Question for Glock owners

[Mrgunsngear]

Voyager is correct---Glocks are manufactured here, 100%. However, most of the Glocks that are US made are exported due to existing contracts but a few have been sold here in the US. Most of them were sold from November 2007-February 2008 because of the huge spike in demand correlating with President Obama's election. Those guns now bring in a premium on the used market.

As for the tennifer, Glock doesn't use it at either of their plants anymore and now use nitriting.

Here's a pic of a US made Glock 17 for example:

 

[ScotchMan]

Quote:

Grip angle

Being a former die hard 1911 fan, and as much as I used to believe this and even debated about it, now that Im living with Glocks, I realize its just another over blown issue thrown around by those who lack experience with them.

As with any of them, there is a difference too between picking one up and basing everything on that, or maybe a mag or two out of someone elses gun, and actually taking the time to shoot and learn one, and see what they are really about.

I am actually researching Glocks a bit more, and considering getting one or two. I have 10 round magazine restrictions in my state, so I am limited to guns that have pre-bans available if I want more than 10. For a striker-fired gun which I prefer, that's Glock.

The Gen4s at least get past the ugly factor for me (I think the new RTF looks nice), so I am willing to take another look at the grip angle. I am certain that if I trained with it I would get used to the grip angle and it would point naturally. But then all my other guns wouldn't. So you necessarily have to take an all-Glock or no-Glock position. I could be wrong, I don't own one (yet).

 

[Gats Italian]

Glocks are a lot more user friendly to personal customization than most of the others. If you dont like the finger groves, hack them off and shape the grip to suit, if you want a complete "cat tongue" type grip that wont peel or wear off, and locks the gun in your hand like you wouldnt believe, get out the soldering gun and have at it.

Never before have folks been offered so many grip "features" suitable for removing.

Finger groove/bumps that hit many in the wrong spots, and which better yet, hit differently on different sized frames.

A back strap hump that the Gen 4 interchangeable panels only serve to make more or less present, but do nothing to remove it altogether.

An unrelieved acre of plastic between the bottom of the trigger guard and the top finger bumper, that territory being the cause of "Glock knuckle."

A mildly hooked/squared off front bottom corner of the trigger guard used for a style of shooting grip that fell out of favor over a decade ago.

Yes, you the end user have the opportunity to correct all of these issues on a DIY basis, all while severely impacting the resale value of the pistol.

 

[Tactical Jackalope]

@ Gats Italian, ciao paisano! You mad bro? Fermati to each his own!

 

[MonsterB]

Glock is quickly falling behind the times. They were the shiznit a decade ago but now adays there are as unreliable as ever, and do not offer a signifigant advantage over other polymer pistols like they used to. Most people now buy a Glock "hoping" it will be as good as an older one, not just better, but "hopefully" just as reliable. In many cases they are not. Pretty sad, as they used to be known for 100% reliability. Shooters would put up with the funky grip, different barrel axis, 2x4 grip feeling, and 100% ugliness because the gun would perform so well. Now, not so much. You can still get lucky and get a decent Glock, but too many people have been getting bad results, myself included, to considder them top of the pile as far as functionality goes. Glock needs something major to happen soon or in a few years they are going to be in big trouble.

 

[AK103K]

So you necessarily have to take an all-Glock or no-Glock position. I could be wrong, I don't own one (yet).

I think youre going to find its not a big deal, once you get to use one for a little while. Your brain quickly adjusts.

Ive carried and shoot mainly Glocks for a number of years now, and I shoot them the most. I still shoot a number of other platforms on a regular basis too, just to stay on top of them, and I dont have any problem switching gun to gun at the range.

I think most of the complaints in this respect come from people who arent very broad based in their experience, and are narrow in their thinking when it comes to things they dont have experience with.

Never before have folks been offered so many grip "features" suitable for removing.

Personally, I dont need to remove anything, they fit me fine as they come. I do prefer the RTF2's the best as far as grip treatment goes, which is pretty much a cat tongue in its own right. For those that dont have it, I just stipple them.

As I said before, at least with the Glocks, and a few others, you have the option to make the changes if they dont suit you. Most other guns require a gunsmith and a chunk of change to get it done.

Yes, you the end user have the opportunity to correct all of these issues on a DIY basis, all while severely impacting the resale value of the pistol.

Yes, no, maybe, whos to say. Some like the changes done, and are willing to pay extra to have it done, others dont. Chances are, it will still sell, and not necessarily at a loss (most guns do anyway), in some cases, it may bring a premium.

This isnt just a Glock issue either, a number of the 1911's I bought, needed things changed out to suit me, both new and used guns.

Ive also stippled a couple of other makes besides Glock, so anything is fair game as far as Im concerned.

Glock is quickly falling behind the times. They were the shiznit a decade ago but now adays there are as unreliable as ever, and do not offer a signifigant advantage over other polymer pistols like they used to. Most people now buy a Glock "hoping" it will be as good as an older one, not just better, but "hopefully" just as reliable. In many cases they are not. Pretty sad, as they used to be known for 100% reliability.

I have 11 of them, all Gen 3's, all made from around the mid 2000's, up until last year. The only stoppages Ive had with any of them, were intentionally induced with a snap cap. Every one of them has worked 100%, right out of the box from round one.

The way the internet is, if they were that bad, there'd be a bunch of people on here telling us. I saw the same thing with my P250. Lots of people who "heard" of problems, but when you heard from owners who shoot them, rarely was there an issue.

The last guns I was "hoping" would work, were all 1911's. I will add "wishing" to that comment too. With the last half dozen or so, there was a lot of both, and unfortunately, neither did any good.

 

[greyeyezz]

The way the internet is, if they were that bad, there'd be a bunch of people on here telling us.

Maybe not here but everywhere else....

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=92133

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_5_13/1...roblem_exhibited_by_newer_Glocks_.html&page=1

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=653721

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1413961#13340193440821&ifh=44

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1412621#13340194050041&ifh=44

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/non-xd-handguns/198483-glock-issues.html

But don't take my word, as constantine says....

Ignore this guy ^^^^^^^

 

[MikeNice81]

We bought a gen 3 Glock 26 for my wife and now I want one.

I was anti-Glock for the longest time. After about 40 rounds with my wife's I loved the little booger. With 124gr ammo I shoot it better than I ever shot my CZ P-07 or Taurus 85b3. The only gun I've shot better groups with was a SIG 229. That is mainly because for me the Glock a natural pointer for me.

The only gun I like the grip on better is the S&W M&P9c. Now I just need to shoot the M&P so I can decide which to by next.

 

[ScotchMan]

I'm not pro-Glock, I was recently anti-Glock but am re-evaluating. But, that said, I don't see where Glock is falling behind the times. What are these features that new guns have which Glock is ignoring? They have rails, they have dual spring assemblies now, they have an updated, well-received grip texture, they have replaceable backstraps. I suppose they don't have magazine disconnects and loaded chamber indicators, but I think most people dislike those things. Gen4 updated their line to include the relevant innovations to come out recently.

They have a more well-rounded lineup than ANYONE. For example, I like my SR9c, but if I wanted to upgrade to .45, I couldn't do that. Glock, I just go to the Glock 30. If I wanted to get a 10mm or .357 Sig, Glock has those. Their lineup is one of the nicest things about them.

They are keeping it simple, but that's what they've always been about. I don't see them falling behind the times, just continuing to remain extremely practical and selling guns like crazy to people who get it. I don't buy the reliability issues with new guns. The Gen4s had some early issues that we will still be talking about in 10 years I'm sure.

 

[mrvco]

My Gen3 Glock doesn't feel as natural in my hand as my Sig P226, but I shoot the Glock way more accurately and way more consistently.

So far, my Sig P226 has never suffered a malfunction, but, so far, neither has my Gen3 Glock.

The grip angle on the Glock only seems to matter if I'm shooting from the hip, if I'm actually looking down the sites, the grip angle doesn't seem to affect my aim.

I hear Sig guys saying that Austrian-made Glocks are junk and I hear Glock guys saying that US-made Sigs are junk... in reality they both seem to be high-quality firearms.

Shockingly, my "real world" experiences seem to differ markedly from much of what I see posted on Internet Message Boards.

 

[spodwo]

Never before have folks been offered so many grip "features" suitable for removing.

Finger groove/bumps that hit many in the wrong spots, and which better yet, hit differently on different sized frames.

A back strap hump that the Gen 4 interchangeable panels only serve to make more or less present, but do nothing to remove it altogether.

An unrelieved acre of plastic between the bottom of the trigger guard and the top finger bumper, that territory being the cause of "Glock knuckle."

A mildly hooked/squared off front bottom corner of the trigger guard used for a style of shooting grip that fell out of favor over a decade ago.

Yes, you the end user have the opportunity to correct all of these issues on a DIY basis, all while severely impacting the resale value of the pistol.

I will have to keep the above and use it in future discussions about Glocks as it matches my perceptions exactly. My G19 fits my hand horribly and after 50-100 rounds - the compressed middle finger gets ragged.....

The G22 isn't so bad...

 

[TailGator]

Like AK103K, I will respectfully disagree with the premise that "you necessarily have to take an all-Glock or no-Glock position." I don't have any problem moving between Glocks and other pistols.

Glock grips fit some people and don't fit others, just like lots of other pistols. Buy it, buy it and modify it, or buy something else. Those are our choices, and I for one think having choices is a fine thing.

I don't entirely discount the questions about generation 4 reliability, though. It very well may be exaggerated by internet talk, and it may be a problem that has been solved by subsequent modifications, but some significant numbers of malfunctions occurred. Otherwise, Glock would not have issued a series of different recoil springs, changed out extractors on some pistols, and recommended specific ammunition for use in their pistols for the first time in their history. Having a few pistols with problems doesn't make them all junk, but I can sure understand the frustration of the people, however many there may have been, who paid their money for a pistol that had reliability problems after buying a brand that had previously been extremely reliable right out of the box.

 

[Catfishman]

Never before have folks been offered so many grip "features" suitable for removing.

Finger groove/bumps that hit many in the wrong spots, and which better yet, hit differently on different sized frames.


A back strap hump that the Gen 4 interchangeable panels only serve to make more or less present, but do nothing to remove it altogether.


An unrelieved acre of plastic between the bottom of the trigger guard and the top finger bumper, that territory being the cause of "Glock knuckle."


A mildly hooked/squared off front bottom corner of the trigger guard used for a style of shooting grip that fell out of favor over a decade ago.

The removable features don't bother me. Seems like a good idea, the gun may "feel" right to more people.

Finger Grooves make the gun look better and in my opinion thats about all. The old Glocks sure look plain but who cares. They fit everyone. But don't get carried away, the finger grooves don't really create a problem.

I don't know why anyone with normal hands wouldn't want a back strap hump.

I'm unfamiliar with "Glock knuckle". Never experienced it, seen it or heard of it. Maybe it's not a widespread serious issue.

The front of the trigger guard does encourage someone to put their finger there. That is poor form. It sure hurts my accuracy. IMO it is a slight negative. Of course the obvious fix is to simply ignore it.

There are a few less than perfect features. To me the only significant one is the weak, cheap factory sights. They work fine... unless they don't. It is aggravating to pick up your gun only to find that you can't aim it. I know steel sights are available but that isn't the point.

 

[Shoot45's]

I used to hate the grip angle on Glocks but even more so I hated the sharp turns on the grip.

As to the grip angle I find that with Glock I can bury the web of my hand into the gun a little tighter than with other guns that have a more straight angle, like the 1911's.

So, although I shoot my 1911's more than Glocks, I like them both for different reasons.

No need to knock either design, best to simply choose what works for you and go with that and be happy.
They're both perfectly good designs.