What do you think about Glocks?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Was thinking of Glocks for a moment:

And I have concluded that while being one of the more pedestrian autos on the market... They are reliable, and accurate. This makes them worthy of consideration. They have good sights and a crisp - but rather strange trigger. This makes them an actual option if one is in the market. And if it fits your hand and feels right to you - With the option of the 3.5 pound trigger, well, it becomes an actual consideration.

------------------
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
 
First of all, I have 4 different Glocks, and picked up my first (G19 with Trijicon factory night sights) about 12 years ago. They've all had the Glock "factory upgrades" (or are new enough to not need such, in the case of the G27).
I've shot and carried all of 'em at various times.
My FIRST demand of any PDW is that it be thoroughly reliable.

My 9mm Glocks (2 G19s) are.

My .40S&W Glocks (a G23 & a G27) aren't.

In spite of trying new Wolff magazine and recoil springs, trying different trigger springs, and keeping the guns carefully cleaned, inspected and lubricated, and of course using good shooting form (solid Weaver stance), I've continued to have double feeds and frequent misfires (light primer strikes), though accuracy, at least with the G23, has remained unaffected. (The G27 had a chipped barrel lug, and strung shots vertically, as well as having frequent light primer strikes; It's been sent back to Glock, Inc. for barrel replacement.)

I know my experience isn't typical, but it is only my own experience which convinces me to adopt or avoid a particular weapon or caliber. Although I really like the concept of the .40S&W as an intermediate caliber choice (between 9mm & .45ACP), I'll be going back to all 9mm and .45ACP guns (not including revolvers), since every gun I own or have owned in those calibers has been completely reliable.
(After Day #1 of John Farnam's 2 day Advanced Defensive Handgun Course, I was convinced that the 9mm hadn't enough momentum; John uses drills with heavy swinging steel plates, and it took 10 rounds or more of 9mm to get those things to turn over, with perfectly aimed and timed shots. The .40S&W, .45ACP and .400 CorBon guns did it in as few as 5 shots. Anyway, I brought the G23 for Day #2, and the bugger misfired during the drills! John Farnam couldn't find the problem with it, but watched it happen. Yeah, I know, momentum may or may not mean much in a real-life defensive shooting, and I think we all agree that shot placement is paramount, being much more important than momentum or kinetic energy, but everything else being equal, those bigger caliber bullets hit harder!)
Anyway, you may want to consider carefully which caliber Glock to get. I have briefly shot, but not owned, the 10mm and .45ACP Glocks, and I know nothing of the .357Sig guns, so have no opinions about them, except that their size-thickness (10mm, .45ACP) makes concealed carry more difficult, or the ammo cost (.357Sig) makes practice prohibitive. My $.04.

------------------
"Potius sero quam nunquam."
 
Although the 1911 is my favorite handgun, I have to admit that they are fussy and some take a lot of tuning before they are "completely" reliable. The triggers are without equal, in my opinion. Having said those things, if I was just beginning to go to a SA I wouldn't consider anything but a Glock. I have never liked the triggers of any of the other SA. The trigger of the Glock reminds me of the Daisy air rifles I used to have. However, it is the same each time I pull it and I didn't have any trouble getting used to my G 26. I have found Glocks to be as perfectly reliable as a SA is gong to be, and I think the fact that so many law enforcement agencies have adopted it attests to its reliability and ease of maintenance. I must further admit, however, that most of the time I carry a S&W 640. Who can figure the minds of some of us? Jerry
 
Glocks are to me very ugly. I have a friend who won't touch one without a pair of gloves on so the ugly won't rub off on him. He's nutz! What does looks have to do with whether a gun is any good or not? Glocks are good, even if "ugly goes all the way to the bone!"

[This message has been edited by Rod WMG (edited August 08, 1999).]
 
With the properload and practice
Best Gun Made(my opinion)
1. Safe
2. reliable
3. reasonable price
4. natural pointer(my opinion)
Like all the 1911 Hk and so on everyone has
there favorite gun and you love them or leave them.....Thanks
Best mod 30 19 and 23
 
Just started shooting Glocks a couple of months ago. If you think yours is ugly you should see mine...had a grip reduction done. I have a G35 and with the grip reduction it points OK. The sights are horrible so I am adding some Heine sights. Have about $750 invested in getting it to suit me.

I like the Glock because of the "safe" action and lack of external controls. The high capacity magazines are a bonus too. Yeah, Glocks are good pistols but I had to shoot them a lot to get over the "tactical tupperware" mentality.
 
I've always loved 1911s. Still do. I especially like tinkering with them. I used to say that I would never own a plasic gun.

Well, I now have three Glocks--a 19, 27, and 30. Never had a malfunction. Sometimes I even clean them! ;) The only after-market accessory that I have bought for them (besides holsters) is a set of Meprolight night sights for the 30. Nowadays, whenever I go shoot, it's usually with a Glock.

Sometimes, ugly is good. The more people there are who wont by guns because they are ugly, the more guns there are available for me. :D :D :D

Maybe it's a phase I'm going through. If so, fine. At least I have 3 guns that are absolutely reliable and display adequate combat accuracy (out of the box, might I add). I think the 1911 is a good hobby gun and a good combat firearm, but give me a Glock as long as I'm in this phase.

(I still want a Kimber Gold Match, though. :))
 
Here's my DM0,04's worth (taking into account current exchange rates ;-) )

Bear in mind that I'm an HK-ite, and Glocks simply do not fit me:

Advantages of the Glock: For the price, you get decent durability and reliability, and accessibility of parts and accessories (incl. pre-ban stuff).

Disadvantages: Light weight means more effort on the shooter's part to control the gun. Lack of a manual safety. And despite the reports of reliability from many Glock owners, there is an unnerving amount of discussion about Glock failures you don't find on other discussion groups.

(Yet another disadvantage--they're not HK--*ouch*, who threw that rock?!)

(In computer geeks' terms, Glocks are the NT of the handgun world. *ouch*, who threw that mouse?!)



------------------
"...wer aber nichts hat, verkaufe sein Kleid und kaufe ein Schwert" Lukas 22,36
 
Ulfilas:
>(In computer geeks' terms, Glocks are the NT of the handgun world. *ouch*, who threw that mouse?!)

ROFLMAO!

G17 owner.
 
As a bonafied geek the Glock most represents the Macintosh of the computer world. Easy for an untrained/novice person to operate yet powerful enough to get them into trouble. ;)
Hiker
 
Guys,

Glocks are I-macs. Low-cost, adequate performance, and lots of cheap plastic. In fact, the horrible, cheesy Imac mouse is probably a pretty good match for the horrible, cheesy Glock trigger. I would not be suprised if Glock came out with one with a see-through bondi-blue frame.
 
The autos I have are two Glocks (30 & 31), a SIG P226 (.40 S&W), and a Beretta 92FS. While I love them all, the Glocks are what I would most likely use in a combat situation, or what I would carry if I had CCW. Reliable, accurate, and extremely durable. Low bore axis makes for reduced muzzle flip as well. Easiest of all my guns to clean. And pleasant to carry, thanks to it's light weight (albeit very durable) polymer frame. While it may not be for everyone, I have not met a single person who has credible handgun knowledge say that the Glock is a poor or flimsy design. The only reasons that some of those people don't care for them are hand fit, doesn't point like a 1911, etc.
 
There is merit in what the Glock was designed for...DEFENSE. If you want a "pretty" gun, the Glock may not be it, but you cannot ask for a better defense weapon.

Think about it. How many 9mm handguns can hold 17 rounds inside the hand grip? (or 18/19 with modifications to mags. The one that comes to mind is the H&K VP70Z which held 18, but also looked like something from Flash Gordon.

In a fire fight there is no doubt what I'd want to be packing...a high capacity durable, reliable, straight shooting Glock 17 with plenty of extra 17 round factory mags.
 
I have never understood the uproar regarding Glocks. I agree, they are not the prettiest gun, and for some they fit the hand like a 2x4. That aside, I have a G21 (the full-size .45 ACP), and I love it. I also own a SIG P226 and since buying the Glock I don't shoot it. I have never owned anything other than Beretta, SIG, Glock, Benelli, and Bushmaster firearms. All of these are top quality and I keep them in perfect condition, so reliability for me has never been an issue. This being the case, I cannot say whether the Glock is more or less reliable than the others, as I have never experienced a malfunction in any of them. All told, my Glock is probably my favorite gun (though I really enjoy all of them so it's a close race). Why? Because it's accurate, comes up quick, and goes bang every time I pull the trigger. Oh, and most important, it's fun to shoot. In fact now that I'm done with this message, I'm gonna go to the range and put a few boxes of hardball through it.

[This message has been edited by BigBird (edited August 09, 1999).]
 
Well, I recently fired a 1911 for the first time and decided that I would like to get one. I posted a request for a suggestion for an economical 1911 over on their forum. The post grew quite a response. It got up to 46 responses, most of which got so far away from the point that the moderator threw out all but 12 of them.

Basicall, I learned that there must be no such thing as an economical 1911 that is good for straight out of the box target shooting. I guess their idea of economical is a $600 Kimber that must have another $200 o mods to make it functional.

As for me, I htink that I'll just stick to the reliable and proven Glock for half the money and still have enough left over to buy that Mini-14 that I suddenly find myself wanting.

------------------
"God grants liberty only to those who love it and are always ready to guard and defend it." --Daniel Webster
 
FWIW--

For about ten years after Glocks were introduced, I just shook my head over them--I had no use for their look, peculiar action, or plastic parts, and was not tempted to try or buy one of them. This changed dramatically when I got my concealed handgun license and wanted a pistol that was (1) reliable, (2) easy to shoot where I wanted it to, (3) easy to maintain on daily basis, and (4) lightweight. I still like the pistols I've always liked--1911s, SIGs, Berettas, S&Ws, etc.--but when it comes to concealed carry I'm now also a confirmed Glock fan.
 
about a year ago, I was decided to upgrade my duty weapon...I was going to choose a big and small of the same brand name ...ie two pistols. Note even considering the Unsafe and ugly Glock, My choices would be from Berretta, Smith & Wesson or Sig Sauer.

after I weighed reliabilty, durabilty, dependability, rust resistance, simplicity and accuracy. I researched the web and went to the range a lot.

the best choice of the Smith, sig or Baretta was the glock. (21/30 for me)

If you would like more info I would invite you to visit another BBS called Glocktalk. www.glocktalk.com

Glock? no regrets! SDnR :)
 
Gunz: I don't own any Glocks, but I'm really not interested in a weapon just because of how it's made, who makes it, what it's made of, etc, etc, ad nauseum. My semi-autos are all SIGs and my revolvers are all S&W. Why? Because I can hit what I want/need to with them and they work every time...nothing more, nothing less. Could I do the same with a Glock or HK? Probably...I'm just not interested in finding out...

Don't get me wrong...I'm not totally inflexible...used to carry and shoot 1911s but switched to SIGs a little over a year ago and have never looked back.
 
37 posts on this subject and not one mentioning the cost of shooting a Glock cause you can't use reloads or lead bullets. Do the math. Say 15,000 to 20,000 rounds of expensive factory jacketed vs. same number of lead reloads. Difference in the price of bullets (lead vs. jacketed) if reloading, I end up with enough saved on the cost of the bullets alone to buy me a nice brand new medium priced handgun. Now work out the price difference between lead reloads and jacketed factory and you'll probably end up enough ahead that you can buy all the stuff you wish you could but can't afford. Total cost of ownership does matter bigtime.
 
I gave the Glock an Honest try for about a year. It was reliable and accurate but not
as accurate as I'd like. I'm going back to
steel for the following reasons;
The grip on the glock is too flat for my hands. Working with the grip by building it
up did not improve it. The magazines do not
drop out on command. I know there are drills
to remedy this but it just bugs me that
it does this. I know many LEO's that carry
them every day and they work well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top