Printable View
I agree with your statement. And by your " on duty " comment I assume you are a police officer. If so thank you for your service. But as far as being a civilian and a well rounded shooter in can be challenge. We can't afford to go shooting as much and again I'm assuming your precinct gives you ammo and has its own range. Although deversifying the guns we shoot is a great strategy. We are more then able to be proficient in the weapons we own.
Thank you,but technically I wasn't your normal beat cop.Here in Podunk where I live I was in the Posse,or Auxillary.Basically I had all normal powers of your patrol officer,but it was wise to let one of them do an arrest.The Academy training was about 60hrs shy of full standards,most of that was the legal and takedown sections.I thought about doing the remainder of the class later but the hit in pay wasn't cool.That's compared to my normal job,we didn't get paid unless someone hired us for security,it was all volunteer work to help out the comunity.
We basically had to provide our own weapon,I carried a Smith 586 and when we did the auto transition they had a Beretta 92 in the gun room,so I got that and a buddy grabbed a 5904,most of the others bought their own because there was some junk and non approved calibers in there.They supplied carry ammo and reloads for qualifying twice a year but that was it,our personal shooting ammo was on us.I was with them for about 8 years and had to resign,my time was getting too scarce to continue as Captain but I got roped into a DUI working on the other coast with a friend-I already told my Commander I was going to resign and was waiting for him to have a replacement set up.Poor timing but it helped a little in the DUI case-that's a long story.
I understand what you mean about the 'civillian' thing,ammo sure isn't cheap now.Back then,late 80's and 90's,I started reloading because the local range ran combat matches among others,but not IPSC sanctioned.The rules were based on IPSC and alot of IPSC shooters came here,but there was alot of emphasis on tactics.I think this is around the time Bill Wilson started IDPA,but we were doing it before it took off.Reloading really helped,I could make a box of 45s for 3$ then.I shot that most,but also ran a 9 and did revolver and shotgun class.I got to shoot alot,but it was because of reloading,women can be expensive,but throw in a few kids and there's a sucking sound every time you grab your wallet.
Rambling again,take care man.
My Glock and millions of others worked just fine right out of the box. Glock not charging me for expensive sights I won't like and will change anyway is fine with me. Are all your guns 100% stock? And for the downloading issue, here is another reason I posted in another thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M1911A1
It has been my experience that the weapons I've fired that use double stack mags have springs that are fully compressed when fully loaded. When trying to insert a fully loaded mag when the slide or bolt is forward, the top round in the mag must be pushed down by the slide/bolt for the mag to be inserted. If the spring is fully compressed the extra space is made by the staggered rounds being pushed outboard. This made me have to hit the bottom of the mag to get it to lock in. The sides of the mag bulge causing the mag to want to stay in place even if the mag release is pressed. I have even seen m16 mags split at the seem where they are spot welded together due the performing repeated combat reloads with fully loaded mags (inserting fresh mag while round is still in chamber meaning bolt is forward). Because my carry piece has plastic double stack mags and plastic seems to have memory, I download them by 1. There are reasons other than 'spring fatigue' to consider downloading certain mags.
One Glock, two magazines and 29 rounds are plenty for me to be carrying daily.
I don't totally buy that.Some mags do bind but my HK USP,Beretta 92 and Smith 5900 series don't.All have at least 1/2 a round worth of play for a tactical reload.If you beat on any mag it will get ruined,dropping them on hard surfaces really kills them and watched alot go that way.I've seen very few split seams on mags,the ones I have seen were from dropping on hard ground during reloads.Overloaded pressure has caused spread lips in my experience,or looseniong baseplate joints.
Glock's mag spreading was intentional from the start,the guns were of the KISS approach for operation.I've seen newbies accidentally drop mags quite a few times,Glock did this so your average non-gunner wouldn't tie up the gun should they hit the release accidentally.The reasoning is sound,but the US bitched about it and Glock came out with drop free magazines.Whether they still do or not I don't know,we're talking 20 some years ago.I understand the KISS approach,because idiots are handed guns in the military and LE all the time.What I think is counterproductive to the KISS approach is putting the safety in the trigger,you have an idiot holding a gun and pulling the trigger overrides the safety?Pure genious there.These guns were designed for 'general masses',but they require highly proficient gun handling abilities to be as safe as they can be,kind of an oxymoron going on with the intent and the design.
My gen 3 G19 has no play with all 15 in the mag. The m16 mags I was issued had no play with all 30 in the mag. I don't remember about the m9's. I'm not sure what you don't buy, but what I posted was what I have experienced first hand. The information surely isn't universal, but it applies with certain equipment.
I guess I'm a fence rider when it comes to Glocks. I've owned/tried almost all of the models at one time or another but for reasons not worth repeating never quite warmed to them in total. Having said that I can't dispute their many positive attributes either aside from what has been the Gen4 clusterpuck. In my opinion the real unquestionable star in the Glock line up remains the mid sized G19/G23 model. Even a devout Glock hater (which I am not) has got to admit that it is pretty hard to beat for a balance of capacity, power, weight, size, thickness, bore axis, barrel length, etc. My own prefered favorites the USPc and P2000 HK's fall way short on paper in comparison as they are heavier, thicker, shorter barrels and have less capacity. Damned annoying but no less true. Gaston was clearly using their noggin when they came up with this one and I would contend it still remains unequaled in all those "balance oreinted" catagories. However, what might make the most sense on paper reviewing the stats and specs doesn't translate into mass acceptance or we'd all be toting G19's.
Regarding the "to top off or not to top off a magazine" issue my 2 cents is that this is a design flaw or perhaps a more PC explanation would be a manufacturers oversight. As Rex stated above there should be enough tolerance built into a properly set up magazine to allow for full loading and the then logical insertion of the full magazine into the mag well. Period. Short loading by one round certainly serves as a work around solution but frankly if I didn't care about capacity I'd be toting a Colt Python. To be fair I don't recall having this problem with the Glocks that I have owned (G21, G20, G19, G22, G23, G17, G27, G26, G36, G30) but I can vividly recall some other brands/models where this issue did stand out. Not really a game changer but annoying. YMMV
I suppose I'm not the greatest at wording things,I believe your experiences,and there is truth to the doublestack mags,but it's not alll inclusive in my eyes.As you said,it applies to certain things.
I don't totally recall the AR mags because I haven't shot it in years.I have close to 20 of the 30 rounders but they are all older GI contract mag.They are from the good contractors,but they are 80s at the newest.I have 2 clipped together that will work with a full 30 rounds,but most are tight as you said.Right now they are all burried except a Sanchez I keep in it but I don't think they are the same make.I was told to keep the old ones downloaded to 28,and it just stuck,with the exception of the 2 clipped together for some of the off the wall matches we used to have.
Didn't mean any offense,things sometimes come out differently than I mean.Poor articulation skills I'd say.
I don't have a problem with Glocks. They make great CC weapons as they are reliable, accurate, easy to maintain, fun to modify and, very importantly, easy to replace when the cops confiscate it after a good SD shot.
It's a tool, no more, no less.
I appreciate the civility guys. I don't believe the Glock is the end all-be all for everyone, but it certainly works for me. My G19 isn't perfect, but it's minor issues were easily corrected and the pro's definately outweighed the con's by far. Because I can't at the moment invest in several sidearms, the G19 is the best one handgun to own for my purposes. Hopefully I will be able to add to my collection in the future, but even then the G19 will go nowhere. I trust it and love it. :smt023
Tueful,I didn't even know you posted until I saw this was still runing.I agree on the 19 for general balance,it's right there but that grip angle!Just me,but I never dreamed that with that grip angle the frame flex would be so pronounced-drove me nuts.
My last post was for SMann for any future readers.So,believe it or not man,you have a good gun and if it proved itself spot on you are well taken care of.I can't believe I said that :smt104
Easy has a great point though,if some douche does push you where you shouldn't have to,I'd rather tie up something that cost 1/2 as much as what I normally carry.
Ditto!Quote:
Originally Posted by DWARREN123
I don't see where they are any better than S&W, Beretta, Sig Sauer, etc. I own a 26. For me it is a nice shooting gun, but I prefer my Beretta PX4 as the grip is more comfortable. My wife shot the 26 and didn't like it
Okay so you just described my Sigs and my H&K perfectly -- as well as many other top tier handguns.Quote:
Originally Posted by DWARREN123
Don't own a Glock and won't own a Glock.
WHY? Because I find them very uncomfortable to hold and shoot and as a result do not shoot very well with them.
To each his own.
Do not understand why the Glockenspeilers feel that the Glock is the next best thing to cartridge ammo. It isn't.
Its a very fine weapon and if it works for you then great -- but just because it works for you doesn't make it work for anybody else.
The BEST weapon in the world is the ONE that works best for you!
I'm with you,nobody has given me a good reason to like them in 26 years.I find there are more flaws in the design than good points.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tip
Best bang for your buck in my opinion. I don't think they look bad either. Never a malfunction with mine.
MapQuote:
Originally Posted by Map9690
Glock introduced the poly gun and it was ground breaking.
Question?
What contribution has Glock made recently?
I own a M&P shield single stack poly gun which is molded to fit my hand like a glove.
My Shield is thin accurate 100% reliable with all ammo.
Map, it is my opinion Glock introduced one heck of a gun but failed to keep up with the competition with research and development.
Poly guns Like M&P will continue to cut into Glock's market share if they don't start getting innovative.
Russ
Um, really?Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
I was going to say that.The reality is the groundbreaking happened 15 years before the Glock.Other than that rediculous little post in the middle of the trigger,nothing about the gun is groundbreaking,innovative,perfection,whatever.All of this comes from marketing propaganda that people believed without question or knowledge.There was already a plastic gun,a poly bore gun,a striker fired gun,a funky grip angle gun,doublestack mags,guns that sights broke,guns that had crappy triggers,guns that blew up,guns that wiped primers,etc,etc.
The only thing I see Glock did nobody else I know did was get more people hit by negligent discharges in such a short time period.The gun was designed for the average Joe,read as gun ignorant people.How did that work out?The need for the NY trigger,and the leg toll still increases years later.As I said before,these guns are for the opposite type of people they were designed for,you wouldn't hand a newbie a GI 1911 condition 0 would you?And yes,the old GI guns could have nasty 7lb or more triggers,so don't blow smoke up my butt about it not being comparable,I've shot Glocks and that little extra pull length is insignificant to a nasty,gritty,sloppy GI trigger.
ok, after all these posts, who's changed their mind about Glocks... one way or the other....? Nobody? I really didn't think so.
This poster said it best with this one sentence. Arguing firearms' biases and opinions is rather ridiculous folks, for the reason this poster stated in the above quote. It's kinda like arguing which underpants are the best or which beer is the best or other similar totally subjective positions... because that's pretty much what it all boils down to; subjective opinions. Granted there are a few absolutes, but those revolve around quality and reliability. Once you have satisfied those fundamental issues, then everything else is personal opinion and that means subjectivity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tip
To say that the Glock is not as good as, say, the Beretta 92 series is pure hogwash. The "not as good" part would be solely based upon personal preference, not issues of quality and reliability. And that is fine and as it should be. The Glock is a proven design but then again, so are a host of other serious combat defensive handguns. The point is, taking a strongly biased position and arguing from that stance is a bit childish, don't you think? Most gun people I know have a variety of guns in their collections because they appreciate the features and values of different firearms. I fall into this category and enjoy what I have accumulated over the years. We should celebrate the fact that we have these choices and take advantage of them... not get worked up over some silly and biased ideas about this gun versus that one.
The "Only-est" Hand Gun That's The "Best-est" "R" One that Shoots Well With Bullets The Chose is Yours ! "Luv My Gram er" L.O.L.
SouthernBoy,I agree with the majority of what you say.I've heard this Glock perfection,best,what-have-you for over 20 years,and had them shoved in my face by cultists.I got sick of it a few years ago and at times I just can't ignore it.I love 1911s and think they are one of the nicest pistols in existance,and know how to make them work if the factory can't.I don't go around doing this crap,buy and use what you want and move on if it doesn't work out for you,no big deal really.If you ask for my opinion,you'll get it,but don't expect it to agree with yours or get your panties in a wad.It's kind of like the church solicitors knocking on your door weekend afternoons or the liberal media spewing their crap over and over,at some point you just had enough and have to say something.I know,ignore it,but sometimes something needs to be said to vent frustration.
I don't really think Glock is better than any other handgun but they aren't worse either. Its mostly matter of opinion. I own and XD and love it. I have put about 1500 rounds down range without a problem and shoot decent with it. Now with that being said I shot a Glock 19 the other day and I was amazed. My grouping were better and I faster follow up shots. So now I am going to buy a Glock simply because it works for me. My buddy shot my XD and loved that better than the Glock and he wants and XD now. So I don't think Glock is better it just matters on the shooter and how well that weapon performs for that shooter.
I just came to the dark side 2 years ago. I had a G19 when they first came out. Nice gun, my agency would not allow it for on or off duty so I sold the Glock ( carried a 357 revolver for another 6 or 8 years). We were issued a Beretta 96D, biggest chunk of crap to ever grace my holster. After 3000 rounds the frame cracked so I started carrying my H&K USP/c 40 LEM. After a couple of years the P2000 came out and I was issued one. Carried it on/off duty for about 8 years firing about 15,000 rounds through it both on duty and off duty IDPA events.
The H&K's run flawless, have no aftermarket support, limited factory support. I am a H&K armorer, they are a well deigned, robust gun.
Enter Gen 4 Glock. They run flawlessly, smaller, lighter, more ammo on board, aftermarket is phenomenal parts and accessories are everywhere. Parts if you need them are everywhere and cheap. The first time I shot the Glock in a match I shot better than I had ever shot the H&K. I guess there is a reason none of the championship shooters use H&K's.
You should agree with everything I wrote (heh, heh).Quote:
Originally Posted by rex
Seriously, there are so many really fine handguns out there that to limit oneself to just one brand seems to me to be a little juvenile. I like Glocks and I own a number of them. Several of them are in my carry stable. But I also like S&W M&P's, some Kahr's, Ruger revolvers and Mark series, Kimber and Springfield 1911's, and Browning Hi-Powers to name a few. Each of these guns has their own particular special features which I both enjoy and respect. I am not about to limit my selections to one or two brands simply because of brand loyalty. Glocks are fine handguns for their designed purpose. The same can be said for a bunch of other handguns, too.
Too many choices... not enough time or money.