What is the appeal of Glock handguns?

Status
Not open for further replies.
liv4spd said:
I'm new to the gun world. It seems like Glock is one of the most popular handgun brands. I can understand it is a very reliable brand. Other than that, what is the appeal of Glock handguns.

I tired a Glock 19 once, and find it to be extremely boring. On the other hand, I'm fascinated with guns made by other brands like Sig Sauer, Walther, Ruger, CZ, etc.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the wide, wide world of guns!

Reliability is a huge factor in Glock's appeal. Are they boring? Sure. They go bang, just almost like clockwork. But if we're talking about a defensive gun, boring is exactly what I want. I want the gun to go bang when I pull the trigger, every time, with every ammo, in all conditions. If I'm in a self-defense situation, I already have all of the excitement I really want in my life, and then some.

As a matter of history (and purely my opinion), Glocks had all but cornered the market on extremely reliable polymer pistols about 40 years ago. Since then, many other manufacturers have developed their own designs in that area that have also proven to be very reliable. I'm sure some of those designs were copied from Glock. (Google S&W getting sued by Glock for one example.) Regardless of how they got to these new designs, though, the point is that Glock isn't the only game in town any more. Nonetheless, it appears to continue to dominate the law enforcement market, and there are a ton of gun buyers who buy what the police carry, figuring that "if the police carry it, it must be good."

So there's my 2¢, worth exactly what you paid for it.
 
Struggled

The lack of a safety lever was a struggle for me when I purchased my G19 about twenty odd years ago. Good holsters that fully cover the trigger solved that for me. I recently connected with an old friend who is interested in learning to protect herself with a handgun. I will bring several self defense handguns to the range, I will recommend Glock. That recommendation may change, the simplicity appeals.
 
The lack of a safety lever was a struggle for me when I purchased my G19 about twenty odd years ago. Good holsters that fully cover the trigger solved that for me. I recently connected with an old friend who is interested in learning to protect herself with a handgun. I will bring several self defense handguns to the range, I will recommend Glock. That recommendation may change, the simplicity appeals.
Click to expand...

Hopefully she attains the same level of “PERFECTION” that you have. I sincerely hope your “PERFECTION” continues to. The gun demands it.
 
Miami

There was a comment earlier that the FBI shot the Miami killers, Platt and Mattix, with "snubnose revolver" and that the felons were drug crazed. Autopsy yielded that neither individual was under the influence of drugs. The snubnose comment is true......partially.

Three agents were armed with S&W M459 9mm semiauto handguns. My understand is that these agents were part of a unit within the FBI issued same. Rank and file agents still carried revolvers, albeit full size 6 shot/4" models.

There were 2" snub .38's present as backup guns for the agents and used in the fight : Agent Hanlon lost his 4" revolver in the collisions and carried on with his snub before being wounded. I am not certain, but I believe that before he was wounded, Hanlon got 2 peripheral hits on killer Platt. A second agent fired one round from his back up .38 after firing a full magazine from his 459. (not certain on this) Two of the three agents killed were armed with the new M459 pistol. Both Platt and Mattix received multiple wounds from multiple weapons,

The Miami shootout did not launch the move to auto pistols, it had already begun. What sprung from the Miami tragedy was the search for a more effective LE cartridge (the 10mm and then the .40) and a partial recognition that patrol carbines are a viable weapon for the patrol officer.
 
I will bring several self defense handguns to the range, I will recommend Glock. That recommendation may change, the simplicity appeals.
Click to expand...

Be sure to include a revolver or two, medium frame DA .38 is a good one. Doesn't get simpler, not even a Glock.

Also, I wouldn't recommend anything. Explain /demonstrate the pros and cons of each and let her decide what to learn on. Support her choice, even if you dont think its the best choice. Its more important that she be comfortable with her choice and learn the basics and how to use it. THEN if she changes her mind about what is best for her, she has some experience to base it on.

when people are just starting out shooting, too much gun is worse than about everything else, although too small a gun (physical size) can be as much of a drawback as too big, as well.
 
The snubnose comment is true......partially.
...

There were 2" snub .38's present as backup guns for the agents and used in the fight : Agent Hanlon lost his 4" revolver in the collisions and carried on with his snub before being wounded. I am not certain, but I believe that before he was wounded, Hanlon got 2 peripheral hits on killer Platt.
Click to expand...
Hanlon did, indeed use his snubby (5 shot .38Spl 2"bbl) backup. However, Dr. W. French Anderson's analysis of the autopsy does not credit Hanlon with any of the wounds to Matix or Platt. To be fair, a number of the hits on Platt could not be attributed to any one person categorically, but based on position, they appear to be from Mireles, Orrantia, Dove and Risner. Anderson does say one of Platt's leg wounds could have been from one of four possible agents--including Hanlon as a possibility.

McNeill was carrying a 6 shot .357Mag revolver with a 2" barrel. I suppose it could be called a snubby. He did score hits on Matix early in the encounter but was injured in the hand and was unable to reload his revolver as a result. He was shot by Platt and paralyzed while attempting to reload.

Risner fired nearly all of his shots from a 9mm, but is reported to have fired a single round from a .38Spl revolver, presumably a backup snubby. The hit credited to Risner took place early enough in the encounter that it is unlikely he would have already switched to his snubby.
 
The Miami shootout did not launch the move to auto pistols, it had already begun. What sprung from the Miami tragedy was the search for a more effective LE cartridge (the 10mm and then the .40) and a partial recognition that patrol carbines are a viable weapon for the patrol officer.
Click to expand...

My reference to the Miami shootout was a much looser reference than folks here are taking it. Basically, in Miami, New York and a few other places the criminals driven by massive cocaine profits were driven to weapons like the Tec-9, MAC-10, Uzi and other 9mm autos with greater firepower. Police were stuck in a slow transition from revolvers. I believe the criminals were also stepping into some PCC’s and rifles where this was not being considered by most police.

I do appreciate the added details. That lesson cannot be forgotten.
 
That lesson cannot be forgotten.
Click to expand...

Here's the lesson that should not be forgotten.

The bad guy received a fatal wound from a 9mm round that met or exceeded all the requirements of the time.

But because it was not also an instantly incapacitating wound, the bureaucracy blamed the round, and about everything else except the "hero" agents who were actually the reason the disaster happened the way it did.

the Fed said the 9mm wasn't good enough, began the search for a new caliber, and created new standards to be met. Now, today nearly 40 years later, after having gone through the 10mm and the .40 S&W, the "new" 9mm is again regarded as good enough.

This situation will probably hold until the next time their chosen round fails spectacularly, and then they will start a new witch hunt, and eventually, probably come back to what they condemned before.
 
It's been awhile since I read the full Miami report, but if I remember correctly the final shots, and the ones credited with killing both Platt and Matix, were fired by Agent Mireles out of a Smith & Wesson Model 19 .357 Magnum revolver, 2.5" barrel.

The load fired from the gun was the "FBI Load," a +P+ LSWCHP round that had been general FBI issue for .38s/.357s for quite a few years at that point.
 
what is the appeal of Glock handguns?

Damfino.

Bought my first, a G23, in 1992. Owned it for about ten years, and at one point added a G19.
Never really bonded with either one, sold them both.
I've toyed with the idea of a G20 or a G29, but never went any farther than that.
I get that they are a quality made, reliable product. But to me, they have all the appeal of a toaster oven. Or a Tesla.

Different strokes, different folks.

YMMV, and probably will.
 
One wag did describe the Glock as having all the aesthetics of a stick of butter. That's exactly what the slide looks like. . .

Having said that, I've owned several over the years and have two now. They're simple, reliable and really easy to field strip and clean.
 
It's been awhile since I read the full Miami report, but if I remember correctly the final shots, and the ones credited with killing both Platt and Matix, were fired by Agent Mireles out of a Smith & Wesson Model 19 .357 Magnum revolver, 2.5" barrel.
Click to expand...
Anderson lists the gun as a 6 shot .357Mag revolver but doesn't provide anything else on it.

The FBI FOIA release indicates that Mireles' revolver was a 686 but for some reason does not list a barrel length.

Ayoob mentions a single 4" L Frame amongst the agents' weapons and also indicated that Mireles was carrying a 686.

McNeill was, according to the FBI carrying a 2.5" Model 19.
 
My favorite description of a Glock is one I found in a work of fiction, but its rather apt, I think.

Hero is protecting a woman and they are expecting an assault by bad guys. He offers her a Glock and gives her a quick "tutorial".

He takes out the loaded mag, shows it to her, and says "this is the gas tank."

Reinserts the magazine and chambers a round. "Now the motor is running..."

He points to the trigger and says "this is the gas pedal..."

She takes the gun (carefully, keeping her finger off the trigger) and asks "where's the brake??"

"There is no brake!"

:rolleyes:
 
appeal was the result of aggressive marketing.
they sold guns that felt like 2x4's in your hand that were top heavy, but because they advertised them as simple...people bit.
the idea of a gun other than steel was odd back then. alloy plastic guns were different. it made people look. and when they saw that they worked,
the rest was history.
 
People "bit" because they cost LESS and they WORKED.

It can feel like a 2x4, it can have a crappy trigger, it can have all the grace and beauty of a hog on ice, but if it works reliably and it is cheaper, people will buy them, and agencies on budgets will flock to them.

GLock didn't conquer the LEO market because they were new, or because they were plastic or because of their "safe action trigger", or any other features of the gun itself, they did it because their pistol got the job done and cost less.

Not many remember (and many owners today never knew) that during the days when they were focused on LEO sales, they were REALLY focused on LEO sales and "civilian" customer service and support was...poor. From the customer's point of view, anyway.

Glock has always been "death" on reloads. Meaning that if shot reloads it killed their warranty. Didn't matter if the reloads harmed the gun or not. If you shot reloads (or couldn't proove you didn't) the warranty was void, and Glock would not cover the cost of repair, no matter what it was. And this was in the days before they added "Perfection" to their marketing slogans.

This may sound like bashing, but back in those days, I had several people tell me it happened to them. Any problem with the gun, when they went to Glock, Glock said "you shot reloads, no warranty!!"

AFTER GLock had essentially sewn up the LEO market, they got a LOT more friendly to their civilian customers, and have remained that way.

Good, ruthless, business, worked with typical Austrian efficiency, but not something that made the little guy feel good about the company.

Also, for me, the rabid fanboys who seem to grow like mold on old food, didn't help. Their answer to every question was "get a GLock!!" and they chanted that mantra endlessly it seemed.

These, and some others I have not mentioned are the reasons GLocks have no appeal for me.
 
Glock has an appeal on the sidelines to me. I have never owned one but I have shot several and handled many. I like the feel of the Glock 33 and the Glock 27 and the Glock 26.

I want to cast bullets and handload for these pistols.
 
"The FBI FOIA release indicates that Mireles' revolver was a 686 but for some reason does not list a barrel length.

Ayoob mentions a single 4" L Frame amongst the agents' weapons and also indicated that Mireles was carrying a 686."

OK, that's sounding more familiar. As I said, quite a while since I read the full breakdown.
 
Like it a lot

44 Amp really enjoyed your Glock description, no brakes. Thanks much for the tip, I shall let her choose. Guidance is a good thing, recommendation, perhaps not. Always safety first, not safety lever first. Another lady friend greatly enjoys the .38 revolver I traded her for the 03 Colt she both did not like, and was pretty inadequate caliber wise. The .38 special was ideal and recoil a non issue we were both happy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top