M2.0 Really Challenging Glock?

[Arik]

Arik. Very simple the packaging shows the extent glock will go to to save a penny. As for a ransom rest also very simple. It showed my m&p's were more accurate than my glocks.
As for flexing a ransom rest simulates a hand gripping the pistol. To hold it during firing. Glocks are so ultra thin they are by far the most sensitive to pressure in the ransom. barely any pressure and the pistol a . Won't fire or b. Won't reset. What this tells us is that glock uses the ultra thinnest plastic possible to save a penny. Just look at their sights. If you like glocks by all means shoot them. I still have a lone wolf custom g41 it's fun to shoot . But I like my m&p 45 better

Do you buy TV's that come in wooden crates or ones that come in cardboard boxes? What do you do with those cardboard boxes afterwards? What the box tells me is it's a mode of transportation. If I can save and $25 I'd gladly take my gun in a brown bag. It's going to go into the trash within 10 minutes of buying. At best it'll get lost somewhere in the basement for ever and ever. I don't understand why I should pay more money than necessary on a transport box.

If ransom simulates hand gripping than the guns shouldn't function at all. It's amazing that despite being ultra thin they still work after being thrown out of helicopters, frozen, shot at, ran over, blown up, set on fire. Why is it still working after having ran 1000 rounds of continuous full auto fire? The ultra thin frame should have warped and or melted.

I simply look at history of performance. Despite whatever it looks like in a rest it still works

 

[Mister X]

My last two s&w wheelguns came in cardboard boxes. I guess that means they are cheap junk.

 

[Rastoff]

The Glock 19 is the perfect compromise between small size for concealed carry and large enough to be comfortable and easy to shoot/manipulate. The original M&P fell on either side of that. The full size was/is a great gun, but many found it larger than they wanted when carrying. The compact was/is an easy gun to conceal, but not as easy to manipulate for regular shooting.

S&W made a smart move when they came out with the M&P Compact 2.0. It is almost exactly the same size as the G19. I also see it as a superior design. Of course that is open to debate if you want to start another thread.

However, what's really challenging Glock is not the 2.0, but the Shield. The Shield has taken the handgun world by storm. I don't know of any small/tiny gun that is a direct competitor. All the others on the market either have terrible triggers or serious reliability problems.

Glock still commands a large part of the market and has a serious cult following. That cult following can't sustain them alone. They have recently bowed to the market by offering interchangeable back straps and the MOS. If they don't continue to innovate, they will fall behind. I don't think they're stupid. They will innovate, but so far, what they've put out is lack luster.

 

[stavey]

Mister x glock makes their pistols out of the same thin plastic as their boxes. Hell glock doesn't even bother with a cutout in the box . A flap of foam with all the junk rammed in their. Not very impressive. As for your wheelguns . I would hope s&w would at least put revolvers in a padded case and then in the box. Like ruger does with their lcr's. However we are talking glock /mp. here. Bottom line shoot what you like. They will all get the job done defensively.

 

[Mister X]

However, what's really challenging Glock is not the 2.0, but the Shield. The Shield has taken the handgun world by storm.

I wouldn't say the World. Outside of the U.S., how many Shields are being sold? And here it seems to be popular primarily with novices. And consider military & police use worldwide of Glock vs S&W M&P. There's simply no comparison.

 

[Arik]

The Glock 19 is the perfect compromise between small size for concealed carry and large enough to be comfortable and easy to shoot/manipulate. The original M&P fell on either side of that. The full size was/is a great gun, but many found it larger than they wanted when carrying. The compact was/is an easy gun to conceal, but not as easy to manipulate for regular shooting.

S&W made a smart move when they came out with the M&P Compact 2.0. It is almost exactly the same size as the G19. I also see it as a superior design. Of course that is open to debate if you want to start another thread.

However, what's really challenging Glock is not the 2.0, but the Shield. The Shield has taken the handgun world by storm. I don't know of any small/tiny gun that is a direct competitor. All the others on the market either have terrible triggers or serious reliability problems.

Glock still commands a large part of the market and has a serious cult following. That cult following can't sustain them alone. They have recently bowed to the market by offering interchangeable back straps and the MOS. If they don't continue to innovate, they will fall behind. I don't think they're stupid. They will innovate, but so far, what they've put out is lack luster.

Agreed on all except the last point...well mostly.

I dislike "innovation" or rather add ons. It's one thing to come up with a completely different design. Like let's say the new Hudson H9. It's definitely innovative whether you actually like it or not. However, good gun companies are usually good when they make one or two things. When they start changing things up is when you get issues. Sig was great when they only made 226/220. Then they branched out to a hundred different options in 59 different finishes and their quality started to suffer. At one point they had almost 30 versions of 226 in 9mm. Glock was great when all they made were their base models. Once they got into changing things that's when problems started. The extractor problem of 2010, the MOS problem with screws walking out, now the problem with gen5 finish flaking off the internals and causing triggers to bind, rear sights being way off. Now they're coming out with a X version which is a 19 slide and a 17 frame. Why? It does nothing a +2 mag adaptor doesn't do to a 19. And most people who conceal carry that style of gun would rather have a longer slide and a shorter frame.

If you have a design that works leave it alone. If you want to add a different model fine but leave well enough alone.

Now when I look at guns such as Glock or Sig I only buy the old ones.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Dave Lively]

Now they're coming out with a X version which is a 19 slide and a 17 frame. Why? It does nothing a +2 mag adaptor doesn't do to a 19. And most people who conceal carry that style of gun would rather have a longer slide and a shorter frame.

I thought the same thing when Sig came out with the 320 "Carry" which also has a 4 inch barrel slide with a 17 round grip. Apparently this size gun is popular with police that spend a lot of time riding in cars. The shorter barrel makes it more comfortable while driving and concealment is not an issue. Glock probably wants to make sure they have all the bases covered when it comes to law enforcement sales.

As a civilian I agree that a Glock 19 size gun makes more sense.

 

[Rastoff]

I dislike "innovation" or rather add ons.

Well, I think you're using "innovation" differently than I am. "Add ons" are not innovation. That's just lipstick on a pig if you ask me. No, being innovative is what S&W did with the 2.0 trigger. They took an OK trigger and completely changed the trigger bar to sear connection and made it better. With the M&P in general, they took a polymer frame and embedded a steel sub frame, that's innovative.

The original Glock was innovative. Until the G43, they didn't do anything innovative and even the G43 is just a variation on the same old design.

So, what I meant was that Glock needs to be innovative to continue in their dominance. Like Harley Davidson, they sat on their laurels for a long time and their cult following won't carry them forever.

In truth though, the M&P 2.0 Compact is the first direct competitor to the G19. I'm curious to see if it will really give the G19 a run for its money.


I also agree that changing the flagship is not the right idea. When Gibson released the Les Paul guitar, it quickly became their best seller. When they said they were going to "improve" the design, Les Paul said, "If you open a hot dog stand and it does well, you don't change it to a hamburger stand. You open another stand down the street and change that one." Don't mess with success.

 

[Mister X]

I thought the same thing when Sig came out with the 320 "Carry" which also has a 4 inch barrel slide with a 17 round grip. Apparently this size gun is popular with police that spend a lot of time riding in cars. The shorter barrel makes it more comfortable while driving and concealment is not an issue. Glock probably wants to make sure they have all the bases covered when it comes to law enforcement sales.

As a civilian I agree that a Glock 19 size gun makes more sense.

The full size Glocks(primarily the 17 and 22) have been the choice for a very large number of police departments for a long time. If there has been frequent ongoing complaints about the length, it's news to me. The Glock 19's slide is only .47" shorter than the Glock 17's.

 

[catcus-jack]

Glock is a has been.

 

[Telecaster]

Glock is a has been.

Yet it's S&W that has financial challenges.

 

[Philadelphia Patriot]

My best friend works for the Philadelphia Police Department. He said the department is doing a presentation on smith and Wesson pistols to the higher ups soon. I know within past year or so the firearms instructors were testing the M&Ps.

I had to edit the above. It sounded like my friend was doing the presentation and that is not true.

 

[Rastoff]

The Glock 19's slide is only .47" shorter than the Glock 17's.

According to the Glock website:
G17
Overall Length- 7.95"

G19
Overall Length- 7.28"

That's more like .67" which is a noticeable amount.

 

[Mister X]

According to the Glock website:
G17
Overall Length- 7.95"

G19
Overall Length- 7.28"

That's more like .67" which is a noticeable amount.

That's overall length. The backstrap "hump" extends farther back on the 17. I'm just referencing slide length.

 

[Arik]

Glock is a has been.

How so? Their flagship guns continue to work and provide defense and reliability to officers, soldiers and civilians. It's everything I want in a handgun. How is that a has been? Because they don't do fancy slide designs? When they try to improve that's when problems start. Otherwise I don't care what zig zags they cut into the slide or what they add into the frame so long as it works. If my 20 year old Glock does everything I need it to in a self defense handgun I have no reason to buy a new one or a different brand even

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Horn]

Good Explanation of The Rest

Arik. Very simple the packaging shows the extent glock will go to to save a penny. As for a ransom rest also very simple. It showed my m&p's were more accurate than my glocks.
As for flexing a ransom rest simulates a hand gripping the pistol. To hold it during firing. Glocks are so ultra thin they are by far the most sensitive to pressure in the ransom. barely any pressure and the pistol a . Won't fire or b. Won't reset. What this tells us is that glock uses the ultra thinnest plastic possible to save a penny. Just look at their sights. If you like glocks by all means shoot them. I still have a lone wolf custom g41 it's fun to shoot . But I like my m&p 45 better

I appreciate different view points. I especially thought you're explanation of what the Ransom rest accomplishes was well put for
a lot of new folks to shooting. You did "expose" something about the Glock pistols new to me. So, you "did good".
You most certainly touched some hot buttons. Me? My pistols are all tools. I never loved any I used on duty or off duty other than appreciating them and treated them well.
I had a G26 and found it not to my liking and sold it. I have a G43 and keep it as a "recliner"arm and have other brands in a couple of other locations at home. All work as designed and all blue label
pistols with the same manual of arms.
Thanks again for a really good explanation.
I hope this can end what ever got started from your valued effort.
Stay safe out there.
Poli Viejo

 

[Mister X]

If there were some inherent flaw in the Glock design that negatively affected it's performance as a defensive weapon/tool, I'm pretty sure it would have surfaced long ago.

 

[Muss Muggins]

If there were some inherent flaw in the Glock design that negatively affected it's performance as a defensive weapon/tool, I'm pretty sure it would have surfaced long ago.

It's "its," but otherwise we finally agree on something . . .

 

[BE Mike]

There is no doubt that there are other choices out there for those who aren't in love with Glocks. The 2.0 is one of those choices. Once Sig gets caught up on the demand for accessories and X change kits for the P 320, there will be more Glock owners considering them. No doubt that Glock has the public name recognition and huge share of the police market. That being said, they really haven't done anything innovative since they came out with the G 17. I owned a Glock 23 and never really got to love it. They are an outstanding pistol; just not my cup of tea. My second plastic gun was a Kahr CM-9 and my third is a Sig P320 Compact. I still have and shoot the last two. No other pistol, including the M&P 2.0 will "kill" the Glock market, but Glock may commit suicide by not keeping up with current innovations offered by other manufacturer. That's what cost them the lucrative military contract, IMHO. One doesn't have to look very far back in firearm manufacturing history to see that Colt put the company on life support, when they solely depended upon the military contracts and spent no time developing innovative products or even producing old designs with high demand.

 

[Practical]

It is ironic people are debating the thickness and rigidity of polymer handguns.

10-20 years ago people were saying america is going down hill because our guns were made of plastic and ONLY American made Steel handguns like 1911's were in one man's opinion the best option.

A gun that meets the user's requirements and does so at reasonable cost, high reliability and minimal maintenance cost.

Glocks work for Law enforcement and now parts of US military. Are simple to maintain and don't require returns to the factory but can be fixed by armorers and Glock certified armorers anywhere.

S&W requires return to the factory and limits some parts.

Glock wins. (Note I still own more S&W than glocks and like the lifetime warranty because, I am a lazy consumer.)

 

[Arik]

IMHO. One doesn't have to look very far back in firearm manufacturing history to see that Colt put the company on life support, when they solely depended upon the military contracts and spent no time developing innovative products or even producing old designs with high demand.

Colt had more problems than just failure to develop innovative products. Colt hasn't been family owned for a 100 years. It's been bought and resold by corporations who's sole purpose is to take as much money out of the company as possible and sell the leftovers. With each resale the company has managed to not dissolve but barely exist. At one point the rights to build were sold separately for the company which caused Colt the manufacturer to pay for the rights to build the firearms they've been building. It's a lot more convoluted than just not being innovative and relying on gov contracts

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[BE Mike]

Colt had more problems than just failure to develop innovative products. Colt hasn't been family owned for a 100 years. It's been bought and resold by corporations who's sole purpose is to take as much money out of the company as possible and sell the leftovers. With each resale the company has managed to not dissolve but barely exist. At one point the rights to build were sold separately for the company which caused Colt the manufacturer to pay for the rights to build the firearms they've been building. It's a lot more convoluted than just not being innovative and relying on gov contracts

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Sounds a lot like S&W, but S&W has come out with new and innovative products over the years. Some were more successful than others, yet they are still thriving. I'm old enough to remember Colt's innovations, like the Double Eagle and All American 2000. I suppose that was the best they could do. I think Glock is resting on his laurels (like Colt). I think that Gaston was counting on brand recognition to get the military contract instead of trying to meet specs. If they stay with what they have, the parade will pass them by.

 

[Arik]

Sounds a lot like S&W, but S&W has come out with new and innovative products over the years. Some were more successful than others, yet they are still thriving. I'm old enough to remember Colt's innovations, like the Double Eagle and All American 2000. I suppose that was the best they could do. I think Glock is resting on his laurels (like Colt). I think that Gaston was counting on brand recognition to get the military contract instead of trying to meet specs. If they stay with what they have, the parade will pass them by.

Eh....yes and no. S&W was bought by other companies to add to the parent company's overall portfolio and obviously to make money. Where as Colt was sold to corporations who specialize in taking companies apart for as much money as possible. In simpler terms they are the junk yard and Colt is the junk car being sold piece by piece to make more profit. The parts are worth more then the company as a whole which is why at one point the rights were sold off then the Colt was sold off to a different corporation that does the same thing. The previous corporation sold the rights separate from the company and made more money then selling as one.

Glock actually did meet gov specs. In the recent Sig/Glock military trials it came down to Sig dropping the price to cost. Sig is selling their guns at cost. There may be some profit on the back end with parts, mags and rebuilds but as of now Sig is braking even on the sale of firearms.

Aside from that Glock is already used by the military just not universally. Every time theres a military procurement program they come in in the top when it comes to function. The last one was Sig simply outbidding on the price with similar function results. Before that was their lack of manual safety but that MHS was dropped altogether

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[cash71]

Just a little info regarding gun sales..much of the info we get about how many Glocks are sold is at glock forums and by people that grossly over blow everything about Glocks....I've heard guys say glock sells millions of of guns in the US. the truth is in 2016 Glock sales were 252 thousand guns all models....S&W sold 990 thousand handguns all models and Ruger sold 770 thousand handguns all models...the ATF is always 1 year behind listing sales for reasons of not effecting the marketplace.

These numbers are derived from ATF GUN registrations and as we know all gun sales have to be reported through the FEDS. Glock comes in total gun sales 9 th...Ruger comes in no. 1 @ 1million 668 thousand total sales and S&W comes in at no. 2 @
1 million 474 thousand total sales. S&W and Ruger totals are rifles and handguns


This tells me Glock sells no where near the amount of guns they are reputed to sell.. Glock guns are no threat to S&W or Ruger. This doesn't mean Glock isn't a decent gun it's just to put things straight....

I no longer have Glocks...I have S&W, CZ'S, Sigs and a Walther..
I sold many S&W's many years ago when I left collecting for 10 years BIG MISTAKE but whats gone is gone now I'm back again..

 

[Mister X]

Glock guns are no threat to S&W or Ruger. This doesn't mean Glock isn't a decent gun it's just to put things straight....

What about worldwide? I don't think you'll find too many Ruger's and S&W's in the holsters of military and police around the globe compared with Glock.

 

[cash71]

What about worldwide? I don't think you'll find too many Ruger's and S&W's in the holsters of military and police around the globe compared with Glock.

What does that matter these are numbers that can be proved facts in the US.....who knows what anyone sells world wide and frankly I don't care I was just tired of hearing ridicules claims over and over about Glocks, so these numbers put things in perspective..

I think Glocks are decent pistols but in no way the best ever (the new m&p 2.0 is a better gun plus my CZ's are better guns and my Sigs are better) based on they sell so many they don't sell what they lead you to believe they do.

Plus S&W, Ruger, CZ, Sig Sauer plus many more companies, are real gun companies that make full lines of guns rifles, pistols and revolvers. not just one gun......my .02

 

[Mister X]

What does that matter these are numbers that can be proved facts in the US.....who knows what anyone sells world wide and frankly I don't care I was just tired of hearing ridicules claims over and over about Glocks, so these numbers put things in perspective..

I think Glocks are decent pistols but in no way the best ever (the new m&p 2.0 is a better gun plus my CZ's are better guns and my Sigs are better) based on they sell so many they don't sell what they lead you to believe they do.

What ridiculous claims? It's not hard to verify what military and police here and worldwide use as their service pistols. Same with PD's here, the FBI, Spec Ops units and the majority of prolific defensive shooting instructors.

I could care less what the average civilian buys. Ruger's biggest seller is the LCP. The average gun buyer is untrained and uneducated and a great many of them simply go with the smallest and cheapest when picking out a handgun for personal defense. I'm much more interested in what knowledgable defensive shooting instructors and well trained individuals who put their lives on the line on a regular basis choose, and in that context, Glock is the choice of the majority.

 

[Arik]

What does that matter these are numbers that can be proved facts in the US.....who knows what anyone sells world wide and frankly I don't care I was just tired of hearing ridicules claims over and over about Glocks, so these numbers put things in perspective..

I think Glocks are decent pistols but in no way the best ever (the new m&p 2.0 is a better gun plus my CZ's are better guns and my Sigs are better) based on they sell so many they don't sell what they lead you to believe they do.

Plus S&W, Ruger, CZ, Sig Sauer plus many more companies, are real gun companies that make full lines of guns rifles, pistols and revolvers. not just one gun......my .02

All I want is ONE gun. ONE solid build reliable gun. No need for a line up. Make one and make it well. I loved Sug when they made only one gun. I'll take an old West German 226 over anything they make now. An old Glock over anything new. CZ75? Meh it works thats all it has to do but I'll take a USP over that any day. Ruger, Remington and the rest can make all the mediocre guns they want.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Arik]

What ridiculous claims? It's not hard to verify what military and police here and worldwide use as their service pistols. Same with PD's here, the FBI, Spec Ops units and the majority of prolific defensive shooting instructors.

I could care less what the average civilian buys. Ruger's biggest seller is the LCP. The average gun buyer is untrained and uneducated and a great many of them simply go with the smallest and cheapest when picking out a handgun for personal defense. I'm much more interested in what knowledgable defensive shooting instructors and well trained individuals who put their lives on the line on a regular basis choose, and in that context, Glock is the choice of the majority.

Better reply then mine

I stopped giving advice to friends. They would ask about a specific style of gun they wanted and id give them a few options. A few weeks later they come back with something completely different and almost always sub par. When I ask why they picked that one the reply is always...."well the store recommend it and it was cheap!". Gun bought simply on price. No other thought went into it. That's who "the whole lineup" is made for.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Telecaster]

First time I've heard Ruger called mediocre.