I'm interested in getting one of these 2 guns (the glock 21 or HK USP.45). I already own a Kimber Custom, but I wanted to get one of these 2 to add to my collection. Based on durability/ruggedness (able to withstand harsh environments/moisture), reliability (ammo digestion, feeding, and ejection), ease of maintenance/cleaning, and service life, which one comes out on top?
Glock 21 or HK USP .45
- Thread starter meat
- Start date
Boy, you are really going to start a war here!
In my opinion (it is very biased toward the H&K I'll warn you in advance), its a toss-up.
The GLOCK tenifer finish would probably win out for effectiveness in harsh environments, but H&K will hold its own assuming the guns are cared for. H&K's are available in stainless which would make it easier for it to compete in the harsh environment arena.
For reliability, GLOCKS have a great track record, but though they are not as popular, the H&Ks are superbly reliable as well. I'd say it would be a toss up here. I seen one (of many) H&Ks fail to feed. The round that wouldn't feed was a PMC fmj that was subsequently tried in several GLOCKs and a couple of Hi Powers and failed to feed in all.
Ease of maintenance would be a toss up for field stripping, but for full disassembley of the frame, the edge would probably got to the GLOCK (H&K has more parts).
Service life would be equal in my opinion.
That being said, I would pick the H&K because I shoot them much better than the GLOCK. As close as they are, I would shoot them both, pick the one I liked best, and not look back. Or, buy both!
Shake
In my opinion (it is very biased toward the H&K I'll warn you in advance), its a toss-up.
The GLOCK tenifer finish would probably win out for effectiveness in harsh environments, but H&K will hold its own assuming the guns are cared for. H&K's are available in stainless which would make it easier for it to compete in the harsh environment arena.
For reliability, GLOCKS have a great track record, but though they are not as popular, the H&Ks are superbly reliable as well. I'd say it would be a toss up here. I seen one (of many) H&Ks fail to feed. The round that wouldn't feed was a PMC fmj that was subsequently tried in several GLOCKs and a couple of Hi Powers and failed to feed in all.
Ease of maintenance would be a toss up for field stripping, but for full disassembley of the frame, the edge would probably got to the GLOCK (H&K has more parts).
Service life would be equal in my opinion.
That being said, I would pick the H&K because I shoot them much better than the GLOCK. As close as they are, I would shoot them both, pick the one I liked best, and not look back. Or, buy both!
Shake
I had a Glock 27. It was very nice, but I just couldn't get around the fact that it didn't have a safety or decock lever of any kind, and it had about a 5 lb trigger pull. It made me nervous. That will be a factor for me for now on. So, without any other considerations, and since they are both highly regarded pistols as far as accuracy and dependability, I'd have to come down on the side of the H&K USP.
Glock_Racer
New member
Get both!
But what I always say to people is go to your local gunshop and handle both. Even better, if you know a friend that owns one or the other ask him if you can shoot it.
I actually own a custom G21C and the full size HK USP 45. So here's my observations:
HK
Better trigger
Very accurate out of the box
Manual safety
Bigger recoil
G21
Easily upgradeable
No manual safety to fumble with
Lighter frame = slower recovery time
Wide grip
But what I always say to people is go to your local gunshop and handle both. Even better, if you know a friend that owns one or the other ask him if you can shoot it.
I actually own a custom G21C and the full size HK USP 45. So here's my observations:
HK
Better trigger
Very accurate out of the box
Manual safety
Bigger recoil
G21
Easily upgradeable
No manual safety to fumble with
Lighter frame = slower recovery time
Wide grip
Demonvomit
New member
I believe the HK is a way better built gun than the Glock.Hk uses better quality parts and better construction i believe you get what you pay for.
I bought a few Usp's (5) I bought a few glocks (5) but i still reach for the Hk's first
You will be happy with what ever choice you make
Later
I bought a few Usp's (5) I bought a few glocks (5) but i still reach for the Hk's first
You will be happy with what ever choice you make
Later
rogerdodger
New member
i cant comment on out of the box. But the HK USP 45 tactical
i bought with the threaded barrel and great trigger job
blows away the Glock IMHO. if u can get used to the differnt sights.
i bought with the threaded barrel and great trigger job
blows away the Glock IMHO. if u can get used to the differnt sights.
The problem I usually have trying to decide between 2 guns is that I eventually get both. That being said, get the HK first before they go up in price again and get the Glock later. Glock prices seem to have leveled off.
I have had both the 21c and USP 45. Sold the 21c a couple of months ago! Still have the USP. As a matter of fact, I've added another USP to the collection too.
I have had both the 21c and USP 45. Sold the 21c a couple of months ago! Still have the USP. As a matter of fact, I've added another USP to the collection too.
I own both and rank them both very high. I'd hate to get rid of either. I have a Tactical so I have a great trigger in my H&K. I have never shot the H&K USP full size (non-Tactical). I have heard the trigger in the standard USP is a bit tough. But I have also heard many folks complain of the Glock triggers.
I really like my G-21 trigger. I have to shoot my G-21 a bit to get up to speed...the same with all my glocks.
If I had to choose between the two you are comparing...I'd shoot both of them first. Both are extreemly accurate.
If you elect to consider the Tactical. It's easy...the Tactical.
My .02
I really like my G-21 trigger. I have to shoot my G-21 a bit to get up to speed...the same with all my glocks.
If I had to choose between the two you are comparing...I'd shoot both of them first. Both are extreemly accurate.
If you elect to consider the Tactical. It's easy...the Tactical.
My .02
Bill Siegle
New member
both are great guns but I like the Glock trigger better. Also if you want to add a flashlight, the M3 is a lot cheaper than the UTL
Good luck with your decision.
Good luck with your decision.
If you are quite familiar with your Kimber, then the HK in V1 (or V2 if leftie ) would be much more familiar to you.
Both are great, but I kinda prefer the way the HK points over the Glock...
It's not that one is bad, I'd feel 100% safe with either in a "situation", but since all the guns I've ever owned had the more 1911 angled grip, I don't point the Glock as well...Sorta the same reason I gave my Ruger MarkII to my father, and plan to buy the 22/45... (Well, I actually did it mostly because I love him, because I owe my safe handling practices, and love for shooting to him, but it also gives me an excuse to buy another gun )
) would be much more familiar to you.Both are great, but I kinda prefer the way the HK points over the Glock...
It's not that one is bad, I'd feel 100% safe with either in a "situation", but since all the guns I've ever owned had the more 1911 angled grip, I don't point the Glock as well...Sorta the same reason I gave my Ruger MarkII to my father, and plan to buy the 22/45... (Well, I actually did it mostly because I love him, because I owe my safe handling practices, and love for shooting to him, but it also gives me an excuse to buy another gun
)The Glock is by far the simplier and easier of the two designs to maintain. Fewer parts, striker fired (as opposed to hammer driven firing pin) makes the Glock as simple as one can get for a firearm.
The HK seems to be the antithesis to the Glock design. Whereas the Glock is simple, the HK involves a complicated (but conceptually clever) firing system. By exchanging a few parts on the HK, you can reconfigure it to be DAO, SA, decock, southpaw or what not. Depending on the configuration, HK also has the advantage of second strike (OK, so it's no substitute for Tap, Rack, Ready).
Both are proven, reliable designs and each has its merits. It's like anything else. Designs are compromises to achieve a certain desired goal and what one sacrifices in one aspect they gain in another. The engineers for Glock and HK have done their jobs superbly.
Me, I'd go for HK. Already have a 45 Glock but I find the HK easier to shoot. Mind you, it's just a personal preference.
The HK seems to be the antithesis to the Glock design. Whereas the Glock is simple, the HK involves a complicated (but conceptually clever) firing system. By exchanging a few parts on the HK, you can reconfigure it to be DAO, SA, decock, southpaw or what not. Depending on the configuration, HK also has the advantage of second strike (OK, so it's no substitute for Tap, Rack, Ready).
Both are proven, reliable designs and each has its merits. It's like anything else. Designs are compromises to achieve a certain desired goal and what one sacrifices in one aspect they gain in another. The engineers for Glock and HK have done their jobs superbly.
Me, I'd go for HK. Already have a 45 Glock but I find the HK easier to shoot. Mind you, it's just a personal preference.
I just sold my Glock 21 for an HK USP9f. I will be buying the USP45f in a few weeks.
The HK's are better built and are just a bit nicer to shoot. While perhaps a *bit* more accurate than a Glock21, the G21 and USP45 will be equal in terms of reliability, durability, and CQB-distance accuracy. Only beyond 25 yards will you see the HK outshooting the Glock in equally competent hands, in my experience. Even then, the difference isn't much. Field stripping is equally easy on both guns, neither requires much lube at all.
The USP series has a much nicer trigger, I prefer the 1911-style controls and the ambi mag release. Steel sights, and many other "little things" that make owning an HK more enjoyable. Mags easily fill to capacity when new (Glock mags do not), mags easily "click" into place, all controls have a very nice, positive feel to them. Glocks have this cheap "squeak" when racking the slide, USP's do not. USP's make no sound when shaken, the polymer grip will not bend when pressed hard like a Glock. I am far more accurate with any USP than any given Glock (I've fired every USP in Variant One, and many Glocks).
My opinion? Obviously - the HK USP45 is the right choice. However, the important aspects of a self-defense and carry gun are equal, you should choose the one you shoot best. The HK is a nicer, more expensive feeling gun, but that should not be much of a concern on a defensive weapon. Go shoot both and decide which feels better, both are excellent weapons and you will get a lifetime of top-notch service from either pistol.
The HK's are better built and are just a bit nicer to shoot. While perhaps a *bit* more accurate than a Glock21, the G21 and USP45 will be equal in terms of reliability, durability, and CQB-distance accuracy. Only beyond 25 yards will you see the HK outshooting the Glock in equally competent hands, in my experience. Even then, the difference isn't much. Field stripping is equally easy on both guns, neither requires much lube at all.
The USP series has a much nicer trigger, I prefer the 1911-style controls and the ambi mag release. Steel sights, and many other "little things" that make owning an HK more enjoyable. Mags easily fill to capacity when new (Glock mags do not), mags easily "click" into place, all controls have a very nice, positive feel to them. Glocks have this cheap "squeak" when racking the slide, USP's do not. USP's make no sound when shaken, the polymer grip will not bend when pressed hard like a Glock. I am far more accurate with any USP than any given Glock (I've fired every USP in Variant One, and many Glocks).
My opinion? Obviously - the HK USP45 is the right choice. However, the important aspects of a self-defense and carry gun are equal, you should choose the one you shoot best. The HK is a nicer, more expensive feeling gun, but that should not be much of a concern on a defensive weapon. Go shoot both and decide which feels better, both are excellent weapons and you will get a lifetime of top-notch service from either pistol.
Brian Newbill
New member
I have shot alot of Glocks and 1 USP. If you have learned to shoot with a 1911 style pistol, you will not like the Glock. If you learned to shoot with the Ruger MK II standard model, you will not like HK.
The Glock has a lower bore axis so if you are used to the 1911 style you will shoot it low.
Both guns have a mushy feeling trigger, but HK has a DA/SA trigger.
HK mag release is better.
Glock is much simpler and easier to take apart.
HK is much like a S&W to take apart, more complicated but not bad.
Both guns have reputations for extreme reliability.
Try them both if you can.
The Glock has a lower bore axis so if you are used to the 1911 style you will shoot it low.
Both guns have a mushy feeling trigger, but HK has a DA/SA trigger.
HK mag release is better.
Glock is much simpler and easier to take apart.
HK is much like a S&W to take apart, more complicated but not bad.
Both guns have reputations for extreme reliability.
Try them both if you can.
What more can I say that hasn't already been said? They are both fine guns. Total breakdown Glock wins, but field striping I believe is a wash. As for ruggedness the USP torture test is well documented, but the Glock is no slouch either. I'm more accurate with the USP, but I also hit the target with the Glock. What do I have? I own a USP .45F and just past the 2500 round count and not one malfunction of any kind. I like the control locations of the USP over the Glock. I especialy like the thumb activated safety lock and decocker. I feel the USP is a better gun, for me. You're going to have to try both guns yourself and make your decision. Have Fun!