geez, you're so wrong.
Originally Posted by kenjihara
first of all you don't have to get DA/SA if you buy an HK.
second, Hk's CS is fine...try to call them instead of emailing them.
3rd; I can tell you are a die-hard glock fan since you say the HK mags and the HK frames feel like junk...really...it's the opposite; glock mags and frames feel like junk.
4th; imho HK's conceal better then glocks...especially if you compare fullsize to fullsize & they aren't as slippery in wet weather as glocks.
5th; HK IS the better gun! go to glocktalk...glocks break all the time...HK's break rarely & they don't come with plastic sights.
Anyway; enjoy your glock!
...yeah, and you enjoy your H&K. My Glock carries very nicely, in part due to the fact that it's comfortably padded by the extra $300 I didn't spend on an H&K.
Originally Posted by mw1311
Both our statements are basically opinions, so I'll just explain mine in detail rather than just saying 'no, you're so wrong!'.
I understand that there are umpteen versions of the HK trigger system... of the ones I tried, none of them wowed me. If I was going to get a pistol with an external hammer like the USP, I'd probably go for traditional double / single. They're straightforward and shootable. If I were going to do that, though, I'd get a Sig instead, because their guns shoot so smoothly and the trigger feels right. I thought the trigger on my Bulgarian Makarov was at least as good as the trigger on some USP's I've shot, and the double action trigger was better.
I've known a few people who had HK pistols, my impression of their customer service is based on their experiences. They don't care.
3rdly, for those keeping track, please pick up a Glock and an HK again. I don't like the feel of the polymer that HK uses; it just feels thin in the wrong places. The HK felt clunky when I shot it; not like a Ruger, but still clunky. The controls on a USP feel like they came out of a '91 Toyota Tercel; they feel like crummy plastic.
As for the magazines, it could be argued that the polymer mags have an advantage over the metal ones in that they're pretty much impossible to dent. I've seen the polymer mags that some of the USPs come with, and they felt like the bad aftermarket mags for Glocks you used to see ten years ago; they are whippy, thin, crummy things. Like something that would come with an Airsoft. Current Glock mags are pretty Tonka-tough; I never have problems with mine. I guess the metal HK mags I saw were fine, except that for the price you could buy two or three Glock mags, and for that price they just weren't in any way better.
Want a holster? If you carry a Glock, everyone who makes holsters makes one or more for the Glock, in every conceivable configuration. There are lots of them, so prices are good. Same with other accessories.
I like to carry the Glock 19 or 23. These pistols are at a pretty ideal shootability / capacity / concealability ratio, even for a smaller guy like me. The USP compact is probably fine... It's nice being able to use Glock 22 mags as a reload for my Glock 23, and Glock 17 or 18 mags for my Glock 19... As for the 'slipperiness' issue... don't know what you're talking about. Never had a problem holding onto mine.
5th(ish)... How is HK a 'better' gun again? Why are the dovetails so deep in their frame, by the way? I've seen HK slides that cracked at the rear dovetail cut; wtf is that about? Is that due to those awesome metal sights? Why is it that metal sights are better, by the way, because I've been hitting fine with my substandard plastic ones. I've got one set of meprolight (metal) sights on one pistol and the plastic adjustable sights on the other... the adjustment feature has come in handy, is easy to use, and is no bigger than most combat sights. Pretty good for junky plastic sights, I guess. Especially on a pistol that cost me $430 out the door, brand new. The Meprolight sights were installed for me by Glock a few years ago for $55, shipped (those were the days...) Glock pistols have fewer moving parts and are just simpler machines. Mine always work.
I've had one problem with my Glocks; the first one I bought used to stovepipe when it was new. I sent it to them, they lightly polished the feed ramp, and it never did it again. Since then, smooth sailing. There are going to be more stories about Glocks; there are just more Glocks out there than anything else.
And at the risk of being labelled a 'follower', I like Glocks. This isn't merely due to the fact that I think HKs are too spendy; I just didn't like them, price be damned. There are a lot of shooters who've jumped ship on Glock because 'everyone has a Glock', or because someone told them the triggers were no good. Yeah, they're different, but it's not insurmountable. It shouldn't be anything that 200 rounds and a buddy looking over your shoulder can't cure. You can buy a lot of extra practice ammo for $300.
I like the simplicity, the straightforward manual of arms, the subtle streamlined aesthetic, and the practicality of Glock. You didn't specify, but I assume that you prefer the perceived 'shootability' and the tech appeal of HK. I like a nice light single action trigger too, but not when it comes with a ridiculous double action trigger; the HK trigger didn't do it for me. For that set-up, I prefer Sig. I've seen the LEM trigger... isn't that pretty much their equivalent of a Glock safe-action trigger? I mean, it's double action, only lighter? Like, pre-cocked lighter, right?
So, that's why I like the Glock better, just my experiences and impressions, not trying to bag on you. Although I think HKs probably comes with a little elitist-factor on them. And yeah, they look cool. Glocks are a little bit boring for some; boringly reliable, and with a subtle, plain shape. Still, if I could only keep one pistol, it'd be one of my Glocks.
I stated several times on this and other forums how much more expensive my P2000 w/nite sites was compared to a glock 23 w/ nite sites... P2000 $640, G23 $530. So maybe you understand that I don't feel like I've been ripped off. Dollar for dollar, Hk is the better gun. Thank your local dealer if you can't find cheap nib HK's. As for the polymer...I guess that's in the eye of the beholder, to me the glock polymer feels cheap. Glock are decent entry-level guns.
When was the last time gaston designed a new gun? In the 80's? that's 1 reason HK's are a bit more expensive but worth it.
In the end I'm happy you own a glock, actually I'm happy you own a gun....doesn't matter to me which one. I'm just sick of the "glock perfection" BS. There are quite a few guns that are better then glocks. IMHO the Finish on the slide is the only thing Gaston perfected on glocks.
It's all about what one prefers, how the person can shoot it & how reliable it is.
So, enjoy your Glock...I'll enjoy my HK & Shipwreck enjoys his P99...
Originally Posted by kenjihara
I disagree with most of that. It is much easier to come by holsters and accessories with Glock, though there are plenty for HK if you know where to look. The HK mags are more expensive, but that is just an initial investment. They are still in the ballpark of reasonable. I prefer HK's trigger to Glock. I don't keep my guns on DA. They are on SA with safety on, C&L. So that is not an issue. I don't like Glock's mushy trigger.
HK customer service use to suck in the past but they are very good now. Everyone that has used them on HK pro and other forums say good things about them. The part about Glock having fewer moving parts, thus less to go wrong is nice in theory. It seems Glock uses more lower quality parts that tend to break often. Just look at the Glocking section on GT. Personally I have not been impressed with all the breakages I have seen. I have found HK mags to be very reliable despite their feel. Glock's are very good as well.
The part about the frame makes me laugh. To me the HK's frame feels much better quality then Glock. I was also told it uses a better plastic (Don't know about that.) One thing I do know is that you don't see any HK's with the end of the frame warped up towards the slide, like on many Glocks. The HK in .45 is slimmer then the Glock in .45 (though HK is taller). I can't speak for the other calibers. To add to the quality, all HK's were designed for the calibers they shoot. They were not just a chop job like on other guns.
Another reason I choose HK is that it has a more tradition grip angle. I hate that damn hump on Glocks. There is no point to it. The HK line are also more accurate than Glock, yet just as reliable. This is why I choose HK over Glock
Last edited by -gunut-; 03-08-2007 at 04:48 PM.
Glocks rule and guess what? So does HK.
Sounds good to me
Originally Posted by spacedoggy
Here we go...
C'mon guys. Anytime there is a question between "Gun A" vs a Glock, you'd think there was a holy war going on. There is always a Glock owner that gets excited - ESPECIALLY on Glocktalk.
Nothing wrong with Glocks. But, I prefer, personally, many guns to a Glock. The P99 and HK's being among them.
I think the HK is made better. And, the trigger is a lot better - specially the SA trigger (U can carry a USP/USPc cocked and locked so U need not worry about the DA pull)
I'm glad to hear that their customer service has improved. That's encouraging.
Originally Posted by -gunut-
Originally Posted by kenjihara
It is...though I hope I never have to use it!
I had to use the HK CS once. When I bought my P2000SK it didn't come with a extra backstrap, propably it got lost at the gun show. I called HK & the nice guy on the other end of the line told me he'd send one in my direction. 3 days later it was in my mailbox.
Originally Posted by -gunut-
This is a great forum. On a topic that is as potentially fiery as this the disagreements were very gentlemanly. Good thing no one dissed a P99....
You really cant go wrong with a Glock 9mm. But if you can afford it I'd go with the HK.
You are either HK over Glock, or Ford over Chevy, or Pepsi over Coke. It is a constant battle, but every Glock owner I have met said they have a Glock because they could not afford an HK. It is the poor mans HK for lack of a better term. Not that you have to be rich to own one, but that you may be a little more frugal so you would settle for the cheaper weapon. I feel like you always get what you pay for.
I have shot many Glocks but I always go back to my HK and it was the duty weapon of choice for me. It to me has a better feel. The Compact versions are perfectly balanced. I can take my HK USP compact .40 and stand it up on the handle (pic to follow). Remember: "In a world of compromise, some don't."
As far as customer service goes, I had a friend buy an HK after shooting mine and after having it for a while wrote a nice email telling how much he appreciated the reliability and overall greatness of the gun. About a week after writing he received a package containing a H&K long sleeve T-shirt and a hat thanking him for the nice email. I have no personal story to tell you about H&K's customer service because in 9 years of owning mine I have never had to call them. In the past I shot more then the average person having to qualify twice a year as well as "fun" trigger time and training. I have dropped it, thrown it and slid it on the ground more times then I care to remember and it has never failed me. But that is just my experience with the HK. Take from it what you will.
Last edited by FallGuy; 03-12-2007 at 02:58 PM.
Search tags for this page
glock 17 9mm two tone
glock 17 or hk usp
glock 17 vs hk usp
glock 17 vs hk usp 40
glock 17 vs usp
hk usp 9mm vs glock 17
hk usp compact or glock
hk usp vs glock 17
two tone glock 17
usp or glock 17
usp vs glock 17
whats better a glock 17 or a kh usp
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» Springfield Armory
» HGF Sponsors