I recently have been interested in buyning a glock 9mm, probably the 19. After doing some serious reading, It seems that glocks are top notch in reliability, dependability, durability, and accuracy. I just read a book called Combat Handgunnnery by Chuck Taylor. He claimed to have put over 100,000 rounds of ammo through his glock 17 and that it is still going strong with almost little show of wear. I also recently got Glock's Annual catalog that they put out with all the articles and reviews in it. They claim that their gun is definitely one of the best in reliability, dependability, durability, and accuracy. How true is this of glocks? Is this just clever marketing?
Are glocks really this good?
- Thread starter meat
- Start date
Reliability, durability and dependability are, indeed, all at or near the top of the heap. Accuracy is more in the "plenty good enough" category.
Take one for what it is; a stone-axe simple, amazingly rugged, reliable utility pistol and you will not be disappointed. Just don't fall for the whole "Glock: Perfection" hype. There's no such thing as a perfect gun; they're just tools, you pick the right one for the job at hand.
Take one for what it is; a stone-axe simple, amazingly rugged, reliable utility pistol and you will not be disappointed. Just don't fall for the whole "Glock: Perfection" hype. There's no such thing as a perfect gun; they're just tools, you pick the right one for the job at hand.
Jody Hudson
New member
I agree with Tamara. They are wonderful tools. I prefer the 19 and 21 myself.
I have found the East German Makarov to be superior in all the stated areas. However, I have a 19 with hi-cap mags for when I'm in the woods where I know there are large dog packs; because of the nearly-as-good reliability, nearly-as-good accuracy and the larger capacity magazines and the fact that Quik-Shok makes ammo in 9mm and not in 9x18 for the Makarov.
Otherwise; I consider the Glock 19 to be second best of all pistols for ME and the Glock 21 to be the BEST .45 that I've ever owned or shot (out of several dozens of all types and prices and customizations).
You'll do well with any Glock. But they are not perfect, just almost so. Makarovs are as close to perfection as I've found in firearms.
I have found the East German Makarov to be superior in all the stated areas. However, I have a 19 with hi-cap mags for when I'm in the woods where I know there are large dog packs; because of the nearly-as-good reliability, nearly-as-good accuracy and the larger capacity magazines and the fact that Quik-Shok makes ammo in 9mm and not in 9x18 for the Makarov.
Otherwise; I consider the Glock 19 to be second best of all pistols for ME and the Glock 21 to be the BEST .45 that I've ever owned or shot (out of several dozens of all types and prices and customizations).
You'll do well with any Glock. But they are not perfect, just almost so. Makarovs are as close to perfection as I've found in firearms.
I too will have to agree with Tamara. The Glock is a very GOOD weapon. It's not perfect my any stretch. The accuracy is only very good .It seems like every other gun out there will outshoot the Glock in accuracy. Also if you really love the craftsmanship of a finely made firearm the Glock won't make you swell with pride. I personally prefer guns made out of metal but I do own a Glock for when I need to carry a weapon that I really have no emotional attachment to.
Well I guess I have to be the bastard here and go against the popular opinion. I don't like Glocks. I might even hate them.
I don't care how reliable, dependable, or whatever else the Glocks have claimed or proven themselves to be. To me, they've proven to be nothing except innacurate. It was't untill after I started shooting with them that I learned about their "legendary" durability. The guy's story seemed a little tall, but I believed him, because for all I know, they are the Tanks of Pistols, they're just not accurate.
The only way I can shoot accurately with a Glock is by thinking about how I am shooting...which wouldn't matter if I had all the time in the world to take a shot. However, the usual reason for buying a Glock is for personal protection and unfortunetly Glock pistols are not my first choice for a defensive pistol.
Get a Sigarms (as my friend puts it...the Cadillac of pistols) or a Kimber, or a CZ 75. These are all very reliable guns that shoot far better than Glocks.
I don't care how reliable, dependable, or whatever else the Glocks have claimed or proven themselves to be. To me, they've proven to be nothing except innacurate. It was't untill after I started shooting with them that I learned about their "legendary" durability. The guy's story seemed a little tall, but I believed him, because for all I know, they are the Tanks of Pistols, they're just not accurate.
The only way I can shoot accurately with a Glock is by thinking about how I am shooting...which wouldn't matter if I had all the time in the world to take a shot. However, the usual reason for buying a Glock is for personal protection and unfortunetly Glock pistols are not my first choice for a defensive pistol.
Get a Sigarms (as my friend puts it...the Cadillac of pistols) or a Kimber, or a CZ 75. These are all very reliable guns that shoot far better than Glocks.
P
PreserveFreedom
Guest
I carry a Glock 27 regularly. No problems and I trust it 100%
IamNOTaNUT
New member
Meat -
Yes. But they are not as good a sliced bread. Or cold beer.
Yes. But they are not as good a sliced bread. Or cold beer.
I also own a G21 (my favorite of all my firearms) and a G19.
And I'd like to also second Tamara's observations: Glocks are durable and reliable, maybe the best in the industry on both counts, but they're still just a tool in your hands.
blarney,
Don't know how accurate you need your pistols to be, but I can put 10 shots in the "A" zone from 20 yards in about 12 seconds with my G21. And I went 30 out of 30 at 50 yards into the same zone with the same firearm firing deliberately. Glocks may not be a "natural" for you, but for some of us they are the best choice out there. I know they are for me, because I tried everything else at one time or another. I don't see anyone winning a target competition with a Glock anytime soon, but they are far more than "adequate" in the accuracy department.
And I'd like to also second Tamara's observations: Glocks are durable and reliable, maybe the best in the industry on both counts, but they're still just a tool in your hands.
blarney,
Don't know how accurate you need your pistols to be, but I can put 10 shots in the "A" zone from 20 yards in about 12 seconds with my G21. And I went 30 out of 30 at 50 yards into the same zone with the same firearm firing deliberately. Glocks may not be a "natural" for you, but for some of us they are the best choice out there. I know they are for me, because I tried everything else at one time or another. I don't see anyone winning a target competition with a Glock anytime soon, but they are far more than "adequate" in the accuracy department.
Glock reliablity
What I've seen at the range, they are accurate, dependable weapons. But as one pointed out, everything a Glock can do, a Makarov can do just as well, and some instances better. The Makarov will stand up to the all the abuse a Glock will. I think the Makarov can fire lead bullets, from what I'm told, and I could be wrong, No Glock can do that, due to the polygonal bore.
What I've seen at the range, they are accurate, dependable weapons. But as one pointed out, everything a Glock can do, a Makarov can do just as well, and some instances better. The Makarov will stand up to the all the abuse a Glock will. I think the Makarov can fire lead bullets, from what I'm told, and I could be wrong, No Glock can do that, due to the polygonal bore.
Blarney,
Perhaps a better way to gauge the preformance is to put the gun in a ransom rest and see what it will do. The fact that you personally have trouble shooting Glocks says little about the accuracy of the line. It says volumes about what you should be shooting, and it looks like Glock is not on your short list. Not a problem, unless you're giving advice to someone that the pistol itself is innacurate, which is simply untrue.
- Gabe
Perhaps a better way to gauge the preformance is to put the gun in a ransom rest and see what it will do. The fact that you personally have trouble shooting Glocks says little about the accuracy of the line. It says volumes about what you should be shooting, and it looks like Glock is not on your short list. Not a problem, unless you're giving advice to someone that the pistol itself is innacurate, which is simply untrue.
- Gabe
bad_dad_brad
New member
I have never bought a firearm that I did not like. Because I researched and handled before I bought. As far as handguns, I like my Glocks the best. My favorite is the G19.
Glocks are not target weapons but they are combat accurate. They are controlable (especially in 9mm), totally reliable, and I can abuse them if I so choose and they will still go boom.
I am used to the trigger because I never shot that many handguns before my Glocks. But I can imagine if you are used to single action pistols, then the Glock trigger might seem a little weird.
Glocks are not target weapons but they are combat accurate. They are controlable (especially in 9mm), totally reliable, and I can abuse them if I so choose and they will still go boom.
I am used to the trigger because I never shot that many handguns before my Glocks. But I can imagine if you are used to single action pistols, then the Glock trigger might seem a little weird.
Glock reliablity
I've not personally shot the Glock, but have seen it in action, I'm not taking anything away from the Glock, Its a rugged, reliable, and accurate weapon. Its easily maintained and is nearly indestructable. On the same note, the Makarov is also, a rugged, reliable, and accurate weapon. It too, is also easily maintained, to me, even easier than a Glock, as the barrel of the Makarov is not intended to be removed. To me, since the Makarov has been issued and used by five countries, possibly more that came under the Soviet sphere of influence as their sidearm, has a 50+ year track record, and has likely been subjected to simular tourtre tests like the Glock has, makes the Makarov (to me anyway) the better weapon due to its proven track record. The Glock too, has a track record of its own and its also positive, but not as long quite yet. One would do well with either. The Glock has one advantage over the Makarov, (unless its in .380) is caliber availabilty. 9x18mm Makarov is becoming popular, but not the the extent that the 9mm Parabellum, .40 S&W, .357 SIG, 10mm, and .45ACP already is.
I've not personally shot the Glock, but have seen it in action, I'm not taking anything away from the Glock, Its a rugged, reliable, and accurate weapon. Its easily maintained and is nearly indestructable. On the same note, the Makarov is also, a rugged, reliable, and accurate weapon. It too, is also easily maintained, to me, even easier than a Glock, as the barrel of the Makarov is not intended to be removed. To me, since the Makarov has been issued and used by five countries, possibly more that came under the Soviet sphere of influence as their sidearm, has a 50+ year track record, and has likely been subjected to simular tourtre tests like the Glock has, makes the Makarov (to me anyway) the better weapon due to its proven track record. The Glock too, has a track record of its own and its also positive, but not as long quite yet. One would do well with either. The Glock has one advantage over the Makarov, (unless its in .380) is caliber availabilty. 9x18mm Makarov is becoming popular, but not the the extent that the 9mm Parabellum, .40 S&W, .357 SIG, 10mm, and .45ACP already is.
I used to hate glocks and now I love them.
I used to hate thier trigger. When I was new at shooting I felt the mushy trigger made it hard to get good groups. But later I found that it was a very easy trigger system to master and it was actually a better trigger design than the lot of DA Sa designs. It allows a shooter to have light consistent trigger that requires no safety to be taken off prior to shooting. The GLocks low bore axis reduces muzzle jump compared to other auto's like HK USP's and all the sigs. Glocks are available in every caliber you could want. They always seem to work. I have found that the accuracy on most glocks is equal to most other brands except sig in slow fire in the hands of a good shooter. In Speed drills I have found that only 1911's can do as well for me as the glock.
PAT
I used to hate thier trigger. When I was new at shooting I felt the mushy trigger made it hard to get good groups. But later I found that it was a very easy trigger system to master and it was actually a better trigger design than the lot of DA Sa designs. It allows a shooter to have light consistent trigger that requires no safety to be taken off prior to shooting. The GLocks low bore axis reduces muzzle jump compared to other auto's like HK USP's and all the sigs. Glocks are available in every caliber you could want. They always seem to work. I have found that the accuracy on most glocks is equal to most other brands except sig in slow fire in the hands of a good shooter. In Speed drills I have found that only 1911's can do as well for me as the glock.
PAT
Pray tell what exactly is the tactical advantage is being able to fire lead bullets. I am still laughing my butt off over the very notion that someone would actually carry a mak as a defensive pistol in this day and age. Heck I would rather have a good 357 mag revolver and I hate revolvers.
PAT
PAT
Jody Hudson
New member
Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion about Glocks and Makarovs. But, you obviously are not fully aware about the similarities between whores and super models as much as you could be... Either you havn't known enough super models or the whores you know are not expensive enough. Just teasing... Not really... 
I love these faces most of all...
By the bed is the Makarov (and my Mossberg pump). In the woods is the Glock. That's my decision based on my experience.
And I dooooo miss those Super Models, having lived in Hollywood and NYC both for a while and working with a bunch of them. I never had enough money to PAY for the super model looking whores either, but I worked with lots of them from Vegas.
I had to smile at your example. Perhaps another one will be more convincing...
I love these faces most of all...By the bed is the Makarov (and my Mossberg pump). In the woods is the Glock. That's my decision based on my experience.
And I dooooo miss those Super Models, having lived in Hollywood and NYC both for a while and working with a bunch of them. I never had enough money to PAY for the super model looking whores either, but I worked with lots of them from Vegas.
I had to smile at your example. Perhaps another one will be more convincing...