In Praise Of A Glock.

[WardenRoss]

How did I stumble across this thread (rubbing my eyes) from 1989?

Wait, you mean it's a current thread?

.

 

[CajunBass]

I'm not a Glock "fan" but I've owned several over the years and don't dislike them. I've only got one now, a G-42 and it's a pretty neat little gun. I like it a lot.

 

[double-dipper]

Last week I saw a video showing a plasticky FN pistol that was in the sun in a car and the owner took his fingers and squeezed inward at the bottom of the empty magazine well and both sides came together. Now I do not know if a Glock uses this lousy a grade of plastic but FN sure as heck is.

Do you believe everything you see on the internet? There is a lot of fake things posted on youboob! Just say'in friend!

 

[venomballistics]

I have to admit to gaining significant respect for the glonk.
They have set a few useful standards, particularly their 9mm magazines.
Any 9mm PCC worth it's salt today either takes a glock mag, or can be readily adapted to do so. In the current arena of PMF's, The whole of the Gen 3 and Gen 5 designs have contributed greatly to many interesting developments.
This same community has also developed a good number of interesting things for the glock as well.
The DMB&Co D.R.U.M. is one such development . It's a 3D printed 60 round drum mag with interchangeable towers for glock 17, 19, 26, Scorpion evo, M11, and a few others.
I run the G26 tower in an AR9 build that has been stunningly flawless. It just wouldn't be possible without Glock's contributions.

 

[AlHunt]

I'd post in this thread but I can't think of anything that hasn't been said about Glocks less than 1 million times.

 

[WarDawg]

I was told once that back in the Nam the enemies rifle could chamber our M16’s cartridge. But our M16 couldn’t chambers the enemies. It’s how you want to look at it as the truth . Or just turn the bottle up and take another snort. Wardawg

 

[budhall]

A lot of misleading claims here. It might mean more if you can provide some actual data other than your opinion.

Agree 100%!! Interesting "claims", but everything described is operator error. Just one more symptom of the trend of late to require stupid warning labels for virtually every possible error of stupidity. i.e. to protect us from ourselves; I'll pass, thank you!!

 

[Sal1950]

I was told once that back in the Nam the enemies rifle could chamber our M16’s cartridge. But our M16 couldn’t chambers the enemies.

OMG, that's the craziest thing I've read in a long time.
A AK47 7.62 being able to fire a M16s .223

Buy what you like, I'm an American and I buy American Company Products whenever possible.
My guns and my cars/trucks all, every one of them.

 

[bigggbbruce]

I've owned one Glock, and I gave it away.

 

[MyTurn]

I don’t carry guns that can melt in a car window.

I carry a CZ-75BD with wooded stocks.

Where did you ever hear such a ridiculous thing?

 

[MyTurn]

I've owned one Glock, and I gave it away.

Please give your next one to me!

 

[bigggbbruce]

Please give your next one to me!

Don't hold your breath. I wasn't looking for that one.

 

[dobegrant]

Have been shooting Glocks since 1990 and have never had an issue with any of them.

 

[desi2358]

I have owned a number of Glocks over the years going back to a first generation G17 I bought in the late 80's. In general, I found them to be a solid, reliable handgun with only a couple flaws. The first one being the grip angle has always seemed off to me, resulting in a tendency to point low. Not a gun I could pick up in a hurry and count on hits by point shooting. Using the sights they are fine but they just don't feel right in my hands. Kind of a subjective thing.

As to some of the other complaints I've seen posted........... I discovered that they were prone to misfires when shooting military surplus ammo (of which there was a lot on the market back then and likely had hard primers) but never seemed to misfire with commercial ammunition. The plastic sights can be damaged or knocked off. I had one of mine lose a front sight and when we had the gun shop I replaced a few for customers plus a couple on trade ins. As to the trigger being snagged and going off, it's certainly possible but most such cases I could get actual facts on resulted from holstering with a finger on the trigger. Largely a training issue.

Currently I don't have a single Glock in the house but do have a couple S&W M&P models. They simply fit my hand better. Won't turn down a deal on a Glock if one comes up though, confident that they will work just fine.

 

[WildBillWJW]

Dobe, my experience has been the same with Glocks. Purchased my first, I believe early 90’s around the time of the 94’ assault rifle bill. My 2nd Gen model 23 came with high cap mags, but they were the early non metal lined. It proved such an easy to shoot, reliable, and combat accurate pistol I followed it with a 3rd Gen model 27…for warm weather CC.

Even the short mag 27 was easy to hit with, including small targets. And nether gun has ever skipped a beat. The first CC course my wife and I attended in LA. The instructor had us complete the full 240 round qualification shoot. Every other semi auto that day at the range had at least two failures, a really nice Sig 226 had to be broken down and cleaned/oiled halfway through. But my Glock 19c never failed to go pop.

When we all got to the field stripping and cleaning of our guns section, and I removed my 19’s slide, the after market captured recoil reducing spring literally fell apart in my hands. But my Glock had never stopped shooting during the 240 rd hour plus shooting session! All my Glocks now are kept stock except for the addition of night sights. Here’s my CC, auto, and edc team…

 

[Warren Sear]

I've owned one Glock, and I gave it away.

 

[Warren Sear]

Hard to beat a G19. It's my every day carry.

So nice,
I did it twice!

 

[austinnottx]

I had a custom manual safety put on my Glock 19. Without a manual safety if you snag the trigger it will fire. It happens when you carry them or attempt to holster them, or if you are in the process of trying to load or unload the Glock without being extra careful. That is a headache and a real danger I will not put up with.

What people do not understand is that the Glock trigger safety was "not" designed to keep the gun from going off if you accidentally snag the trigger (and it doesn't) rather it was designed to keep the gun from firing if it was dropped and the passive firing pin safety failed. Glock has had numerous recalls way, way, to numerous to go into here, suffice to say Glock called them "upgrades" gambling that the average Glock owner would be too dumb to know that the term is synonymous with recall. For the most part Glock was right.

The other glaring design disaster of the Glock is that it has a totally unsafe takedown procedure. The slide must be forward and you must pull the trigger before removing the slide, that is an accident waiting to happen and happen it does all the time when people forget to check the chamber before attempting a take down of the pistol.

Now contrast this to more safely designed pistols that require the slide to be locked back and open before takedown. A forgotten round in the chamber would be ejected out when the slide was pulled back.

Glocks have very weak striker energy (they flunked a German police test trial so the Germans just modified the requirements to get them to pass).

If you do not believe any of this take an empty cartridge case and seat a high primer (no gun powder, no bullet). Put it in the chamber and gently press the slide home. Now attempt to fire off the primer. It will not fire. Try this same test with a hammer fired gun or even a 1900's era striker fired gun and they both will fire the primer.

If the open striker channel (another design defect) is not kept squeaky clean or is over lubed you run the risk of a misfire, especially in handloads that may have a high primer not fully seated. To make it even worse the bottom of the glock grip has a gaping large hole in it which is an open highway to the underside of the slide and striker channel and dust and other contaminants can easily find their way into the striker channel.

Glock chambers were purposely made oversize to aid in feeding reliability but this results in lousy accuracy and the rear of the cartridge is not fully supported making a blow out of the cartridge case far more likely than with other designs. It's a major reason Glock warns not to use handloads in their firearms.

Glock trigger pulls are generally creepy which again is not an aid in accurate shooting.

Glock plasticky sights wear down with numerous holster presentations and of course snap off easily when the gun is dropped.

In conclusion be honest and ask yourself this question: "Would you carry a loaded revolver with the hammer cocked back even in a holster let alone just stuck in your waistband"? Any sane person would answer, "Heck no, do you think I am nuts!" Well then do you think carrying a Glock with a round in the chamber is any different as far as an accidental discharge. The honest answer is no, there is no difference because both weapons will fire with the light snag of the trigger which fires them off instantaneously, you get no second chance.

There is an old axiom dating back thousands of years and it is "What people cannot see, they do not fear" that is why they think a Glock is safe to carry with a round in the chamber (they cannot see the cocked back striker). Herr Glock originally was going to put a hammer on his new pistol but was told that no one in their right mind would buy it and they were right no one would have.

If you have a stock factory Glock carry it with the chamber empty otherwise get a manual safety installed if you want to carry it with the chamber loaded. I might add that the manual safety can be left in the "on" position when loading or unloading the Glock, which again will also prevent those other types of accidental discharges as well.

And the most laughable axiom is "The best safety is between your ears" the graveyards and/or wheelchairs are full of such people, its called "being a victim of Darwinism".

very thorough. now do a report on driving above 25mph.

 

[Phenix]

Isn't that thing nose heavy?

Would just make it steadier for better accuracy and easier to get hits during rapid-fire.

 

[65-2x2]

I know that Glocks are fine tools I know that they are tough, reliable and accurate...and they are cheap. (did I mention cheap?) However, there are a heck of a lot of fine tools out there. Glocks are just so damned ugly and that is why I don't own one. They look like something made in N. Korea; functional by no sense of style, grace or dignity. I just have to depend on good looking junk like CZs, Berettas, Colts, and Smith and Wessons. If I ever lose a gunbattle to a Glock, at least I will go out with style