WHY GLOCK? I don't understand why so many people are THE GLOCK fans. Why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The Sig Man

New member
I am thinking about buying a Hk USPC .40 or .45, but I am keep hearing about ditch the Hk, and get a glock. I have a sig p229 9mm(the best), Bettera 92FS(too big), and Daewoo DP51(cute). But, I've never thought about getting a Glock. I personally think that it is boxy(no style) and ugly, but please educate me more about the Glock.
 
-Glocks are among the finest combat-ready handguns that exist today, and I also think they are THE MOST DURABLE pistols today.

-More than 60% U.S. police officers carry Glocks.

-Go to: http://www.kolumbus.fi/nimery/whyglock.html
and you will find the answer.

[This message has been edited by Irfan (edited September 12, 1999).]
 
1.The're cheap
2.They feed most ammo reliably
3.The light weight
4.Combat accurate - 3" @ 25 yards
5.So simple even a Police Officer can use one ;)
6.The Advertising "Glock Perfection" - 7.Nothin' ever breaks/wears out/goes astray ?
8.And if it does, complete deniability due to clause 6!
9.The endless supply of free parts from Smyrna ! :D
10.It eez Glock Swinehund, eet eez zehr gutt!
*******************
Or you could buy an attractive, nicely balanced gun like a 1911 ;)

------------------
"The Gun from Down Under !"
http://www.para1911fanclub.w3.to/
Alternate E-mail
hs2k@email.com
 
I've carried daily a Beretta, Sig, Glock and H&K. Your right the Berettas big. The Sigs are expensive. H&K's shoot real nice but they do cost. Glock's are ugly but I've owned six of them(Dept changed calibers). Glocks are also less expensive then all the others.
By the way HS all guns are easy to use for a police officer. It is the computer that becomes diffucult :)
 
They are ugly! I made fun of my friend when he bought his first one. Now I own a G17 and I love it! Only like 35 parts (keep it simple) and everyone I've ever handed the gun to can shoot it accurately with very little practice. The Glock is a workhorse. You need to check out glock talk. The format is the same as firing line and the guys there are intelligent and helpful.
 
Its a propaganda blitz. Glock figured out how to make a reliable piece by using plastic and cheap metal stampings, and instead of passing the savings on to the consumers they buffaloed people into thinking it was "high tech" rather than just cheap manufacture.

The other factor is its simplicity. Police organizations can save a lot of money in training. They also save money in lawsuits since traditional DA/SA pistols in SA mode have been the target of many lawsuits - the perp claims he was shot by "accident" by a nervous cop with a light SA trigger. The miserable Glock trigger eliminates that source of lawsuits.
Unfortunately, people see the Police with Glocks and think they are chosen because of they are in some way superior instead of the real reason - budgetary limitations. Then they run to the gun store and plunk down their money for a "plastic fantastic".

Still, they do work and I'll be buying one when the price drops down to about $129 where it belongs.


------------------
Keith
The Bears and Bear Maulings Page: members.xoom.com/keithrogan
 
General... :D :D :D

I like the glocks. Haven't bought one yet, but everything I've seen with them is leading me to a purchase. No one has mentioned how easy they are to clean!
 
Keith:

I used to feel exactly the way you do. In fact, I still think the Glock is ugly and over priced. Gaston did a great job of marketing his cheap disposable pistol as a high tech marvel.

However, I have been shooting Glocks through the summer (thousands of rounds) and I am really beginning to like their high capacity and lack of external controls. As a double action revolver shooter the trigger doesn't bother me. In short, I am finding the Glock does have a place in the market. As with so many issues, the truth is in the middle. Glocks do not deserve the hype the die hard Glockaholics give them. Nor do they deserve the unwarranted criticism leveled at them by folks who have not put them through the mill.

My "main" pistol is the ugliest Glock you ever saw, a G35 with an ARS grip reduction. It only shoots 3-inch groups at 25 yards but it is a real workhorse. I don't "baby" my Glocks the way I do my Les Baer or Wilson. I have shot over two thousand rounds of ammo through my G35 of various makes and bullet configurations and the only malfunction was the slide locking back with a loaded magazine when I bumped the stop.

I just started packing a new G27. It shoots incredibly well, not too heavy, small enough to conceal and holds nine rounds. Sure, I would rather have bragging rights to a new Les Baer Stinger, but even at the “over priced” $425.00 tag, the Glock is tough to beat.

If I had to bet my life on an off the shelf auto pistol loaded with any major brand of hollow point personal defense ammo, I would choose the Glock. The new Colts wouldn’t even come into the picture.
 
I guess you either love Glocks or you hate them. Keith is obviously one of the people who dislike Glocks. I'll be the first to admit that the Glock Trigger is a funky one.

For the record, I own 2 Glocks. A 26 and a 35. I also have a H&K Compact 9mm. I like them all. Also there are 3 different trigger pulls here.

The thing I like about Glocks is 1)I know that it isn't going off unless the trigger is pulled 2)An absolute breeze to break down and maintain 3)Very easy to conceal, lightweight, high capacity for its size.

I like Glocks. That's me. You need to rent one at a range and decide for yourself.

------------------
"any color worm will do as long as it is purple"
 
The Sig Man,

I have another problem which is different from yours. Why is everyone so preoccupied with looks in a gun? Yes, I like pretty and eye-appealing guns, but it is a side benefit, not crucial to the use/operation of the arm.

Glocks are what we old time Texans used to refer to as "plug ugly." That fact affects the operation function not one whit, it may even contribute to the good functioning, due to the design, i.e., "form follows function." I have a good shooting friend who actually won't shoot my Glock or the one of our mutual shooting pard. That is simply on the basis of how ugly it appears to him. Does he acutally think the "ugly" will rub off on his hands?! (He isn't going to win any "Sexiest man alive" cover endorsements himself, and neither will I or our other friend.)

Frankly, I wish the Glock were more attractive, but much more than that, I think the shape and width make it hard to conceal well in my mode of carry. I ask you, which is more important?

My personal philosophy is that a good gun becomes automatically (pun intended) better looking immediately upon proving itself. If I have to own a house, vehicle, gun, or whatever, which fits certain aesthetic standards just because I think it reflects positively upon me, then I need to get my priorites straight. The gun is not a part of me. It is a tool, a machine, an inanimate object, not one of my children, nor an extension of my personality. I have a great fondness for firearms (some say "unreasonable"), but they are "things," and deserve to be regarded as such.
 
Sig Man,

Among the Sig, H&K, or Glock, buy (or stick with) the one that fits your hand the best, that you shoot the best. If you are collecting guns, get what you want.

On balance, if you anticipate having to actually shoot someone someday, use the one that works best for you. Any other expert opinions regarding materials, looks, pet theories or marketing reasons should be dismissed immediately for this purpose. It's your life we're talking about here.

Good Luck


------------------
Devil and the deep blue sea behind me,
Vanish in the air you'll never find me...
 
I don't see how Glocks are overpriced when you compare them to SIGs or Berettas which generally cost substantially more. When I buy a pistol that I may need to rely on for self-defense, I pay for function. I don't care if it is a product of "cheap manufacture" or if it uses plastic. I would much rather have an ugly, plastic pistol that always works than a pretty, aluminum pistol that doesn't. And I'd certainly rather have a Glock than a $1000+ 1911 that is less durable and holds less ammo.
 
OK, I'll play the bad guy here amongst all you Glock lovers. I don't like 'em at all. Aside from being butt ugly, I've seen and heard too much about them to ever trust one. Stories about ADs abound despite the so-called safe trigger action and we've had entire threads here about KBs. Yes, I have shot them, a number of times and don't care for the way they feel in my hand.
Keith is right. "Plastic and cheap metal stampings."
So I'll revert to my standard comment on Glocks. Plastic sucks, nuff said.
 
David Wright is correct,Don't let opinions sway you either way.Try one! If it works for you Good,If not that doesn't make it a bad gun. BTW I have been shooting glocks for about seven years now and never had any KABOOMS (Knock on plastic) :)
 
I have heard "about" ADs (with Glocks), too, but nothing to make me think they are fundamentally more frequent with Glocks than DA/SA or DAO pistols. And certainly less frequent than police revolvers.

I've had and sold two SIgs (P239, and P220), and still have a P-210. I also have several other handguns, including a Glock 17, and a custom 1911.

The Glock and the 1911 shot circles around all my other guns, although the Sigs were in no way inaccurate or unreliable. Nice guns -- but I like the Glock 17 an the 1911 better. I've put thousands of rounds through the Glock and so far the only damage is a brokern trigger spring. It cost me $.10 to replace that -- got it from a friend who is a Glock armorer.

(I shot a practice IDPA session this morning, and a friend showed up. I let him shoot my Glock and I shot the P-210. While it is not exactly a fair comparison, they are both service pistols. He shot the best he's ever shot in IDPA-type scenarios. The P-210 is much more accurate, but I can consistenly shoot the Glock better than any of my other guns, when speed, accuracy and quick reloads are an issue.)

You have to keep in mind that many of the guys who participate on these types of forums seem to think comments about their favorite guns is an attack on their manhood. Be careful what you say...
 
Glocks quite simply are utility guns. They are not pretty, but they get the job done. The only use they really accel at is self defence and conceal carry. They have a lighter trigger than a double action but not nearly as good as a single action. They are light and can carry more rounds in a smaller package. I don't think they are much to get excited about, but if you want a gun that will protect your life and stand up to abuse, they are a good choice. However, one reason they are so reliable is that they have a longer portion of the chamber unsupported compared to other pistols. While this leads to better feeding, it increases the chances of a case failure. As a result they are less forgiving if you load a round that is too hot. This is why reloading isn't recommended.

I also think that a good number of glock owners are fairly new to handguns. The first handgun they bought was a glock because they saw it in so many movies and thought it was cool. As a result they have not been exposed to other types of pistols, which leads to their believing Gaston is God and that glocks are perfect.

After I bought a G30(which I think is a pretty nice gun), I started to hang out on the Glock Talk forum. After about a month, I realized that most of the people there were just plain crazy. They would flame anyone that would remotely suggest that glocks are not perfect. If someone would ask a question about upgrading there pistol with aftermarket parts, they would promptly be chewed out for even thinking about it, because Gaston is God and the gun is already perfect. As a result, I even started to become a Glock hater and I owned a Glock! I pretty much avoid that forum now due to its close-mindedness.

[This message has been edited by jason h (edited September 12, 1999).]
 
I hope you have better luck here Jason.

Hopefully you will see, we are a pretty good group of guys and gals.

Welcome to TFL and happy shooting.

J



[This message has been edited by LadydeeJ (edited September 12, 1999).]
 
Rod WMG puts it well. for a defensive pistol, beauty should not even be on the criteria list. collecting, that's a different matter entirely; a Sig 210 or maybe a Korth wheelgun is the ticket there (or maybe a Hammerli target .22).

if you want to play the cost game, here's another look, straight out of Cost Accounting 101;
cost of a reliable, shootable gun in a decent caliber; Glock -> $450
total cost of a reliable, shootable gun in a decent caliber; Colt Commander -> $600 + $500 of add'l parts and gunsmithing, thus initial purchase value of the Commander is negative $650.

is the Glock perfect? of course not. does it perform the required task? no question. the Glock has flaws, but then so do all of the "venerable classics" that are worshiped. hell, funny how H&K, Walther, etc are going to "cheap plastic". and as for "cheap stampings" look at a Glock barrel then look at a barrel from Colt, or from BarSto for that matter. Glock has better a better bore and finish than some of the exalted 45 purveyors. I have some sketches I've been working on that will result in the One True Pistol, but I doubt I'll ever collect enough capital to go into production.

concerning KBs, there have been KBs from 45s for the last 40 years, and even H&Ks have had them in the USP. I'll take the KB situation seriously when somebody shows me careful statistics which present KBs per thousand rounds per gun.

as for Glock Talk, I have been there for more than a year and haven't seen much of what Jason alludes. there are many running discussions as we speak about; aftermarket sights, aftermarket recoil springs and guide rods, aftermarket barrels, grip reductions, etc. all sans flamage.
 
As far as shooting pleasure is concerned, I would stick with my 1911's. They have good triggers, look great, have a small grip, are fairly easy to shoot, can be readily accurized and customized, and come in .45 cal. However....

(a) I hate dealing with gunsmiths. You don't need a gunsmith with a Glock. It is fairly easy to strip a Glock down to the last component and to replace parts if I have to. Now that the political climate in Kalifornia is bad for gun-folks, one needs a gun that can easily be maintained forever (Buy Kasler's book on Glocks).
(b) Glocks are tough! See comment (a).
(c) GLocks are very easy to clean compared to my P220 and 1911's.
(d) Glocks are easy to shoot because of the the single type of trigger pull. BTW, does anybody else notice that 1911 folks like Glocks too?
(e) Glocks are relatively cheap in comparison with the SIG's and HKs. I admit, Glocks could be cheaper.

The only thing that I don't like with Glocks is that once in a while, brass gets ejected into my face. This has to do with limp wristing, a non-existant problem with any other guns! I also heard that limp-wristing with Glocks causes jams, although I don't rememeber any jams with my G17 in the five years that I have owned it.

Just my $0.02
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top