Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 34 of 34
  1. #21
    Old Padawan's Avatar
    Old Padawan is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Phoenix AZ
    Posts
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by submoa View Post
    The original poster inquired about G26:

    Anyone having either a Model 26 or Model 27 with a serial number utilizing the following alpha-prefix: DGD, DGV, DHS, DHT, DKV, DKW or DKX, your guide rod is defective. According to Glock, the rods were not tempered correctly. If you have one of these guns, call 1 (888) 569-6830 to get a replacement rod. This number was been set up specifically for the replacement of the rods.

    2 lawsuits are currently pending in Federal District Court against Glock arising from the Portland Police Bureau kB! incidents:

    3:2006cv00287 City of Portland v. Glock, Inc. et al
    3:2006cv00145 Pirv v. Glock, Inc. et al

    These suits were filed after HP White had published their report exonerating Glock in the incidents and blaming the kB!s on overpressure cartridges. Both Pirv (the injured officer) and PPB have evidence contrary to HP White to reassert Glock to be at fault.

    Glocks are not bad handguns. But they are not the perfect handguns that the legions of fanboys make them out to be. Be a knowledgeable consumer, don't take fanboy endorsements at face value, compare products and choose the one that makes the most sense for you.

    If in the end you choose a Glock. Great.

    In the end this whole bickering amounts to using an Internet Search Engine (Google, Yahoo, etc.) vs. the denial of someone who has called himself the Pole Smoking Ass Pirate of Arizona.
    Guide rods defective or not have nothing to do with a Ka-Boom. They do nothing to support your argument.

    A civil suit does not aid your argument, it supports mine. All it does is demonstrate the litigious nature of our society. It further reminds us that if there were a defect, then suits would have been filed and lost by Glock. If Glock loses a lawsuit and continues to produce the “defective” product, then they expose themselves to further litigation.
    They are still producing their guns in large numbers.

    Wow. You just listed your first documentation. It seems you are able to do effective research. I appreciate your listing a study indicating the gun was not at fault (thanks for helping me prove my point) BUT THE AMMO WAS.

    You have failed. You are unable to prove your point.
    You have not shown that an unsupported chambers cause dramatic failure in a firearm. If pressure were the issue, why did the hundreds of thousands of 1903 Springfields used by our armed forces see service in both WWI and WWII? The pressures of the 30-06 cartridge surpass that of a .40 or 9mm. Yet the gun worked well.

    I note that as this debate continued your opinion changed.
    Your original statement was: “Glock 26 - unsupported chamber cause of case rupture explosions = gun destroyed & possible injury to shooter”
    And now: “Glocks are not bad handguns. But they are not the perfect handguns that the legions of fanboys make them out to be. Be a knowledgeable consumer, don't take fanboy endorsements at face value, compare products and choose the one that makes the most sense for you.”
    (I would like to point out that if you had made this comment earlier I would not have said anything as it is clearly stated as an opinion and not a fact.)

    I fail to see what relevance my nickname of “pole smoking ass pirate” has to this debate. The term was coined by a small minded man who was too stupid to listen to a reasonable explanation, all that mattered was his uneducated opinion. Oh wait, now I see why you used it…

    Since you seem to have given up on logic, and resorted to sarcasm, (a common tactic employed by those who are unable to support their argument with facts) I will no longer reply to your comments in this thread.
    Have a pleasant day.
    "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." -Mark Twain

  2. #22
    submoa is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    784
    Again all pictures, articles, quotes provided by me can be easily found in a rudimentary internet search. I would encourage anyone considering any handgun to do a simple search on the internet in addition to soliciting OPINIONS of members here.

    And so, the incontrovertible fact is that controversy surrounds Glock kB!s. Contrary to disinformation from Glock fanboys, this has not been resolved.



    Addressing Old Padawan post,

    You have made self serving comments about your reasoning and logic.

    Your Pole Smoking Ass Pirate nickname is relevant since you used it in your SIG line for months. No one cares who tagged you with it. Whether or not it is true, your use defines you. And it shows your reasoning skills in posting an ad in this forum with that signature looking for a roommate.

  3. #23
    B3nT is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    13

    Love my PPS!

    I bought my PPS in January. It's very slender, and when I realized how short the sight radius is (compared to my other guns) I figured it would probably be tough to shoot it accurately. Also, it is sooo petite I was sure it would be harsh in use.

    Wow: was I wrong on both counts. It's a great little shooter (see the Gunblast review for an objective overview). I'm not the world's best shooter, but I can get most of my rounds into 5" -- at 25 yards! For me, that's amazing with a 3" barrel. I can do better with my full size P88 or 1911, or with my red-dot equipped BHP, but the little Walter PPS with its open sights continues to amaze me every time I take it out! If I have to critique a favorite, the single stack magazines included are 6 and 7 rounds (8 is optional), which is comparatively tedious at the range, but is at the same time what makes it so incredibly small and slim for carry.

    (As a P99 owner, too, though, I would suggest you take a peek at the P99c AS, if you can find one. My P99 is a full-size QA, and wouldn't fit your compact requirement, but it is an excellent firearm with truly awesome ergonomics.)

    Colt Huntsman 22
    Walther P38 9mm WWII heirloom
    Sig-Hammerli Trailside 22, Millet 3MOAx30
    Walther P99 9mm
    Browning High Power 9mm, JPoint 4MOA
    Browning Buckmark, Millet 3MOAx30
    Walther PPS 9mm
    Colt Model 80 Government IV .45
    Walther PP .380
    Walther P88 9mm

    Browning BPS 12 ga
    Ruger 10/22, Nikon Monarch 4x-12x 40

    Hawken .50 ca 1810 War of 1812 heirloom
    Sharps .50 ca 1860 Civil War heirloom

  4. #24
    PX
    PX is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    SE GA.
    Posts
    101
    [QUOTE=B3nT;129784]

    (As a P99 owner, too, though, I would suggest you take a peek at the P99c AS, if you can find one. My P99 is a full-size QA, and wouldn't fit your compact requirement, but it is an excellent firearm with truly awesome ergonomics.)



    JMOO:

    I think the PPS is an excellent cc firearm. You DO give up capacity, (and in the case of the P99c/AS) a wonderful trigger/striker for one that IMO is less safe for the average "civilian" concealed carry person, but the trade off is the PPS is VERY THIN, and lighter than the P99c/AS. My PPS is quite accurate at self defense range, but the P99c/AS was MORE accurate by a bit, but in a self defense senario not enough to make a difference.. For making holes in targets my P99c/AS was the better choice, but for daily comfort, ease of concealment the PPS is the better choice, for me.

    I still have the full size P99/AS for my "home defense" pistol..

    Either is fine.

    Best Wishes,

    Jesse

  5. #25
    BeefyBeefo's Avatar
    BeefyBeefo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,873
    Quote Originally Posted by B3nT View Post
    You DO give up capacity, (and in the case of the P99c/AS) a wonderful trigger/striker for one that IMO is less safe for the average "civilian" concealed carry person
    The gun is only as safe as its' handler. The striker action has nothing to do with the safety of the firearm. Finger off the trigger=no boom.

    -Jeff-

  6. #26
    PX
    PX is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    SE GA.
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by BeefyBeefo View Post
    The gun is only as safe as its' handler. The striker action has nothing to do with the safety of the firearm. Finger off the trigger=no boom.

    -Jeff-


    Jeff,
    Respectfully you are right, and you are wrong.

    IF a person has been trained properly to keep his finger out of the triggerguard and off the trigger until he/she is ready to shoot something then you are right.

    IF, however, a person has not been so trained then the difference between THAT person having a firearm with a Glocklike (or Glock) trigger vs the traditional DA/SA does have something to do with the safety of the firearm, in THAT person's hands.

    For example, I'm an old (65) and I have owned firearms since I was twelve years old. Been carrying concealed, legally, since the summer of 1966. In the formative years of my firearms "training" (if indeed it can be called that) I was taught all of the standard safety rules of the time, but at the time (early 1950's) I respectfully suggest "keeping your finger off the trigger" was not one of them.

    I WAS taught to never apply pressure to the trigger, but having your index finger lightly ON the trigger was simply the way it was done. The current "keep your booger picker off the trigger, and horizontally aligned along the side of the slide" (or thereabouts) is the relatively new, and excellent, way folks are trained, and with the advent of the everlite trigger pull, such as in the Glock and like types of firearms, it's prudent and wise, and if you watch every cop show on tv you can see it is standard NOW.

    However, if you have the time, find yourself a retired senior citizen leo who was on the job in the 1950's and probably later too, and I'm willing to be that person will tell you just what I'm telling you.

    When the issue weapon (and that carried by the majority of citizens who indeed carried during that time) was a traditional DA/SA revolver, generally a S&W or perhaps a Colt with a heavy DA trigger pull ,VERY FEW, a very, very few, persons MIGHT have be smart enough to keep their fingers off the trigger, but the fact is most of us were not that smart.

    Watch an old movie or tv program of those times and you will find the folks with guns, police, good guys and bad guys, always had their trigger fingers right on the trigger when they expected trouble.

    So, half a century into my personal life as a gun owner I find myself deliberately making a conscious effort to keep my trigger finger where it belongs, but even when I do fall back on my early (bad?) training I never apply pressure... Just something I don't do. Not saying I'm right, or smart, or the present training is not a great leap forward in safety while handling a loaded gun (yes, they are all loaded), but some folks are of the idea this has been common training for all times, and that's simply not true.

    I'm willing to bet if you run into an old cop from "those days" and ask him/her (very few "hers" then too) he/she will tell you that if they were in a situation requiring the firearm to be drawn out of the holster then that same situation was dangerous enough, or offered the potential for being dangerous enough, to have the triggerfinger in the only place it would do them any good if firing their weapon was necessary, and that was ON the trigger.

    Of course during that time,unless you were so stupid as to "cock" your weapon seeking the lighter SA trigger pull, a margin of safety was offered in the heavy DA trigger pull, which is not offered in pistols such as the Glock or PPS of today.

    For me personally, I just consider my PPS as always "cocked" and my natural instinct is to treat it as such by keeping my finger out of the triggerguard like a good boy should anyway.

    Betcha' most cops and such would have their fingers on the trigger, and the only allowance for safety might be the barrel of that firearm would be pointed up, or in a safe direction until the situation got critical, then the barrel would be pointed in the direction of the perceived threat, but perhaps pointed slightly down.

    I think the new method of training as regards safety with a firearm as relating to the relationship between the trigger finger, and the trigger itself is great. I taught that method to my Son, and Granddaughter.

    But no one ever taught me that when I was a kid, because that method was not the way it was done.

    No offense intended, but even tho we are dying off at a pretty good rate now, there are still a bunch of folks who have done quite well, as regards safety, for many decades, by keeping pressure off the trigger until the right time, but keeping our fingers ON the trigger when we think might have to shoot something.

    Just personal opinion, contrary opinions welcomed.

    Best Wishes,

    Jesse

  7. #27
    MLB's Avatar
    MLB
    MLB is offline Supporting Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    971
    Excellent post of a perspective I hadn't considered PX. Thanks.

  8. #28
    BeefyBeefo's Avatar
    BeefyBeefo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,873
    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    IF, however, a person has not been so trained then the difference between THAT person having a firearm with a Glocklike (or Glock) trigger vs the traditional DA/SA does have something to do with the safety of the firearm, in THAT person's hands.
    Then, if that person has their finger on the trigger knowing that it could be a potential hazard, wouldn't that make the person the dangerous aspect of the equation, and not the gun?

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    For example, I'm an old (65) and I have owned firearms since I was twelve years old. Been carrying concealed, legally, since the summer of 1966. In the formative years of my firearms "training" (if indeed it can be called that) I was taught all of the standard safety rules of the time, but at the time (early 1950's) I respectfully suggest "keeping your finger off the trigger" was not one of them.
    Would you agree that it is a much safer practice to keep your finger off the trigger until the threat is potent? If so, then wouldn't the old "training" be considered obsolete, and everone should adhere to the newer and safer "training"?

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    I WAS taught to never apply pressure to the trigger, but having your index finger lightly ON the trigger was simply the way it was done. The current "keep your booger picker off the trigger, and horizontally aligned along the side of the slide" (or thereabouts) is the relatively new, and excellent, way folks are trained, and with the advent of the everlite trigger pull, such as in the Glock and like types of firearms, it's prudent and wise, and if you watch every cop show on tv you can see it is standard NOW.
    You admit that having your finger off the trigger is "excellent", but as above, would you consider to be better? Also, the trigger pull on a Glock isn't necessarily very light, or atleast I wouldn't consider it very light. I think keeping your finger off the trigger should be done no matter how long or heavy the trigger pull is. I'm not sure where television comes into this, as TV has, or should have nothing to do with any sort of safety practices.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    However, if you have the time, find yourself a retired senior citizen leo who was on the job in the 1950's and probably later too, and I'm willing to be that person will tell you just what I'm telling you.
    I'm not doubting you, but if in fact the newer practices are safer (by any means), than don't you agree that the older practices should be obsolete?

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    When the issue weapon (and that carried by the majority of citizens who indeed carried during that time) was a traditional DA/SA revolver, generally a S&W or perhaps a Colt with a heavy DA trigger pull ,VERY FEW, a very, very few, persons MIGHT have be smart enough to keep their fingers off the trigger, but the fact is most of us were not that smart.
    Here again, you are implying that it would have been smarter to keep your finger off of the trigger. So, in that case, regardless of how individuals were once trained, wouldn't you agree that they should adapt to new training and newer practices?

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    Watch an old movie or tv program of those times and you will find the folks with guns, police, good guys and bad guys, always had their trigger fingers right on the trigger when they expected trouble.
    Once again, I'm not sure where TV comes into this. I see many actors in current movies and shows with their fingers on the trigger with absolutely no threat present, but this is besides the point, as this is to be considered acting and nothing else.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    So, half a century into my personal life as a gun owner I find myself deliberately making a conscious effort to keep my trigger finger where it belongs, but even when I do fall back on my early (bad?) training I never apply pressure... Just something I don't do. Not saying I'm right, or smart, or the present training is not a great leap forward in safety while handling a loaded gun (yes, they are all loaded), but some folks are of the idea this has been common training for all times, and that's simply not true.
    I was not by any means implying that there has been common training for all times. My point is that, if there are newer and better training practices in place, than all individuals should learn to adapt at all costs. Breaking bad habits can be hard, but sometimes it's necessary.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    I'm willing to bet if you run into an old cop from "those days" and ask him/her (very few "hers" then too) he/she will tell you that if they were in a situation requiring the firearm to be drawn out of the holster then that same situation was dangerous enough, or offered the potential for being dangerous enough, to have the triggerfinger in the only place it would do them any good if firing their weapon was necessary, and that was ON the trigger.
    I could potentially agree with this, but how serious of a threat are we talking about here? I will have my finger off the trigger until I'm ready to use the weapon. There is no time taken (atleast miniscule), in shifting my finger from the side of the weapon to the trigger, and this would only be done so if the threat was serious enough. So, if a BG was in my face and I perceived the threat to be serious enough, than my finger would touch the triger....to fire the weapon.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    Of course during that time,unless you were so stupid as to "cock" your weapon seeking the lighter SA trigger pull, a margin of safety was offered in the heavy DA trigger pull, which is not offered in pistols such as the Glock or PPS of today.
    I would consider the pull of the Glock or PPS a sort of middle ground. If the finger is off the trigger until one is ready to fire, than the "weight" of the trigger pull is irrelevant. Perhaps to "cock" your weapon would not have been so "stupid" if one's finger is off the trigger until he/she is ready to use the weapon.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    For me personally, I just consider my PPS as always "cocked" and my natural instinct is to treat it as such by keeping my finger out of the triggerguard like a good boy should anyway.
    Here again, you're saying that this is the way it should be done, therefore all individuals should adapt to the correct training practices regardless of what they were once taught.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    Betcha' most cops and such would have their fingers on the trigger, and the only allowance for safety might be the barrel of that firearm would be pointed up, or in a safe direction until the situation got critical, then the barrel would be pointed in the direction of the perceived threat, but perhaps pointed slightly down.
    This is itself is an unsafe practice, and I would hope that none of these "cops" are working in my neighborhood. IMO, carying out that practice would imply that the individual is concerned about a ND. If that is the case, than this individual should not be in the field of law enforcement. A cop could keep his sights on the potential threat with his/her finger off of the trigger, and move his finger to the trigger when the situation got critical and he/she was ready to fire his/her weapon. This would not only keep the gun pointed in the direction where it should be pointed (a bullet shot up in the air, has to end somewhere. A bullet shot at the ground also has to stop somewhere with a possible ricochet.), but this would also allow for the target to already be aligned with the sights.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    I think the new method of training as regards safety with a firearm as relating to the relationship between the trigger finger, and the trigger itself is great. I taught that method to my Son, and Granddaughter.
    Once again, do you think it is a better practice? Once again, if so, shouldn't all individuals adapt should new training practices?

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    But no one ever taught me that when I was a kid, because that method was not the way it was done.
    Once again, if the new practices are better, shouldn't one adapt?

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    No offense intended, but even tho we are dying off at a pretty good rate now, there are still a bunch of folks who have done quite well, as regards safety, for many decades, by keeping pressure off the trigger until the right time, but keeping our fingers ON the trigger when we think might have to shoot something.
    No offense intended here either.

    Quote Originally Posted by PX View Post
    Just personal opinion, contrary opinions welcomed.
    Same here as well.

    -Jeff-

  9. #29
    Old Padawan's Avatar
    Old Padawan is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Phoenix AZ
    Posts
    818
    By your logic, people without training should only use double action only firearms.
    Guns are as safe as their user. A “safer” gun does not fix an unsafe user. They are fixed by training. Training is applicable regardless of age.
    If you can’t keep your finger off of the activator of a potentially deadly device, you should make the decision not to possess said device.
    If you cant handle a gun safely, buy a knife. At least that way you only hurt yourself.
    "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." -Mark Twain

  10. #30
    masterofnotmuch is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2
    well speaking as a gunsmith and not a glockster as we are know as. glocks don't break as much as other pistols i maybe work on on 4 glocks a month and most of the time they are just putting on after market parts (mostly sights) the store that i work at really sells the glocks two to one (one being all other pistols in our shop). also think the "indestructible" rep that glocks get just adds more hype if one blows up. there have been alot of 1911 that blowup plus they been making them for almost 100 years now. had three come in the place i work where they where bought and yes i own a Springfield 1911 had a kimber but they pissed me off because of the severe lack of costumer service

  11. #31
    masterofnotmuch is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2
    opps don't know how to delete

  12. #32
    group17 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    131
    If you want a safety on your Glock or PPS drop the mag and pull the trigger after checking the chamber is empty. Put the mag back in and you can't fire it till you rack the slide. You can keep your finger on the trigger as much as you want until you rack the slide.

    Now if you plan on carrying it you will have the time penalty of having to rack the slide first before firing the round. IMO not a good idea.

  13. #33
    Hollander is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    a little south of Atlanta
    Posts
    97
    I have the PPS in both 9mm and .40. Both great guns with no problems. Carry them all the time. Very good accuracy at self-defense range. Never have been sorry that I bought either one of them.

  14. #34
    Rocker's Avatar
    Rocker is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    62
    I like the Springfield XDM 3.8 in 9.. I had the original 4.5 one, but thought the grip made it a little large to carry conceled..
    but now they make a "compact" version with smaller grip size for better conceled carry..

    I had a PPS and thought it was also a great carry gun.. slim and lightweight. thought the grip was a little square and uncomfortable for shooting but it carried great..

    Then I got caught up in the 9 vs 45 thing ("Cant carry anything other than a 45 they say")... and sold it and got a 3" Kimber 1911.. but still think about the PPS.. as i think it was a better carry gun.. and really a 9mm (or 40) should be enough if needed.

    Oh yeah i just bought a 1972 Walther PP that i carry more now.. and its a 7.65 (.32)... and i thought a 9 and 380 was too small to carry.. scheech!!.. what am i thinking..
    Hey if you cant make fun of yourself who can..

    Bottom line is if you like the PPS then get it, its a great gun and i doubt you will have any issues with it..

    I know its not an easy decision.. thats why we have more than one handgun... good luck

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

idpa glock
,
idpa glock 17
,
modern handguns
,
nypd glock
,
threaded barrel for walther pps
,
threaded barrel walther pps
,

walther pps 9mm

,
walther pps 9mm threaded barrel
,
walther pps guide rod
,

walther pps threaded barrel

,
walther pps vs glock 26
,
wha does walther 9mm hand pistol looklike
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Springfield Armory

» HGF Sponsors

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1