninterested in them. I don't really like the grip angle, I think they are kinda ugly, and everybody and their dog owns one. And their motto. Perfection. ug. No mechanical object will last indefinately and will fail at least once.

Some people are just weird, how they pretty much hate an inanimate object. Proves that hate is abound everywhere.

 

[fastbolt]

Somehow this thread hasn't been all that surprising considering the topic.

Glock makes a rather simple, utilitarian and serviceable defensive pistol which can suit the needs of a number of folks.

As a Glock armorer I've certainly had the opportunity to replace a number of broken, damaged and worn parts in working LE Glock pistols. I can say the same for some other firearms for which I've been trained as an armorer. Hardly a surprise. Things can break. That's one of the reasons they make spare parts, you know.

As a matter of fact, this thread (and another one like it elsewhere) have reminded me that I need to put together a parts order for Glock. I haven't had the parts needed for some repairs for some Glocks that have been brought to my attention in recent months. My stock of parts slowly dwindled while my attention was occupied elsewhere, it seems.

Anyway, personally I tend to prefer Glocks chambered in 9mm.

I do own a G27, but only because it came to me for a price not likely to be repeated and I thought I'd give it a try. I decided to keep it, but it has been slightly less reliable when it comes to feeding issues than the G26. I think the brisk recoil of the .40 S&W cartridge requires more of the shooter than the 9mm cartridge, especially when fast-paced, difficult and complex courses-of-fire are involved, but I feel that way about other .40 guns, as well (and I own 5 pistols chambered in .40 S&W). I've run over 10,000 rounds through my G27 and have only experienced maybe over a dozen feeding issues (a couple of which were obviously ammo-related, so they can't really be attributed to the gun itself) and I can accept that for my needs.

I've handled and shot (and repaired) some Glock .45's, but the design just hasn't appealed to me enough when chambered in ,45 ACP for me to buy one of my own. I thought the G37 I handled and tried was interesting, but I don't need yet another cartridge in my personal collection.

Ditto the .357 Sig model/cartridge.

Matter of fact, ditto that for the G20, although when I tried one of the early ones imported in '90, using the standard Norma ammo of the time, I felt it was an interesting offering.

I suppose it would be fair to say that I've seen fewer problems in 9mm Glocks, and have heard of fewer problems reported in 9mm models by other LE armorers with whom I've spoken, than in other caliber offerings.

The tac-light issue affecting some .40 guns (G22/23's) is real enough to the folks who have experienced it. I know of an agency where a friend worked, and for which I met their armorer, and their G22's were still experiencing erratic feeding issues when their folks attached lights to their guns. Last I heard they were going to try some brand new mag springs on their guns to see if that helped (and yet their guns were only 4-5 years old and should have come with the 11-coil mag springs when new).

I also listened to another armorer in my last Glock armorer class asking for some direction to get his own G23 reliably feeding when he attached a light. the advice he was given in the class? Try some different ammunition.

Maybe the new Gen4 guns will be another step along in hopefully resolving issues like these. Locking block, mag spring and mag follower revisions haven't seemed to have completely done the trick, yet.

I was sort of hoping that Glock would increase the slide mass of the .40 models at some point, since you can only go so far when increasing recoil spring rates, especially if you're going to use the same springs in 9mm guns. Unfortunately, that would also probably mean the slide profiles would be affected and new guns wouldn't fit in existing holsters for .40 models, which would probably be a marketing concern for both Glock and the holster makers. Dunno. Just idle speculation.

I'll be keeping my pair of subcompact Glocks.

For that matter, I'll also be keeping my pair of SW99's and my pair of M&P's.

The next plastic framed pistol I buy will be another M&P, though.

I've been to 6 armorer classes spread among the Glock, 99 and M&P pistol lines, and I don't really feel inclined to 'play favorites' among them. They all work well for their intended roles.

Bottom line?

Glock makes a fine and serviceable pistol.

It's just a handgun.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Kingofthehill]

I own glocks, and although they have been good to me and work like they are supposed to... im not going to sing their praises.

there ARE better, and there ARE polymer guns better than glocks like the M&P... but Glocks just have a huge fanboy following that gets old after a while. Just like those grumpy all metal 1911 fanboys and the Sig/HK Preppy's.

damn near every gun serves a purpose and is better in 1 area than another. Glock fits in that race as well, but it doesn't cover all bases, no guns do.

JOe

 

[saturno_v]

Very short and simple

I respect Glock for their accuracy and reliability.

I would never buy one because:

1) I do not like polymer pistols (I "tolerate" just my P-11 because it is pocket piece)....probably is not rational but I just do not like them

2) Their functionally primitive firing system...I know, it is for simplicity and cutting costs, etc...however, it is more limited and more prone to mishandling compared to a SA/DA decocking design, it is an undisputable fact.

3) I personally find them ugly...not a strong reason but a reson anyway...

 

[J Lazy H]

There have been many here that "just don't like the looks" of a Glock. I have to agree 100%. That said, I don't pull my ccw G23 2nd gen. out all the time to show it off. To me it's a tool, (I guess I am too). I have some Colts, Browning's and a few others in my safe with all the bling that I go to, to impress my gun buddies. Some with grips that cost more than my Glock, one with an internal laser that looks so cool on my Kimber I still almost wet myself every time I show it off. It would only be my night time gun or indoors gun because you can't see the dot in the bright sunlight. Oh well, it looks cool. All joking aside now, I didn't at first just start shooting one hole with this G23. It aims different, recoils different, has a different trigger feel than any of my other hand guns and so it goes. I give it a run at the range at least twice a month just to keep it second nature for me when and if I need to use it to defuse and or stop a threat. I wonder if a bg (bad guy) would feel embarrassed if he/she was shot by an ugly gun?

 

[easyg]

Here's a key difference: Pietro Beretta, Nazi hostage between late 1943 until freed by Italian Partisans in 1945.

Regardless, Beretta supplied the Italian army with weapons to kill the allies in WWII until 1943.

Gaston Glock? Just a Nazi 1944-45 and suspected Nazi sympathizer not too long ago.

He was 15 years old.
How politically "in the know" was the average 15 year old in the 1940's?
This is really lame.

Regardless of their stupidity for jumping in on World War One and becoming Nazis for WW2, there's no denying they actually participated in those wars.

You don't believe that Austrians fought in WWII???

FN's BHP soldiered on for the good guys more than for the bad guys.

And the same is true of Glocks.
By far there are more "good guys" carrying Glocks than "bad guys".

Nah, the Swiss know a lot about shooting, unlike an old Nazi working in his basement.

I would guess that the average Swiss conscript is no more competent with a handgun than the average Austrian conscript.

Nevertheless, you should be able to identify the gratuitous insults of Herr Glock that were heaped upon totally legitimate design criticisms for what they are. Someone got that they were hyperbole.

Sure....right....

 

[ForumSurfer]

Personally, I don't care for the grip angle of the Glock.

I don't either. I think they are far, far from perfect. I think they are far from aesthetically pleasing. It's a tool, nothing more.

Yet I just bought one. I respect it for what it is. I don't feel it is perfect or superior to other designs. I simply felt no collection was complete without one. If I ever get accustomed to this grip angle thing my gen4 17 will become my night stand weapon.

 

[captain awesome]

Well, I don't hate them, I don't own one, I don't own a 1911, I do own an XD, and here is why. Growing up, my dad/family was never all that into hand guns, mostly just rifles and shotguns, although we did have a couple single action revolvers. As I grew up I began to really appreciate the revolvers, I absolutely love the way thy look, feel, and handle. Never did gain a fondness for the black plastic semi autos.

A year and a half ago I was looking for a second job, and went into armed security. They wouldn't supply my side arm, and wouldn't allow me to carry a revolver, so I had to buy one and was on a budget. I looked at glocks and honestly they were too expensive. I found the xd I bought for about 2/3 the price of a comparable glock at several of the gun stores I went to so I settled on that. it was quite a package for a decent price I thought. I have since fired several hundred rounds through it never had a misfeed, it is fairly accurate, but I have never really loved it.

I was of the decision that when I had more money i would buy a glock, the reason being that the accessories and add ons for them were cheaper and everywhere. But I never warmed up to them enough to do it. I came to the conclusion that they are over priced pieces of plastic, how ever reliable they may be. They have no style IMHO and everyone else has one, and they all pretty much look the same.

I would much rather have a nice stainless 1911. they may be over priced as well, but they feel better in my hand, I like the look better, and while every one has one of them too, I have seen some beautiful custom 1911's, and they have quite a history. I shot my great great uncles 60 year old 1911 on Saturday. Have you ever shot a 60+ year old glock?

Not badmouthing them, they just don't excite me, and I will probably never own one because of that. to many of my fellow guards just wont shut up about their glocks as well. If I try and get a word in edge wise about my xd I am promptly cut of or "educated" on their guns superiority. What ever.

 

[REAPER4206969]

Have you ever shot a 60+ year old glock?

Are you suggesting the Glock will not last 60+ years?

 

[Mike J]

I do not own a Glock. I have nothing against them. The ones I have shot were accurate & handled well.
However the Glock Kool Aid Corps I find very annoying.

 

[Mitch from LA]

Yes, Glocks are perfectly cromulent handguns.

A noble pistol embiggens the smallest man

 

[J Lazy H]

"Glock Kool Aid Corps" ????