|
Quoted: Glock is like the Hyundai Accent of the gun world. Cheap, ugly, reliable, unrefined, middling and uninspired. If they make a manual safety version for the military and it gets accepted, I guess from the perspective of American soldiers having solid, reliable guns that's a win. I'd go with the Beretta though. |
|
Quoted: I think Glock recently sold a thumb safety model to German cops. It also doesn't require the trigger to be pulled for disassembly. I think Glock also sold a different thumb safety model to the Israelis. I know it doesn't mean much, and sample of one, but a Glock is the only new pistol I ever had "jam" on me at the range. I mean one example I had took a decent number of rounds through it before it started to function correctly. Yeah, maybe I limp wristed it or the like, but I'll never forget it. I never had that experience with any other new autoloading pistols. |
|
Quoted: Except for the thousands of people who have fired their Glock when they were just cleaning their gun.  Quoted: Quoted: Glock. They're producing a quality product now and can meet the simple standard of "Don't blow off your user's balls" Except for the thousands of people who have fired their Glock when they were just cleaning their gun. Get out of here with that. This is a Sig bashing thread not a glock leg thread. |
|
Quoted: Get out of here with that. This is a Sig bashing thread not a glock leg thread. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Glock. They're producing a quality product now and can meet the simple standard of "Don't blow off your user's balls" Except for the thousands of people who have fired their Glock when they were just cleaning their gun. Get out of here with that. This is a Sig bashing thread not a glock leg thread. The Sig is a more advanced design. With a Glock you have to pull the trigger to shoot yourself whereas Sig does it for you. |
|
Glock seems like a no brainer. I agree with the Penguin. The FCG concept seems pointless for agency use. It is a solution in search of a problem. There is a lot of talk about increasing America's manufacturing base. Yet our military small arm contracts go European based companies. There is a logic error there. I wouldn't mind seeing S&W, a US based company, getting contracts for the M&P. In my mind the fundamental 320 problem is tolerance stacking due to bad QC. That leads to the question of the rifles. The development process leading up to the M7 seems to be just as messed up as the that of the M18. At first you would think Colt would be logical answer for service rifles. Colt hasn't had an original thought in my lifetime. What other American based company has the capacity to arm the US military with quality service rifles? LMT? Now that Ruger has purchased Anderson, maybe Ruger will have the capacity? |
|
Honestly, I'd buy one with a safety and optic sight ready, but, barring that, I have a couple 3rd Gen G19's and that'll be it for buying them. |
|
I like the M17/M18 just fine, they shoot better than the M9 and the trigger is better. We probably should have just bought new M9s to keep all the mags and holsters the same as before. I don't know why military sidearms cause such a stir in the civilian world. Most of the time they aren't even used in combat, and they spend most of their service life doing force protection of some kind never leaving the holster or they stay in the armory. |
|
Quoted: Glock is like the Hyundai Accent of the gun world. Cheap, ugly, reliable, unrefined, middling and uninspired. If they make a manual safety version for the military and it gets accepted, I guess from the perspective of American soldiers having solid, reliable guns that's a win. I'd go with the Beretta though. Good analogy but I would say Toyota/Honda rather than Hyundai. I would not buy a Hundai if I wanted long lasting reliability. They may be geat now but I would still go with Toyota/Honda which all of my DD vehicles have been for the past 25 years or so. When I think relatively inexpensive, reliable, kind of ugly, basic transportation I think Toyota and Honda. |
|
Quoted: Glock is like the Hyundai Accent of the gun world. Cheap, ugly, reliable, unrefined, middling and uninspired. If they make a manual safety version for the military and it gets accepted, I guess from the perspective of American soldiers having solid, reliable guns that's a win. I'd go with the Beretta though. 
|
|
I think Glocks should be the standard firearm for Police and Military. It's cheap, reliable, easy to operate, easy to work on, and can be made in the USA. I don't really understand why taxpayers should be footing the bill for Staccatos for police. Glock is the Toyota Hilux of the gun world. |
|
Military armorers regularly allow M9s to go without spring changes for long enough that they break locking blocks (supposed to change the recoil spring every few thousand rounds, locking blocks tend to break after 10k-25k rounds without spring changes depending on locking block version), despite the spring change taking only a moment during normal field stripping, and some of you still think a 1911 will be a good option. I've talked to a few people over the years who used military-issue M1911A1s towards the end of their service, when they were transitioning to the M9. They all thought the M1911A1s were junk. The modern view of the M1911 is tainted by nostalgia and the vastly better quality of high-end civilian versions of the gun, and there is absolutely zero chance that a 1911 made at a cost that's competitive with Glocks or even the M9A4 would be up to the standard people expect from 1911s these days. |
|
Quoted: I think Glocks should be the standard firearm for Police and Military. It's cheap, reliable, easy to operate, easy to work on, and can be made in the USA. I don't really understand why taxpayers should be footing the bill for Staccatos for police. Glock is the Toyota Hilux of the gun world. And you know glock will still be making the same gun in 30 years. |
|
Quoted: The RXM with a thumb safety? It's also nice for a gun that might be turned into a PDW with a FCU chassis, since safeties become rather important if you have a gun bouncing around on a sling. |
|
Quoted: The M&P line destroys Glock in my opinion. Quoted: Quoted: IMHO some variant of the S&W M&P should be in the holster of every service member issued a sidearm. That they offer so many variants makes if an absolutely perfect platform.  The M&P line destroys Glock in my opinion. Does the M&P need the trigger pulled to be taken down? I haven't ever owned one, and haven't shot one in many years. |
|
Quoted: Except for the thousands of people who have fired their Glock when they were just cleaning their gun. Quoted: Quoted: Glock. They're producing a quality product now and can meet the simple standard of "Don't blow off your user's balls" Except for the thousands of people who have fired their Glock when they were just cleaning their gun. The Gen 6 does not require pulling the trigger to take it apart. |
|
Quoted: I never understood the big deal around this, was it just a government requirement? Quoted: Quoted: The Gen 6 does not require pulling the trigger to take it apart. I never understood the big deal around this, was it just a government requirement? No, Glock says they are changing due to listening to end users. No trigger pull, Red Dot ready, and a trigger guard undercut. They come out 2026 in 9mm. 40 cal will be following. No more 45 GAP or 357 Sig. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Glock is like the Hyundai Accent of the gun world. Cheap, ugly, reliable, unrefined, middling and uninspired. If they make a manual safety version for the military and it gets accepted, I guess from the perspective of American soldiers having solid, reliable guns that's a win. I'd go with the Beretta though. We just sold off a 21 year old Hyundai Accent that was the first car my wife ever bought for herself, before I met her. She loaned it to her parents for many years. It had around 230K miles on it and still ran. The comparison was an obvious one. It was boringly reliable and unenviably mediocre, esthetically embarrassing, and lacking in the safety department (but perfectly safe if you don't negligently crash it). Pretty much everything a glock is. |
|
Quoted: No, Glock says they are changing due to listening to end users. No trigger pull, Red Dot ready, and a trigger guard undercut. They come out 2026 in 9mm. 40 cal will be following. No more 45 GAP or 357 Sig. I bet they still have their stupid ass proprietary light rail though. |
|
Quoted: Better suited to what and why? Quoted: Quoted: Cool in the early days of wonder nines, and still a fine pistol, but Glock is better suited. Better suited to what and why? General issue firearm that's going to be carried more than shot. Lighter weight, fewer parts, smaller grip. |
|
Quoted: Military armorers regularly allow M9s to go without spring changes for long enough that they break locking blocks (supposed to change the recoil spring every few thousand rounds, locking blocks tend to break after 10k-25k rounds without spring changes depending on locking block version), despite the spring change taking only a moment during normal field stripping, and some of you still think a 1911 will be a good option. I've talked to a few people over the years who used military-issue M1911A1s towards the end of their service, when they were transitioning to the M9. They all thought the M1911A1s were junk. The modern view of the M1911 is tainted by nostalgia and the vastly better quality of high-end civilian versions of the gun, and there is absolutely zero chance that a 1911 made at a cost that's competitive with Glocks or even the M9A4 would be up to the standard people expect from 1911s these days. It isn't that they "allowed" them to go too long without recoil spring changes, it's that the TM said to change the recoil spring when it got to be shorter than the barrel with the pistol disassembled. |