Let's try this, Glock fans

[Playboypenguin]

I have stated before that a friend of mine was in charge of purchasing for our local police dept. at one time. The Glocks are adopted by police forces for two major reasons...

1. initial cost
2. trade in value

In the trials I have had personal experience with (Portland, Beaverton, Tacoma, Seattle) the Glocks usually tested in the top five of available firearms in criteria tests. What put them on top is cost. Glocks sells the weapons to police forces at a MAJOR discount. Do not confuse the LEO discount given by dealers with the bulk cost Glock gives LE agencies.

Glock also gives agencies 100% of purchase price towards trade-in when the guns wear out. Once a gun is returned by an agency it is refurbished and resold to make up the loss they they obtain upon initial sale.

Glocks are fine firearms. They are reliable and accurate but they are far from the best that agencies test. They just end up making the most sense when you take the bottom line into account.

Glock gambled that by making the gun common in law enforcement it would pump their civilian sales to a point where they could afford the cost of heavily discounting the guns for LE agencies.

Most agencies will allow officers to purchase other firearms with their own money but will provide the Glock. here in the northwest officers that really are into firearms are easy to pick out because they are the ones with the Smiths, Sigs, and the Kimbers on their hip.

 

[357 sig 229 sauer]

Playboypenguin ,What firearms test the best in the tests you observed ?

 

[ISP2605]

I was commanding our R&D when we were testing for new sidearms. We had been carrying S&W autos for 32 yrs at that time. We tested 15 different makes/models from various manufacturers. The testing lasted several months and there were several facets involved. First the range officers tested and scored the guns using a standardized testing criteria that ranged from the subjective to the objective. Then testing was opened up to anyone on the dept who wanted to test the guns. The only stipulation was they had to shoot "X" numbers of rds from every gun. I forget what the "X" number was, something like a minimum of 32 rds or something like that. They also had to complete a score sheet on each firearm.
When the testing was done the scores were tallied. #1 was SIG followed by S&W and then Glock, in that order. The scores for the top 3 were fairly close and then there was a spread to #4 and on down. The bid request went out to SIG, S&W and Glock for 2500 guns plus new holsters and 750 rds of training ammo for each officer in exchange for our S&W 5904/6904. Glock's price came in at about $250,000. S&W was about double Glock's price and SIG was over double S&W's price. That made the decision a no brainer. Either $250,000, $500,000+, or $1.3+million.
None of the makers have a bad duty weapon. Any of them would work well. But when an agency can get a serviceable duty weapon and save the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars it becomes near impossible to explain why not going with the low bid.
Such a pricing is not unusual. It's called aggressive marketing. SIG was cutting some "can't refuse" deals right have the 357 SIG rd came out. The local PD had been carrying S&W 6906 for a few years and they were needing to upgrade, things like fading night sights and some maintenance issues began to appear. SIG offerred them an even swap. The PD turned in their 6906 and SIG gave them, at no cost, all new 357 SIGs, new leather, I forget how many rds per officer for transition training, and a 2 yr supply of duty ammo. Additionally, SIG told them if the 357 SIG didn't catch on nationwide then SIG would convert all the PD's SIGs to .40 at no cost. Can't turn down a deal like that.
Playboypenguin wrote 'Glock gambled that by making the gun common in law enforcement it would pump their civilian sales to a point where they could afford the cost of heavily discounting the guns for LE agencies." Exactly. That's part of the aggressive marketing. About every manufacturer of everything made does the exact same thing. Chevy did it in 1991. Dodge did it in the 80s. It's a very common practice. Take a loss selling to a major purchaser and then use that sales as advertisement and the civilian market follows.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Playboypenguin ,What firearms test the best ?

It all depends one what guns that particular dept chooses to test. In Tacoma, the report I read had the Kimber Pro Carry II on top (followed by a Sig). That was a year ago though. It was the reason I bought a Kimber Pro Carry II which was my very first 1911. I thought the Sig was too boxy.

In the Portland tests I believe it was a Sig that tested as the best.

 

[evan1293]

Im not trying to get the discussion off track, but for you LE guys.... do you ever see HK getting a look in these tests? It seems like with the DA/SA + manual saftey and the reputation of these guns they'ld be a viable option (except maybe for the cost which is compatible with the sigs)... Also, are the guns tested (weather glock or otherwise) tested in calibers other than 9mm due to stopping power issues with this cartridge?

 

[357 sig 229 sauer]

thanks for the info ISP2605 and Playboypenguin

 

[357 sig 229 sauer]

I read HKs test great when clean,but not so great when dirty or in sandy environments

 

[ISP2605]

.... do you ever see HK getting a look in these tests? It seems like with the DA/SA + manual saftey and the reputation of these guns they'ld be a viable option

I personally liked the H&K and rated it right up there with SIG. Some didn't like it because of the oversized controls when going thru fast, tactical tests and changing hands. That would have been a training issue which could have resolved itself.
Biggest disappointment with H&K was the customer service, or lack of. H&K was the worst of all the makers. Response was terrible and some times non-existent. For a company trying to get a contract with a state agency, and the resulting spin off contracts with the other state LE agencies, they sure didn't have their act together. Very poor.

. Also, are the guns tested (weather glock or otherwise) tested in calibers other than 9mm due to stopping power issues with this cartridge?

All 15 of the guns we tested were in .40. We had been carrying 9mm but the boss made the decision the new guns would be .40s. No tests, no input, no discussion. The field could pick the platform but the caliber was going to be .40. The .40 has worked OK so it's not like there was a major hue and cry at the change. But the 9mm had worked well for us too for a lot of years. However, at the time a lot of agencies were going to .40 and many of us felt the boss was doing it for "me too" when he was at all the conferences with other chiefs.

 

[Ocraknife]

Glocks are lightweight, have huge capacities, are economical, are accurate, lots of aftermarket accessories and are extreamly reliable. From an LEO's persective, it would be pretty easy to see why people like them.

Personally, I can't get used to the trigger pull, width and looks. I really, really, want to like them but, I am not yet there. I am going to keep trying, this Sig addiction is costing me a lot of money.

 

[Ocraknife]

I read HKs test great when clean,but not so great when dirty or in sandy environments

My HKs were as accurate and reliable as my Sigs even when fired dirty, I never used either in a sandy environment however.

 

[357 sig 229 sauer]

i meant really dirty,torture test dirty

 

[shooter_john]

I hated Glocks for a long time... But then I was issued one... and then I bought three more. I consider myself very "into firearms," and I can't think of a LE situation when I would rather have any handgun other than a Glock on my hip, especially a Kimber. (When a $1000+ (CDP II) gun falls apart in your hands (ambi safety broker in half while firing), you kinda lose your taste for it.) I have never had a Glock do anything except go bang, everytime I want it to, whether it be Patrol, SWAT, or competition. My preferred Glocks are the 35 and the 19.

 

[Sturmgewehre]

I will report what I have been told by the several LEOs-two of whom are
shooting buddies of mine-that the main selling point of the Glock is that it is
considered a good weapon for people who have little proficiency in handling
firearms.

That's asinine. The Glock is a professionals firearm. The LAST thing you want to do is give a novice a Glock.

Why?

Simple, the gun lacks any manual safety. That means if you put your finger on the trigger when you shouldn't, an AD is in your future. Saying a Glock is a novices firearm is like saying "a cocked S&W 686 is a novices firearm". The last thing you want to do is give a person not proficient with firearms a cocked weapon that lacks a manual safety. However, a cocked weapon without a safety is fine and quite deadly to the bad guy in the hands of a trained professional.

The Glock is a popular weapon with Police and others who carry firearms professionally because it's one of the quickest, lightest, most accurate weapons in a fight. There are no safeties to fumble with. You draw and shoot. It is critical that you have proper firearms training to be safe with a Glock as one goof or moment of lacking judgement and you'll have an AD.

If you've had proper training the Glock is one of the best fighting firearms in the world.

 

[Sturmgewehre]

I will report what I have been told by the several LEOs-two of whom are
shooting buddies of mine-that the main selling point of the Glock is that it is
considered a good weapon for people who have little proficiency in handling
firearms. A few years ago the New Jersey State Police adopted the Heckler
and Koch P-7 for the same reason. The Staties I know said they actually had
more safety problems and ADs with the P-7 and it was quietly dropped a few years ago.

Case in point, the Glock is a professionals firearm.

 

[Sturmgewehre]

Personally, I can't get used to the trigger pull, width and looks. I really, really, want to like them but, I am not yet there. I am going to keep trying, this Sig addiction is costing me a lot of money.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Granted, compared to a Beretta with its sexy lines or a HK with his superior craftsmanship and design, the Glock looks like an ugly brick. Even the name sounds like a bowl movement... but in practical application, the Glock is nearly impossible to beat.

If I could only take one handgun from my collection to protect my life with, it would be a G17 or G19. I'm not 100% behind the .40's or .45's (Glock) because of well documented failures, but the 9mm models are nearly indestructible and I would put them up against any other 9mm in the world in terms of reliability, accuracy, shootability, and weight.

 

[357 sig 229 sauer]

Glocks are not for amateurs imo








Richmond Times-Dispatch

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

A security guard at the federal courthouse in downtown Richmond was slightly wounded this morning when a handgun he was handling accidentally discharged.

The guard was grazed in the right upper thigh area by a lone bullet fired from a .40-caliber Glock 23 pistol, and he was taken to VCU Medical Center, where he was treated and released, said Jim Daley, the supervising deputy in charge of the U.S. Marshals Service in Richmond.

The guard, whose name was not released, is employed by Akal Security, which provides 22 security officers for the courthouse at 10th and East Main streets.

Daley said the guard had just reported for work about 7 a.m. and was putting on his equipment in a third-floor room used to store weapons, radios and other equipment. As the guard was putting the gun in his holster, it discharged, Daley said.

The bullet struck a filing cabinet and broke apart. No other injuries were reported.

Authorities are unsure why the weapon fired, Daley said. The Glock 23 has no external safety.

"We're going to check and make sure there are no defects with the gun and go from there," he said.

 

[Texshooter]

My neighbor was on the group that was to choose the new autoloader for the PD in the county we live in.

They went with the Glock 22.

He had nothing bad to say about the pistol, although he personally wanted the SIG platform.

He said the main reason they went with Glock is, with the trade of old wheelies, they got them for FREE. FREE speaks volumes with those in charge of the pursestrings. FREE.

 

[Ocraknife]

but in practical application, the Glock is nearly impossible to beat.

Yep, you pull the trigger and it fires just like it is designed to do. Not that much different from many other pistols on the market. In a pinch I would trust my life to a Glock without reservation but as of now, I find that other designs fit my hand better and inspire tighter groupings. Your milage may vary.

 

[Willy T]

Quote: What I would like to see is POSITIVE input as to why so many law enforcement agencies have switched to Glocks.

Price...... If you feel the need to be propped up, Glock makes a fine weapon for the WalMart revolution. Like the big jar of pickles.

 

[9x19]

Its been posted before, but...

The FBI's Tests of the Glock 22 and 23 (.40 S&W).

When the FBI tested the Glock models 22 and 23, they did abuse testing, a parts interchangeability test, exposure tests, an obstructed bore test, a Field Suitability Evaluation plus accuracy and endurance tests. In addition, all pistols had to have a service life of 10,000 rounds.

Glock’s 22 and 23 met or exceeded all requirements.

The Field Suitability Evaluation used agents of different size, height, weight, and sex who put 250 rounds thru three of each model pistol. This included a 30 round bullseye course, then 2 10 round strings from the holster at the FBI Q target from 10 yards, then fired two more 10 round strings from the ready position. They also fired five 10 round strings from ten yards as fast as they could fire and reload. Another two 10 round strings were fired from prone at Q targets 50 yards away, Finally, they shot two 50 round FBI qualification courses. FBI gunsmiths also fired the pistols from bench and Ransom rests for accuracy.

Abuse tests included: They field stripped three guns, and swapped parts among them, then fired 20 rounds from each without failure. Two of the pistols were put into a freezer to –20F for one hour, then immediately withdrawn and fired, next they went in an oven at 120F for one hour and immediately withdrawn and fired. With the pistol containing primed cartridge in their chamber, and dummy rounds in the mags, they were next dropped, twice at each orientation, onto concrete from a height of four feet: muzzle down, muzzle up, on their right side, on their left side, sights down, and squarely on the butt. Immediately following this, the cases were examined for primer indents then the pistols were fired with 20 rounds to ensure proper functioning.

The guns, loaded again with primed cartridges in their chambers, and dummy rounds in the mags, were tossed from a height of four feet, to a distance of 15 feet onto concrete, landing twice each on their right and left sides. The guns could not fire and the magazines had to stay in place. Immediately following this, the cases were examined for primer indents then the pistols were fired with 20 rounds to ensure proper functioning. Two magazines, loaded with dummy ammo were also dropped, twice at each orientation, onto concrete from a height of four feet onto their base plates and onto their feed lips. They could not lose a round and were then tested by firing 10 rounds each without a malfunction.

They also dunked them in salt water for 5 minutes, pulled them out, shook them for 15 seconds, rinsed them with clear water and let them sit for 24 hours then fired 20 rounds without malfunction (shrug). One of the three guns was cleaned, lubed and loaded then put in a box containing half play sand and half road sand, and covered up. It was removed shaken out and fired until empty. The last abuse test had a bullet lodged in the barrel, one inch in front of the chamber. Then one round of service ammunition was fired with the obstruction in place. The pistol could not rupture or fragment the frame slide or barrel. As an added test five more rounds were fired after the first round cleared the barrel obstruction.

The endurance test meant firing 10,000 rounds thru each of the six pistols. No major parts replacements were allowed, including magazines, and the malfunction rate could not be greater than 1 in 2000 rounds. The pistols never missed a beat, with zero malfunctions in 60,000 rounds. They were then fired with another 10,000 rounds, for a total of 20,000 rounds each, and a grand total of 120,000 rounds (that’s 145 five gallon buckets of empty brass). One model 22 needed a new trigger bar after 17,131 rounds and another 22 needed a trigger bar after 19,494 rounds. The other model 22 and all three model 23s made it thru all 20,000 rounds without a failure. Following the endurance tests, the pistols were once again tested for accuracy and passed (4” at 25 yards with a variety of ammo from 155 to 180 grain bullet weights).