Thread: Anyone bought 1 of these yet?

Metal Glock???

Actually, I have heard of them. It's a cool concept.

They're even uglier than usual. But doesn't that sort of defeat the whole purpose of getting a Glock anyway?

Hmmmm, the new improved all around better ALUMAGLOCK...............
I think ruger beat em to it tho........

Supposedly, it fixes the grip angle and brings it more inline with the standard angle on most guns. I think it is kinda interesting. I wouldn't mind shooting 1 to see what I though. U get the low bore axis in a metal gun. Wouldn't buy 1 w/o trying it - but it is "interesting." Glock purists are turning over in the grave or screaming bloody murder... but, oh well..

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Supposedly, it fixes the grip angle and brings it more inline with the standard angle on most guns. I think it is kinda interesting. I wouldn't mind shooting 1 to see what I though. U get the low bore axis in a metal gun. Wouldn't buy 1 w/o trying it - but it is "interesting." Glock purists are turning over in the grave or screaming bloody murder... but, oh well..

Not this Glock fan. You can now build a "Glock" without any Glock parts, pretty funny, like a 1911.

You've been able to get a different grip angle on Glock for years with the various grip reductions out there.

My understanding is that the steel frames are outselling the aluminum ones by about 10-1. This means the majority of these are going to competition shooters (IDPA, no doubt) rather than serious users. A steel Glock in 9mm would likely kick about like a .22.

Well, the upper is still Glock. I am rather surprised they were able to do this w/o a patent disbute -as the receiver IS the gun here - any it works with the original Glock upper.

As I said before, I might like one - I'll bet it would be very nice. But, I'd have to try one out 1st. I'm not a big enough Glock fanatic to just buy one on my own first.

As for grip angle, I don't like the grip angle on very many automatic pistols. To my mind, the ideal grip angle is closer to that of the classic Luger pistol, or my Colt Woodsman, or a Ruger Mark II. If I just look at something with my Woodsman in my hand, the weapon is pointed at it. My G23 just doesn't point as well.

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Well, the upper is still Glock. I am rather surprised they were able to do this w/o a patent disbute -as the receiver IS the gun here - any it works with the original Glock upper.

You can buy a "Glock" slide from Caspian Arms, springs from Wolff, and all the internals from various aftermarket companies. Presto, a Glock with no Glock parts!

It's the next kit gun, after the 1911 and the AR15.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham at Galco

You can buy a "Glock" slide from Caspian Arms, springs from Wolff, and all the internals from various aftermarket companies. Presto, a Glock with no Glock parts!

It's the next kit gun, after the 1911 and the AR15.

Cool! An American Glock. That may just warrant me building one.

Looking pricy though. $489 for just the slide and frame. But you also have to consider that it's a genuine custom.

Quit putting ideas in my head.

Can U get EVERY single part w/o going to Glock? I don't think U could get EVERY part.

1911 is in the public now - anyone can build them. But w/ Glock still being pateneted, I was just surprised to see it, since the received IS the weapon... I realize U can buy slides and barrels and such already...

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Can U get EVERY single part w/o going to Glock? I don't think U could get EVERY part.

1911 is in the public now - anyone can build them. But w/ Glock still being pateneted, I was just surprised to see it, since the received IS the weapon... I realize U can buy slides and barrels and such already...

But the metal frame is, by its very definition, NOT the same as the patented Glock part, since it is different in shape and weight and made of a different material.

If Galco makes a leather holster that's shaped differently from a patented kydex Blade-Tech holster, even if they fit the same gun, obviously no patent has been infringed.

I think you can replace every part on a Glock with "race gun" parts. The gun only has 33 parts. I'll leave it to a gamer to try, though.

....don't see the point....monumental waste of time an effort

Unless the metal frame provides substantial material strength advantages over the original polymer, I don't see the point!!

There could be obvious disadvantages concerning corrosion of the metal frame in hostile environments. This was one of Clock's original selling points!!

It would probably have even less recoil, due to the metal frame. I'd like to try one just to see what it was like - but I wouldn't buy one w/o a try at shooting one. If I liked it, then it might be cool to throw my G34 upper on it.

I've always preferred the original 80's style straight framed Glocks to the newer 'ergonomic' frames with the finger and thumb grooves. It looks like this can be used as a substitute now. Pretty neat; good find.

Originally Posted by Dustoff '68

....don't see the point....monumental waste of time an effort

Geeze Grandpa! Get back in the coffin!



Looks neat. I would love to give it a try!

With all of the torture tests performed on Glocks, I don't think strength of the polymer frame is an issue. The only advantage in my view would be less perceived recoil due to the increase in frame weight. Another thought is that some shooters just like the feel of metal frames as opposed to polymer.

Originally Posted by martial_field

With all of the torture tests performed on Glocks, I don't think strength of the polymer frame is an issue. The only advantage in my view would be less perceived recoil due to the increase in frame weight. Another thought is that some shooters just like the feel of metal frames as opposed to polymer.

I think they are selling something like 10 steel frames for every aluminum frame, so people are clearly buying them to decrease recoil. Basically, competition guns versus carry guns. I think the aluminum frames may appeal to people who don't like the Glock grip shape/angle - it feels more like a Glock with a grip reduction.

I dont know why they wouldn't offer one in .45acp! '

I got excited when I read about these ccf raceframes in the Oct 07 issue of American Handguner since I've been considering either a kimber 1911 or a Glock 21(and then a 1911 sometime after). I was planning on getting the Caspian 1911 style SS slide and when I read of these I got the idea of building a ss Glock 1911!!! I can still do so, but not in .45acp which ideally is what a 1911 should be. I'd be happy with a Casipan slide on my 21 with a grip angle reduction I guess..

I read about these too. Looks Intresting. I would like to try one out. I'd love one in a single stack.

I Personally Have A Stainless Steel Ccfraceframe On My G34 And It Is Bar None The Best Thing I Ever Did. I Absolutely Love It, Just Got Off The Phone With Larry Today He Is A Great Informative Guy To Deal With.

I Can Attest That My Groups Shrunk Right From The Get Go At 25 Yards Buy 3 Times And I Hold Alot Steadier Because Of The Weight.

I Would Not Recommend The Stainless Frame For Carry Maybe The Aluminum Would Be Better. U Can Change Backstraps From Standard Glock That It Comes With Or U Can Get A 1911 Style Backstrap If Thats The Feel U Want.

Definitley Worth Tryin Guys Im Tellin Ya I Love Mine......

JACO126, any chance we could see a picture of your G34? I'd like to try the stainless frame, sounds like a pretty nice gun for the range.

they are all for glocks. i never will buy one.i really cant see buying a new frame for any of my guns.

Ship just read a posting I think over at GT, on it one guy has a couple of photos of one he built up with it. I would like to try one of the "TI" frames when they come out, with the 1911 back strap, but I don't carry glocks so kind of a moot point.