Glock vs. Springfield
Sorry if I missed something but I didn`t understand why the the original thread was closed--it seemed like folks were having a civil discussion. Maybe it has been beaten to death--like the revolver vs. autoloader--but I believe both have their merits. I apologize if there was some deeper reason but I think it a legitimate discussion.
I have a G26 and have shot my friend`s springfields--like was said both are great guns and it comes down to personal preference. Try each and see what you like. Glocks feel a bit blocky to me. BOTH go bang and hit the target OK.
I DO feel the grip safety on the springfield is a good idea--especially for a new CCW or someone new to shooting. This would give a slight edge to what I believe are two essentially equal guns. Yes, the biggest safety is between one`s ears however Glocks seem to have a higher ND rate. I believe this is for 2 reasons:
1. A somewhat light trigger pull of the stock Glock
2. A relatively short trigger travel.
Glocks are great guns--their trigger is what makes a glock a glock and the springfield trigger is to me very glock-like. IMHO one needs to use especially good care holstering and unholstering Glocks--and making sure NOTHING gets into the triggerguard. One should NEVER carry a Glock unholstered and (like every other gun) if dropped LET THE GUN FALL.
Both Glocks and Springfields are intrinsically safe and will NOT go bang unless the trigger is depressed. One should ALWAYS keep the finger off the trigger until the gun is on target. Where I believe the grip safety helps is where the trigger gets snagged inadvertently. Unfortunately, this DOES happen (just axe plaxico) and is less likely to happen with the springfield due to its design.
So I think there is room for discussion and I like the grip safety on the sprinfield and have told new shooters this as a point of consideration.
In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit -- John Galt
Last edited by TXplt; 11-21-2011 at 05:21 PM.