User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:08:29 PM EDT
[#1]
[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=4&t=6621&w=searchPop[/url]
read that |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:11:57 PM EDT
[#2]
also, here is a Springfield Mil-Spec torture test:
[url]www.1911forum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=b531abeedada07afcd695f6f2405f3b8&threadid=55698[/url] 3,300 rounds through it, took a slight nudge to close the slide on round 1,002 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:14:09 PM EDT
[#3]
All I know about the Glock (literally all I know - I've never used one), is that the Danish Army adopted the Glock in the 1990s to replace their former service pistol. Note - the former pistol was the SIG 210, one of the finest (and most expensive) handguns ever made.
So I assume it's pretty damn durable and rugged. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:15:23 PM EDT
[#4]
Glocks, Sigs, Beretta, etc... are all good designs. However- I had a Glock 17 I brought in 1992 that jammed with FMJ after about 1K rounds, even after a trip to the factory and back. Finally sold it and got a Beretta 92 that runs like a champ.
I think if you have the dough, it's a neat addition to have in your collection, but man is frail and fallable, and all mfgrs can make a lemon now and then. I wasn't too kean on having a gun with no safety either, but that's a matter of personal taste. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:17:25 PM EDT
[#5]
Good guns. The ones chambered in .40 S&W seem to have KB issues though.
I dont particularly like Glocks for ergonomic reasons. But that's my only problem with them ( the new G36 .45 single stack is an exception). It's just a matter of personal preference. They're decent guns, $375 is a good price. I'd rather have a Glock than a 1911. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:19:35 PM EDT
[#6]
The Glock is a great pistol in that it is very simple and very reliable.
It's more accurate than 90% of the shooters in the world, even then you can upgrade the barrel etc. Some people like 1911s and other pistols because they feel better, point better, and the triggers feel better. Personal preferance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:24:26 PM EDT
[#7]
[banghead]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:25:01 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Some people like 1911s and other pistols because they feel better, point better, and the triggers feel better. Personal preferance. for me thats it the 1911 just is a great shooter but I kinda want a beater pistol something I wont care about if I drop it or get wet. The other day it was raining and I was putting my jacket over my 1911! plus I won't do my garage gunsmithing to try and make it better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:29:43 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Quoted: Some people like 1911s and other pistols because they feel better, point better, and the triggers feel better. Personal preferance. for me thats it the 1911 just is a great shooter but I kinda want a beater pistol something I wont care about if I drop it or get wet. The other day it was raining and I was putting my jacket over my 1911! plus I won't do my garage gunsmithing to try and make it better. The range I go to has got to be the 8th wonder of the world, in that it is ALWAYS RAINING when I go. Everything gets wet, range bags, car, clothes, guns, ammo boxes, etc. .. but those puddles are pretty cool to shoot at [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:31:23 PM EDT
[#10]
I prefer the RG.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:33:56 PM EDT
[#11]
Yeah awesome gun! It would have been adopted by the US if the handgun trials had been held a few years later than they were. If your curious always look to law enforcement and what they choose as their tools. They run torture tests ,accuracy tests, Dropping tests etc. They have chosen 75% of the time the Glock. Only much more expensive models are chosen by the "Richer" depts who can afford it. Like the H&K Usp, Sig 220 etc. Definatly a gun everyone should own AND USE. But it does have it's weak points. Look up the glock recall because of rail splitting with the higher power cartriges. But look at it this way, Almost all guns produced after 1988 are knock offs of the "plastic", Safe-action,tennifered utilitarian look of the glock. This hoopla about the springfield XD-9 I don't know, but it looks so much like the glock why bother?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:35:59 PM EDT
[#12]
The Glock 17 is very durable. The 40SW models and the Glock 19 less so.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 12:45:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: All I know about the Glock (literally all I know - I've never used one), is that the Danish Army adopted the Glock in the 1990s to replace their former service pistol. Note - the former pistol was the SIG 210, one of the finest (and most expensive) handguns ever made. So I assume it's pretty damn durable and rugged. The Sig210-2 is not a service pistol, but a target. I've read that pistol is available in the US for about $2,100. The Glock 17 is super reliable. My old now-closed in door range Santa Anita Firing Range, Monrovia, CAlif(10 miles east of L.A.) had on that went 500,000 rounds before cracking the slide, and when they closed, it was upto 750,000 rounds. One of the guys says that you can fling the Glocks across the concrete floor, run over and pick it up and shoot it. You can't do that with a 1911 because you will probably crack the slide or frame. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 1:09:08 PM EDT
[#14]
Glocks are very tough.
They are very reliable, decently accurate, and are generally hold a lot of rounds. That said, I don't particularly like them. I just prefer 1911s. I can't say which is better for service, but personally I'd take the 1911. I agree with the idea of wanting a beater pistol, I plan on buying a G17 when I'm older. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 1:31:20 PM EDT
[#15]
I loved my Glock 26 when I had it. Unfortunately it was too wide for carry purposes. I am in the market for a good CCW weapon that is light (under 20oz) but not too wide. Kel-Tec has spotty reliability, Kahr are way too $$$, and I'd prefer .380 or 9mm).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 1:36:13 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Quoted: All I know about the Glock (literally all I know - I've never used one), is that the Danish Army adopted the Glock in the 1990s to replace their former service pistol. Note - the former pistol was the SIG 210, one of the finest (and most expensive) handguns ever made. So I assume it's pretty damn durable and rugged. The Sig210-2 is not a service pistol, but a target. I've read that pistol is available in the US for about $2,100. Not sure how to (mis)understand that statement, or what exactly you mean. It clearly WAS a service pistol, because it was issued to all officers in the Danish Army for decades (in fact, you were REQUIRED to keep it at your home), so it definitely was used as a service pistol. When I think of a "target pistol" I think of single-shot .22lr pistol, or at least adjsutable sights - the SIG 210 is a rugged, super-reliable 9mm handgun that just happens to be really accurate. I'd say it makes a pretty decent service pistol. Does it make a sensible service pistol? HELL NO. I don't know what the hell the Danish Army was thinking when they adopted it (in the early 50s or something, if I recall correctly), because they could have spent that money a LOT better. So I'm not even sure if we disagree or not - but at least it is no longer used as a service pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 1:38:39 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: I loved my Glock 26 when I had it. Unfortunately it was too wide for carry purposes. I am in the market for a good CCW weapon that is light (under 20oz) but not too wide. Kel-Tec has spotty reliability, Kahr are way too $$$, and I'd prefer .380 or 9mm). snubby .38 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 1:53:21 PM EDT
[#18]
Yavapai Firearms Academy has a Glock 17 with 120,000 documented rounds through it. All that has been replaced are the springs and the plastic channel liner for the striker.
A 1911 won't do that! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 1:55:41 PM EDT
[#19]
[b]KaBoom![/b]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 2:36:49 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: [b]KaBoom![/b] Exactly, I used to see 1911s kaboom all the time back in my IPSC days. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 3:04:06 PM EDT
[#21]
you could get yourself a case of 'glock leg' if'n you use one of those!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 7:56:30 PM EDT
[#22]
Glock vs 1911 [rolleyes] [beathorse]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 8:33:54 PM EDT
[#23]
I have a 2nd gen Glock 17 with 67K and a 2nd Gen 19 with 28K+ and have never had a single problem with either. I'm working on 10K plus out of a Gen 3 17.
I have a former team mate that has 75K+ through one of the company 17's and it's still going strong. Other than the Trijicon sights dimming, finish wearing on high points and some dings in the frame from mag insertions they have been 100%. And that's with everything from new Federal Ammo to Egyptian military ammo of questionable quality. Don't let the KB gang fool you. It's limited to the .40 and .45 models either using reloads or the rare rotten egg .40 that came out a year or so ago.....even problems with these E series guns were rare. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 8:45:57 PM EDT
[#24]
Sauer. SIG Sauer.
That solves your problems.[:D] XxX - Diehard 1911/SIG Fan ( Likes Glocks on Tuesdays ) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2004 8:59:19 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: Yeah awesome gun! It would have been adopted by the US if the handgun trials had been held a few years later than they were. Mak762-The Glock 17 is what you're looking for, several have been documented to last over 100,000+ rounds. My two beefs would be 1-the stock sights are cheap plastic junk, I have dented them by dropping the pistol on a wood floor & 2-Some Glocks were manufactured with frame rails that were out of spec, you'd have to make sure any Glock you buy was not one of the ones effected or the rails could break, and despite Glock's claims to the contrary I think that could lead to the pistol ceasing to work. Glock not only made these pistols wrong, but then tried to hush hush it and, even worse, I believe they would have replaced LEO guns and not the civilian ones. For that reason I don't like Glock, however I choose guns based on rational, rather than emotional reasons. If you're worried about the reliability problems your 1911 has had, the newer ones do seem to be less problematic, but in an absolute sense a Glock is more likely to be more reliable. I wouldn't worry about exposing your 1911 to the rain, it's not some fancy target pistol. Soldiers have slogged through swamps, mud, beach landings, sandstorms and just about everything else for almost a 100 years with them and they were counted not only counted on to reliably go bang (well at least with FMJ [;)]) but they probably had finishes that were not as good as the one on your pistol. There is nothing wrong with having wear and dings on your pistol, anyone carrying and practicing with their pistol consistently will. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
