What's the most overrated handgun in your opinion?
- Thread starter Tool
- Start date
- Status
The Verminator
Moderator
armoredman
New member
I carried a CZ P-01 for SD for 13 years - I never had anything like what you are describing, not in MANY CZ pistols. What ammo were you using? The CZ "short chamber" on the P-01, PCR, RAMI, P-10S, P-10C, P-10F, P-10M, P-07, P-09, Scorpion, OR the SP01 Phantom never ever failed to fit and fire factory ammo. Contact CZ-USA and have them figure out what the problem is. For reloads, I generally load to 1.095 COAL for both JHP and RN.
Most overrated handgun? Automag. HUGE handgun, fragile construction, breaks often, zero company support, just looks good in the movies.
Most overrated handgun? Automag. HUGE handgun, fragile construction, breaks often, zero company support, just looks good in the movies.
armoredman
New member
First..."STNG"?
Second, Glock sells their guns to LE so cheap...well, I know what we paid for them last decade, and at that priced I would have bought three...and I don't even like Glock. And no, I won't say what the cost was, but it was very cheap. They also buy all the used guns the Dept has for more than they are worth, and then resells them on the cheap, which explains why CDNN had so many used LE turn in guns. They dominate the market not JUST because the guns work, (they do), but by aggressive salesmanship and insanely low prices that make more sense when you realize how little it costs the FACTORY to make one. They aren't perfect - I've had three Glocks fail in front of me or in my hand, but then again, nothing is perfect. They are generally reliable, durable and accurate, and I don't feel badly when my issued Glock 19 is holstered on my side. I'd rather carry that than a Hi Point!
Second, Glock sells their guns to LE so cheap...well, I know what we paid for them last decade, and at that priced I would have bought three...and I don't even like Glock. And no, I won't say what the cost was, but it was very cheap. They also buy all the used guns the Dept has for more than they are worth, and then resells them on the cheap, which explains why CDNN had so many used LE turn in guns. They dominate the market not JUST because the guns work, (they do), but by aggressive salesmanship and insanely low prices that make more sense when you realize how little it costs the FACTORY to make one. They aren't perfect - I've had three Glocks fail in front of me or in my hand, but then again, nothing is perfect. They are generally reliable, durable and accurate, and I don't feel badly when my issued Glock 19 is holstered on my side. I'd rather carry that than a Hi Point!
STNG is a reference to Star Trek Next Generation, where one of the main bad guys are the Borg, a bio/mechanical collective 'Hive mind" who absorb other species and believe their dominance is inevitable, and who's main slogan is "Resistance is futile".
My comment was in reference to another comment that stated Glock domination was .."as certain as the sunrise".
Glock did take over the police market, for a while, they might still be number one, but I know a lot of police agencies who got Glocks have now moved on to other pistols.
I'm told that Glock's square slide was chosen because it is cheaper to make than the common round top slides, and that they chose polygonal rifling because it was cheaper than conventional cut rifling.
I think they chose the trigger they did because every decent trigger design was already covered by someone's patents...
And their plastic frames are significantly cheaper to make than metal alloy frames. Combined with their aggressive marketing, super low prices and "sweetheart deals" to law enforcement is what let them dominate the police market.
I don't fault them for being ruthless, efficient capitalists, but I do fault them for being smug and arrogant about it.
I remember the days, early on, when Glock was still trying to capture the police market, and how, while they would sell their pistols to private citizens, after that, they would barely talk to you, and any problem you had with their pistols was always your fault and they usually claimed that you shot reloads in it (whether there was any proof you did, or not) and therefore they wouldn't fix it. Go away!...
AFTER they got the police market pretty sewed up, that attitude to consumers did soften a bit, but only a bit. Now that Herr Glock has passed on, they may become more consumer friendly, but since they are so successful as is, there's no real reason for them to change.
Between their marketing as "perfection" and the slavish devotion of the "fanboys" I feel the Glock is the most overrated handgun ever.
Its not the ONLY overrated handgun, by any means, I just think its the top of the list. I put one of my favorite pistols on that list, too. The 1911A1 became quite overrated, by tale tellers, and those who had to embellish the truth to emphasize their points.
If you read the actual combat histories, you can find lots of documented examples of the 1911A1 jamming in combat conditions. What got it the reputation for always working was not that it did always work, but that it worked more reliably than the other military pistols of the time. And so, the tale grew in the telling, and over time it changed from "works better than everything else" to "always works, never jams," ...etc.
In that regard, and some others, the 1911A1 became over rated. But not as much as Glock has become, in my opinion. And that's what the OP asked for, my opinion.
My comment was in reference to another comment that stated Glock domination was .."as certain as the sunrise".
Glock did take over the police market, for a while, they might still be number one, but I know a lot of police agencies who got Glocks have now moved on to other pistols.
I'm told that Glock's square slide was chosen because it is cheaper to make than the common round top slides, and that they chose polygonal rifling because it was cheaper than conventional cut rifling.
I think they chose the trigger they did because every decent trigger design was already covered by someone's patents...
And their plastic frames are significantly cheaper to make than metal alloy frames. Combined with their aggressive marketing, super low prices and "sweetheart deals" to law enforcement is what let them dominate the police market.
I don't fault them for being ruthless, efficient capitalists, but I do fault them for being smug and arrogant about it.
I remember the days, early on, when Glock was still trying to capture the police market, and how, while they would sell their pistols to private citizens, after that, they would barely talk to you, and any problem you had with their pistols was always your fault and they usually claimed that you shot reloads in it (whether there was any proof you did, or not) and therefore they wouldn't fix it. Go away!...
AFTER they got the police market pretty sewed up, that attitude to consumers did soften a bit, but only a bit. Now that Herr Glock has passed on, they may become more consumer friendly, but since they are so successful as is, there's no real reason for them to change.
Between their marketing as "perfection" and the slavish devotion of the "fanboys" I feel the Glock is the most overrated handgun ever.
Its not the ONLY overrated handgun, by any means, I just think its the top of the list. I put one of my favorite pistols on that list, too. The 1911A1 became quite overrated, by tale tellers, and those who had to embellish the truth to emphasize their points.
If you read the actual combat histories, you can find lots of documented examples of the 1911A1 jamming in combat conditions. What got it the reputation for always working was not that it did always work, but that it worked more reliably than the other military pistols of the time. And so, the tale grew in the telling, and over time it changed from "works better than everything else" to "always works, never jams," ...etc.
In that regard, and some others, the 1911A1 became over rated. But not as much as Glock has become, in my opinion. And that's what the OP asked for, my opinion.
stinkeypete
New member
Marketing sells guns, and marketing doesn't care about facts.
The goal is to sell more guns, not provide the best product to the consumer. If those two goals coincide, it's a lucky coincidence.
Once people have invested in an idea, it's difficult to change their minds. This is where Brand Loyalty comes from, and other unfortunate psychological conditions.
My club will not allow the use of holsters on the pistol ranges. Too many people shot the floor. One guy shot his foot, the other his leg. That was it, enough is enough, no more holsters allowed.
These accidents did not happen with revolvers. They did not happen with 1911s or Berettas. Maybe they could have, but you know the brand of gun involved in both negligent firings.
If the goal is to protect yourself from getting shot, first-- don't shoot yourself. Second-- don't let someone take your gun from you. Now we can argue about which is best.
The goal is to sell more guns, not provide the best product to the consumer. If those two goals coincide, it's a lucky coincidence.
Once people have invested in an idea, it's difficult to change their minds. This is where Brand Loyalty comes from, and other unfortunate psychological conditions.
My club will not allow the use of holsters on the pistol ranges. Too many people shot the floor. One guy shot his foot, the other his leg. That was it, enough is enough, no more holsters allowed.
These accidents did not happen with revolvers. They did not happen with 1911s or Berettas. Maybe they could have, but you know the brand of gun involved in both negligent firings.
If the goal is to protect yourself from getting shot, first-- don't shoot yourself. Second-- don't let someone take your gun from you. Now we can argue about which is best.
Shane Tuttle
Staff
It's fairly common when discussions reach around page 3, there's not much more to add to the topic at hand...Rambling Anecdotes notwithstanding.
Alas, I have to open my big mouth, anyway. And boy, if anyone knows me, there are two brands I absolutely H.A.T.E. HATE. One I'm going to pile on my hatred, one I'm going to defend. I can't believe I'm going to do that. But I hope those that consider my viewpoint will understand I'm honestly trying to be relatively objective. If I'm going as far as defending a platform I'd rather see in the perverbial trashcan, I hope a little bit of latitude can be had on my argument. I do apologize ahead of time and admit I didn't read every single post word for word. Also, bear in mind I'm not projecting my comment as pure fact. Just my own conclusions.
1. Glock
OK, I hear some don't care about how many were sold to support their popularity. I get that. Lowest bidder, etc. However, a big part of that is the firearm must pass certain levels of reliability, parts availability, and universal fit for the masses, yes?
Who blew the doors open on the Plastic Fantastic craze? It wasn't HK's VP70. Why did the XD line become so popular in the U.S.? It was already popular in Croatia under another model number. But not really anywhere else. What about S&W's M&P line? HK's P30?
Let's face it: If it weren't for Glock hammering the market, NONE of the other firearm manufacturers would be successful with their own platforms. Counterfactual? Yep. However, I saw how Glock was marketed. It doesn't matter if they had issues such as the early .40SW platforms or poor sales of the .45GAP. Why? Their overall reliability in 9mm and other sub-models were already established. They pushed how simple they were to field strip, clean, reassemble, and shoot with combat accuracy. People dragged them through the mud along with other competing platforms such as the 1911 at the time, picked them up, and shot them with no cleaning. Non-scientific as it was, the Glock was the clear winner in reliability when abused. They pushed their metal treatment process was superior to corrosion resistance. As much as these were hyped, which could correlate to being overrated to you, Glocks by and large proved to live up to it. How many successful business start-ups and established businesses turned to aftermarket parts/upgrades for Glock? Not only that, you now have a reliable firearm that's easily found at your LGS at a fraction of the cost of other firearms (especially the 1911) and the typical enthusiast can modify them at a large capacity of their imagination. You couldn't do that with any other gun to that degree. Not the 1911. Not a Ruger Mark I, II, or III. Not an HK P7.
Glocks dominated in every aspect that other manufacturers could only DREAM. They were the litmus test. Other manufacturers targeted Glock because they had the market cornered. It was everyone vs. Glock.
Respectully, unless you just turned 21, I honestly can't fathom how anyone can honestly say Glock is overrated in regards to their contributions to the firearm industry over the last 40 years....
...but they are WAY overrated in fitting me and my style of handling/firing a handgun.
Oh, and Kimber? If I typed up a 5 paragraph essay on them on here, the language filter will make it look like one, big red blob. Otherwise, I don't even see it as being an overrated firearm. In my book, a firearm has to be able to, you know, fire, before it can even be considered one.
ETA: Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go vomit due to spending 45minutes typing up a defense for Glock...
Alas, I have to open my big mouth, anyway. And boy, if anyone knows me, there are two brands I absolutely H.A.T.E. HATE. One I'm going to pile on my hatred, one I'm going to defend. I can't believe I'm going to do that. But I hope those that consider my viewpoint will understand I'm honestly trying to be relatively objective. If I'm going as far as defending a platform I'd rather see in the perverbial trashcan, I hope a little bit of latitude can be had on my argument. I do apologize ahead of time and admit I didn't read every single post word for word. Also, bear in mind I'm not projecting my comment as pure fact. Just my own conclusions.
1. Glock
OK, I hear some don't care about how many were sold to support their popularity. I get that. Lowest bidder, etc. However, a big part of that is the firearm must pass certain levels of reliability, parts availability, and universal fit for the masses, yes?
Who blew the doors open on the Plastic Fantastic craze? It wasn't HK's VP70. Why did the XD line become so popular in the U.S.? It was already popular in Croatia under another model number. But not really anywhere else. What about S&W's M&P line? HK's P30?
Let's face it: If it weren't for Glock hammering the market, NONE of the other firearm manufacturers would be successful with their own platforms. Counterfactual? Yep. However, I saw how Glock was marketed. It doesn't matter if they had issues such as the early .40SW platforms or poor sales of the .45GAP. Why? Their overall reliability in 9mm and other sub-models were already established. They pushed how simple they were to field strip, clean, reassemble, and shoot with combat accuracy. People dragged them through the mud along with other competing platforms such as the 1911 at the time, picked them up, and shot them with no cleaning. Non-scientific as it was, the Glock was the clear winner in reliability when abused. They pushed their metal treatment process was superior to corrosion resistance. As much as these were hyped, which could correlate to being overrated to you, Glocks by and large proved to live up to it. How many successful business start-ups and established businesses turned to aftermarket parts/upgrades for Glock? Not only that, you now have a reliable firearm that's easily found at your LGS at a fraction of the cost of other firearms (especially the 1911) and the typical enthusiast can modify them at a large capacity of their imagination. You couldn't do that with any other gun to that degree. Not the 1911. Not a Ruger Mark I, II, or III. Not an HK P7.
Glocks dominated in every aspect that other manufacturers could only DREAM. They were the litmus test. Other manufacturers targeted Glock because they had the market cornered. It was everyone vs. Glock.
Respectully, unless you just turned 21, I honestly can't fathom how anyone can honestly say Glock is overrated in regards to their contributions to the firearm industry over the last 40 years....
...but they are WAY overrated in fitting me and my style of handling/firing a handgun.
Oh, and Kimber? If I typed up a 5 paragraph essay on them on here, the language filter will make it look like one, big red blob. Otherwise, I don't even see it as being an overrated firearm. In my book, a firearm has to be able to, you know, fire, before it can even be considered one.
ETA: Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go vomit due to spending 45minutes typing up a defense for Glock...
The Verminator
Moderator
Even with your heart-rending and amusingly overdone rant.........STNG is a reference to Star Trek Next Generation, where one of the main bad guys are the Borg, a bio/mechanical collective 'Hive mind" who absorb other species and believe their dominance is inevitable, and who's main slogan is "Resistance is futile".
My comment was in reference to another comment that stated Glock domination was .."as certain as the sunrise".
Glock did take over the police market, for a while, they might still be number one, but I know a lot of police agencies who got Glocks have now moved on to other pistols.
I'm told that Glock's square slide was chosen because it is cheaper to make than the common round top slides, and that they chose polygonal rifling because it was cheaper than conventional cut rifling.
I think they chose the trigger they did because every decent trigger design was already covered by someone's patents...
And their plastic frames are significantly cheaper to make than metal alloy frames. Combined with their aggressive marketing, super low prices and "sweetheart deals" to law enforcement is what let them dominate the police market.
I don't fault them for being ruthless, efficient capitalists, but I do fault them for being smug and arrogant about it.
I remember the days, early on, when Glock was still trying to capture the police market, and how, while they would sell their pistols to private citizens, after that, they would barely talk to you, and any problem you had with their pistols was always your fault and they usually claimed that you shot reloads in it (whether there was any proof you did, or not) and therefore they wouldn't fix it. Go away!...
AFTER they got the police market pretty sewed up, that attitude to consumers did soften a bit, but only a bit. Now that Herr Glock has passed on, they may become more consumer friendly, but since they are so successful as is, there's no real reason for them to change.
Between their marketing as "perfection" and the slavish devotion of the "fanboys" I feel the Glock is the most overrated handgun ever.
Its not the ONLY overrated handgun, by any means, I just think its the top of the list. I put one of my favorite pistols on that list, too. The 1911A1 became quite overrated, by tale tellers, and those who had to embellish the truth to emphasize their points.
If you read the actual combat histories, you can find lots of documented examples of the 1911A1 jamming in combat conditions. What got it the reputation for always working was not that it did always work, but that it worked more reliably than the other military pistols of the time. And so, the tale grew in the telling, and over time it changed from "works better than everything else" to "always works, never jams," ...etc.
In that regard, and some others, the 1911A1 became over rated. But not as much as Glock has become, in my opinion. And that's what the OP asked for, my opinion.
The only rational conclusion is...........
RESISTANCE REALLY IS FUTILE!!!!!!!
Glock still rules and nothing can change that reality.
The Verminator
Moderator
I put up with the Glock's blockiness because their Glockiness makes up for it.
They may not fit my hand comfortably........they may not look beautiful.......
But they chew up the targets beautifully and give a bang every time I pull the trigger.
Happy camper here.
armoredman
New member
FYI, that's not Photoshop, AI, nada. That's a real rubber ball Glock guys gave my young son at NRA '09 in Phoenix, AZ.
Mike Irwin
Staff
These days... the 1911 and its various iterations.
Is it a good platform? Yes.
Has time really passed it by in so many ways?
Yes.
Is it a good platform? Yes.
Has time really passed it by in so many ways?
Yes.
Any 1911, and here's why:
- Unnecessary grip safety - a stupid solution looking for a problem; see Hi-Power - no grip safety!;
- Round count isn't much better than a revolver.
- Sears wear out and break/chip
- Idiot marks from takedown
- Questionable format for hot 10mm - good for slow 45.
- Parts don't just drop in - need fitting.
-
- Unnecessary grip safety - a stupid solution looking for a problem; see Hi-Power - no grip safety!;
- Round count isn't much better than a revolver.
- Sears wear out and break/chip
- Idiot marks from takedown
- Questionable format for hot 10mm - good for slow 45.
- Parts don't just drop in - need fitting.
-
I do agree with the 1911 being over rated today, but I don't agree with your reasons being the fault of the original design, but what people have done with it.
Unnecessary magazine disconnect - a stupid solution looking for a problem; see 1911 and numerous other designs.
Just different opinions, both valid as opinions.
How does this make it overrated??
This one has me scratching my head, specifically, how this is a 1911 problem..
This one is easy its entirely the fault of the idiots doing it. Not the gun.
This one is both a yes and a no for me. Yes, I agree the stock .45 1911A1 is being pushed hard by the 10mm, and that does make it questionable if that was a good idea. Other side of the coin, the 1911 pattern/system will take it and more, just fine, IF specifically made for that. I've had LAR Grizzlies in .44Magnum, and in .45Win Mag. They are stretched and beefed up, but they are 1911 pattern guns and handle the magnums just fine.
I was a Small Arms Repairman (MOS 45B20) in the Army when the 1911A1 was our service pistol. I can assure you that parts did "drop in" and no fitting was needed. This was because everything was made to the same common Govt mandated standards, and the parts were inspected to ensure that.
Today, with lots of different makers, each one making their own variations, tweaking and changing specs to "improve" things, you can't count of that, anymore, and some makers change things to ensure only "their" parts will fit.
So, I do agree the 1911 is on the overrated list, just not for precisely the same reasons you do.
georgehwbush
New member
from what i've read on this forum, i would have to vote that GLOCK is probably the most over rated; not because there is something wrong with them, but because i dislike "pushy salesmen" and glock is the only name i have seen really pushed here.
The Verminator
Moderator
And the standards demanded a LOOSE fit right?
Which is why all the parts popped together with ease.
Which is why these pistols were very reliable but not capable of stellar accuracy.
Current manufacturers are going for accuracy and the tolerances are much tighter.
I had a Colt Commander circa 1971 and it was a jammomatic.......but quite accurate.
armoredman
New member
I had a couple dozen 1911s in the Armory, all rattled like castanets, all worked perfectly, and all hit the target. Only issue I had was keeping the sea salt from eating them away.
Late to the conversation and all I have to offer is my $.02 worth.
For those of you who hate Glocks so much, I recommend you don't buy one. Why you feel it necessary to tell other people not to buy them escapes me.
I've always thought the Browning HiPower was more popular than it deserved to be. YMMV! But, if you like the P-35, more power to you.
Dave
For those of you who hate Glocks so much, I recommend you don't buy one. Why you feel it necessary to tell other people not to buy them escapes me.
I've always thought the Browning HiPower was more popular than it deserved to be. YMMV! But, if you like the P-35, more power to you.
Dave
No, the standards demanded a PROPER fit.
Serviceability was the requirement, stellar accuracy was NOT. Never forget that the 1911 was designed to be what the customer wanted. A service pistol. Not a match pistol. Browning originally offered a 200gr bullet at 900fps. The Army wanted a 230gr. The original design didn't have a thumb safety. The Army wanted one. So, Browning gave them what they wanted.
Match accuracy wasn't a requirement, reliability with service ammo, and "minute of man" accuracy was, and that's what they got.
As far as being "loose" if you ever get a chance to do a hands on inspection of one of the old 1911s or 1911A1s that wasn't in service use for 50,60, or 70 years, you'd be surprised, I think. They aren't "loose" or "sloppy" and they don't rattle. (much, anyway...
) The newest .45s the govt bought (outside of small purchases for spec ops units in fairly recent times) was in 1945. Even the ones that didn't see hard use in combat were handled, cycled, stripped and reassembled thousands of times if not tens of thousands of times or more over the years, and not by people who cared for anything other than the gun worked.
Yes, you can improve the accuracy of the 1911 design by tightening certain tolerances, but its been a well known fact for about a century that doing that reduces the guns reliability. Not a concern for a target pistol, but not a good idea for a service pistol.
What were you running it on, that jammed so badly??
The Verminator
Moderator
Your dirge for the grand old 1911 is instructive.
Here we have the sad tale of a weapon that can be accurate if it gives up on reliability or reliable if it gives up on accuracy.
It is a battlefield gun--made for shooting men in harsh conditions of mud and sludge and blood--reliable and accurate enough to hit a man's body.
Perfect for that application. "Proper" fit of parts is loose--if a dollop if mud or glop or a few pebbles get into the works--the gun keeps working.
I am aware, of course, that a gunsmith can make the newer ones quite reliable (though the owner may still have to tinker with them) if you want to put the money into them.
And some recent manufacturers have found a decent compromise that can bring accuracy and pretty good reliability (although the owner may still have to tinker with them).
But........why screw around when you can have a Glock that always goes bang and holds 14 instead of eight?
- Status