Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 2/8/2010 1:13:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/18/2010 11:57:47 AM EDT by boarklr]
I purchased my Gen 4 G17 a little over a week ago. In my exceptionally limited experience with it (100 rounds down the tube + much dry fire practice) I'm happy. I've had no problems, and it feels / shoots like a Glock. However, though internet reviews are pretty sparse, I'm reading a lot of negativity:

1. The mag release it too big.
2. The dual recoil spring assembly is / will be defective.
3. The replaceable backstraps look / feel like crap. (I leave them off because I wanted the slightly smaller grip)
4. Should have "fixed" the grip angle.
5. Glock is just trying to take back market share from the M&P line.
6. The barrel assembly is proprietary.
7. It's not a "real" Glock.
8. etc.

Most of these postings refer to the Gen 3's as THE standard and apparently the pre-declared favorite. ( I have a Gen 3 G19, and I love it.) Here's my question to those of you here that may remember.....Did the Gen 3's receive similar scrutiny and doubt as they replaced the Gen 2's? The Gen 3's had ergonomic changes - finger grooves, thumb rests, rail. They also had mechanical changes - extra pin, changed extractor, etc.

How long will it take for Gen 4 to prove itself as the Gen 3 clearly did so many years ago? Or will it?


Link Posted: 2/8/2010 1:15:36 PM EDT
I love Glocks, but when you look at the S&W MPs, they are sexy. When you look at the Gen4 Glocks you think "how the hell did they manage to make it even uglier?"
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 1:25:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Castillo:
I love Glocks, but when you look at the S&W MPs, they are sexy. When you look at the Gen4 Glocks you think "how the hell did they manage to make it even uglier?"


I do not agree that Glocks are particularly ugly, in fact I like their simplicity. (of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder) However, if I had to take a pistol for a wife, 1911 all the way for drop dead sexy.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 1:34:06 PM EDT
what I don't like about pre-gen 4 Glocks is the slippery frame. Seriously, take a class with one outside in the summer and see how awesome it is. It sucked for me.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 1:54:46 PM EDT
"proprietary barrel assembly"?

Just about every handgun out there has a proprietary barrel assembly, except perhaps 1911s and BHPs.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 1:58:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By FredMan:
"proprietary barrel assembly"?

Just about every handgun out there has a proprietary barrel assembly, except perhaps 1911s and BHPs.


I may be wrong here. I'd read complaints that you can't drop a Gen 4 Barrel in a Gen 3 and vice versa. Can you drop a Gen 3 in a Gen 2?
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 2:14:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By boarklr:
I purchased my Gen 4 G17 a little over a week ago. In my exceptionally limited experience with it (100 rounds down the tube + much dry fire practice) I'm happy. I've had no problems, and it feels / shoots like a Glock. However, though internet reviews are pretty sparse, I'm reading a lot of negativity:

1. The mag release it too big.
2. The dual recoil spring assembly is / will be defective.
3. The replaceable backstraps look / feel like crap. (I leave them off because I wanted the slightly smaller grip)
4. Should have "fixed" the grip angle.
5. Glock is just trying to take back market share from the M&P line.
6. The barrel assembly is proprietary.
7. It's not a "real" Glock.
8. etc.

Most of these postings refer to the Gen 3's as THE standard and apparently the pre-declared favorite. ( I have a Gen 3 G19, and I love it.) Here's my question to those of you here that may remember.....Did the Gen 3's receive similar scrutiny and doubt as they replaced the Gen 2's? The Gen 3's had ergonomic changes - finger grooves, thumb rests, rail. They also had mechanical changes - extra pin, changed extractor, etc.

How long will it take for Gen 4 to prove itself as the Gen 3 clearly did so many years ago? Or will it?




To the OP- I know these are not YOUR complaints, just what you are reading and reiterating here. That being said, this is my response to them;

1- No. Its not. Its not even close to being too big, and I can't figure out how anyone would even think that. Youre not going to accidentally dump a magazine, and its easier to release in a hurry without shifting my grip. I like it.
2- Mine works just great. Its worked in the Gen 3 subcompacts since their creation. This frankly is nothing new, and its worked great for HK as well. I prefer the new recoil setup. Its smoother and to me reduces felt recoil
3- They dont look or feel like crap. When they are on, they are SOLID. If you dont like RTF because it will ruin your manicure, maybe shooting sports aren't for you. Ruger also makes a damn fine .22
4- The grip angle is fine, the hump is what some people dont like. If you can't adapt, its not the guns fault, you just might be missing a portion of your brain. There is nothing so absurd about the grip that anyone with normal brain function can't figure it out. Back in the day when I ran HK's, 1911's, Sig's and others, I had no problem switching back and forth once I took the time to put some rounds down range. When I picked them up the first time, I went WTF, but I can rest assured that the Glock didn't outsmart me, and I quickly learned to run both. Regardless, for those out there who will inevitably bitch, do you really think someone won't make aftermarket backstraps for this frame to eliminate the hump? Give it time. Glock likes their design and they believe in the angle/hump. Frankly, I like it, it helps me maintain the highest grip possible, but you can't please everyone. Im sure the aftermarket will solve this "problem".
5- And S&W was trying to take the marketshare from Glock with the M&P, so....ok? Whats the point on this one? Does that mean Glock can't make a gen 4? Exactly the opposite. Thats how we make some really nifty advances.
6- How many people buy guns to swap barrels around with other older versions? The differences are minor, so it very well may work. Frankly, I dont care to find out the hard way and lock up my gun, and its not an issue anyways. Lone Wolf has reported that their barrels work in gen 3 and gen 4 with no issues, so maybe they are interchangable, but who gives a shit?
7- Oh really? Last I checked, it says Glock on the side and was made by Glock? I hear people say they didnt change enough, then people bitch about it changing too much.
8- To the ETC. The Gen 4 is what it is. If you don't like it, great. There are other suitable options out there. Go find one you like, buy it, and leave the rest of us in peace. Frankly, the gen 4 addresses alot of the complaints people had about gen 3's and I think they knocked it out of the park. Others obviously will disagree.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 2:19:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/8/2010 2:21:27 PM EDT by boarklr]
Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Originally Posted By boarklr:
I purchased my Gen 4 G17 a little over a week ago. In my exceptionally limited experience with it (100 rounds down the tube + much dry fire practice) I'm happy. I've had no problems, and it feels / shoots like a Glock. However, though internet reviews are pretty sparse, I'm reading a lot of negativity:

1. The mag release it too big.
2. The dual recoil spring assembly is / will be defective.
3. The replaceable backstraps look / feel like crap. (I leave them off because I wanted the slightly smaller grip)
4. Should have "fixed" the grip angle.
5. Glock is just trying to take back market share from the M&P line.
6. The barrel assembly is proprietary.
7. It's not a "real" Glock.
8. etc.

Most of these postings refer to the Gen 3's as THE standard and apparently the pre-declared favorite. ( I have a Gen 3 G19, and I love it.) Here's my question to those of you here that may remember.....Did the Gen 3's receive similar scrutiny and doubt as they replaced the Gen 2's? The Gen 3's had ergonomic changes - finger grooves, thumb rests, rail. They also had mechanical changes - extra pin, changed extractor, etc.

How long will it take for Gen 4 to prove itself as the Gen 3 clearly did so many years ago? Or will it?




To the OP- I know these are not YOUR complaints, just what you are reading and reiterating here. That being said, this is my response to them;

1- No. Its not. Its not even close to being too big, and I can't figure out how anyone would even think that. Youre not going to accidentally dump a magazine, and its easier to release in a hurry without shifting my grip. I like it.
2- Mine works just great. Its worked in the Gen 3 subcompacts since their creation. This frankly is nothing new, and its worked great for HK as well. I prefer the new recoil setup. Its smoother and to me reduces felt recoil
3- They dont look or feel like crap. When they are on, they are SOLID. If you dont like RTF because it will ruin your manicure, maybe shooting sports aren't for you. Ruger also makes a damn fine .22
4- The grip angle is fine, the hump is what some people dont like. If you can't adapt, its not the guns fault, you just might be missing a portion of your brain. There is nothing so absurd about the grip that anyone with normal brain function can't figure it out. Back in the day when I ran HK's, 1911's, Sig's and others, I had no problem switching back and forth once I took the time to put some rounds down range. When I picked them up the first time, I went WTF, but I can rest assured that the Glock didn't outsmart me, and I quickly learned to run both. Regardless, for those out there who will inevitably bitch, do you really think someone won't make aftermarket backstraps for this frame to eliminate the hump? Give it time. Glock likes their design and they believe in the angle/hump. Frankly, I like it, it helps me maintain the highest grip possible, but you can't please everyone. Im sure the aftermarket will solve this "problem".
5- And S&W was trying to take the marketshare from Glock with the M&P, so....ok? Whats the point on this one? Does that mean Glock can't make a gen 4? Exactly the opposite. Thats how we make some really nifty advances.
6- How many people buy guns to swap barrels around with other older versions? The differences are minor, so it very well may work. Frankly, I dont care to find out the hard way and lock up my gun, and its not an issue anyways. Lone Wolf has reported that their barrels work in gen 3 and gen 4 with no issues, so maybe they are interchangable, but who gives a shit?
7- Oh really? Last I checked, it says Glock on the side and was made by Glock? I hear people say they didnt change enough, then people bitch about it changing too much.
8- To the ETC. The Gen 4 is what it is. If you don't like it, great. There are other suitable options out there. Go find one you like, buy it, and leave the rest of us in peace. Frankly, the gen 4 addresses alot of the complaints people had about gen 3's and I think they knocked it out of the park. Others obviously will disagree.


I agree with you right down the line. I just wonder if it was the same whiny crap 10 years ago when the Gen 3's rolled out.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 2:47:24 PM EDT
I think they did a decent job with the Gen4 overall and plan on picking up a Gen4 G19 as soon as they are out. I do think they should have flattened the hump and give people the option of a flat backstrap. Then the hump could be added with the various add-on backstraps. Perhaps offer more than 2 of them.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 3:02:41 PM EDT
So far, I haven't handled one, but by the looks like of it, i'll stick to the Gen2 & 3.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 3:19:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/8/2010 3:19:47 PM EDT by M4A1bushmaster]
Originally Posted By jb241970:
So far, I haven't handled one, but by the looks like of it, i'll stick to the Gen2 & 3.


+1 looks ugly,

People say glocks are ugly but to me the gen 4's are the only ugly ones...

Not saying there not good but Id rather have a Gen 3 over a gen 4
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 4:26:48 PM EDT
i own 3 glocks gen 3, 19 and 35 and a rtf 17 love them .the gen 4 glocks grip is stupid!! that is all.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 5:39:18 PM EDT
I don't think they went far enough with the backstraps. Should have made the base completely flat and then the other backstraps can add the hump from there.

Other than that, I don't think anything they did was a step in the wrong direction.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 5:57:15 PM EDT
i'm getting the first g19 i see! i hope it's this spring! what have you heard?
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 7:29:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By boarklr:
in fact I like their simplicity.

And that's the problem with the GEN4. It goes against everything Glock is known for.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 7:34:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By boarklr:
Did the Gen 3's receive similar scrutiny and doubt as they replaced the Gen 2's? The Gen 3's had ergonomic changes - finger grooves, thumb rests, rail. They also had mechanical changes - extra pin, changed extractor, etc.

There was no functinal changes on the GEN3. The locking block pin was added on the GEN2 22/23/24 in the early 90's and added to the .380/9x19mm in the early 00's. The 15* extractor was done on the GEN2 first as well.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 7:42:12 PM EDT
Here is a 2 pin GEN3. It's been butchered, but you get the idea.

Link Posted: 2/8/2010 8:31:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/8/2010 8:33:21 PM EDT by Marksman14]
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By boarklr:
in fact I like their simplicity.

And that's the problem with the GEN4. It goes against everything Glock is known for.


How? Backstraps and a new spring? Trust me, its still simple.

I totally agree with people saying they should have made more backstraps, and that the base gun should/could be flat, but again...I PROMISE someone will make an aftermarket backstrap to solve that problem. The backstraps are so damned easy to make, it will happen soon too.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 8:35:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By M4A1bushmaster:
Originally Posted By jb241970:
So far, I haven't handled one, but by the looks like of it, i'll stick to the Gen2 & 3.


+1 looks ugly,

People say glocks are ugly but to me the gen 4's are the only ugly ones...

Not saying there not good but Id rather have a Gen 3 over a gen 4


Considering the lines of the gun stayed the same, what dont you like? The bigger magazine release or the RTF frame texture?

Idk, maybe I'm just blindly biased since I own one and it works as advertised, but who knows.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 8:58:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/8/2010 9:01:14 PM EDT by benzo]
Originally Posted By gmor:
i'm getting the first g19 i see! i hope it's this spring! what have you heard?


march i believe, but i think its just a bunch of rumors. One of the glock forums said somebody was taking preorders.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 9:02:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By boarklr:
in fact I like their simplicity.

And that's the problem with the GEN4. It goes against everything Glock is known for.


How? Backstraps and a new spring? Trust me, its still simple.

The back straps, while going against the Glock philosophy, are not a problem. But that recoil spring assembly? Holy shit. That massive mag catch that looks like Bubba installed it with a Dremel is not that appealing either. The fact it uses so many proprietary parts seals the deal.

Link Posted: 2/8/2010 9:43:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By boarklr:
in fact I like their simplicity.

And that's the problem with the GEN4. It goes against everything Glock is known for.


How? Backstraps and a new spring? Trust me, its still simple.

The back straps, while going against the Glock philosophy, are not a problem. But that recoil spring assembly? Holy shit. That massive mag catch that looks like Bubba installed it with a Dremel is not that appealing either. The fact it uses so many proprietary parts seals the deal.



That recoil spring system is absolutely nothing new to Glock, and the best part about that ugly mag release is that it works.

The important parts that people commonly replace remain the same. Locking blocks, all the guts of the frame, and the guts of the slide are absolutely unchanged.

I was unaware that it was common practice to swap slides and barrels and those parts among other Glocks

Of all the glocks I've owned, I have yet to do that, ever.

I think you need to actually spend some time with a Gen 4.
Link Posted: 2/8/2010 10:21:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

That recoil spring system is absolutely nothing new to Glock, and the best part about that ugly mag release is that it works.


That mag catch is going to lead to many inadvertent mag drops. The GEN4 recoil spring assembly does not appear to be of the same design as the sub-compacts. Even if it is there have been many reports over the years of the double recoil spring assembly breaking and locking up the weapon. If the standard Glock recoil spring assembly breaks the weapon continues to operate unaffected.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 12:58:53 AM EDT
To each his own, I guess.

I'm not too crazy about them for some of the reasons that GLOCKREAPER and others have mentioned.

I don't really see where anything has been "improved" over Gen3, unless it's shown over time that the new Recoil Spring Assembly actually, finally, and totally cures the reliability issues surrounding .40 Glocks with lights mounted.

Even this, however, is only of academic interest to me personally, as I'm mainly focused on 9mm with pistols now, and don't run lights on pistols.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 3:33:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By boarklr:
Here's my question to those of you here that may remember.....Did the Gen 3's receive similar scrutiny and doubt as they replaced the Gen 2's? The Gen 3's had ergonomic changes - finger grooves...



Yes, some people on Glocktalk swore they would never buy a glock with finger grooves. I don't know if they ever came around or not.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 4:12:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

That recoil spring system is absolutely nothing new to Glock, and the best part about that ugly mag release is that it works.


That mag catch is going to lead to many inadvertent mag drops. The GEN4 recoil spring assembly does not appear to be of the same design as the sub-compacts. Even if it is there have been many reports over the years of the double recoil spring assembly breaking and locking up the weapon. If the standard Glock recoil spring assembly breaks the weapon continues to operate unaffected.


Really? Have you handled a Gen 4? If someone dumps a mag from this vastly improved catch, then they should probably put the gun down an walk away.

You Glock guys crack me up. You think they are ugly, hell they are all ugly! They aren't a real Glock?!? Glock felt the need to make these improvements. If you trusted them to make the "best" handgun before, why not now?

I don't like glocks all that much but recently bought the new Gen 4 G22. I prefer the smaller grip. Though I haven't fired it yet, I look forward to putting some rounds down range. I think a lot of people have never seen this gun and are speaking out of turn.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 5:33:43 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 9:35:48 AM EDT
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Se la vie.


Sorry for nitpicking, but it's "C'est la vie". (I tried to resist!)

Glock (or any other manufacturer) is never going to please everyone. Before the Gen4, plenty of people were complaining that Glocks needed interchangeable backstraps, etc etc. Now that they have them, the people who liked Glock to begin with are upset. I personally haven't seen or held one yet, for the simple fact that I haven't gone out looking. When the 19s come out, I'll go handle one.

Just from what I've seen and heard, I am a little disappointed in the execution of the backstraps. They could've done much better. It's at least an attempt at progress though!

Link Posted: 2/9/2010 10:55:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Human beings, especially dim ones, don't like change...even if that change is objectively positive. They especially don't like it if they have been convinced that the product they are holding in their hands is/was perfect because they believed a marketing slogan put out by a gun company. See, if their whole world view is based on the fact that they have a "perfect" handgun, it kinda makes life difficult for them when the company that claimed perfection introduces a new gun with changes quietly made to deal with defects that they hid behind marketing claims of perfection.


Ouch, that won't buff out.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 12:31:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Castillo:
I love Glocks, but when you look at the S&W MPs, they are sexy. When you look at the Gen4 Glocks you think "how the hell did they manage to make it even uglier?"


I'm the exact opposite. I think M&Ps are fugly, especially the full size ones (the compacts are better I'll admit) and I like the simple appearance of Glocks, especially Gen 1 and Gen 2 Glocks.

The only Glocks I don't like the looks of are the RTF2s, the slide cuts are just weird.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 12:35:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/9/2010 12:36:55 PM EDT by John_Wayne777]
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 1:18:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/9/2010 1:22:13 PM EDT by Marksman14]
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

That recoil spring system is absolutely nothing new to Glock, and the best part about that ugly mag release is that it works.


That mag catch is going to lead to many inadvertent mag drops. The GEN4 recoil spring assembly does not appear to be of the same design as the sub-compacts. Even if it is there have been many reports over the years of the double recoil spring assembly breaking and locking up the weapon. If the standard Glock recoil spring assembly breaks the weapon continues to operate unaffected.


Well then I guess thank god they tweaked it so its not exactly the same? Give it some time, good news is you can still have your gen 3's

Please do yourself, and myself for that matter... a huge favor, grab a gen 4 glock, and tell me how that "massive" mag release is going to cause inadvertent magazine drops. Maybe I just have a grip that works out perfectly, but I'd really really like for someone to show me how thats even possible, any more so that it is with the gen 3's.

Seriously.

You're bitching about problems that as of right now don't exist.

Link Posted: 2/9/2010 1:22:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/9/2010 1:23:57 PM EDT by Marksman14]
Originally Posted By ken_mays:
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Human beings, especially dim ones, don't like change...even if that change is objectively positive. They especially don't like it if they have been convinced that the product they are holding in their hands is/was perfect because they believed a marketing slogan put out by a gun company. See, if their whole world view is based on the fact that they have a "perfect" handgun, it kinda makes life difficult for them when the company that claimed perfection introduces a new gun with changes quietly made to deal with defects that they hid behind marketing claims of perfection.


Ouch, that won't buff out.


Nor should it, because its the God damn truth. Glock fan or not, there have been issues that needed to be addressed....and if this is the solution, so be it.

Link Posted: 2/9/2010 2:04:42 PM EDT
Like it or not it is here to stay. Glock came out with these updates due to too many Glock 22's jamming when a flashlight or laser is hung on the rails. Many PD's had this issue so the fix was dual captive recoil spring and some other stuff.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 2:20:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Originally Posted By ken_mays:
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Human beings, especially dim ones, don't like change...even if that change is objectively positive. They especially don't like it if they have been convinced that the product they are holding in their hands is/was perfect because they believed a marketing slogan put out by a gun company. See, if their whole world view is based on the fact that they have a "perfect" handgun, it kinda makes life difficult for them when the company that claimed perfection introduces a new gun with changes quietly made to deal with defects that they hid behind marketing claims of perfection.


Ouch, that won't buff out.


Nor should it, because its the God damn truth. Glock fan or not, there have been issues that needed to be addressed....and if this is the solution, so be it.



Of course it's the truth, but plenty of people have their ego wrapped up too tightly with brand loyalty.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 3:01:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Originally Posted By TheLefty:
They could've done much better. It's at least an attempt at progress though!


If improvements to a pistol were blowjobs, the Gen 4 changes would be the wife touching it with her tongue and saying "There, happy now?"


This is an excellent, and hysterical, comparison!
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 3:12:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

You're bitching about problems that as of right now don't exist.

All in good time.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 3:19:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Originally Posted By ken_mays:
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Human beings, especially dim ones, don't like change...even if that change is objectively positive. They especially don't like it if they have been convinced that the product they are holding in their hands is/was perfect because they believed a marketing slogan put out by a gun company. See, if their whole world view is based on the fact that they have a "perfect" handgun, it kinda makes life difficult for them when the company that claimed perfection introduces a new gun with changes quietly made to deal with defects that they hid behind marketing claims of perfection.


Ouch, that won't buff out.


Nor should it, because its the God damn truth. Glock fan or not, there have been issues that needed to be addressed....and if this is the solution, so be it.



+1

Any speculation on whether they will continue to manufacture / sell gen 3's? How long did it take them to phase out the gen 2's?
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 3:22:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

You're bitching about problems that as of right now don't exist.

All in good time.


Will your prophesy occur before or after the skies fall, the oceans boil, and the moon turns to blood on 12.21.12?
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 3:27:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By boarklr:
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

You're bitching about problems that as of right now don't exist.

All in good time.


Will your prophesy occur before or after the skies fall, the oceans boil, and the moon turns to blood on 12.21.12?




Seriously, some people have to bitch for the sake of hearing themselves. The glock spring is strikingly close to HK's design. Its really quite simple, but again, you'd have to own one to know that.

The way I see it, if you're so smart that you can accurately predict massive spring failures and magazines plunging to the depths, you should go apply for an engineering position with Glock.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 7:23:58 PM EDT
I just don't like Glocks period; third or fourth. Just my personal preference.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 7:44:06 PM EDT
Well, I pretty much hate all Glocks due to the horrible ergonomics and mushy trigger.

As for the Gen 4. No real improvement over the Gen 3.
Replaceable backstraps that make the gun bigger??? The 17/19/22/23 is too big already. If they had done a grip reduction and then used the straps to go back up that would be something usefull. They kept the stupid and much hated fingergroves.

Of all the glocks, the Gen 2 is the least bad.
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 7:51:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By NVGdude:
Well, I pretty much hate all Glocks due to the horrible ergonomics and mushy trigger.

As for the Gen 4. No real improvement over the Gen 3.
Replaceable backstraps that make the gun bigger??? The 17/19/22/23 is too big already. If they had done a grip reduction and then used the straps to go back up that would be something usefull. They kept the stupid and much hated fingergroves.

Of all the glocks, the Gen 2 is the least bad.


Actually with no backstrap, its considerably smaller grip wise.

Link Posted: 2/9/2010 8:09:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Actually with no backstrap, its considerably smaller grip wise.

2mm
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 8:14:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By boarklr:
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

You're bitching about problems that as of right now don't exist.

All in good time.


Will your prophesy occur before or after the skies fall, the oceans boil, and the moon turns to blood on 12.21.12?
I'm sure it will be just as successful as the ambi mag catch and the picatinny rail and the curved slide serrations and the RTF2 grip and...

Link Posted: 2/9/2010 8:50:15 PM EDT
So basically what you're saying is, you have zero experience with gen 4's, and have absolutely nothing to contribute to a worth while discussion on the matter.

Got it.

Link Posted: 2/9/2010 8:57:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
So basically what you're saying is, you have zero experience with gen 4's, and have absolutely nothing to contribute to a worth while discussion on the matter.

Got it.


Did you read the fuckin' thread title?
Link Posted: 2/9/2010 9:05:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/9/2010 9:15:04 PM EDT by Marksman14]
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
So basically what you're saying is, you have zero experience with gen 4's, and have absolutely nothing to contribute to a worth while discussion on the matter.

Got it.


Did you read the fuckin' thread title?


I did. Not only that, but I gave a lengthy response detailing my feelings based on experience. By the way, while that may be the title, the intent was to get to the bottom of the issues that were listed. He posted them to discuss the matters. In part to presumably clear up confusion about internet speculation from other gen 4 owners, as well as discuss how the gen 3 was received when it was released. You question if I read the title, I question if you have reading comprehension problems. Now you can disagree with the appearance all you want, hate it, think its ugly, whatever you desire. But from a functional standpoint, its quite clear you have no experience with the platform and simply love gen 3's. So be it, thats your perogative....but frankly you've popped up all over the place bashing these things any chance you can get and yet....you have zero experience with them.

All you've done is speculate stupid shit that either isn't true, or hasn't been even hinted upon as a problem by actual users. Presumably, he posted this to clear up speculation and rumor, not listen to yours.

You can either listen to people who have purchased these, or you can continue to spout your bullshit anywhere possible and ignore actual feedback. The new recoil system still has to spend some time on the market, yes. But thus far I've read of zero problems with it, nor experienced any personally, so anything beyond that is....again...complete and utter speculation. If you see one up close, you'll understand, there isn't really much that can go wrong with it. Its simple, stout, and thus far I have no reason to doubt its ability. If a problem comes up, so be it. I frankly don't give a damn. I don't have any emotional ties to it, its a god damn tool.

Either way, could you atleast try and do your part in keeping this technical? Nobody is going to learn anything based on your speculation, especially when it contradicts actual user feedback.
Link Posted: 2/10/2010 3:30:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/10/2010 3:31:37 AM EDT by boarklr]
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Actually with no backstrap, its considerably smaller grip wise.

2mm


Yes, it's about 2mm....verified with calipers. Though I really cannot see the difference, I can definitely feel it. In fact, I fondled both a gen 3 and a gen 4 side-by-side when I made my purchase, and the smaller grip was a selling point for me with my smaller hands. So, I consider the 2mm considerable. The "M" back strap makes it feel like a gen 3 to me...aside from the rough texturing.
Link Posted: 2/10/2010 5:21:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/10/2010 5:21:59 AM EDT by Canoeguy]
Originally Posted By boarklr:
Originally Posted By GLOCKREAPER:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Actually with no backstrap, its considerably smaller grip wise.

2mm


Yes, it's about 2mm....verified with calipers. Though I really cannot see the difference, I can definitely feel it. In fact, I fondled both a gen 3 and a gen 4 side-by-side when I made my purchase, and the smaller grip was a selling point for me with my smaller hands. So, I consider the 2mm considerable. The "M" back strap makes it feel like a gen 3 to me...aside from the rough texturing.


This was my feeling also. As I stated earlier I am not a huge Glock fan. I needed one because I agreed to be a reserve deputy, and guess what the department uses. The smaller grip was a big selling point for me. Also three mags in the box is pretty cool.

It still won't point as natural for me as many other guns, but a few thousand rounds down the pipe should remedy this akwardness.
Link Posted: 2/10/2010 7:37:32 AM EDT
I'm one of those guys who have done a lot of bitching about the gen4 Glock. It's not that I hate it or think anything is wrong with it per say, its that I think Glock majorly missed a great opportunity to make their pistol more adaptable to a larger number of shooters.

Originally Posted By boarklr:
Glock is just trying to take back market share from the M&P line.

This in my opinion is not a compliant, it is a fact. Glock has lost thousands of sales to people who like the overall pistol but can't (or won't) deal with the grip. The M&P is the closest thing to a Glock but has the ability to adapt to a much larger percentage of people. Glocks first ad for the new Gen4's clearly show what their intention was for the Gen4...

Change your grip, not your gun

And that's kind of the interesting thing here. I think most people realize that Glock's focus is on Military and LEO sales. For the individual, you can make the argument that if the Glock doesn't fit you, find something else that does. Personally I hate that argument because I feel there is much more to selecting a pistol then just how it fits your hands. None the less, I don't think Glock is too worried about loosing some individual sales but they do care a lot about their Mil\LEO sales and that is were I think they are really missing the boat. If you're in charge of selecting the sidearm for your dept or unit, how can you select the Glock (as great as it may be) knowing that it may not fit a large percentage of your officers? Why would you not go with something like the M&P that is proving to be just as reliably, with just as good if not better factory support but yet can be adapted to fit the majority (if not all) of your people easily and without permanent modification to the firearm?

So that to me is why the Gen4 Glock is a huge bust. They had an opportunity to design something just as adaptable (if not more so) then the M&P and that was IMO clearly their goal but they didn't even come close. The smallest grip is still going to be too fat for a number of shooters and there is still no way to remove the finger grooves or palm swell without a dremel or heat. I would be shocked to find even one person who refused to own or shoot a Gen3 because of the grip but would some how find the Gen4 grip acceptable.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top