Hindsight - should Glock have listened to its customers

T

TxFlyFish

New member
Now that Glock delivered what everyone been crying for years with the g43, I can't help but to wonder what if they didn't cave in to its customer's demands and never released it. The g43 initial excitement is waning and to be honest it doesn't add much to an already crowded segment. In hindsight I would have been just fine if they stick with the double stack 9mm. There I just complained that they listened to us for once...aren't we just a bunch whiny crybabies
 
It offers commonality with Glocks other models, both in grip shape and feel and the trigger feel. I've spent the past few months doing a comparison between a number of striker fired pistols and even among what is essentially the same trigger system there can be enough differences in the trigger to make going between manufacturers require a bit of an adjustment period. I agree that Glock may not have needed the G43 and the market is already full of single stack 9mms, many lower in price. But some market share is better than none and like I said there are legitimate reasons to potentially prefer it over the competition (the aforementioned commonality).
 
It seems like none of the major companies in any segment of retail listen to there customers. Look at Apple. It seems as if in many ways they do exactly the opposite of what their customers want. Apple fanboys will always buy Apple and Glock fanboys will always buy Glock. I have and will continue to buy every iPhone and iPad Apple releases.

Glock on the other hand, has lost a loyal customer. Hold a VP9, a PPQ or even an M&P and why would you buy a Glock. Ergonomics are soooo much better on the non Glocks and reliability is as good. I would trust my life to a Glock, but I would trust it to any one of them. So why wouldn't I buy a gun that simply feels better in the hand? Glock needs to evolve if they want to keep there dominant place in the market.

Again, the Glock is a great gun, but they didn't listen to this customer, so they are no longer for me.

As for the Glock 43, I bought the Shield and it fits me just fine.
 
Hold a VP9, a PPQ or even an M&P and why would you buy a Glock. Ergonomics are soooo much better on the non Glocks and reliability is as good.
Click to expand...

Here's what's funny about ergonomics though: it's very subjective. Until recently I owned a P320, a VP9, a M&P 9 (with APEX kit), and a Glock 19. I sold the VP9, plan to sell the P320, and carry the Glock 19. The Glock 19 actually doesn't feel bad in my hand. I might prefer the others a bit more just handling them, but when I did two months of comparison among them I shot the Glock as well as any of them and the Glock is of a smaller form factor that made it easier for me to carry (it is a bit lighter too). I'm by no means a Glock fanboy. I've hated Glock in the past, but when I did the actual shooting comparison the Glock just worked for me. If something else works for you, that's perfectly understandable. I just find it hard to make any conclusions when it comes to ergonomics.

I would trust my life to a Glock, but I would trust it to any one of them.
Click to expand...

I agree with this too. Glock has made a reputation on reliability, but I haven't found them to be dramatically more reliable than many of their competitors.

Glock needs to evolve if they want to keep there dominant place in the market.
Click to expand...

I don't think they can now, nor do I know if they should/need to. If Glock suddenly had better ergonomics for you personally, so what? You already stated the M&P and VP and PPQ all feel good to you. To me Glock's market share is because of the name and the history behind it. If they change it then they just became an M&P or VP or PPQ knockoff (heck plenty of people already accuse the VP9 of being a PPQ knockoff). I do agree though that going forward as the departments that do have Glocks currently get to the point when they need new pistols, they might go with other options. I don't know if they can stop the market share loss, but I also think they'll likely be around for years or decades to come.
 
I bought my Glock 17 from kind of a "building my collection" perspective, without very high expectations. I have other pistols that feel way better in the hand, but yet somehow I shoot the Glock more accurately than any other pistol.
 
I've never understood the comfortable grip thing--That's like saying one size shoe fits all. Every handgun I buy I understand there's going to be some time figuring out the grip/trigger-pull technique.
 
I've never understood the comfortable grip thing
Click to expand...

Me either, your hand will conform to whatever shape you put in it. The problem is between the ears, not with the grip.

I have other pistols that feel way better in the hand, but yet somehow I shoot the Glock more accurately than any other pistol.
Click to expand...

This is a common theme and why Glocks dominate LE. Twenty years ago when all of my local LE friends were changing over to Glocks they all hated them, until they started shooting them.
 
The Europeans want different things...maybe the Croats know the drones here in the states will gobble up anything they choose to produce. If they don't/didn't produce "it" the "there's only one brand" folks will buy the next closest thing, regardless because that's the next line in their programming. Most of them don't realize there are actually other brands out there.
 
I think that glock is diluting their image, caving in to everyone's tastes and ever "catching up" to the lastest trends, eg gen 4 modular grips, slide cutouts for rds, and now a little late the single stack 9mm. They try to make something for everyone by reacting to current trend setters. It used to be that glock doesn't care what you think, and while we all cried out for features, imho they had a much better image then

Classic example is apple v samsung...apple doesn't care what you think...it tells you what you want vs Samsung will give you all the features you requested
 
Me either, your hand will conform to whatever shape you put in it. The problem is between the ears, not with the grip.
Click to expand...
I couldn't disagree more. Yes, your hand can hold pretty much any gun. But that doesn't mean one gun isn't more comfortable than another, or hold at a more comfortable and natural shooting position than another. No two hands are the same, nor are they attached to one's wrist the same, nor to the arm the same, etc. etc. You seem to claim that ergonomics don't matter. I say they do. I won't carry a firearm I have to fight with. If my body doesn't fall into love with it, and quickly, I'm moving on.
 
I think that glock is diluting their image, caving in to everyone's tastes and ever "catching up" to the lastest trends, eg gen 4 modular grips, slide cutouts for rds, and now a little late the single stack 9mm. They try to make something for everyone by reacting to current trend setters.
Click to expand...

And yet we have other posters like Ride Madone who wish they would do even more. How does one company please everyone?

For that matter, when you mention "catching up" that's sort of hilarious given in Apple's WWDC 2015 this past Monday they mentioned a number of "new" features. Essentially they copied the "snap" feature from Windows 8, Proactive Intelligence is their version of Google Now, Apple Maps is their version of Google Maps, Apple News App which is their version of Flipboard, iPad Multitasking was first seen on Windows, and the newest being Apple Music which is their version of Spotify. Apple is no longer the trend leader in many areas, very much like Glock.

Classic example is apple v samsung...apple doesn't care what you think...it tells you what you want vs Samsung will give you all the features you requested
Click to expand...

Samsung is doing extremely well in the mobile phone market. They may not have the name and the image of Apple, but their sales are impressive. There are few companies out there that wouldn't want to be as successful as Samsung. Let's also not forget that Samsung makes a number of the hardware components in the iPhone.

Wanting a company to tell you what you want instead of being able to provide feedback is part of the reason I've chosen not to own an Apple product.
 
features mean something to me. I have never wanted an iPhone. although it's a pain that me and my wife are on different platforms, I like my HTC phones. but now that apple's ios 8 can let me back out of annoying group texts, I am considering making the change. you can do it on android, but only if using a text message app. I think everyone has been asking for a way to get out of mass texts for awhile, and iphone answered the call.

I don't dislike Glock, but I just want a manual safety. there are a lot of people like me and glock knows it and hasn't conformed. although they have added a few features, they seem to be standing by the "no manual safety" even though they HAVE to know it costs them some customers. even if they did have a safety, I don't think I would buy one, just because I think they are a bit over-priced. but, almost half of everyone I know owns a glock, so they seem to be doing something right and will likely have a large slice of the pie for some time.
 
I don't dislike Glock, but I just want a manual safety. there are a lot of people like me and glock knows it and hasn't conformed. although they have added a few features, they seem to be standing by the "no manual safety" even though they HAVE to know it costs them some customers.
Click to expand...
I think Glock has pretty much boxed itself in in this respect. After decades of evangelizing their system to law enforcement agencies (which has always been the centerpiece of their marketing strategy), I don't know how they could now say, well..."Gosh, we were wrong. Manual safeties are really a good idea after all" after years of vehemently claiming the opposite.
 
I’m not sure GLOCK makes decisions about models and options based on some rigid viewpoint. GLOCK is a for-profit business and not a group of fanboys that are going to stick with their way of doing things even if it cost them money. I suspect if they believed adding manual safeties would significantly increase their profits they would offer them as an option. A lot of folks buy GLOCKs based on brand awareness with little concern for the manual safety issues one way or the other.
 
Hold a VP9, a PPQ or even an M&P and why would you buy a Glock. Ergonomics are soooo much better on the non Glocks and reliability is as good
Click to expand...

I'm a big HK fan, and the ergonomics of my P30 are excellent and it affects the way I shoot the gun. But I have the P30 and an HK45, in addition to my G-17 and G-21, so my HK guns haven't replaced my Glocks.
 
To those who think Glock has not been innovative enough and the changes they make are minor and slow in coming should remember who brought the polymer striker fired pistol to the point where it is now.

I have seen it in many industries. Manufactures that believe they have to come out with something new to keep their appeal with the public. It seems they change something only for the sake of changing something. A lot of times a point is reached where, when a manufacturer changes something, it is actually a step backwards and they make their product less reliable. I have seen it in cars, archery equipment, guns, and a host of other products. Why would Glock want to improve on something that is probably near perfect and cross a line with reliability. If they produced a model and then had to come out with a massive recall what would happen to their image. To me, if a pistol shoots straight, shoots fast, is reliable and fits good in my hand then their is no need to improve anything, just to come out with something different.

We all know of Remington, Winchester, and Colt. They have a long history of making good guns. But they have had their screw ups too. Why would Glock want to take the chance on moving back from the pinnacle of reliability, just to make a change they think necessary to keep the interest of the public. Their reliability is what keeps the interest in their pistols and they would do well to remember that.
 
I think of Glock as the Harley Davidson of guns. They have stayed with the same products with minor upgrades and they dominate the market because of loyal customers and name recognition. Why make drastic changes when you are very successful with what you do?
 
I think of Glock as the Harley Davidson of guns. They have stayed with the same products with minor upgrades and they dominate the market because of loyal customers and name recognition. Why make drastic changes when you are very successful with what you do?
Click to expand...

I see them more like the Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic of the gun world, moderately priced, reliable but uninspired. A lot of us have "grail guns" uncommon or really cool guns. There aren't any Glock models on my list :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top