Are glocks really this good?

Mak "problems"

9x18mm is hardly underpowered. Like any caliber, if the shooter does his or her part, the bullet will do its part. One or two well placed 9x18mm slugs will convince your adversary to cease and deist. The sights might not be the best, but to me they will shoot nearly dead on at 25 yds. The trigger varies from country of manufacture, The East German's are regared to have the best triggers, although I've handled and shot all 5 examples and own an East German. To me, they all break cleanly and smoothly. The tactical advantage of a lead bullet is that sometimes, one may be faced with the possiblity of it being the only available, I would much rather have a weapon that can fire them without fear of adverse effects. As far as capacity goes, I was brought up on this rule: If you can't solve the problem with 6 shots (was a revolver), then you have a problem no handgun will solve. In the Makarov's case, its 8 shots, again, do your part and it will serve you will. Defense ammo is not that difficult to find if one knows where to look. A few online ammo dealers that can ship some 9x18 JHP within 24 hours will work.

I believe the Makarov is a viable platform for me, may not be for everyone. I did not express or imply it was a Glock, totally different animals, and as I said before, One would do well with either.
 
While the Sig might be the Cadillac(Yuck) of guns, I'll take a Glock which I consider the Lexus of guns or a H&K which I consider a Mercedes of guns.
 
chrismc1

I am sorry but having more than 8 rounds is a good thing and in my line of work it is essential. Yes most shootings are over in very few rounds but the exceptions can kill ya. As for power I will not trust a pistol that has less than 400 foot pounds unless it has a lot of momentium like the 45 acp to make up for it. The mak is light and slow a bad combination.
PAT
 
Agree to disagree

355sigfan,


Then for you, its (the Makarov) not the best choice for you since it does not fufill your requirments. We are, after all human and have different needs and wants in things. Sidearms are no execption. For me, it works just fine. Should I need more power, thats what my SKS and my Mauser 98K is for. Was a spirited debate though.
 
Actually MOST of the time, when I go into the woods where there are feral dogs and recently a few cougars; I always carry my little TPH .22 and with a vest or jacket, my G19. However, my .22s have killed dozens and dozens of feral dogs up to about 80 to 125 pounds. I used to live on a main path between thousands of acres of inaccessable woods with one little access in my back yard -- and the way to the local chicken plant where hundreds of pounds of chicken offal was dumped every morning just before dawn. The feral dogs, and cats, would exit the big woods ,through my back yard, on the way to the feeding grounds. On the way, all tuned up for eating, they'd often act quite agressively toward the breakfast smells of my home and my human scent I guess. Some lived... Most died of .22 head shots, if I saw them.

So, the tiny, light, slow (out of a two inch tube) little puny, ineffective .22 is lots less than a 9x18 but I would not want to have one in me. Shot placement is superior to anything else. Even chest shots with a 12 gauge slug or buck shot are not quickly reliable for police or civilian use against a torqued up criminal.
 
While the Sig might be the Cadillac(Yuck) of guns, I'll take a Glock which I consider the Lexus of guns or a H&K which I consider a Mercedes of guns.
Click to expand...


Then a finely-tuned custom 1911 must be the Rolls Royce of guns!
circle.gif
 
They claim that their gun is definitely one of the best in reliability, dependability, durability, and accuracy.
Click to expand...

Which manufacturer will not claim their product excels in every category?

GLOCKS are great guns.

I'll get flamed for this, but oh well :rolleyes: The GLOCK line of pistols is probably more hyped than any other line of pistols on the market. Do they deserve it? You be the judge.

I spoke to a neighbor the other day who was taking a civilian police "awareness" course with the local PD. During the course, they were exposed to much of the day-to-day routine of a police officer. One of the things they did was fired all of the police weapons. I asked him what the police carried for sidearms and he replied that they carried the GLOCK. He said they liked it because "it hit harder and was more accurate than any other handgun out there". Now my neighbor isn't a "gun person", but I would garuntee that a statement like that would weigh heavily on his decision of which brand of handgun to buy.

It bothers me a little to read/hear that type of statement. GLOCKS aren't perfect, they break, have malfunctions, might not be the most accurate hangun on the shelf, but to a beginner it is sure going to seem that that is not the case from what a lot of people say about them.

As far as your questions, in my experience, they are excellent in the first three compartments, but I would say it is a stretch to say they are top notch in accuracy. They are plenty accurate, but not top notch. Sure, any given individual gun might be more accurate than a lot of target pistols, but taken as a whole, they aren't top notch.

If you like the manual of arms and how they feel, buy one. If you don't, look elsewhere. Don't buy one just because people tell you they are the best.

Shake
 
I'll take the Combat accuracy of a Glock anyday over some super accurate and tempermental 1911. Last time I was at the range I saw 2 1911's w/all the gadgets malfunction, one kept having the slide lock engage before the mag was empty and the other stovepiped a few times. Another gun that failed was the rental Desert Eagle .50 ae which stovepiped every few rounds (This wasn't the first time I've seen that gun do that, that same gun stovepiped on me when I shot it last year too)
 
I have to agree that comparing a Makarov to a Glock is like....comparing a Yugo to a BMW? I mean, they both drive and all...but that is about where the comparison ends.

8 rounds of .380 versus what any Glock carries?

I don't know, I am at a loss for words that the two could even be compared.

BUT, for those that like the Mak and carry it, more power to you, whatever works for you is great. I can't see why anyone would not rather buy a used Glock though, unless they really can't afford $300 or so for an old Glock 19 or 22.


Re: Glock accuracy.
First of all, Glock is really taking over the competition market, so to say that Glocks cannot be shot fast and accurate is wrong. The only gun I see in any number at my IPSC competitions besides 1911's are Glocks, and every week there are more Glocks, often in the hands of ex-1911 shooters. (Not meant to bash 1911's, they are actually my favorite of all!)

Second, Glocks have been tested at very good groups in the past. Chuck Taylor says that he gets 2 inches at 50 yards from his G22 from a Ransom rest, and other tests have shown the stock Glock 21 to print 1.75" at 50 yards with optics from a bench. That is very accurate! The Glock is a very accurate gun, just about at accurate as any top gun on the market. Many people just don't know how to pull the trigger smoothly. That can be fixed with practice and instruction.

My Glock 32 (.357 SIG) prints 3 inch groups all day long at 25 yards. And most of the size of that group is my own fault, not the gun's, because I am shooting offhand. On a good day I do much better and I have seen a good shooter from a bench who could get constistent 1.5" groups at 25 yards with my gun. Seems pretty accurate to me.

One of my Sig-loving friends always reads articles that rave about the Sig and then comes and tells me how this article says Sigs are more accurate. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but when we go to the range I outshoot him by a mile, so who cares if the gun is accurate, the shooter is what matters.

But, to people that just don't like Glocks: that is cool, use and carry whatever you like.
 
Last edited:
Agree to disagree

Thats fair enough. Please don't be offended if I disagree with you or anyperson on this board. I may think something you do is not smart. That does not mean I think your dumb. It just means I think you made a bad choice.

These are the things I require in a hand gun.

1. reliability
2. comfort feel way it fits my hand practical accuracy.
3. accuracy
4. adiquate power. (nothing under 9mm need apply. For me I prefer more than that)
5. capacity (in a duty gun that means at least 10 rounds in a ccw that means at least 6)
PAT
 
Like Tamera, I like and believe in Glock firearms. I don't worship them. My personal choice for "beside the bed" is a Glock 21 w/Heine (sp?) slant 8 night sights. I shoot the 21 as good as I can shoot a handgun. I have other fine guns which folks would argue are "better"...but in my hand...the Glock will never know how good they "can" shoot.
The Glock is a fine gun for the bedside (I.M.H.O.) because it's a no brainer. Keep one in the tube...and all you have to do just pull the trigger. If I'm in a hurry to defend my family...I don't want to have to think about safetys or control levers. I pray I never need to use a gun on anyopne, but should I have to...I don't want to waste a single milli-second preparing the gun.
 
Not offended at all. I just happen to trust my Makarov more than any other because I shoot that weapon the best. I do have another weapon if for some reason its either inappropriate or not possible to carry it , in which case, my S&W Miltary and Police circa 1940 would be it. Can't beat .38 special, a proven round with nearly 100 years expereince, even more than the 9mm and the .45.


Agree to disagree

Thats fair enough. Please don't be offended if I disagree with you or anyperson on this board. I may think something you do is not smart. That does not mean I think your dumb. It just means I think you made a bad choice.

These are the things I require in a hand gun.

1. reliability
2. comfort feel way it fits my hand practical accuracy.
3. accuracy
4. adiquate power. (nothing under 9mm need apply. For me I prefer more than that)
5. capacity (in a duty gun that means at least 10 rounds in a ccw that means at least 6)
PAT
Click to expand...

 
Glocks are a tough pistols one of the best, even if you don't like them it doesn't change the fact they are tough. I love Glocks, I own enough of them. Glocks are like hammers you can just pound away with them and they never wear out. I love my walther pistols not as tough as the Glocks but still a very good gun and as for the Makarov they are worth every penny spent on them they are one well made gun and shoot fabulous. I own three. Glock 17 is a bread and better, meat and potatoes, gun bar none.:)
 
.38 special a proven round over 9mm or .45 (throw in .40 S&W and .357 SIg as well)???:rolleyes: C'mon man, you really are letting nostalgia get the better of you
 
Nostalgia?

Nostalgia? I'm only 21 years old. To my knowledge, other than the .45 colt. The .38 Special would be the oldest handgun defensive round, (developed in 1902). Followed by the 9mm Parabellum (1908) and then the .45ACP (1911). It is a fact that it is a proven cartridge with a near 100 year record of police and military users. And by most that I know and talk to, a .38 is more than adequate for defesive use.


38 special a proven round over 9mm or .45 (throw in .40 S&W and .357 SIg as well)??? C'mon man, you really are letting nostalgia get the better of you
Click to expand...
 
Spears and big rocks were used since the stone age for defense... So what's your point???

I can agree that the .38 may be a sufficient round for Self Defense but saying it's better than the .45 ACP, .40 S&W, .357 SIG or even the 9mm??? This is the first time I heard this argument on the net or anywhere... I wonder why :D

I guess we should all go back to driving Model T's, listening to transistor radios and using candles for a light source.:rolleyes:
 
The point

Never said it was better, Just my preference. I've been regared as a bit eccentric. As far as adaptabilty goes, the Glock has most beat, as its offered in all popular self-loading chamberings, from .380 to .45.
 
it hit harder and was more accurate than any other handgun out there

Well that statement is partly true. Due to thier poligonal rifling they do have more velocity than most other designs that use conventional rifling about 10% more.


PAT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top