Is the price of Glocks sneaking upward ?

L

Lohman446

New member
I have actually reached the point where considering going from a P938 to a larger "compact" carry gun has some draw mostly for capacity. As such I have been looking around firearms that are close to the Glock 19 though I prefer a hammer. Having looked at several options I almost broke down and "just ordered the Glock" until I clicked on the pricing.

I'm not cheap when it comes to buying firearms especially ones that may be employed to protect my family. I'm just kind of staring blankly at $600 for a G19. Yes you can find them cheaper but realistically the benchmark I am holding it against is the $450 to $500 I can readily find CZ P07s for. I mean the G19 is one of the most commonly produced handguns out there with millions in circulation. The price really was a surprise.

"But holsters are cheaper and more available for the Glock" Not really. I have found I am drawn to crossbreed holsters for some reason I cannot articulate fully and logically and the pricing is consistent. While I get there is more aftermarket support for the Glock my opinion on carrying a modified defense weapon is not high so it renders the point moot.

Just a curiosity question
 
I don't know what the sales tax is in your state but in FL a $600 Glock is actually closer to $650 out the door. I don't know where to find a NIB Gen 5 19 for $450 BUY IT!! I just paid $449 for an M&P 9 2.0, out the door with nics & tax was $485 and change.

I love the Crossbreed holster - not cheap.

Why is Glock so expensive? CZ brings in European made firearms for much less. Witness, Beretta, Springfield - all from Europe with less expensive offerings.

One must conclude that there is incredible demand for Glock and the pistol fetches its MSRP or better.
 
Are you looking for a Gen 5? If not go to slickguns.com and you can find them cheaper than $600 for sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I’ve noticed that the M&P 2.0 Compacts are flying off the LGS shelves around here at $509,95, and the Gen5 19’s are starting to collect dust at $599.99. I think the two guns are fairly equal functionally but there is no way to justify the $90.00 difference between these 2 guns
 
FYI I was told by a Glock dealer last year that Glock will not allow dealers to advertise current double-stack models (i.e. other than the 42/43) for less than $499. Note that I wrote advertise—the pistols can be sold for whatever price the dealer deems appropriate, but they just can't advertise the lower price.

This is why you hear about people buying <$499 Glocks but you won't find them directly on Google or see them in sporting-goods store sales ads.

This is why you'll see "Call/Email for Price" labels online, "Too Low to Print" labels in sporting-goods sales flyers, or "Ask for Price" tags at the LGS. If you see such a label, follow the suggestion and ask. :)

As a footnote, note that the policy applies to current models; discontinued versions can be advertised for less. It also doesn't apply to the Blue Label program.
 
The problem is not the $600 (or $500). The problem is the Glock seems to me to be priced out of its market. I remember the old debates about HK and Glocks where it was "MAYBE the HK is better but you can buy two Glocks for that." Yeh... not any more.
 
Glock is popular but I can't see their market share increasing even if their sales are (due to so many more guns being sold in general). Smith and wesson and others are definitely cutting into that market share because they are quality and have much better price points.
 
Just like adamBomb said Glocks market share is increasing even if their sales not. And yes There are many other factories that got very good quality maybe even better than glocks but price pretty lower. But I would said if you are Glocks fan you don't really ask for price. You'll pay $300 or $800 you will buy Glock.
 
Lohman446 said:
The problem is not the $600 (or $500). The problem is the Glock seems to me to be priced out of its market. I remember the old debates about HK and Glocks where it was "MAYBE the HK is better but you can buy two Glocks for that." Yeh... not any more.
Click to expand...



HKs have come down in price mainly because of the VP9. I don’t really think Glocks have gone up. I bought my Gen 5 from a local store for $550. Newer models tend to have higher prices for a time and then go down. The Gen 3s and Gen 4s are sub $500 online now https://gun.deals/search/apachesolr_search/Glock+19?mobile=true. I can find the M&P Compacts for typically $400 to $450 online, but the Glock Gen 4s and 5s do have an extra mag when comparing prices (although they have plastic sights too).

I guess I don’t really think Glocks’ prices have gone up, it’s simply that there are a lot more affordable options now. They might be at risk of pricing themselves out eventually, but frankly I and a number of others would still rather the Glock. Of course going forward with new shooters that might change, but frankly the market has been crowded for a few years now. We’re noticing it more because the new gun market has practically crashed in terms of prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
For a lot of people Glock is still, "the gun to have." There's something called, "first mover advantage," it belongs to Glock. Even if HK was the first plastic pistol, we are looking for the first, "mover;" ie Myspace came before Facebook, Facebook claimed, "first mover advantage."

The M&P afaik does not have the following Glock has. S&W is a premium brand but we may not see that reflected in the GLOCK-M&P Price Comparison until say M&P Gen 3. So consider M&P Gen 2 a bargain when compared to the new Gen 5 Glocks. I agree that Gen 3/4 Glocks have very little, if any price differential with the M&P's.

I might guess, but would fall short of vehemently saying, "HK is having difficulty maintaining a premium price point for their pistols."

I might guess, but would fall short of vehemently saying, "Glock Gen 6 will not be as expensive as Gen 5 because Glock may have difficulty maintaining a premium price point for their pistols."

I could be very, very, very incorrect in my guesses, and assumptions.
 
Glock is a great gun, but it's the epitome of basic and no frills, and plastic to boot. Their prices need to reflect that or I'll opt to spend a bit more for something else.
 
Glock is overpriced and has been for a while now. Large pd ‘s can get them for under $100 but we have to pay a premium for a gun that is becoming less competitive every year.

I bought a mp 2.0 compact a couple months ago for about $400 and it’s finish is better, is more accurate, more reliable, has a better trigger, metal sights, and aesthetically more appealing compared to my gen 4 19. I also don’t get brass to my face with the mp. Meanwhile a gen 4 glock sells for more.

Glocks should realistically be around $400.

I also think glock may not be in the best financial standing at the moment.
 
Glock knows their base won't jump ship no matter what. They also know their dealers push glock no matter what. So why change? Glockers would plop down 750 for a 19 if that's what it took.
 
TunnelRat said:
I’m curious what about Glock makes its current financial situation worse than the other manufacturers.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
There is almost no R&D in a Glock even the Gen 5 compared to other platforms. You cannot get lower in terms of material costs.

On the price side Glocks are still pretty cheap. I picked up a couple of Glock 19s Talo Gen 4s with 3 mags and AmeriGlo night sights for $475 each shipped. When you look at the night sights and the extra mag you are looking at a $400 base gun.
 
So what does that have to do with regards to my question to Voodoo about the company itself? If anything that means they should be in a better situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
TunnelRat said:
I’m curious what about Glock makes its current financial situation worse than the other manufacturers.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Divorce and the uncovering of several shell companies were both major financial hits to glock and he has been under severe scrutiny by the irs. I believe he was also sued a few times for other matters.
 
To me that’s not enough to predict financial doom for Glock as the company (I also am not sure how separated Glock the man is from Glock the company in terms of legal payments from his personal problems). Look at the credit ratings of some of the other companies in the industry currently. I can think of a number of companies in worse shape financially.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top