WHY GLOCK? I DON'T UNDERSTAND.....SECOND ROUND!

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Sig Man

New member
First of all, thank you all for responding on my topic on September 13 "why glock? I don't understand why so many people are the glock fans". However, the most responds I've received are that glocks are cheap and reliable. The answers I've tried to get were the functional wise. If I wanted to get a cheap and reliable beat-up gun, I've gotten a cheap CZ already. I am thinking about buying a HK USPC .40 or .45 here! If money was the problem, I was not even thinking about getting a HK. Now, I know that glocks are cheap. But,that's not my main priority of choosing a gun. I do like to get opinions like if the glocks are more accurate than Hk or has better control figures...etc. Thank you for acknowledged me that the glocks are cheap, but I need to know more than that to beat over my choice of the HK USPC. Thank you.
 
I didn't reply to your first post, but to throw in my two cents, I love my Glock 19 because of its simplicity of operation and user friendliness. The Glock lacks all the external bells and whistles of other pistols, which in turn makes it easy to operate and friendly to the hand. My previous experience with pistols has been with 1911's and I had become familiar with 'dehorning' the pistol and doing this or that so the hammer wouldn't bite the web of my shooting hand or the sights wouldn't gouge my clothing if I drew it a certain way, to name a couple. These are but small technicalities and I have no complaints about my 1911's, but when I finally picked up the Glock and shot it, I realized I didn't have to worry about those little things with this pistol. I like the fact that the Glock now has an extensive record in trials and in the field and has stood up as a reliable and very durable, easy to maintain pistol. Cost was not a factor in my selection of the Glock and I likely would have readily paid as much as I did for my SIG P226 (though I'm glad the current fair market value dictated otherwise). As far as I'm concerned, my Glock is a bargain and worth far more than just its shelf price. I'm not any more sentimental about my Glock than I am with any of my guns, but it is a 'work' gun and is quite suitable to stand up to the kind of use which I wouldn't want to put any of my 'heirlooms' through. Get whatever pistol tickles your fancy, if that's what it comes down to, but for serious use, I wholeheartedly recommend a Glock.
 
Why are you so worried about this? If you want a USP, then get a USP. Glock good... USP good. Everybody happy. I prefer Beretta's myself. Me happy to! :)
 
If you're looking for a pistol that is accurate and reliable, Glock and HK USP pistols are both fine service arms. My personal experience has been that the HK is somewhat more accurate than the Glock shooting from the bench. However, both pistols will make holes in the "A" zones at 50' if I do my part right.
If you asked me wich I would prefer to carry concealed for 10 to 12 hours, I would choose the Glock. It's lighter and more compact making it easier and more comfortable to conceal and carry. JMHO. YMMV. :)

------------------
May your lead always hit center mass and your brass always land in your range bag.

~Blades~
 
The HK USP has a very weird way of re-assembly due to the captive recoil spring.
Glock are not "cheap" but more "economical" If you get the same accuracy and reliability plus higher capacity than HK. Why pay more for the HK other than the name? the HK also has a FAT grip and sharp plastic edges.

Personal preferences...I stick with the Glock and the HK P7.

------------------
If you want peace, prepare for war.
 
I bought my first Glock when they introduced the model 21. It has served me faithfully ever since. Sure it is less expensive than the Sig, but it has alot less parts to break. It is fairly accurate for all but the most discriminating shooters. They don't jam, will feed any ammo from hot to soft except lead, and before Brady they held the most rounds, except for some of the very expensive race guns. If you don't like them don't buy one, the people who own them know that they are one of the finest guns out their. As for myself you can keep your Sigs I'll stick with my Glocks, and old faithfull my 1911.
 
8 years of owning and carrying 4 different Glocks (19,21,22 & 23), 24,000 rounds downrange, ZERO malfunctions of any kind has convinced me that Glocks are outstanding pistols.

If somebody doesn't like them I could care less what thier opinion is. Don't ask me my opinion of the 1911, you may not like what you hear.

I also like Kahrs and am an HK USPC fan.

Try a Glock. If you like it, get one. If you don't like it, don't get one.

Pretty simple huh?

------------------
Dan

Check me out at:
www.mindspring.com/~susdan/interest.htm
www.mindspring.com/~susdan/GlocksnGoodies.htm
 
As a non-Glock owner (Beretta for me), here's my take on it:
Why own a revolver? Why did police agencies cling to revolvers long after semi-autos became popular (ie 1911, 92F)? To me, the answer is simplicity and reliability. When you draw a revolver and squeeze the trigger, it will shoot. No ifs, ands or buts!

Well, now comes along the Glock. Very similar principle. If it's loaded, draw, squeeze the trigger and it will fire. No forgetting manual safeties. No cocked hammer (or having to manually cock it). And reliability is almost a non-issue (I say almost, because I don't think any semi-auto can be more reliable than a revolver.)

Basically, IMHO the Glock is the high capacity answer to the revolver.

LL
 
I wouldn't call the Glocks cheap, just realisticaly priced!

What led me to buy my first Glock (a 19) was all the press that the Glock 17 received. Many people attempted to abuse the hell out of the gun in attempt to make it fail, and thus justify that it was a piece of junk. Of course, the Glock proved them wrong. I purchased the 19 because it fit my hand perfectly. When I closed my eyes and brought the weapon up to fire, I noticed that the sights were on target. Another selling point for me was that the parts are interchangeable within models and some parts interchange between models. One magazine article had a test where approximately 20 Glock 17s were field stripped, the parts mixed up, and then the 17s were reassembled with randomly picked parts. All shot and functioned normally. Try doing that to a 1911!

My 19 is accurate enough for what it is intended to do. Remember, it's not a target pistol. My other Glock is a model 20, and I am more accurate with that then the 19. I believe that the longer sight radius is the reason. Both guns are stock with the only additions being Trijicon night sights and the glock factory extended slide release. I added the slide release because I noticed that the stock release was hard to use when your thumb was wet.

I would suggest to anyone trying to decide between the two that you go to a range that offers rentals and try a couple of Glocks and USP models. Honestly, they are both great guns- It's a matter of preference.
(i.e. Like Apples- Do you like red delicious or granny smith? ) Find the one that fits you, points instinctively, (try the eyes closed test) and is comfortable to shoot. Also when testing, see which weapon allows you to get back on target faster for the second shot. Remember each person is different and what is posted by fellow members may not apply to you!
 
I don't want to anger anyone here but this is how i view things. I drive a old chevy p/u with a bone stock 350 small block,carb and no fancy do dads but it always starts,runs,and drives good. I bought a glock because it always goes bang when i pull the trigger. There are nicer trucks out there as are better guns, but i don't feel the need to spend more money to buy potential problems. The more things something has, the more it breaks (murphys law). If the computer s#%t's in that spiffy high dollar car your walking,and if something breaks or jambs in that high dollar pistol you might die.Money can sometimes only buy you problems. Go to a range and rent a glock or shoot a friends and then make a decision but there are too many happy glockers for all of us to be wrong.
 
Sig Man,

You shouldn't develop any cold feet about purchasing a USP40C or 45C. I own a 40C and a 45FS and am very pleased with them in all departments. I also own a Glock23(40SW) and like it also, but I still prefer the USP40C because I shoot it better(tighter groups at point of aim). With the G23 the 1st shot out of the cold barrel is high by about 3 inches, after the barrel is hot it hits closer to point of aim but not as tight groups as the USP(at least for me). Price difference is about $100 but I don't feel bad about the extra cost of the USP.

------------------
 
Here are the reasons I like Glocks the best:
1. Among the most reliable, if not THE most. Will eat up any jacketed ammo.
2. Its durability and ruggedness cannot be beat. Freeze it, bury it, pour dirt, sand, salt water, mud, etc....it'll keep functioning...and will never rust on you. All of the metallic parts are tenifer treated, making them nearly diamond tough. And the impact resistant polymer frame is tougher than steel, yet much lighter. The frame is thus impervious to rust and hard impact, and will not be affected by extreme temperatures
3. The low bore axis makes felt recoil less, and reduces muzzle flip. Plus the polymer frame absorbs some recoil. Very controllable pistols.
4. Consistant trigger pulls for each shot. Sure, revolver, and other DAO pistols have this too. But Glocks give you the shortest and easiest DAO trigger stroke. Plus you can install different trigger springs to vary the weight of the trigger pull.
5. The safe action system incorporates 3 safeties that work together. This means that the gun will not go off unless the trigger is intentionally pulled.
6. Simplicity is what makes the Glock an ingenious design. About half the number of parts of most other pistols. Less parts to break. And if you have to replace any parts, it's so easy to do so yourself...anyone with half a brain can do it. Plus no external safeties to fumble with.

HK's, SIGS, Berettas, are also fine choices. Can't go wrong with any of the above. But for those reasons I described above, the Glock is my choice for a defensive sidearm.


Oh, forgot to mention this too...Glocks are plenty accurate for a combat pistol. They may not be match accurate like a custom 1911 race gun, but they will shoot much better than most people are capable of. Plus the polygonal barrel rifling helps with accuracy, and also helps conserve bullet velocity more so than traditional cut rifling.

[This message has been edited by shamster (edited September 14, 1999).]
 
SIGMAN,
The grass is always greener..... old principal. Keep with your sig's if they work shoot em. Me, and everone I know, got glocks, 'cause they are what we want... they shoot well, and they are reasonably priced. I thought I wanted a sig one time, but all I would have been buying was a name, so I got 2 glocks with the money.

------------------
10MM Magnum.... tried the rest, now I got the best
 
Ok, this topic is really trolling it now.

Just the same, I don't know what's the big deal with Glocks either. Just don't get it.

Ironic since I own nothing but Glocks. Basically, out of an entire group of guns that fits my needs, the Glock came out the winner. The fact that they aren't too expensive certainly didn't hurt.

That's it.
 
my motto in life is "less is more."
so to describe a glock-it may look like less, but it really is more.
I also agree with everything shamster says.


H&k always!
 
I must agree. Just pick up a Glock 30. Can't wait to add it to my Glock collection.

Glocks are great. Unfortunately, I was reading a very "biased" Newsweek article and they basically attributed all the shootings in America to Glocks. What a junk publication.
 
I was a latecomer to the Glock. Skeptic. Didn't like the Tupperware. Last winter I bought a Glock Model 29. Yeah, 10mm. Well, out of the box it shot better than my FN Highpower with the Millett sights, match barrel, polished feed ramp, and expensive trigger job. I fired over five hundred rounds with it in the first three days before I had a malfunction. That was without cleaning. Now that I am cleaning it regularly I have never had another malfunction. The first three days was to get a baseline of what I could expect. (The malfunction was the slide locking back on several rounds in a magazine-I might have bumped the slide latch.)

That being said, my next handgun will be a Kimber .45. I don't have a Model 1911 for the first time in years and I itch!

[This message has been edited by Spartacus (edited September 15, 1999).]
 
I own a Glock. The trigger and internals are made of stamped metal and resemble toy pistol parts.

I don't understand this "wives tale" that polymer is stronger than steel. As an engineer I can tell you that polymer is not stronger than steel, especially when comparing the same weight of steel and polymer.

There is a picture of a G21 on Glock Talk with the frame broken in three pieces from a kb. I have seen a few kb'ed pistols in the last 25 years and never seen a steel gun break into little pieces like this one.

My G30 has about 500rds (no +p and properly lubed)) through it and the rear slide rails are showing greater wear than I would have anticipated from normal break in. I'm not convinced it is going to last 10K rds.

I do not dislike Glocks, I think they are fine for what they were designed to do. I definately don't think they are the Messiah of pistols and I think they are too expensive for the type of construction. The most expensive part to make is the barrel and it uses poygonal rifiling which is probably the least expensive barrel to make.

On the plus side it is a very accurate pistol and very feed friendly. It is easy to clean and is corrosion resistant. The feed friendliness is at the expense of a very loose and very unsupported chamber.
 
Sig Man

I think it's a toss up between the USP & Glock. Glock hasn't got a reputation for breaking firing pins & bad customer service, the USP has a supported chamber & a safty for those who don't feel safe with a revolver type action. I can tell you why the Glocks are so much better accepted by the world wide shooting public than your namesake Sig: No stamped metal slides, no rust issues, no ND's due to pressing the slide release rather than the hammer drop under pressuer, no high bore axis, no CRUNCH-tic, no grip pannels incresing girth, 30% fewer parts, simple/quick light mount & easy to maintain.
Every guy I know that has to carry a Sig would rather carry a Glock. I can see why.
 
When the FBI assembled a cross section of agents (men/women, big/small, new/old) and had them fire most of the 40 pistols, the majority picked Glock.

They put the Glocks through the wringer and they passed. They are having less problems with them than the SIGs, and they didn;t have many with the SIGs.

The FBI is not the only agency to not just pick Glocks, but prefer them.

The Illinois State Police tested all the 40s, the SIG, S&W, Glock passed. Went Glock on low bid.

They do work any way you get them.

If YOU are gonna like them is another story. :)

------------------
>>>>---->
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top