I have finally given up on Glocks! (Page 4 of 5)
|
Originally Posted By tgmr05: The sad part for glock, is they have basically cornered the -switch- aficionado market. There may be more illegal switch equipped glocks in private hands, than standard glocks in current LE hands. And the LE market was what truly launched glock. Doubtful. Most law abiding Glock owning citizens like being on these sides of the bars. |
|
The G19 size/performance envelope is where a lot of lines cross for a lot of people: - The same sight radius as a 4" K-frame. - 16 shots/30 oz - Excellent and controllable and deliverable accuracy across the entire pistol caliber range and down to .14 splits with basic technique. - As close to perfectly reliable as a man-made machine can be, proven across decades, millions of users and hundreds of millions of rounds. - The simplest and most trouble free design, detail stripped with an ink pen. Weatherproof. - Tolerant of abuse, indifferent maintenance and poor to no lubrication. - Rounded and smooth edges. - An ecosystem of parts, accessories and holsters developed across 40 years. From inception, Glock has pissed people off because of their "Perfection" marketing slogan, the very idea of a polymer frame ("They weren't first!" screeches HK), the not-a-1911 trigger, grip angle, plastic sights, LE sales ploys (ruthless, pseudo-ethical and brutally effective), lack of innovation and every other possible criticism that can be dreamed up by devotees of other brands...and still everything is trumpeted as "The Glock Killer". It is The Standard to beat. Smaller guns struggle to do what it can, and larger guns are simply larger. Completely devoid of romance or cachet. A gun that makes no statement about its user. A soulless killing machine. |
Isaiah 1:18 - "Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD: "though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow"
|
Originally Posted By Sabre223: Doubtful. Most law abiding Glock owning citizens like being on these sides of the bars. Doubtful? There are roughly 10-15 million glock pistols in private ownership in the US. Based off Glocks marketshare of police/law enforcement- there are roughly 500,000 to 625,000 glock duty pistols in 2026 in the US. In Chicago alone in 2024, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Chicago intercepted 1,507 illegal firearm-modifying devices, which included hundreds of Glock switches imported primarily from manufacturers in China. One city, one year, and only what they were able to intercept. The reality of how many years the switches have been coming in across the country, and how many have potentially been printed - yes, it is quite possible there are more switch equipped glocks than there are duty glocks in LE hands. And it does not appear the number of switches is going to decrease. And, there are still millions of glocks that can accept them. A big black eye for Glock. And Glock turned a blind eye to this, until lawsuits/bans forced their hand. Not exactly helpful for law abiding Glock owners… |
|
Originally Posted By tgmr05: Doubtful? There are roughly 10-15 million glock pistols in private ownership in the US. Based off Glocks marketshare of police/law enforcement- there are roughly 500,000 to 625,000 glock duty pistols in 2026 in the US. In Chicago alone in 2024, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Chicago intercepted 1,507 illegal firearm-modifying devices, which included hundreds of Glock switches imported primarily from manufacturers in China. One city, one year, and only what they were able to intercept. The reality of how many years the switches have been coming in across the country, and how many have potentially been printed - yes, it is quite possible there are more switch equipped glocks than there are duty glocks in LE hands. And it does not appear the number of switches is going to decrease. And, there are still millions of glocks that can accept them. A big black eye for Glock. And Glock turned a blind eye to this, until lawsuits/bans forced their hand. Not exactly helpful for law abiding Glock owners… It's certainly a stretch, and saying Glock turned a blind eye to it is ridiculous. People have been uncorking semiautos for over 100 years, and immediately after Glock introduced their "switchproof" V series pistols, switches were predictibly developed for those too. |
|
Originally Posted By AK-12: It's certainly a stretch, and saying Glock turned a blind eye to it is ridiculous. People have been uncorking semiautos for over 100 years, and immediately after Glock introduced their "switchproof" V series pistols, switches were predictibly developed for those too. Stretch? There is a growing culture, a very large culture, that have adopted switch glocks. Ignoring that fact is not a good optic. Glock could have taken steps years ago, and chose not to. So, yes, glock turned a blind eye. Glock is still around, and will be for quite a while, hopefully. A lot of law abiding citizens still like their product. |
|
Originally Posted By tgmr05: Stretch? There is a growing culture, a very large culture, that have adopted switch glocks. Ignoring that fact is not a good optic. Glock could have taken steps years ago, and chose not to. So, yes, glock turned a blind eye. I don't know why you feel that the criminality of a demographic that the legal system refuses to hold accountable would be Glock's responsibility; but as I stated above, even when Glock did "take steps" to prevent the use of switches, switches for those models were out there within days of their release. Your posts also have a bizarre undertone implying that there is some sort of problem with Americans having access to automatic weapons. |
|
Originally Posted By tgmr05: Stretch? There is a growing culture, a very large culture, that have adopted switch glocks. Ignoring that fact is not a good optic. Glock could have taken steps years ago, and chose not to. So, yes, glock turned a blind eye. Glock is still around, and will be for quite a while, hopefully. A lot of law abiding citizens still like their product. Originally Posted By tgmr05: Originally Posted By AK-12: It's certainly a stretch, and saying Glock turned a blind eye to it is ridiculous. People have been uncorking semiautos for over 100 years, and immediately after Glock introduced their "switchproof" V series pistols, switches were predictibly developed for those too. Stretch? There is a growing culture, a very large culture, that have adopted switch glocks. Ignoring that fact is not a good optic. Glock could have taken steps years ago, and chose not to. So, yes, glock turned a blind eye. Glock is still around, and will be for quite a while, hopefully. A lot of law abiding citizens still like their product. Sounds like you think Ford is culpable for speeding tickets because they don’t impose a hard governed speed. Glock didn’t “turn a blind eye” they just realized it’s neither something they can fix nor something they are responsible for. The V switch was in progress before the pistol was even widely available… |
|
Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Not really if the holster was designed correctly for that specific model (Gen 5, XDM Elite) or for a gun that was designed from the ground up with ambi-controls (Echelon). The issue is taking some holsters designed for a non-ambi gun (Gen 3, XDM) and trying to use it with an ambi-gun (Gen 5, XDM Elite). Adding ambi controls to a pistol that already had ambi controls won't cause holster compatibility issues? No shit... This is a non-issue. Gen 4 came out 15 years ago. Gen 5 is approaching 10 years. Any serious user is not going to sweat the fact that their obscure random holster purchased a decade and a half ago may not fit the pistol they bought today. Fact: if you buy a 9mm Glock today, you would have to search far and wide to find a holster manufacturer who does not make a holster for that gun. Exceptions may be companies that make niche products for .22s and things that people don't generally carry. |
|
Originally Posted By BrandonP: Tbf that can happen with any gun you put ambi controls on. Originally Posted By BrandonP: Originally Posted By Joedirt199: If the holster is tight on the sides, the ambi slide stop can cause issues with fitting a 5 into a 3/4. Tbf that can happen with any gun you put ambi controls on. True, but when the newest generations come standard with them it sucks if you want to use the gen3 holster you used to used |
Do Good
Be Dangerous
Live Free
Be Dangerous
Live Free
|
Originally Posted By BrandonP: Adding ambi controls to a pistol that already had ambi controls won't cause holster compatibility issues? No shit... This is a non-issue. Gen 4 came out 15 years ago. Gen 5 is approaching 10 years. Any serious user is not going to sweat the fact that their obscure random holster purchased a decade and a half ago may not fit the pistol they bought today. Fact: if you buy a 9mm Glock today, you would have to search far and wide to find a holster manufacturer who does not make a holster for that gun. Exceptions may be companies that make niche products for .22s and things that people don't generally carry. Originally Posted By BrandonP: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Not really if the holster was designed correctly for that specific model (Gen 5, XDM Elite) or for a gun that was designed from the ground up with ambi-controls (Echelon). The issue is taking some holsters designed for a non-ambi gun (Gen 3, XDM) and trying to use it with an ambi-gun (Gen 5, XDM Elite). Adding ambi controls to a pistol that already had ambi controls won't cause holster compatibility issues? No shit... This is a non-issue. Gen 4 came out 15 years ago. Gen 5 is approaching 10 years. Any serious user is not going to sweat the fact that their obscure random holster purchased a decade and a half ago may not fit the pistol they bought today. Fact: if you buy a 9mm Glock today, you would have to search far and wide to find a holster manufacturer who does not make a holster for that gun. Exceptions may be companies that make niche products for .22s and things that people don't generally carry. Well, you aren't adding ambi-controls to a pistol that already has them.  But that's not what I meant. I think we're more or less in agreement... for example, I used to own an XDM Elite (ambi-controls) which would work with some XDM (single side controls) holsters, but not all of them. This was an uncommon issue in my experience (every holster I tried happened to work just fine) and largely disappeared after the XDM Elite had been out for a while. With Glocks, I think the issue comes when someone happens to have a gen 3 holster and they just try to shove their Gen 6 in and hope for the best.
|
|
I haven’t given up on Glocks but my edc is now a Shield X. I’ve seen a few people have issues with the 15 round mags and certain defensive ammo but through 1200 rounds I haven’t experienced any problems. I find it to be severely underrated. My Glock 19 and 17 won’t be going anywhere but my 43X and 43 may be looking for another home soon. |
|
Originally Posted By the_professional: In honor of this thread, I purchased a long sought after Gen 5 G21 MOS on Blue Label yesterday... @the_professional Where did you find that pistol? I searched for a while recently and settled on a Gen V G21 MOS... not disappointed but wanted a Gen 5. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
1361
EE: 100% (7)
MI, USA
|
Originally Posted By Fooboy: The G19 size/performance envelope is where a lot of lines cross for a lot of people: - The same sight radius as a 4" K-frame. - 16 shots/30 oz - Excellent and controllable and deliverable accuracy across the entire pistol caliber range and down to .14 splits with basic technique. - As close to perfectly reliable as a man-made machine can be, proven across decades, millions of users and hundreds of millions of rounds. - The simplest and most trouble free design, detail stripped with an ink pen. Weatherproof. - Tolerant of abuse, indifferent maintenance and poor to no lubrication. - Rounded and smooth edges. - An ecosystem of parts, accessories and holsters developed across 40 years. From inception, Glock has pissed people off because of their "Perfection" marketing slogan, the very idea of a polymer frame ("They weren't first!" screeches HK), the not-a-1911 trigger, grip angle, plastic sights, LE sales ploys (ruthless, pseudo-ethical and brutally effective), lack of innovation and every other possible criticism that can be dreamed up by devotees of other brands...and still everything is trumpeted as "The Glock Killer". It is The Standard to beat. Smaller guns struggle to do what it can, and larger guns are simply larger. Completely devoid of romance or cachet. A gun that makes no statement about its user. A soulless killing machine. Oh, is that why Glock pissed people off? I thought they were great at first, I mean at a time when good was 2 ftf per 100, Glocks were amazing. They actually made other companies just do better. Great! I think pissed off came from: promotion of dishwasher safe by armorers, piss poor triggers, lack of practical safety mechanism, lack of innovation, lack of response to dangerous trigger, 40 blow ups, blocky grip, gang usage due to easy switch mod sold by Mr Bezos, poor sights, low LEO pricing, but high citizen pricing, etc complaints. I think that fucking pissed people off….of yea and accidentally killing girlfriend while dancing. |
|
I get that it's after 5:00 PM in CONUS but it's also Tuesday. |
|
I cannot give up what I do not have. I was gaga for Glock when I first saw the advertising for them a VERY long time ago, that would be my next and best pistol! Then I held one. It didn't fit my hand right. I can use them - I have qualified Expert or Distinguished Expert with the originally issued Glock 19 and now the Glock 45 for the last 24 years. I can shoot them, I can carry them, I can use them proficiently. That is not a problem. I just don't like them. That's all. Nothing wrong with the gun, I just don't like them. I also am not fond of the Beretta 92 series, 1911 single actions, (unless on a square range), or very large caliber revolvers. This statement will undoubtedly get me pilloried, but truth is truth. I like the CZ grip and have carried a CZ pistol of one flavor or another for decades. I've carried a P-10 variant for 9 years now. And what is on my belt as I type this? Go figure, right?  My tastes are odd and eclectic, I don't care. I wouldn't buy a current Glock not because there is anything wrong with them, (I have had three Glocks fail either in my hand or in front of me over the decades, but they were range guns), I just don't like them all that much. Now, having said all that, I do understand that Gen 6 is slightly different? I might handle one just to see if it feels better. |
What have the Romans ever done for us?
Joined:
Jul 2008
Posts:
46088
EE: 100% (212)
TN, USA
|
Originally Posted By armoredman: I cannot give up what I do not have. I was gaga for Glock when I first saw the advertising for them a VERY long time ago, that would be my next and best pistol! Then I held one. It didn't fit my hand right. I can use them - I have qualified Expert or Distinguished Expert with the originally issued Glock 19 and now the Glock 45 for the last 24 years. I can shoot them, I can carry them, I can use them proficiently. That is not a problem. I just don't like them. That's all. Nothing wrong with the gun, I just don't like them. I also am not fond of the Beretta 92 series, 1911 single actions, (unless on a square range), or very large caliber revolvers. This statement will undoubtedly get me pilloried, but truth is truth. I like the CZ grip and have carried a CZ pistol of one flavor or another for decades. I've carried a P-10 variant for 9 years now. And what is on my belt as I type this? Go figure, right? https://i.imgur.com/8jb96Z2.jpg My tastes are odd and eclectic, I don't care. I wouldn't buy a current Glock not because there is anything wrong with them, (I have had three Glocks fail either in my hand or in front of me over the decades, but they were range guns), I just don't like them all that much. Now, having said all that, I do understand that Gen 6 is slightly different? I might handle one just to see if it feels better. It does. I hate the blocky grip - the 6 fixes it all. It’s made me put Glock back in the lineup. 
|
Panem et Circenses
I have also learned from experience that the greater part of our happiness or misery depends upon our dispositions, and not upon our circumstances.
Kites rise highest against the wind, not with it. - Churchill
I have also learned from experience that the greater part of our happiness or misery depends upon our dispositions, and not upon our circumstances.
Kites rise highest against the wind, not with it. - Churchill
Joined:
Nov 2023
Posts:
13
EE: 0% (0)
OR, USA
| Well I don't "like" glocks, but I have several. Honestly I think theres better options, but I am a fan of it in stock configuration or lightly modified. Personally I will take a makarov over a glock 43, but I will take a 19 over the makarov. I own them mainly due to collecting though I am thinking on switching one of my CCWs to a glock. |
|
Originally Posted By cayman_shen: I just don't think the Glock trigger is that bad. I don't get it either... there are certainly better triggers, but Glock's really not that bad. Though to be fair, I think Glock is now at the back of the pack in this regard when compared to mainstream competitors (at least in my experience). |
|
Originally Posted By NN300BLK: I don't get it either... there are certainly better triggers, but Glock's really not that bad. Though to be fair, I think Glock is now at the back of the pack in this regard when compared to mainstream competitors (at least in my experience). I recently tried the tactical triggers enhanced connector, and I can safely say that it’s the best thing you can do to a Glock. I got the drop in kit, their reduced FP safety spring is actually immediately noticeable, and the metal shoe ain’t bad. Dare I say the trigger actually feels good. |
|
Originally Posted By cayman_shen: I just don't think the Glock trigger is that bad. I dont think the trigger is horrible either. I also dont think the stock sights are as bad as everyone makes them out to be. |
Doesn't mean that much to me to mean that much to you.
|
One thing is objectively true about Glock triggers: they do not mask terrible trigger control. As for the crappy factory sights, it makes sense. Most people have a preference and would like to change them anyway. For example, I shoot with nods and can't stand night sights. |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
1437
EE: 100% (3)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By Fooboy: The G19 size/performance envelope is where a lot of lines cross for a lot of people: - The same sight radius as a 4" K-frame. - 16 shots/30 oz - Excellent and controllable and deliverable accuracy across the entire pistol caliber range and down to .14 splits with basic technique. - As close to perfectly reliable as a man-made machine can be, proven across decades, millions of users and hundreds of millions of rounds. - The simplest and most trouble free design, detail stripped with an ink pen. Weatherproof. - Tolerant of abuse, indifferent maintenance and poor to no lubrication. - Rounded and smooth edges. - An ecosystem of parts, accessories and holsters developed across 40 years. From inception, Glock has pissed people off because of their "Perfection" marketing slogan, the very idea of a polymer frame ("They weren't first!" screeches HK), the not-a-1911 trigger, grip angle, plastic sights, LE sales ploys (ruthless, pseudo-ethical and brutally effective), lack of innovation and every other possible criticism that can be dreamed up by devotees of other brands...and still everything is trumpeted as "The Glock Killer". It is The Standard to beat. Smaller guns struggle to do what it can, and larger guns are simply larger. Completely devoid of romance or cachet. A gun that makes no statement about its user. A soulless killing machine. Functionally, the Glock 19 is a very good firearm that essentially set the standard for a modern duty pistol that i never could not ever get into shooting. for me it was just never a comfortable pistol to me. I would not say that i am glock hater, but in 2026 it wouldnt make my top 5 list of guns to carry or shoot, because standard for what makes a good pistol has moved from Reliability, to ergonomics and shootabiliy because everything is glock reliable. I dont own a SW M&P 2.0 but there is no circumstance in which i would chose a 2.0 Carry Comp over a glock 19. the same thing applies probably a half dozen options at the moment. hell i messed around with a Staccatto P4HD a few weeks back and i felt that was an incredible pistol and i would rather pay 1900 for a blue lable P4 vs 600 for a blue lable glock. |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
1438
EE: 100% (3)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By M15A2CLE: Oh, is that why Glock pissed people off? I thought they were great at first, I mean at a time when good was 2 ftf per 100, Glocks were amazing. They actually made other companies just do better. Great! I think pissed off came from: promotion of dishwasher safe by armorers, piss poor triggers, lack of practical safety mechanism, lack of innovation, lack of response to dangerous trigger, 40 blow ups, blocky grip, gang usage due to easy switch mod sold by Mr Bezos, poor sights, low LEO pricing, but high citizen pricing, etc complaints. I think that fucking pissed people off….of yea and accidentally killing girlfriend while dancing. I think glock did a great thing but forcing its competitors to make more reliable pistols. i think alot of peoples frustration with glocks is towards the be all end all crowd who does see the pistol as perfect and simply saying, i get it, but i dont like the way it shoots, it prefer something else, is at times met with wild accusations that not liking glocks is a you problem and indicative of being a shitty shooter. |
|
Originally Posted By mylifemygun: I have carried a Glock for self defense for over 20 years. I liked them for their reliability. Never liked their trigger or grip. They felt like holding a brick. But after holding a CZ P10F and trying a Canik trigger I have sold most of my Glocks! Anyone else dumping Glocks ??? 
|
All politicians are evil, but some politicians are more evil than others.
Who is John Galt?
Who is John Galt?
|
Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. So, three points: 1) Yeah, targets matter more than "feel". 2) But, how naturally a handgun points is a real consideration. 1911 (18 deg) grip angle seems to be very naturally pointing for many. 3) And, grip feel does matter if the gun has mismatched ergonomics with the user that impact performance. And, since they make a lot of different highly ergonomic designs that work well for a lot of users, why would a user pick a Glock if that design does not work well for them? We are living in the golden age of the polymer 9mm pistol with more sizes, choices, and features than ever before. And this isn't just a case where you have one known choice and a bunch of fly-by-night companies. HS Produkt/Springfield have now been around a long time with a good track record, so has the SW M&P, so has the Walther polymer guns, so has the HK VP9, etc. And so has Glock. I think people should choose what works best for them. |
Joined:
Oct 2022
Posts:
144
EE: 0% (0)
IL, USA
|
Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. Agreed. Like trying to convince me the grip tape on a Louisville slugger is bad just hit the ball with the stick. Apparently millions of other people get by just dandy with it. At some point princess and the pea comes to mind. |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
1444
EE: 100% (3)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. The same reason I’m not grabbing a G3 battle rifle when an SR-25 or LMT MWS is on the table is the exact same reason I don’t shoot a Glock in 2026. Mechanical reliability is no longer an excuse for brutal, lazy ergonomics. Modern manufacturing has advanced to the point where "adverse condition reliability" is a baseline metric, not a unique selling point |
|
Originally Posted By NN300BLK: So, three points: 1) Yeah, targets matter more than "feel". 2) But, how naturally a handgun points is a real consideration. 1911 (18 deg) grip angle seems to be very naturally pointing for many. 3) And, grip feel does matter if the gun has mismatched ergonomics with the user that impact performance. And, since they make a lot of different highly ergonomic designs that work well for a lot of users, why would a user pick a Glock if that design does not work well for them? We are living in the golden age of the polymer 9mm pistol with more sizes, choices, and features than ever before. And this isn't just a case where you have one known choice and a bunch of fly-by-night companies. HS Produkt/Springfield have now been around a long time with a good track record, so has the SW M&P, so has the Walther polymer guns, so has the HK VP9, etc. And so has Glock. I think people should choose what works best for them. Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. So, three points: 1) Yeah, targets matter more than "feel". 2) But, how naturally a handgun points is a real consideration. 1911 (18 deg) grip angle seems to be very naturally pointing for many. 3) And, grip feel does matter if the gun has mismatched ergonomics with the user that impact performance. And, since they make a lot of different highly ergonomic designs that work well for a lot of users, why would a user pick a Glock if that design does not work well for them? We are living in the golden age of the polymer 9mm pistol with more sizes, choices, and features than ever before. And this isn't just a case where you have one known choice and a bunch of fly-by-night companies. HS Produkt/Springfield have now been around a long time with a good track record, so has the SW M&P, so has the Walther polymer guns, so has the HK VP9, etc. And so has Glock. I think people should choose what works best for them. “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
1447
EE: 100% (3)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By King_Mud: “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. I am not sure naturally pointing is a stupid concept and most of the segment has moved from a very function over form design philosophy of central Europe of the 70's to a more user friendly interface. nobody that dry fires buys a non glock and comes to the conclusion that oh wow, this points nicely, i dont need to dry fire anymore. its something you do or dont do. its not platformed based. in regards to the point... for me its buying a pistol that in a configuration that i am looking. Glock doesnt make a C4X or carry comp, or really anything comp'd with a decent trigger from the factory. I guess I am not brand captured and if a better tool comes out, i will use it, regardless of who makes it. |
|
Originally Posted By King_Mud: “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. Being uncomfortable isn't an advantage, so I guess you can pretend it doesn't matter. Being comfortable is an advantage which would incline a lot of people to buy something else though. Why would they not? |
|
Originally Posted By AK-12: Being uncomfortable isn't an advantage, so I guess you can pretend it doesn't matter. Being comfortable is an advantage which would incline a lot of people to buy something else though. Why would they not? Originally Posted By AK-12: Originally Posted By King_Mud: “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. Being uncomfortable isn't an advantage, so I guess you can pretend it doesn't matter. Being comfortable is an advantage which would incline a lot of people to buy something else though. Why would they not? It's neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, handfeels simply do not matter. I've picked up pistols like a CZ 75 that felt great to handle at the counter but during shooting make zero real difference as I'm not thinking "Oh this feels so much better. Man, these ergos. That feels so nice in my hand" but just shooting the course and watching how my sights track. Outside of pain like railroad tracks from my old Gen 3 feelings just don't matter. |
|
Originally Posted By King_Mud: It's neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, handfeels simply do not matter. I've picked up pistols like a CZ 75 that felt great to handle at the counter but during shooting make zero real difference as I'm not thinking "Oh this feels so much better. Man, these ergos. That feels so nice in my hand" but just shooting the course and watching how my sights track. Outside of pain like railroad tracks from my old Gen 3 feelings just don't matter. Sounds like you needed more dryfire with the CZ-75. |
|
Originally Posted By AK-12: Sounds like you needed more dryfire with the CZ-75. Originally Posted By AK-12: Originally Posted By King_Mud: It's neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, handfeels simply do not matter. I've picked up pistols like a CZ 75 that felt great to handle at the counter but during shooting make zero real difference as I'm not thinking "Oh this feels so much better. Man, these ergos. That feels so nice in my hand" but just shooting the course and watching how my sights track. Outside of pain like railroad tracks from my old Gen 3 feelings just don't matter. Sounds like you needed more dryfire with the CZ-75.  Maybe. FWIW the Kadet kit is one of the best things ever IMO. |
|
Originally Posted By King_Mud: “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. Originally Posted By King_Mud: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. So, three points: 1) Yeah, targets matter more than "feel". 2) But, how naturally a handgun points is a real consideration. 1911 (18 deg) grip angle seems to be very naturally pointing for many. 3) And, grip feel does matter if the gun has mismatched ergonomics with the user that impact performance. And, since they make a lot of different highly ergonomic designs that work well for a lot of users, why would a user pick a Glock if that design does not work well for them? We are living in the golden age of the polymer 9mm pistol with more sizes, choices, and features than ever before. And this isn't just a case where you have one known choice and a bunch of fly-by-night companies. HS Produkt/Springfield have now been around a long time with a good track record, so has the SW M&P, so has the Walther polymer guns, so has the HK VP9, etc. And so has Glock. I think people should choose what works best for them. “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. Of course someone can train around the Glock ergonomics unless it just doesn’t fit one’s hands. That wasn’t my point. If someone isn’t in the Glock ecosystem, the Glock’s ergonomics give them a good reason to pick one of the literally dozens of other choices that may work better for them without really sacrificing reliability or functional access to accessories. I’m not anti-Glock, I’ve even defended them to a point in this thread. But I do think pre-Gen 6 had less than ideal ergonomics that weren’t competing well with some of the alternatives. The grip angle still isn’t my cup of tea, with me being accustomed to the 1911 grip angle and owning multiple firearms with that grip angle. This is a personal preference. But even with the improvements in Gen 6, I simply don’t see them being better than other pistols’ ergonomics— rather I suspect they’re still playing catch up to an extent, especially in the world of FCU guns with interchangeable grip modules. |
|
Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Of course someone can train around the Glock ergonomics unless it just doesn’t fit one’s hands. That wasn’t my point. If someone isn’t in the Glock ecosystem, the Glock’s ergonomics give them a good reason to pick one of the literally dozens of other choices that may work better for them without really sacrificing reliability or functional access to accessories. I’m not anti-Glock, I’ve even defended them to a point in this thread. But I do think pre-Gen 6 had less than ideal ergonomics that weren’t competing well with some of the alternatives. The grip angle still isn’t my cup of tea, with me being accustomed to the 1911 grip angle and owning multiple firearms with that grip angle. This is a personal preference. But even with the improvements in Gen 6, I simply don’t see them being better than other pistols’ ergonomics— rather I suspect they’re still playing catch up to an extent, especially in the world of FCU guns with interchangeable grip modules. Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By King_Mud: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. So, three points: 1) Yeah, targets matter more than "feel". 2) But, how naturally a handgun points is a real consideration. 1911 (18 deg) grip angle seems to be very naturally pointing for many. 3) And, grip feel does matter if the gun has mismatched ergonomics with the user that impact performance. And, since they make a lot of different highly ergonomic designs that work well for a lot of users, why would a user pick a Glock if that design does not work well for them? We are living in the golden age of the polymer 9mm pistol with more sizes, choices, and features than ever before. And this isn't just a case where you have one known choice and a bunch of fly-by-night companies. HS Produkt/Springfield have now been around a long time with a good track record, so has the SW M&P, so has the Walther polymer guns, so has the HK VP9, etc. And so has Glock. I think people should choose what works best for them. “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. Of course someone can train around the Glock ergonomics unless it just doesn’t fit one’s hands. That wasn’t my point. If someone isn’t in the Glock ecosystem, the Glock’s ergonomics give them a good reason to pick one of the literally dozens of other choices that may work better for them without really sacrificing reliability or functional access to accessories. I’m not anti-Glock, I’ve even defended them to a point in this thread. But I do think pre-Gen 6 had less than ideal ergonomics that weren’t competing well with some of the alternatives. The grip angle still isn’t my cup of tea, with me being accustomed to the 1911 grip angle and owning multiple firearms with that grip angle. This is a personal preference. But even with the improvements in Gen 6, I simply don’t see them being better than other pistols’ ergonomics— rather I suspect they’re still playing catch up to an extent, especially in the world of FCU guns with interchangeable grip modules. If you're in with the PDP, M&P 2.0, CZ P-10, whatever, I don't think it matters and I don't think there's any reason to change. I also think the modules and such are a solution looking for a problem although they are fun to play around with (and neither here nor there). As a tool I think "ergonomics" outside of genuine issues manipulating the controls or a "Grip Zone" that's just grossly over/undersized are overblown as the distinctions disappear when you're shooting. I bought a compact P-09 and was super excited to get it to the range only to realize it shot pretty much the same as a Glock. You mentioned ecosystem and that's why I'm still in Glocks, I have all the stuff and IMO poly pistols are really all the same at the end of the day (except for the P320) and anyone can learn to shoot anything pretty much equally even if handfeelz aren't great because after the beep you don't even notice it. |
|
Originally Posted By King_Mud: If you're in with the PDP, M&P 2.0, CZ P-10, whatever, I don't think it matters and I don't think there's any reason to change. I also think the modules and such are a solution looking for a problem although they are fun to play around with (and neither here nor there). As a tool I think "ergonomics" outside of genuine issues manipulating the controls or a "Grip Zone" that's just grossly over/undersized are overblown as the distinctions disappear when you're shooting. I bought a compact P-09 and was super excited to get it to the range only to realize it shot pretty much the same as a Glock. You mentioned ecosystem and that's why I'm still in Glocks, I have all the stuff and IMO poly pistols are really all the same at the end of the day (except for the P320) and anyone can learn to shoot anything pretty much equally even if handfeelz aren't great because after the beep you don't even notice it. Originally Posted By King_Mud: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By King_Mud: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By MeatGrinder: People crying about grip feel: Man up. Just bought another GLOCK. So, three points: 1) Yeah, targets matter more than "feel". 2) But, how naturally a handgun points is a real consideration. 1911 (18 deg) grip angle seems to be very naturally pointing for many. 3) And, grip feel does matter if the gun has mismatched ergonomics with the user that impact performance. And, since they make a lot of different highly ergonomic designs that work well for a lot of users, why would a user pick a Glock if that design does not work well for them? We are living in the golden age of the polymer 9mm pistol with more sizes, choices, and features than ever before. And this isn't just a case where you have one known choice and a bunch of fly-by-night companies. HS Produkt/Springfield have now been around a long time with a good track record, so has the SW M&P, so has the Walther polymer guns, so has the HK VP9, etc. And so has Glock. I think people should choose what works best for them. “Naturally pointing” is stupid. With a little dryfire you can learn to index anything so having “naturally pointing” as a critical criteria is a giant indicator for “I don’t ever dryfire” and picking a pistol based on that makes zero sense. Handfeels is stupid. If you actually can’t work the pistol that’s one thing but let’s be real, most handfeels people handle it in the shop and decide it's not “ergonomic” because it doesn’t feel like they think it should. When actually shooting I have never noticed handfeels actually improving times or scores. I have noticed pistols that I thought felt nice didn’t track like they should because they squirmed around too much when actually shooting. Most pistols are bought by people that play with it in the shop, take it home, and put it in the safe. It comes out a couple times a year for a stand and shoot at 3 yards at a range and then goes back in the safe. Handfeels are very important here. If you dryfire even once a week anything works and you can learn it/grow accustomed to it. I bought a Gen 3 G19 ages ago to carry instead of a really nice Delta Elite that I was carrying. I didn’t really care for that plastic pistol but it was very practical and I still buy them just for that reason. I don’t really love fondling Glocks but they’ve always worked and the ecosystem is excellent so why change? I actually do like handling a few CZs, M&Ps, and even Sigs more but it’s never translated to a better hitfactor so there’s no point. Of course someone can train around the Glock ergonomics unless it just doesn’t fit one’s hands. That wasn’t my point. If someone isn’t in the Glock ecosystem, the Glock’s ergonomics give them a good reason to pick one of the literally dozens of other choices that may work better for them without really sacrificing reliability or functional access to accessories. I’m not anti-Glock, I’ve even defended them to a point in this thread. But I do think pre-Gen 6 had less than ideal ergonomics that weren’t competing well with some of the alternatives. The grip angle still isn’t my cup of tea, with me being accustomed to the 1911 grip angle and owning multiple firearms with that grip angle. This is a personal preference. But even with the improvements in Gen 6, I simply don’t see them being better than other pistols’ ergonomics— rather I suspect they’re still playing catch up to an extent, especially in the world of FCU guns with interchangeable grip modules. If you're in with the PDP, M&P 2.0, CZ P-10, whatever, I don't think it matters and I don't think there's any reason to change. I also think the modules and such are a solution looking for a problem although they are fun to play around with (and neither here nor there). As a tool I think "ergonomics" outside of genuine issues manipulating the controls or a "Grip Zone" that's just grossly over/undersized are overblown as the distinctions disappear when you're shooting. I bought a compact P-09 and was super excited to get it to the range only to realize it shot pretty much the same as a Glock. You mentioned ecosystem and that's why I'm still in Glocks, I have all the stuff and IMO poly pistols are really all the same at the end of the day (except for the P320) and anyone can learn to shoot anything pretty much equally even if handfeelz aren't great because after the beep you don't even notice it. I agree with the ergonomics point. I've had a couple XDM's over the years and I can shoot that platform really well, but I just never liked the way the grip felt in my hand. I moved my last one on (XDM Elite Compact) mainly because I don't see where a traditional subcompact (and a large one at that) fits in my carry lineup; but the odd grip feel definitely nudged me to move it on rather than just making it a range toy when I decided I didn't want to carry it anymore. I think the grip modules offer more than toy value-- for example the Echelon 4.5f comes with a medium module and the Echelon 4.0c comes with a small. I can shoot both of those guns well, but I was getting a less consistent index on the 4.0c with the small module and it felt a little too small; the medium module fixed that, and I can shoot it better than a 4.5f now for whatever reason. Could I make the small module work? Absolutely. I can shoot micro 9s without trouble. But why settle for less than ideal when the option is available? And, for many women or even just a smaller guy, I can see why the small module would be a really good fit and why Springfield made that the default grip module on the compact. The other cool thing about the grip modules is that if you want a little bit heavier or stiffer grip module, you can buy a metal one and now you have a metal-gripped gun potentially with changeable grip panels, etc. It really allows the end user to tailor a gun to exactly what they want-- even if it really doesn't change split times or targets. The interchangeable backstraps on the Glocks are probably good enough for most users (including myself) with that being said. |
Joined:
Oct 2022
Posts:
147
EE: 0% (0)
IL, USA
|
"naturally pointing" isn't a thing if you are going to practice enough to develop a strong index. Most people have such a poor grip that trying to "naturally" accommodate it is counterproductive. These are the same people that complain about red dots by the way. I could absolutely buy some argument about presentation consistency or how the gun tracks under recoil but that's not what people are saying. They're saying "the gun just needs to fit my current index" which implies that they aren't thinking that their index is going to change with the ergonomics or additional practice that refines that index (it will). |
Member
Joined:
Jul 2024
Posts:
1364
EE: 100% (1)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By armoredman: I cannot give up what I do not have. I was gaga for Glock when I first saw the advertising for them a VERY long time ago, that would be my next and best pistol! Then I held one. It didn't fit my hand right. I can use them - I have qualified Expert or Distinguished Expert with the originally issued Glock 19 and now the Glock 45 for the last 24 years. I can shoot them, I can carry them, I can use them proficiently. That is not a problem. I just don't like them. That's all. Nothing wrong with the gun, I just don't like them. I also am not fond of the Beretta 92 series, 1911 single actions, (unless on a square range), or very large caliber revolvers. This statement will undoubtedly get me pilloried, but truth is truth. I like the CZ grip and have carried a CZ pistol of one flavor or another for decades. I've carried a P-10 variant for 9 years now. And what is on my belt as I type this? Go figure, right? https://i.imgur.com/8jb96Z2.jpg My tastes are odd and eclectic, I don't care. I wouldn't buy a current Glock not because there is anything wrong with them, (I have had three Glocks fail either in my hand or in front of me over the decades, but they were range guns), I just don't like them all that much. Now, having said all that, I do understand that Gen 6 is slightly different? I might handle one just to see if it feels better. Odd and eclectic has no place on a self-defense weapon. But you already knew that. Having to carry and use one has expanded my point of view on a lot of the bro and boomer "carry rotation" bullshit. Literally every gun you listed as models you don't like have enjoyed a sterling reputation decade after decade. But as long as you feel comfortable with that brick on your hip, (owb suprise suprise), that is all that matters. Just because you can, doesn't always mean you should. |