Is There a Downside to a Glock?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I respect Glocks for good engineering and reliability, as a defensive handgun they may well be the best available. From many of the posts on TFL, I'd have to assume that. My gripes are personal preference only-I like the look and craftsmanship associated with a well machined steel frame and slide. Poly guns are practical, they just don't appeal to me. I also don't care for the safe-action trigger or the little sheet metal slide release (ones I've handled took both hands to get the slide to release) or plastic sites. The design is not only functional, it should also be quite inexpensive to produce. Which brings up my final point-I feel they are overpriced given the probable cost of production.

All personal preferences or prejiduces only-again, I respect Glocks as a great tool. Have only handled and shot a few, might learn to love one if I let myself.

Bri
 
Brian; IMHO, THE best value on the market today- with an alloy frame- is the Ruger line of pistols. I can't comment on CZ's because I'm not familiar with them. I won't comment on Glock's thank you very much. I like VALUE and Ruger has it. Best, J. Parker
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The bad things about Glunks are:
1. No safety[/quote]
Sorry, a Glock has a three safeties that engage and disengage with each trigger pull
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>2. Because of the unsupported chamber they tend to KB.[/quote]
I have heard of no reliable reports of ang Glock KB with factory ammo.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>And the number 1 bad thing abou Glunks is:
Poor trigger pull![/quote]
Glocks have to have the most versatile sets of trigger springs should you find that you are not man enough to handle the real McCoy.
 
Batman - No, you are not alone. I LOVE the Glock trigger.
I view it this way: the "take-up" on the Glock trigger is the safety. You disengage the safety right before you shoot, by pulling the slack out of the trigger. I disengage the safety by pulling the trigger until I feel resistance. From that point on, it is a single action trigger, and I only toggle it enough to reset. I can fire very accurately and very fast with the single action Glock trigger. I love the Glock trigger.

It is not a tuned 1911 trigger, but I can shoot is just as well. I don't see it as worse, just difference, and with customization the Glock trigger can be really smooth. Dry fire practice does wonders. One thing about the Glock, is that is loves to be practiced with. Shoot it and dry fire it all day long, every day. It will only get better with use.


[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited September 28, 2000).]
 
Just want to add that a saf t block is a fool's crutch. Glocks are great guns for mediocre shooters but some shooters reach a higher level and see the many weak points of the Glock in reference to trigger, accuracy, and ergonomics. I have seen several of the world's best shooters and they all had 1911's. Also the best spec ops operators in the US still prefer the 1911. Contrary to what some will say in responce to that remark MOST spec ops types will carry a custom 1911 before ANY handgun followed by the SIG 226. Also before anyone responds "the SEALS issue this....." or "Delta issues this...." be aware that top flight teams don't issue any one weapon. The operators are allowed to CHOOSE what they want. They very rarely if ever choose the Glock. Why? I don't know but they don't and that speaks volumes.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Batman:
double tap![/quote]


I love the trigger -- it was the sole reason I switched to carrying my beloved 23. The performance of "double taps" (you couldn't state it more correctly above, Batman :)), "hammers", "controlled pairs", etc. became simply great once I did.

For me, a pistol's just a tool. Do I love the way my screwdrivers lood? Hardly. Do I love the way they do the job intended? All the way.

I don't care for long range accuracies either -- anything beyond 10-15 yards could be questionable to shoot (there're always exceptions, of course). The quality of my "controlled pairs" is the only important factor in making my decision to "Glock".

The reliability of Glocks wasn't an issue. I carried Sigs all the time before and wouldn't gotten anything worse in that department ever.

Therefore, I keep and bear Glocks.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarkStar:
You always see the 'I like Glock' and 'I hate Glock' posts. My question is for all the Glock fans. Is there a downside?

Your Glock is 'perfection' except for that little something?

I'm curious as to if the downsides were correctable with different accessories or techniques or you just grew to love them.
[/quote]

The good point and the bad point of the gun are one and the same for me: the trigger safety.

Good point: I'm a southpaw when it comes to shooting pistols. Dominant left eye, and mostly right-handed, but I shoot more naturally (and more accurately) left-handed. Not having to worry about a safety designed for right-thumbed customers is great, and I can activate the magazine release with my trigger finger with no problem.

Bad point: Since I spend most of my workweek in shirt and tie, I'd really like to get a good CCW rig that would be completely concealed by my pants, such as the thunderwear (I think it's called) that fits in the front. But despite claims that you can safely carry a Glock in it, I'm sure as heck not gonna risk it!
 
The only down side to glocks are the fact that you will want to get rid of all the other combat pistols in your collection.
PAT

------------------
I intend to go into harms way.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AUG:
Just want to add that a saf t block is a fool's crutch. Glocks are great guns for mediocre shooters but some shooters reach a higher level and see the many weak points of the Glock in reference to trigger, accuracy, and ergonomics. I have seen several of the world's best shooters and they all had 1911's. Also the best spec ops operators in the US still prefer the 1911. Contrary to what some will say in responce to that remark MOST spec ops types will carry a custom 1911 before ANY handgun followed by the SIG 226. Also before anyone responds "the SEALS issue this....." or "Delta issues this...." be aware that top flight teams don't issue any one weapon. The operators are allowed to CHOOSE what they want. They very rarely if ever choose the Glock. Why? I don't know but they don't and that speaks volumes.[/quote]

Ha! I had this long reply all written up, and then I realized that this had to be a joke, "tongue and cheek" and all...good one!

[This message has been edited by BB (edited September 28, 2000).]
 
AUG,

I find it funny how you say "The Glock is fine for mediocre shooters" Dont kid yourself man, come along with me to a GSSF match one day and take a look at some of your so called "mediocre shooters" mowing down pins consistently.

I am not going to stoop to a lower level and start to bad mouth 1911s, but if I can say one thing, try getting your average 1911 to function out of the box the way a Glock can and let me know how you make out. I have twice the gun of a 1911 and I proborably paid less than half the price, so go justify that cost.

The future is here man, go with it, if I want to have a tack driver maybe I will someday buy a 1911, but for a defensive weapon that shoots everytime I pull the trigger the Glock has you beet hands down.

"Mediocre shooters" Ptoooooey! :)

~Jason
 
I agree I shouldn't have made the comment about "mediocre" shooters. That was out of of line. But I have been to one GSSF event and the skill level was far behind the IPSC stuff I have seen. Maybe that was a fluke but that is what I saw.

I tend to come off very abbrasive on the internet forums and I don't mean too.

As for a Glock being twice the gun of a 1911? That is as silly as my comments about mediocre shooters shooting Glocks. Sure a good 1911 cost more than a Glock but it does a lot of things better than a Glock. I own one high end 1911 and 2 base 1911's. Of the three guns one has never malfunctioned and the others have failed to feed a couple of times due to poor reloads or a worn out mag. Still you can count on one hand the amount of times the guns have not went bang, thats all three guns combined. They are all shot a lot. I own three Glocks that don't get shot much and only one of them has had a problem (weak mag spring). Glocks are nowhere near perfect. They will always have a loyal following because they are cheap and reliable. They are good guns I just don't think they are great guns.
 
AUG,

No hard feelings at all man, if everybody would just realise that the 1911 and the Glock are about as different as you can get.

They are designed for different duties, you wont take a Glock out to the range to drive tacks through the target at 100 yards, IMHO you wouldnt be able to be as libeal in your ammo choices as you can a Glock, you couldnt let the gun take a beeting like you would a Glock and I dont think you can expect to function like a Glock out of the box.

They are two very different animals, I do beleive for the money that any Glock out of the box is worth twice the amount as a $2000 1911 out of the box that you cant be 100% sure will function to its fullest. I dont see what you get in a 1911 to justify its high price when you can get many guns that function very close if not better that it does.

Shot for shot, dollar for dollar, I just dont see it.

~Jason
 
Downsides to a Glock 26/27: (my opinion only)

Too thick for deep concealment
Grip too short for my big paws
slide holdback lever painful to operate in the traditional manner with frequency

Upsides: Everything else!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top