Mr

Paladin · 05-01-2006, 12:46 AM

Would I buy a Glock?
To begin with, I'm a recently retired police officer who had 30 years in when I pulled the pin. I carried a Glock Model 22 (.40 - 15 +1) for 15 of those years. I thought so much of the weapon, I bought the same model as a personnel side arm. My department required that we qualify 3 times a year. Twice in daylight and once at night.
Each time we fired off 100 rounds. Multiple that times 15 years comes out to (I believe) a total of 4500 rounds. For the first 10 years we carried the first generation and then it was replaced with the second generation. I never once had a misfire, nor did I ever see anyone else have one. We used 180 grain jacketed hollowpoints.
When I wanted a smaller auto, Glock wasn't showing anything but full sized models so I went out and bought an S & W 99 in .40 caliber also. Which I consider to be an excellent handgun as well.
For my money Glock makes an outstanding sidearm. I'm sure there are others who feel just as strongly against them. But that Glock gave me a great feeling of confidence at the beginning of each shift

BattleRifleG3 · 05-01-2006, 07:26 AM

That's great to hear, Paladin! It's my viewpoint that Glocks have been surpassed by other fine handguns such as the Springfield XD in both function and value.

My other issues with Glocks are that the original model in 40 cal had a few KB!s with certain 40 cal ammo that wouldn't likely have happened with the S&W guns the 40 was designed for. Handguns designed more recently or those originally designed for larger rounds are better suited for the 40 S&W round in my own opinion. Everything I have read is that Glock fixed the problem with their guns and ammo makers improved their ammo so that it wouldn't happen, but the possibility of matching an old Glock with older ammo at risk of life and limb makes other guns that cost less seem like a much better idea. I have read similar things of the 45 ACP Model 21 based on the Glock 20 in 10mm. So my confidence in Glocks tends to be in the calibers they were originally designed for, that is 9mm and 10mm.

Another issue with Glocks in my opinion is that they refuse to innovate much. I am the proud owner of a Steyr handgun that I and everyone I know has considered to be at least as good or better than a Glock. The story with the Steyr polymer framed pistols is that the engineer who designed them was originally part of Glock. He had some innovative ideas that weren't a huge stretch. But Glock, whose innovations took handgun technology by storm, refused to consider anything diverging from the very uniform line of handguns they currently offer. This designer then left the company and offered his innovations to Steyer, and I can't say enough how pleased I am with the result. Key differences include the availability of a manual safety, an extremely low bore axis, a very comfortable grip angle, and a solid metal subframe (vs separate rails moulded into the polymer).

I suppose my opinion of Glocks is that they WERE a fine firearm in their day, but that Glock has refused to advance their technology beyond fixing their original problems. Meanwhile, other handguns have been developed that lick Glock's problems from the start, specifically safe sizing for the 40 cal round (9mm Glocks came out before the 40 round.)

ShooMac · 05-01-2006, 09:48 AM

I am a Glock fan. That said, if I were to get one of their .40s I would immediately replace the barrel with an aftermarket one. The stock barrel's throat is extremely wide, I suspect to ensure the feeding of a variety of ammo. This comes at the cost of not fully supporting the case during firing.
I think that Glock is a victim of their own success. When their guns came to the US market they were groundbreaking. Since then they have not come out with any radical new products. Their guns have evolved slightly compared to the original lines. The 1911 has not radically changed either. Its advocates would say that they got it right the first time.

BattleRifleG3 · 05-01-2006, 10:41 AM

The 1911 is a classic and has become standard for many uses, including competition. It is much more easily accessorized than the Glock simply due to its design. It also has room for many features not on the original, including double action trigger, ambidextrous safety, and such.

If Glock would offer more variations they could perhaps hold the market against others, but as it is they don't seem any better than lower priced guns like the Springfield XD.

gonzo454 · 05-19-2006, 01:51 PM

I for one dislike Glock, but my dislike for Glock has little to do with the gun itself…it is more of an…”I don’t care for Tomato Gravy” thing…just one of those doesn’t suit my taste issues, but I agree with the comments regarding the 1911, it is in my opinion a very stable platform for a person to build the “gun they love” upon, so easy to accessorize, you can dress it up just about any way you like.

USMC · 05-19-2006, 02:38 PM

I own 3 .40 S&W glocks. My G27 has around 5000 rds through it. My G23 has at least 20,000 rounds through it. My G22 has around 3,000 round through it. I have had one FTF. It was an old 13 rd mag. non metal lined with a weak spring on the G23 and one FTF due to limp wristing by my wife on the 3rd shot ever fired on the G27. After about 15000 rds on the G23 I broke a spring while cleaning it. I sent it back to Glock who did a safety inspection, replaced the spring and refinished the slide all for free! I have many other brands of pistols but none have ever preformed as well as my Glocks not even my XD!

05-01-2006, 12:46 AM	#1
Paladin Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 15	Mr Would I buy a Glock? To begin with, I'm a recently retired police officer who had 30 years in when I pulled the pin. I carried a Glock Model 22 (.40 - 15 +1) for 15 of those years. I thought so much of the weapon, I bought the same model as a personnel side arm. My department required that we qualify 3 times a year. Twice in daylight and once at night. Each time we fired off 100 rounds. Multiple that times 15 years comes out to (I believe) a total of 4500 rounds. For the first 10 years we carried the first generation and then it was replaced with the second generation. I never once had a misfire, nor did I ever see anyone else have one. We used 180 grain jacketed hollowpoints. When I wanted a smaller auto, Glock wasn't showing anything but full sized models so I went out and bought an S & W 99 in .40 caliber also. Which I consider to be an excellent handgun as well. For my money Glock makes an outstanding sidearm. I'm sure there are others who feel just as strongly against them. But that Glock gave me a great feeling of confidence at the beginning of each shift

05-01-2006, 07:26 AM	#2
BattleRifleG3 Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Western PA Posts: 11,397 Images: 13	That's great to hear, Paladin! It's my viewpoint that Glocks have been surpassed by other fine handguns such as the Springfield XD in both function and value. My other issues with Glocks are that the original model in 40 cal had a few KB!s with certain 40 cal ammo that wouldn't likely have happened with the S&W guns the 40 was designed for. Handguns designed more recently or those originally designed for larger rounds are better suited for the 40 S&W round in my own opinion. Everything I have read is that Glock fixed the problem with their guns and ammo makers improved their ammo so that it wouldn't happen, but the possibility of matching an old Glock with older ammo at risk of life and limb makes other guns that cost less seem like a much better idea. I have read similar things of the 45 ACP Model 21 based on the Glock 20 in 10mm. So my confidence in Glocks tends to be in the calibers they were originally designed for, that is 9mm and 10mm. Another issue with Glocks in my opinion is that they refuse to innovate much. I am the proud owner of a Steyr handgun that I and everyone I know has considered to be at least as good or better than a Glock. The story with the Steyr polymer framed pistols is that the engineer who designed them was originally part of Glock. He had some innovative ideas that weren't a huge stretch. But Glock, whose innovations took handgun technology by storm, refused to consider anything diverging from the very uniform line of handguns they currently offer. This designer then left the company and offered his innovations to Steyer, and I can't say enough how pleased I am with the result. Key differences include the availability of a manual safety, an extremely low bore axis, a very comfortable grip angle, and a solid metal subframe (vs separate rails moulded into the polymer). I suppose my opinion of Glocks is that they WERE a fine firearm in their day, but that Glock has refused to advance their technology beyond fixing their original problems. Meanwhile, other handguns have been developed that lick Glock's problems from the start, specifically safe sizing for the 40 cal round (9mm Glocks came out before the 40 round.) __________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf

05-01-2006, 09:48 AM	#3
ShooMac Super Moderator Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 354	I am a Glock fan. That said, if I were to get one of their .40s I would immediately replace the barrel with an aftermarket one. The stock barrel's throat is extremely wide, I suspect to ensure the feeding of a variety of ammo. This comes at the cost of not fully supporting the case during firing. I think that Glock is a victim of their own success. When their guns came to the US market they were groundbreaking. Since then they have not come out with any radical new products. Their guns have evolved slightly compared to the original lines. The 1911 has not radically changed either. Its advocates would say that they got it right the first time. __________________ "Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash

05-01-2006, 10:41 AM	#4
BattleRifleG3 Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Western PA Posts: 11,397 Images: 13	The 1911 is a classic and has become standard for many uses, including competition. It is much more easily accessorized than the Glock simply due to its design. It also has room for many features not on the original, including double action trigger, ambidextrous safety, and such. If Glock would offer more variations they could perhaps hold the market against others, but as it is they don't seem any better than lower priced guns like the Springfield XD. __________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-19-2006, 01:51 PM	#5
gonzo454 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Houston Posts: 111	I for one dislike Glock, but my dislike for Glock has little to do with the gun itself…it is more of an…”I don’t care for Tomato Gravy” thing…just one of those doesn’t suit my taste issues, but I agree with the comments regarding the 1911, it is in my opinion a very stable platform for a person to build the “gun they love” upon, so easy to accessorize, you can dress it up just about any way you like.

05-19-2006, 02:38 PM	#6
USMC Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 278	I own 3 .40 S&W glocks. My G27 has around 5000 rds through it. My G23 has at least 20,000 rounds through it. My G22 has around 3,000 round through it. I have had one FTF. It was an old 13 rd mag. non metal lined with a weak spring on the G23 and one FTF due to limp wristing by my wife on the 3rd shot ever fired on the G27. After about 15000 rds on the G23 I broke a spring while cleaning it. I sent it back to Glock who did a safety inspection, replaced the spring and refinished the slide all for free! I have many other brands of pistols but none have ever preformed as well as my Glocks not even my XD!