How did S&W lose the LE market?
- Thread starter Silversmok3
- Start date
Can I get an "AMEN" from the congregation?!
amen as I have bought a few
True. Most officers never do more than qualify. Fortunately, that is more than most citizens (95%) do, as well.
1 old 0311
Member
That's the absolute truth.
Before our baby Troops hit the streets they've run about 3500 rds thru their guns at the academy. At minimum each year they're going to run another 400 rds, most will end up shooting more. So their first year on the job they've already run 4000 rds thru their issued gun. Our SWAT guys were running 5000-10,000 rds a year thru their guns. So when you buy an LE trade in gun are you getting the gun that was the spare which set in my closet in the office or are you getting the SWAT guy's gun which is 7 yrs old?
How many non-LEOs actually shoot that many rds in their lifetime let alone thru just one gun? Not many unless they're involved in some type of competitive shooting. Most non-LE guns will get maybe a box thru it then shoved in a drawer.
So when people talk about LE guns being "carried a lot, shot little" then they aren't looking at the facts of non-LE guns which are "not carried, not shot at all".
Kavinsky
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 672
- Reaction score
- 33
to my knowledge it was probably part clinton agreement with the normal shooters where I believe there was at one point a boycott of new smith and wesson products and a matter of money with the LEO's
and seeing as the glock 17 is heavily overbuilt in every matter possibile and everyone was switching to 9mm's in the 90s well you can kind of see how the chips fell, hell its only in the past 10 years that everyone seems to be switching to .40's and .45s again
and the M and P only came out in the past what is it? 5 years? plus the stigma or whatever it was called got smith and wesson sued for copywrite infringment from glock themselves in the 90's and from what Ive heard it wasn't the best reliability wise and trigger wise to begin with.
basically everything that could go wrong, went wrong for smith and wesson and its only now that their playing catch up 10 years too late, if not 15 or 20 years.
and they still havent removed that bloody lock yet nor quite got the QC and Customer service up to par yet, basically they still need to sort all of their models a 100% out and get everything up to spec but it does seem like their eventually getting there, save for the lock business, along with the pinned barrel thing which it seems the magnum guns do need, atleast in the case of the 29.
and seeing as the glock 17 is heavily overbuilt in every matter possibile and everyone was switching to 9mm's in the 90s well you can kind of see how the chips fell, hell its only in the past 10 years that everyone seems to be switching to .40's and .45s again
and the M and P only came out in the past what is it? 5 years? plus the stigma or whatever it was called got smith and wesson sued for copywrite infringment from glock themselves in the 90's and from what Ive heard it wasn't the best reliability wise and trigger wise to begin with.
basically everything that could go wrong, went wrong for smith and wesson and its only now that their playing catch up 10 years too late, if not 15 or 20 years.
and they still havent removed that bloody lock yet nor quite got the QC and Customer service up to par yet, basically they still need to sort all of their models a 100% out and get everything up to spec but it does seem like their eventually getting there, save for the lock business, along with the pinned barrel thing which it seems the magnum guns do need, atleast in the case of the 29.
Last edited:
Capt.,
I certainly can't statistically challenge your facts. I think that the ISP and other highly trained departments fall in that same category. Unfortunately, many smaller departments that are economically challenged don't have that luxury. Some officers in those departments, unless they are "gunnies" are lucky to put 50-100 rounds a year through their weapons...and tragically, the shots on target relative to those fired in lethal situations reflect that lack of training. I don't have the statistics at hand but if I recall correctly, that the ratio of hits to shots fired have improved somewhat over the years but they are still far below optimum.
Bob
I certainly can't statistically challenge your facts. I think that the ISP and other highly trained departments fall in that same category. Unfortunately, many smaller departments that are economically challenged don't have that luxury. Some officers in those departments, unless they are "gunnies" are lucky to put 50-100 rounds a year through their weapons...and tragically, the shots on target relative to those fired in lethal situations reflect that lack of training. I don't have the statistics at hand but if I recall correctly, that the ratio of hits to shots fired have improved somewhat over the years but they are still far below optimum.
Bob
Kavinsky
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 672
- Reaction score
- 33
yeah lock the slide, pull down on the takedown leavers, pull down on the slide lock and pull the trigger, you would think they would have looked into a simple take down leaver by now like on the 92.
but its funny to read that the NYPD had trouble with the Glock 19, maybe thats also the reason why the Kingston police in Texas got rid of them back in the early 90's and switched to another make.
hmm reading this thread is really making me wanna get rid of my glocks now.
Goony,
I've fired many thousands of rounds through most every model of my Glocks and I guess I've just missed that field stripping problem that you are referring to. Still have all my toes too.
Bob
Kavinsky
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 672
- Reaction score
- 33
field striping while absentmindedly having a round in the chamber.
just imagine a tired cop or regular person coming home who isnt thinking clearly who just has to clean his gun, he drops the mag but forgets to rack the chamber, it could happen, especally if the guys not gun savy and hasnt had the rules of safe gun handling driven into his head.
just imagine a tired cop or regular person coming home who isnt thinking clearly who just has to clean his gun, he drops the mag but forgets to rack the chamber, it could happen, especally if the guys not gun savy and hasnt had the rules of safe gun handling driven into his head.
Kavinsky,
It is a very weak argument to blame an unintential discharge on a proven design when the real cause is the ineptitude of the user.
You show me ANY gun and I will show you how to kill yourself with it when you use it absentmindedly.
Bob
It is a very weak argument to blame an unintential discharge on a proven design when the real cause is the ineptitude of the user.
You show me ANY gun and I will show you how to kill yourself with it when you use it absentmindedly.
Bob
The fact remains the average non-LEO still doesn't shoot that much a year. Even that 50-100 rds is more than the average non-LEO. A lot of non-LEOs won't shoot that many ever in a gun. Having taken in a lot of guns on trade from non-LEOs over the years when someone brings in a gun they want to sell or trade the most common phrase I heard was "I bought this X number of years ago and have never shot it." They bring in the box of ammo they bought at the same time they bought the gun and maybe there might be a few rds missing out of the box. Then you look at the gun and it's obviously had very few rds thru it. Non-LEO guns are "fired very little, not carried".
As far as hit ratio that's another completely different topic. But since you brought it up, to answer your concern, to understand the hit ratio you also have to look at the dynamics of the shooting. When a LEO is involved in a shooting situation they are almost always returning fire. That means the BG has drawn his firearm and started firing which means the LEO is drawing and firing while taking incoming. How's your accuracy when you have bullets coming at you? Until you've BTDT and understand the full dynamics of a LEO shooting then the stats don't really mean anything.
You might want to read up on the Glock field stripping procedure before you attempt it. The procedure you described it won't work for the Glock.
Last edited:
Capt.,
You and I have no disagreement on any of your points!
I have never been unlucky enough to have been shot at. I've been a trainee and a trainer long enough to know you are correct that being in a firefight is impossible to duplicate in training.
Bob
You and I have no disagreement on any of your points!
I have never been unlucky enough to have been shot at. I've been a trainee and a trainer long enough to know you are correct that being in a firefight is impossible to duplicate in training.
Bob
The PA State Police went from Beretta M96 Brigadier pistols in 40 S&W to Glocks in the past couple of years. The PSP Berettas are bringing close to $500 on the used market which is far more than the Commonwealth is paying for the replacement Glocks. Our County Sheriff's also went from Beretta M-9's to Glocks. Before the M-9's they carried 5906's.
Several Troopers frequent an LGS in my area that specializes in black guns and LEO trades. These guys are hard core shooters. Some love the Glock and owned them long before the PSP switch. Many carry the plastic bricks on duty but prefer SIG or 3rd Gen S&W's for personal carry. I haven't heard too many lament the departure of the Brigadiers. They also don't like the new S&W M&P pistols or Rugers for that matter.
I owned one Glock 22 in 40S&W. I hated the feel and grip angle on that weapon with a passion. Traded it off after only two months and lost $50 in the process. Too bad the LEO's in departments where they can't carried personal weapons get stuck with guns they don't like.
Several Troopers frequent an LGS in my area that specializes in black guns and LEO trades. These guys are hard core shooters. Some love the Glock and owned them long before the PSP switch. Many carry the plastic bricks on duty but prefer SIG or 3rd Gen S&W's for personal carry. I haven't heard too many lament the departure of the Brigadiers. They also don't like the new S&W M&P pistols or Rugers for that matter.
I owned one Glock 22 in 40S&W. I hated the feel and grip angle on that weapon with a passion. Traded it off after only two months and lost $50 in the process. Too bad the LEO's in departments where they can't carried personal weapons get stuck with guns they don't like.
J D Allen
Member
s&w lost LE market
Glock was the official pistol of austria. The deal was Glock would sell them to American LE at cost. This got them into the LE market. The two problems are accidental shootings and breakage. now that S&W has their own version , many departments are buying them. They buy them at half the cost of retail. As I write my S&W 4046 is on my desk. A real pistol that weighs near 3 pounds and shoots real easy.
Glock was the official pistol of austria. The deal was Glock would sell them to American LE at cost. This got them into the LE market. The two problems are accidental shootings and breakage. now that S&W has their own version , many departments are buying them. They buy them at half the cost of retail. As I write my S&W 4046 is on my desk. A real pistol that weighs near 3 pounds and shoots real easy.
gtoppcop
Member
All,
All of the threads are very good. I did read some excerpts of the Glock book. Good read for anybody remotely interested in firearms and politics.
I've often heard from many older coppers here in the Golden State that S&W's 3rd Gens were some of the finest L.E. sidearms to come out of Springfield. They had the inherent durability, shootability and the backing of S&W should anything go awry. I remember sending a Model 686 back to them with a letter on Department letterhead, only to get it back in NIB shape in less than a week!
Many of you are on-point: Glock simply had a decent product and a much lower price. Remember the early to mid 70s when a Japanese upstart named Toyota flooded the market with reliable fule-efficient cars at a steal of a price??? Simple economics.
The 3rd Gens in my opinion (I used to carry a Les Baer 1911 on the job) are some of the best L.E. guns to be had. That is, if the LEO is able to devote a modicum of time with the gun to learn its strengths and weaknesses. Massad Ayoob has written volumes on the efficacy of the 3rd Gens. The fact remains. No LEO has been killed with his/her 3rd Gen carried on safe. The 3rdGen has many features that make it one of the best pistols for L.E. work. Chief of these are the safety features.
With that said, are there better weapons out there? Yes. I prefer the 1911 platform OR a Model 28 for L.E. usage. In the Corps we're confined to the Beretta. For years I have resisted the platform, but have come to it and learned its strengths and weaknesses and have come away with the humble opinion that it will go down as one of the better MILITARY pistols of all time.
I think that WHATEVER pistol one shoots that he/she can shoot, know and ultimately prevail with IS the BEST platform extant.
As far as the finite budgets go, many of you ARE on point. Departments and Agencies with shinking budgets are necessitated to get the most 'bang for the buck'. Pardon the pun. The Marine Corps is no different. They have (and I believe still are) phasing out the lower receivers of the M9s and replacing them with the M9A1 lowers...thus making a newly-configured light-pistol at a decent outlay of YOUR $$$.
I do however ask myself about the NJSP going to the uber-expensive P7 paltform. That flies in the face of getting the lowest bidder. Just my $.02
Finally, "Service After the Sale" is also another deal maker/breaker. Beretta's L.E. service was from what I'm told horrible. Their L.E. Branch wasn't responsive to the end-user. That's why you don't see many Beretta 92/96s in police holsters. Great gun, but bad service support. Glock and Smith and Wesson both have an enviable record of follow-on service. I'm sure that HK has decent service for the larger agencies (DHS, etc.). I think in the coming years, you will see the M&P platform overtake the Glock. All predicated ont he design AND the service that S&W provides.
Thanks for listening to my ramblings...
-GToppCop
All of the threads are very good. I did read some excerpts of the Glock book. Good read for anybody remotely interested in firearms and politics.
I've often heard from many older coppers here in the Golden State that S&W's 3rd Gens were some of the finest L.E. sidearms to come out of Springfield. They had the inherent durability, shootability and the backing of S&W should anything go awry. I remember sending a Model 686 back to them with a letter on Department letterhead, only to get it back in NIB shape in less than a week!
Many of you are on-point: Glock simply had a decent product and a much lower price. Remember the early to mid 70s when a Japanese upstart named Toyota flooded the market with reliable fule-efficient cars at a steal of a price??? Simple economics.
The 3rd Gens in my opinion (I used to carry a Les Baer 1911 on the job) are some of the best L.E. guns to be had. That is, if the LEO is able to devote a modicum of time with the gun to learn its strengths and weaknesses. Massad Ayoob has written volumes on the efficacy of the 3rd Gens. The fact remains. No LEO has been killed with his/her 3rd Gen carried on safe. The 3rdGen has many features that make it one of the best pistols for L.E. work. Chief of these are the safety features.
With that said, are there better weapons out there? Yes. I prefer the 1911 platform OR a Model 28 for L.E. usage. In the Corps we're confined to the Beretta. For years I have resisted the platform, but have come to it and learned its strengths and weaknesses and have come away with the humble opinion that it will go down as one of the better MILITARY pistols of all time.
I think that WHATEVER pistol one shoots that he/she can shoot, know and ultimately prevail with IS the BEST platform extant.
As far as the finite budgets go, many of you ARE on point. Departments and Agencies with shinking budgets are necessitated to get the most 'bang for the buck'. Pardon the pun. The Marine Corps is no different. They have (and I believe still are) phasing out the lower receivers of the M9s and replacing them with the M9A1 lowers...thus making a newly-configured light-pistol at a decent outlay of YOUR $$$.
I do however ask myself about the NJSP going to the uber-expensive P7 paltform. That flies in the face of getting the lowest bidder. Just my $.02
Finally, "Service After the Sale" is also another deal maker/breaker. Beretta's L.E. service was from what I'm told horrible. Their L.E. Branch wasn't responsive to the end-user. That's why you don't see many Beretta 92/96s in police holsters. Great gun, but bad service support. Glock and Smith and Wesson both have an enviable record of follow-on service. I'm sure that HK has decent service for the larger agencies (DHS, etc.). I think in the coming years, you will see the M&P platform overtake the Glock. All predicated ont he design AND the service that S&W provides.
Thanks for listening to my ramblings...
-GToppCop
The step prior to taking it down where you have to pull the trigger is what I am referring to. This is where many accidental discharges have occurred. Sure, the gun should've been cleared, but it's just poor from a procedural standpoint that a gun need be "dry fired" to be field stripped.
BUFF
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
I don't believe that Smith & Wesson ever owned the police semiauto market to begin with. They would have had to have it first in order to lose it.
S&W did own the law enforcement REVOLVER market prior to the influx of the semiauto pistols. I think S&W failing to acquire a big share of the pistol market had a lot to do with timing and the number of competitors.
S&W manufactured the first American-made, popular double action semiauto, the Model 39, and then invented the double action/high capacity pistol with the Model 59. Their initial competition was mostly single actions like the Colt 1911. American law enforcement traditionally changes things very slowly; we like to do it that way because we always did it that way. Plus, different, better sidearms were a pretty low priority until the officer survival movement gained steam, fueled by violent social unrest beginning in the 1960's and the cocaine wars of the 1980's.
Other makers, mostly foreign, began to be imported. Sig-Sauer, Beretta, H&K, then Glock. The "civilian" market found high capacity semautos to be very attractive. The cops began to feel somewhat under-gunned.
By the time the officer survival movement had enough traction to push police administrators into looking at something better than six shot revolvers, there were plenty of established semiautopistols to choose from.
It was then a combination of timing, user features and price that led to the domination of Glock. By the time most departments decided to switch from revolvers to semiautos, or found their initial semiauto choice wanting somehow, there was the Glock. It was light. It was simple to use, with no safeties to manipulate. It was used the same way the revolver was used, draw point and pull the trigger. No decock, no safety to put back on. It was high capacity. It was reliable. The stockless frame made it somewhat easier for smaller handed shooters than, say, the Beretta 96. Plus, it was cheap to make. Glock was smart enough to combine these factors with aggressive marketing and then product diversity.
Reliable, simple and cheap. In the right place at the right time with a good product at the best price.
There we have it.
S&W did own the law enforcement REVOLVER market prior to the influx of the semiauto pistols. I think S&W failing to acquire a big share of the pistol market had a lot to do with timing and the number of competitors.
S&W manufactured the first American-made, popular double action semiauto, the Model 39, and then invented the double action/high capacity pistol with the Model 59. Their initial competition was mostly single actions like the Colt 1911. American law enforcement traditionally changes things very slowly; we like to do it that way because we always did it that way. Plus, different, better sidearms were a pretty low priority until the officer survival movement gained steam, fueled by violent social unrest beginning in the 1960's and the cocaine wars of the 1980's.
Other makers, mostly foreign, began to be imported. Sig-Sauer, Beretta, H&K, then Glock. The "civilian" market found high capacity semautos to be very attractive. The cops began to feel somewhat under-gunned.
By the time the officer survival movement had enough traction to push police administrators into looking at something better than six shot revolvers, there were plenty of established semiautopistols to choose from.
It was then a combination of timing, user features and price that led to the domination of Glock. By the time most departments decided to switch from revolvers to semiautos, or found their initial semiauto choice wanting somehow, there was the Glock. It was light. It was simple to use, with no safeties to manipulate. It was used the same way the revolver was used, draw point and pull the trigger. No decock, no safety to put back on. It was high capacity. It was reliable. The stockless frame made it somewhat easier for smaller handed shooters than, say, the Beretta 96. Plus, it was cheap to make. Glock was smart enough to combine these factors with aggressive marketing and then product diversity.
Reliable, simple and cheap. In the right place at the right time with a good product at the best price.
There we have it.
Last edited:
Kavinsky
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 672
- Reaction score
- 33
True but even you gotta admit the glock field strip is kind of akward compaired to guns like the Beretta 92 and Walther p38, made all the odder when you read up on the glock design and learn that basically what the austrians were going for was a replacement for the P38, a gun with a simple take down lever that breaks into three basic pieces with the recoil springs built into the frame so they dont go all over the place while field stripping it.
but I did just that on the 17L a moment ago and it worked fine, granted its one of the first ones from 88' but I dont think they've changed it any way have they?
actually I seem to remember trying the one they say your supposed to do and I couldnt get the damn thing appart.
Kavinsky,
I don't know what gun you are field stripping but the procedure that you outlined back in post 50 is not for a Glock.
Kavinsky and Goony,
It seems that the "defect" that you are describing is the absence of a magazine disconnector in the Glock. A number of other guns, including the M1911, are so constructed. There are valid arguments both for and against a magazine disconnector that we needn't go into here. Suffice it to say, if you have a gun either with or without one you should know it and operate it accordingly.
Goony,
If you pull the trigger on a firearm without a magazine disconnector that has a round in the chamber it will fire. It doesn't matter whether you are trying to disassemble it or keep it in the fight while you are reloading! When it does so, it isn't an accidental discharge. The gun is functioning exactly as it was designed. What you are describing is an unintentional discharge caused by USER ERROR!
If a person cannot operate a machine as it was designed, the best advise is to stay away from that machine.
Bob
I don't know what gun you are field stripping but the procedure that you outlined back in post 50 is not for a Glock.
Kavinsky and Goony,
It seems that the "defect" that you are describing is the absence of a magazine disconnector in the Glock. A number of other guns, including the M1911, are so constructed. There are valid arguments both for and against a magazine disconnector that we needn't go into here. Suffice it to say, if you have a gun either with or without one you should know it and operate it accordingly.
Goony,
If you pull the trigger on a firearm without a magazine disconnector that has a round in the chamber it will fire. It doesn't matter whether you are trying to disassemble it or keep it in the fight while you are reloading! When it does so, it isn't an accidental discharge. The gun is functioning exactly as it was designed. What you are describing is an unintentional discharge caused by USER ERROR!
If a person cannot operate a machine as it was designed, the best advise is to stay away from that machine.
Bob
Similar threads
