Gun and Game Forum banner

would you buy a Glock ?

  • I already did

    Votes: 25 36.2%
  • yes

    Votes: 15 21.7%
  • no

    Votes: 29 42.0%
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,922 Posts
No because:
1. The best reliability in Glocks is in their 9mm and 10mm versions. Most of the KB!s are in the 45 and 40 S&W versions. It's been validly pointed out that Glocks will have more KB!s because there are simply more Glocks, but that doesn't explain why they're practically all in the upped caliber versions, as the 9mm Glock is most likely still the most popular model and it's fine. Me, I want higher than 9mm. Glocks were designed before the 40 S&W came out, and while the stronger S&W pistols had the room to spare, the Glocks didn't, based on my observations.
2. Glocks are great, but they were merely the first - not the best. Many other pistols have been designed since with the same strengths and fewer drawbacks, including the ability from the start to take the 40 S&W. Examples are the Steyr M and S series and the Springfield XD. Nothing against the Glocks, just that better guns are now available. Glock has rejected any major design innovations in favor of their existing product line. I think this'll hurt them as their designs become surpassed. Case in point, the Steyr M series were designed by a Glock employee who wanted to actually design stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,922 Posts
Then the question to ask is should you buy a Glock, as opposed to whether or not I would buy a Glock ;). My thoughts are still that the Glocks have been bettered by far by the likes of Springfield and Steyr. But if it's your taste and the price is good for you, I wouldn't oppose the choice.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I want a 26 for carry..a 17 for the range and I haven't ruled out the used 21 from a police dept trade in :target:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,922 Posts
If you give the competition a fair shot and still like the Glock then that's cool. I just really consider the Glocks to be behind. It's one thing if you want a classic metal framed pistol that has a heritage to stick to the original, but polymer framed guns, IMHO, should have the most to show for their futurism, and I frankly think that the Glock is lacking in merit compared to its competition.

I guess I just won't rest until you try out the XD and Steyr and STILL like the Glock. But don't mind me, buy what you want.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I am not aware of any long term corrosion resistance test results of the Springfield or the Steyr
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
A Makarov is a good cheap pistol that if someone steals it you're not out more than $200..a Glock is considered by many as one of the best pistols ever fielded..a lot of cops tell me they'd rather have a Glock than just about anything else available
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,922 Posts
I'll never stop being amazed at how people will describe something as the best out there when they've only fired a handful of pistols.

I can honestly say the Steyr is the nicest in my opinion that I've fired, and that's compared to a Ruger P89, Beretta 92, Norinco 1911, Para Ord P14 45, Star BM, Makarov, and more.

Now if those cops have tried more than just Glocks and all agree on the Glock, then that's cool. I just get frustrated when folks promote what they have solely because it's what they have. Folks who have tried all of the above tend to say that the XD is at least as good as a Glock in every way (and for technical reasona better), that the Steyr is above Glock by far, on a par with an HK USP, and that the SIG is better than all the others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
935 Posts
I've fired a lot of different pistols glocks, berettas, sigs, S&W, and even steyr as well as others I like some of em and wouldn't touch others I've never heard anyone military, LE or other refer to glocks as the best and I personaly think glocks are overrated and over priced and while steyrs are a great shooting gun there a little light. My favorite right now is my baby desert eagle and until I can afford a browning hi power thats what I'm sticking with. But if you got your heart set on a glock then by all means get whatever you want.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
not to rattle your cage BRG3 but I've never read about the Steyr or XD being torture tested...like getting thrown out of helicopters or firing 400 thousand rounds
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
100,000-Round 9mm Torture Test
By Chuck Taylor
On four occasions since 1990, I've written articles about a continuing evaluation I've been conducting to ascertain the longevity of the Glock Model 17 9mm pistol. The first of these, appearing in the February, 1993, issue of Combat Handguns, contained my findings as to the weapon's performance and durability after 33,000 rounds fired. At this juncture, I stated:
"I carried it in the rain, snow, dust and mud. I carried it when the temperatures were over 100 degrees and when they were 40 below.
"I presented the gun more than 10,000 times from it's plastic slide holster, speed loaded it 2,000 times, performed over 5,000 tactical loads, shot it weak-handed in excess of 2,500 times and field-stripped it 250 times.
"From the beginning, I resolved to grind it into the dirt, abuse it like no gun I ever had."
"Why? To find out the truth about Glocks, for once and for all...
"And I succeeded in doing just that. In a 30-month period, I fired 33,000 rounds, all factory loads, of every imaginable type made-- and it ate them all, almost without a single malfunction. I say 'almost' because on the 32,994th round, I finally had one-- a failure to feed! And this in spite of the fact that I cleaned the gun every 10,000 rounds whether it need it or not!
"100 rounds short of the 5,000th shot, both factory-provided magazines ceased to hold the slide open after the last shot, although they both continued to function normally otherwise. At round number 11,000 a second set did the same and was replaced by another.
"By the 500th holster presentation, the left side of the front site was so badly worn that a proper site picture was no longer possible. It was subsequently replaced with a steel version.
"By round number 16,000, I could see steel through the finish-- but it never did rust, although it was exposed repeatedly to rain, snow, perspiration and even blood.
"The trigger pull, originally 5.5 pounds, got smoother and a bit lighter, but it never did double or demonstrate a glitch of any kind.
"And after all this, it still shoots into 3 inches at 25 meters, not much different than when it was new."
Impressed, to say the least, I was still determined to see the test though to the point where the gun failed. So, although the piece had passed the 33,000-round mark without significant negative results or breakage, I continued the test.

The months went by and the test continued. By the end of the summer, 1993, the gun had shot 50,000 rounds without a hitch. Among my additional observations published in Glock Autopistols 1995, were these:

"And now, after 50,000 rounds, nothing has really changed. It still:

"Functions reliably. In fact, not a single additional stoppage has occurred.

"Prints inside the 9-ring of a 25-meter pistol target, exactly as it did when it was new.

"Shows no additional finish wear.
"Exhibits no bore corrosion.


"Clearly, the Glock M-17 is a heck of a pistol and, as a survival instrument, is well worthy of our consideration. It is well-designed, well-made and capable of surviving a wide variety of environmental conditions. It will feed the entire spectrum of bullet shapes and functions reliably with virtually all power levels of 9mm ammunition. In addition, it resists corrosion magnificently and its design causes minimal wear on working parts, giving it an unbelievable long service life.
"Ugly? Maybe, maybe not! It depends on what's important to you-- cosmetics, or function. Regardless, it's my opinion that the Glock 17 is not only a winner, but may well be the world's best 9mm pistol. Obviously, only time will tell, but in the meantime, I've got 25,000 more rounds of 9mm ammunition to run through it to find out."


25,000 more
And the test continued. By February, 1995, the 25,000 rounds were expended, bringing the total to an unbelievable 75,000! Yet, the gun was still going strong, showing no indications whatsoever of impending failure. I replaced nothing-- no springs, firing pins, connectors or any other parts. In fact, viewed from the broad perspective, the gun had actually outlived it's magazines-- six two-mag sets at that point.
Truthfully, I had run out of things to do to the gun. Short of running over it with a car or freezing it into a solid block of ice-- both which I regarded as silly, since they fail to mirror real-world conditions and therefore prove nothing-- I had repeatedly exposed the gun to everything. In the July, 1995, issue of Combat Handguns and Summer, 1995, issue of Glockster, I said:


"After more than 70,000 holster presentations, I can detect no additional finish wear from that which appeared by 20,000 presentations.
"The bore is still without corrosion or excessive wear; the piece still shoots inside the 9-ring of a 25-meter pistol target, using the offhand Weaver Stance. In fact, to determine if any deterioration of intrinsic accuracy had occured, I fired it from 35 meters in a Ransom Rest-- the worst groups were 2 inches!
"As an example of its practical accuracy capability, I offer the following. With the test gun, I was able to perform the following:
1. "Reliably get center-hits on a 18 x 30-inch steel silhouette target at 75 meters, knocking down five such silhouettes in under ten seconds.
2. "Take a whitetail deer with a single shot behind the shoulder at a laser-measured 70 meters.

3. "Successfully pass the ASAA Handgun Combat Master test with it, presenting it from concealed carry, shooting a score of at least 383 out of a possible 400."

My other observations at that time included:

"Internal parts exhibited no real wear or deterioration.
"The polycarbonate frame, though it had at one spot worn smooth from holster contact, appeared intact and without discernible deterioration.
"After more than 50,000 speed loads and an equal number of tactical loads, the magazine well was scarred somewhat but still serviceable.
"While the 56,103rd round blew a primer, the gun was undamaged. The resulting stoppage, a Type 3 (Feedway) was quickly cleared and the weapon returned to service.
"The trigger remained at 5.1 pounds, a reduction from it's original poundage of only 0.4 pounds. It was still smooth and had a crisp let-off.
"It was discovered that magazine service life could be dramatically increased by loading only 15, rather than the rated 17, rounds of ammunition. If a 'Plus-Two' floorplate is utilized, then-- and only then-- should a full 17 rounds be loaded. This prevents the follower spring from being fully compressed, thus causing it to soften and finally 'set', as the expression goes.
"The Trijicon (tritium) sights installed early in the test were still completely serviceable."
It looked like the test was over. The pistol had survived an incredible 75,000 rounds and was completely intact. I had my desired data-base-- the Glock M-17 was irrefutably a terrific pistol. In fact, I was so impressed that I concluded my article in Combat Handguns with this statement:

"Pretty, it ain't, especially after all it's been through. On the other hand, beauty is said to be in the eye of the beholder, and to me, the Glock is a tool, not an objet d'art. This being the case, we must view it differently-- function, not aesthetics, is the prime criteria. Viewed from this perspective, there can be no doubt that the Glock M-17 looks mighty good indeed."

Well, I just couldn't leave it alone. My curiosity about just how long the gun could survive continued to be intense. So, from my stores, I broke out an additional 25,000 rounds of assorted 9mm ammo and continued the test.

And now, the fall of 1995, after having fired a total of 100,000 rounds of virtually all kinds of ammunition...

Nothing has changed! The gun looks the same, feels the same, functions the same as it did before. I've done everything within reason to this gun. I've carried it all over the world, quite literally in every environmental condition known to man-- the steaming jungles of Latin America, the windblown deserts of the southwestern U.S., the 40-below zero tundra of Alaska in the winter.

And it worked-- every time. In fact, since I discovered that loading 15, rather than the rated 17, rounds into the magazine prevented the follower spring from softening, I haven't had a single malfunction. Both magazines used in this last 25,000 portion of my test remain strong and completely serviceable. And, by way of confirmation, I replaced the old springs in the magazines that failed during the test with new ones from Glock, and they, too, function perfectly.

I am especially impressed by the lack of apparent finish wear, even after over 100,000 holster presentations. The gun looks exactly as it did at 20,000! I've actually worn out several holsters, finally selecting the M-D Labs "Thunderbolt" (which I codesigned with M-D honcho Kevin McClung) and matching mag carrier as the best. It's super-fast, yet secure and highly concealable, and being made of Kydex, it's by far the toughest rig now in existence.

The magazine well, although slightly scarred from in excess of 100,000 insertions, also remains entirely functional and looks much like it did in the early stages of the test.

Internal parts, too, look the same. I just can't find any discernible signs of deterioration. The piece shoots just as accurately as it did before and functions flawlessly.

So, in conclusion, the Model 17 9mm continues to defy wear, tear, corrosion and...well, me! I've thrown the whole book of tricks at this gun and yet, as this is written, it continues in service. Obviously, the Model 17 is a terrific handgun-- so terrific that I'd quite willingly bet my life on this one, even after all it's been through. What better recommendation can I give, eh?



Copyright 1995 by Harris Publications, Inc.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Bulletproof said:
I've never read about the XD being torture tested
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY'S XD-9 A TRUE 21ST CENTURY PISTOL
Every now and then in history, something outstanding comes along, something that stands out from the norm so much that it fairly leaps into the spotlight. Louis Pasteur and Jonas Salk stand as giants in the field of medicine, , while George Washington Carver's contributions to agriculture shone brilliantly. Chuck Yeager became a legend, performing brilliantly as he shattered the sound barrier in spite of the broken ribs he'd concealed from his USAF superiors. Audie Murphy, a hometown boy from Texas, became the most decorated US Army combat soldier in history for his exploits in World War II.
In the category of small arms, the names of B. Tyler Henry, Hiram Maxim, John Browning and George Luger attained legendary status, as did Sam Colt, Daniel Wesson. John Garand, Eugene Stoner and Mikhail Kalashnikov cast huge shadows in the world of military rifle design, as does Gaston Glock in the world of handguns.

Yet, though on the surface, these men's achievements appear unrelated, they all share one thing in common – they took existing concepts and reshaped them into something whose time had come. And in so doing, they facilitated a quantum leap in technology that elevated the state of the art in their respective endeavors.

So it is with the Vukovic-led Croatian design team engineers who designed Springfield Armory's XD-9 9x19mm pistol. Although they're probably not aware of it, they created something significantly better than anything that came before. Incorporating the best of both Glock and SIG designs with a few new wrinkles thrown in for good measure, the XD-9 is a strong contender for the title of being the first true pistol of the 21st century.

Historically, the XD-9 began life as the HS-2000, which itself was an improved version of I.M. Metalworks (Karlovac, Croatia) HS-95 of 1995. But it actually first appeared as the PHP in 1991, though that particular pistol was fraught with a few quality control problems due to the ongoing Croatian civil war. Vukovic's design team continually refined the PHP and HS-95, correcting its design and metallurgical weaknesses, the final version being designated as the HS-2000. At this point, I'll forego further historic commentary because it would be redundant, since the HS-2000 was covered in detail in a previous issue of COMBAT HANDGUNS. Shortly thereafter, Springfield Armory acquired importation rights and re-designated the weapon as the XD-9.

Visual examination of the pistol shows it to be a compact, the approximate equivalent of the Glock 19 or 23. It sports an attractive dark-gray matte finish (known as Bruniral) on all metal parts, while its polymer frame is the usual black. From the box, it has fixed high-visibility sights of the tried-and-true 3-dot horizontal pattern to aid in low-light shooting, a nice trigger (smooth and light at 4.0 lbs.), a useable grip safety and no sharp edges of any real significance. And, of particular interest to those who prefer Trijicon's tritium-illuminated 3-dot sights, the XD-9 utilizes the same dovetail size for its sights as does SIG, making installation of replacement sights a snap.

Additional features include:

Checkered (8-lines per inch) front and back straps.

A grip-frame arched on its rear surface to better accommodate the average shooter's hand, thus enhancing its "pointability."

A truly ambidextrous magazine release mechanism, with edge-free, easily operated buttons on both the right and left side of the frame.

A loaded chamber indicator, located on top of the slide to the rear of the ejection port.

A cocking indicator, protruding from the rear face of the slide when the weapon is cocked.

A Glock-type trigger safety.

A large beveled magazine well, with 60-degree, rather than the usual 45-degree, bevel to enhance quick reloading.

Two 10-rd. drop-free metal magazines.

Grooves in the frame forward of the trigger guard to accommodate the SureFire tactical light.

A captive dual-spring recoil spring assembly to reduce muzzle flip and felt recoil.

11. Grasping grooves in both the traditional location on each side of the sides of the slide and on each side behind the front sight, thus accommodating virtually all styles of chamber-checking currently in use.

Seems like a lot for one pistol to have as it comes from the box, doesn't it? Nonetheless, the XD-9 obviously exhibits not just careful, but detailed, attention to all of the tactical shooter's real and imagined needs.

One writer recently criticized the XD-9 because it didn't have a hole in rear face of the grip-frame to accommodate a lanyard, but in all honesty, I find this to be a moot point since no one but certain SWAT personnel use lanyards anyway. And since the XD-9's frame is polymer, drilling the appropriate-sized hole can hardly be considered to be a major obstacle to anyone so inclined.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
At first glance, the left side of the XD-9's slide appears to have a mysterious vertically-angled groove, but it's just part of a 5-second field-stripping process. One need only to:

Cock the piece.

Retract the slide and lock it rearward (thus aligning the takedown lever with the groove).

Turn the takedown lever upward.

Move the slide forward and press the trigger to decock.

Pull the slide forward to dismount it from the frame.

Rotate the slide assembly upside down.

Remove the captive dual recoil spring unit.

Retract the barrel up and to the rear, thus removing it from the slide.

Simple, right? Yes, extremely so, and easily accomplished under stress or in poor light, which is the whole point.

From a mechanical standpoint, I found that my XD-9 functioned normally with all the ammunition I tried in it (see accompanying velocity chart), even though I purposely did not clean it for the entire 1000 rd. test. During that time, very dusty, windy conditions were present, coating all of the gun's exterior surfaces and penetrating deeply into its internal mechanism, but it functioned without a stoppage nonetheless. I noted only a slight increase in trigger pull poundage (perhaps a half-pound), but no decrease in smoothness, allowing 1-second cranio-ocular shots from Ready at 7 meters to be successfully accomplished with relative ease.

Of perhaps supreme importance, though, is that the XD-9 exhibits not only excellent mechanical design and quality of materials and workmanship, but exceptional "user friendliness" as well. In fact, it is so "user friendly" that it took the three ASAA instructors (all ASAA Handgun Combat Masters or Distinguished Advanced Handgun Graduates) whom I asked to test it less than five minutes to successfully transition to it from the pistols they normally carry. This is remarkable, because in no other case has it occurred during my entire career as a professional weapons & tactics instructor.

Once a few dry practice presentations from Ready and Holster were complete, high-speed shooting and weapon-handling drills were immediately begun. The result was as I had expected – all three shot it as well or better than they did the handguns they'd been carrying for years!

Next, I gave the piece to a novice shooter who had only fundamental training in marksmanship and weapon-handling and he, too, performed not just better, but much better than he ever had previously. This is significant because it shows not only how much ergonomics influences performance (at least as much as mechanical reliability itself, in my opinion), but that at least a few designers have finally realized its criticality and given it the emphasis it deserves.

Satisfied, I then repeated the whole process myself, with the same result, "cleaning" the ASAA Advanced Handgun Evaluation Course with a perfect score. Thus encouraged, I then took on the extremely difficult (most say quintessentially difficult) ASAA Combat Master Qualification Course, passing it with a score of 394 out of a possible 400 points. That I was able to do this after only a few minutes with the pistol shows its superiority over more conventional designs.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Frank Spezzano, honcho of Cen-Dex Tactical, provided several superb Kydex holsters and magazine carriers for the test gun on quite literally only a few days notice and that they greatly enhanced not only the XD-9's performance, but the performance of all of the test shooters as well. In fact, because of Cen-Dex's excellent showing, a new holster for the XD-9 and other pistols will be available from them very soon. The result of intensive design collaboration between Mssr. Spezzano and myself, it's been designated the Taylor Nighthawk and is an improvement upon the older Taylor Thunderbolt design. It's not only just as fast, but will accommodate a wider variety of pistols without form-fitting being required.

I also found my XD-9 to be extraordinarily accurate – capable of producing Ransom Rest groups of two inches or less at 25 meters with most of the typical 9mmP ammunition currently available. I also noted that it seemed to have what I call a "fast" barrel – muzzle velocities were significantly higher than produced by the same length barrels of other 9mm handguns.

In fact, when I chronographed the pre-fragmented Glaser "Blue" load, it produced a whopping 1995 fps, causing me to think that something was wrong with my equipment and subsequently repeat the process to be certain the readings were valid! In turn, the chronographing of more conventional loads disclosed a continuation of this "fast" trend (see accompanying chart) – nearly all were 50 to 100 fps faster than with other 9mmP handguns with the same barrel length. This is a great boon for hollow-point bullets, since the faster they go, the better their chance of expansion, particularly since no accuracy loss is sustained to achieve it.

How rugged is the XD-9? Well, as several previous writers have put it, "time will tell." As a new weapon, based on new design concepts it must withstand the test of time in order to be declared superior. However, early indications are most encouraging. Enough, in fact, that I intend to carry and use my XD-9 on both a personal and instructional basis to further test its capabilities.On the other hand, both the Croatian military and police have adopted it, which to at least some degree attests to it serviceability.

As you've no doubt concluded by now, my initial impression of the XD-9 is highly favorable. It feels good in the hand, points beautifully and shoots very, very well. Its controls (slide release lever, loaded chamber indicator, cocking indicator and takedown latch) are well-located, allowing efficient operation under stress and/or in poor light, and it can be field-stripped for cleaning or inspection in less than five seconds. Its ambidextrous magazine release button eliminates rapid magazine changing problems for left-handers and its trigger is light, smooth and clean, allowing excellent high-speed shooting, especially on multiple targets. And perhaps most important, especially from an agency standpoint, it's so "user friendly" that almost no time is needed to transition to it from another weapon.

In short, I think the XD-9 has all the traits necessary to become a legendary pistol and at the very least represents the first quantum leap in handgun technology since the Glock first appeared in the mid-1980s. I agree with those who've said that it must withstand the test of time before unequivocal endorsement of it can be made, but add that it certainly shows all the signs of being a big-time winner! It's without a doubt a true 21st century pistol and from what I've seen so far, a good one, at that. Check out the XD-9. Like me, I think you'll find it to be a heck of a handgun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
I've carried a 22 for years and have a hard time convinving myself to carry anything else. It's my duty weapon and I carry it alot off duty. I also carry my XD40, Taurus 605, Taurus 651, Taurus MilleniumPro .45, Tarus 24/7 .45, and my Makarov off duty.
I have never seen one major failure from a Glock. I've been around them for over 12 years and have only seen one with a bad extractor from the factory.
It's a matter of personal choice, so buy/carry whatever you want, can afford, and are comfortable shooting. For me, it's my Glock 22 in the lead, followed by my XD and 24/7 (VERY closely!). My wheelguns are for short jaunts to the store and such, and my Makarov usually is there somewhere no matter what else I'm carrying! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,922 Posts
Bulletproof said:
I've never seen a Steyr in person...I don't like the way the XD looks, feels or fires :target:
Sounds like a knowledgeable opinion of the XD then. On the Steyr, I bought it based on price and specs, and a wee bit of hope. It has NEVER jammed on me, and I have fed it the whole spectrum of ammunition, including lead and hydrashoks. Hundreds of rounds, not thousands, but still no jams at all. The action is smooth and NOTHING beats its low barrel axis. Recoil feels less than a Makarov or a full size Ruger P-85. Very good for staying on target. Same trigger safety as a Glock but also has a manual safety.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top