Anyone order the Glock "gadget"

Status
Not open for further replies.
80.00 seems a mild price for piece of mind or prevent a fatal mistake!LOL
People pay much more for pistol decorations such as a fancy grip or even more exotic embellishments.
 
I personally couldn't use it. It seems like a bad idea to me... if it gets stuck you essentially have a useless gun. I also can't imagine it's a good idea to have an aftermarket part that renders your gun useless.
 
I personally couldn't use it. It seems like a bad idea to me... if it gets stuck you essentially have a useless gun. I also can't imagine it's a good idea to have an aftermarket part that renders your gun useless.
Click to expand...

Baloney. This is not a complex mechanical device that increases the chance of failure. It is an elegant solution to a real concern for many.
 
Anyone order the Glock "gadget"

HighValleyRanch said:
TunnelRat,

If you read further, SouthNarc tested the device in hours and hours of force on force training at his academy and this (what your referred to) didn't seem to be an issue in the development.

"in addition, noted Instructor Craig "Southnarc" Douglas tested prototype Gadgets for a year in his highly regarded Extreme Close Quarter Concepts (ECQC) class involving students fighting at contact distance in sand, dirt, gravel, rain, and sun with no failures related to the Gadget in more than 500 training evolutions."

These is nothing that would prevent you from pushing on the back of the plate to get the slide back into battery and still be able operate the glock as usual as if it never had the device.

The sole object of this gadget is to be able to detect and prevent movement of the striker when holstering.



I suggest people go to Pistol-forums.com and read much of the development of this device to understand why it came into being.
Click to expand...



I'm not talking about a tap to the back of the slide to get it back into battery. I'm talking needing to apply constant pressure to hold it into battery. From what I can tell on the video constant pressure is what disables the trigger.

It's good to hear that it's been tested as mentioned. I still don't personally want one for the other reasons I mentioned, but it does sound like a lot of work has been put into it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
AK it doesn't seem to concern Glock at all. They do what they do very well and are very successful doing it. That doesn't mean that an aftermarket part that makes it better for some is a bad thing. Why is this offensive to Glock disciples.
 
I'm not offended by it, I just personally wouldn't use it. But there are plenty of products on the market that fit that description and are very successful. Not choosing to use something isn't an insult to the creators.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Im new here and new to CC but isn't your thumb busy drawing the firearm from the holster? I dont know how others were trained, I only know how I was trained. I like gadgets like this and it seems well designed and not made of polymer. IMO the cost of the gadget would be better spent on a quality holster or quality training.
 
Im not offended by it either. I just dont see the point.

All it does is add another level of unnecessary complexity to a basically simple gun.
 
TunnelRat, you have done nothing but make the case, without acrimony, why this product is not for you. I respect that. Dismissing those who choose this product as unknowing or unskilled is another thing though.
 
It is an elegant solution to a real concern for many.
Click to expand...
Is that Glock hate speech for a Rube Goldberg device to resolve a problem that doesn't exist?:D
It doesn't offend me, just seems like an expensive gimmick without real purpose, and a potential for failure.
 
Im new here and new to CC but isn't your thumb busy drawing the firearm from the holster?
Click to expand...
the device is for holstering, not the draw stroke.

And while the average person might holster his/her weapon a few times or even once a day, this device might seem unnecessary if you have all the time to make sure the holster is clear of obstacles, your finger off the trigger, and by angling the body and slowly holstering the weapon. And you might even be able to do that after an encounter with all the adrenaline dump.

If you are holstering your glock 40 times in a training session a couple of times a week (like many of the enthusiasts over at Pistol forums training), then you might see the desire for such a device.
 
If you are holstering your glock 40 times in a training session a couple of times a week (like many of the enthusiasts over at Pistol forums training), then you might see the desire for such a device.
Click to expand...

I've done the training you are describing with Glocks. I've done it with a cover garment, without a cover garment, and in FoF. Honestly holstering wasn't an issue. To me the big key is to have a holster with a rigid opening and body. A lot of the NDs I've read of with holsters are when people are using cheap nylon holsters that fold in on themselves and end up engaging the trigger. This can be done with leather but it has to be stiff enough. You also see people who rush to reholster and get their cover garment trapped in the holster causing a ND. If you're holstering you're doing it because you've scanned the area and decided that the immediate threat has subsided. You shouldn't be in a rush and regardless of the trigger system you need to be careful. I'm also not opposed to a quick peak into the holster, but I get some people hate the idea of losing situational awareness for even 1/2 second.

I get the people on pistol-forum.com likely know all this. But to me NDs with holsters are often from what I said above and to me those issues can be resolved without this device.

Now all that said, I don't carry appendix, but people in the courses I've done have carried appendix. They made it through multi-day courses without such a device, though some did specifically choose pistols with manual safeties.

That said once again if someone wanted such a device that's his/her call.
 
I can see agencies, police/military, mandating the Gadget.

And if enough agencies do so, it cold easily become a standard.

Then, like the ILS on Smith revolvers, another industry will spring up
on how to nullify/remove it.

And for a lot of striker fired buyers, prices will be driven up for the
older guns without it. Yet another market, similar to the Series 70 vs.
Series 80 crowd or the Smith ILS vs non-ILS crowd.
 
I can see agencies, police/military, mandating the Gadget.

And if enough agencies do so, it cold easily become a standard.
Click to expand...
I doubt that Glock will ever make this contraption standard, or even an option on their guns.
 
It's a passive device for safety whilst reholstering. Todd Green was the co-creator of this device and a firm believer in the concept after enjoying the added safety of reholstering AIWB with hammer fired HKs.

I've been using this device daily for years. I've never met one naysayer that wasn't impressed with it in person.
 
Isn't there someone making an actual safety that can be added to any Glock?
If so, for those who are concerned, that might be an even better way to go.
But, to keep it simple (KISS), just observing the safety rule of keeping the trigger finger off of the trigger while either drawing or holstering would do nicely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top