Do you think traditional rifling is cheaper to manufacture? Is there an upside to traditional rifling, or is to be able to fire lead projectiles without a leading/kaboom?

quote:

Originally posted by soggy_spinout:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
^^^^
Wireless reloading

Nonsense. That's for the Gen6 guns and beyond when they finally get the brainwave activators dialed in right. GPS targeting is for the Gen5. Keep it straight, else you'll be accused of spreading fake news.

Hopefully you don't have to "think FIRE in German".

Standard land and groove rifling = lower velocities

Way to go, Glock

We'll dub Gaston as The Man Who Can't Leave Shit Alone

Changed the recoil spring assembly again? Sigh. I'm just gonna stick with my gen 4's. I went from the 3 to the 4 because I loved the new mag release. This just seems like an unneeded new gen.

Simply offer the exiting 4 without finger grooves and ambi slide release as options if you wanted to and be done with it.

IIRC the new barrel was a customer requirement but I forget exactly why.

I don't like the front magwell cutout on the 19. It bugged me on my Gen 2 even with small hands.

I "read on the internet" that the traditional rifling was at the request of the LE agencies to make ballistic matching easier.

It looks interesting but I am very satisfied with my Gen 4. I like the finger grooves (matter of fact I sold my gen 2 because it didn't have any).

That said I might try one in G19 flavor, provided they fixed the whole slide coming off the frame issue the other M models had

I read that the trigger is somewhat improved to compete with the other new striker guns.

Curious to see how the lack of finger grooves and extended baseplate work on the 19. I wouldn't mind a smudge more actual frontstrap length. Not an issue on the 17. As a matter of fact, I don't mind the finger grooves on the 17. Unlike the 19, my fingers actually fit in the grooves. I don't have large hand either.

We are set to take delivery of Gen5 guns in October at work. I have not handled one, but one of my guys went to a Glock advanced armorers class and got to play with one on the break.

The long winded answer was this. When the FBI set out to get a new duty pistol, switching from .40 to 9mm, they worked with ammunition manufacturers to get the ammo they wanted, with the performance they wanted, first thing. They then went to the gun companies with the specs of what they wanted around this round.

Glock in turn built the 17M around these specifications. The change in the barrel in lock up and rifling was to make the gun from a 3 inch group at 25 yards gun, to a 3 inch group at 50 yards gun. The different recoil spring is designed again to maximize the use of the heavier rounds for the FBI.

Because of some of the changes internally the guns supposedly wound up with some really great triggers out of the box. So much so that he said Ghost and some of the other after market parts manufacturers may be hurting.

Now, that is all as reported. He says that it lives up to the hype. For whatever reason, Glock decided to roll mark the gun Gen5 instead of the 17M designation that it started out with.

If all of this is true, it likely won't just be my duty gun, but also my striker fired competition gun when I don't shoot DA/SA. Right now, I am shooting a M&P 2.0.

^^ thanks.

I recalled way back when Glock went to the 3 pin for Glock 9mm, it was for strength for use with +P and +P+ stuff. Now they've gone back to the 2 pin design like the 43. 3 pin no longer needed?

The third pin was never needed on the 9mms. It was originally introduced with the .40 caliber Glocks, and eventually incorporated into the 9mm frame as well to streamline production. (So Glock could use one frame for all 9/40/357 guns.)

The Gen 5 is only being made in 9mm so far. We'll have to wait and see if the third pin appears on the .40/.357 Gen 5s.

^^I would suspect this is the reasoning for two pins.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
The third pin was never needed on the 9mms. It was originally introduced with the .40 caliber Glocks, and eventually incorporated into the 9mm frame as well to streamline production. (So Glock could use one frame for all 9/40/357 guns.)

The Gen 5 is only being made in 9mm so far. We'll have to wait and see if the third pin appears on the .40/.357 Gen 5s.

Ahh your memory is better than mine. I'll get the gen 5 then after good reports from members rolling in. The 2 pin setup had bothered me thus I didn't get the 43, even after the problems had subsided.

The Gen 5 designation is used, but it's limited to the 17/19.

Probably won't be Gen5 in other calibers for a while. Look for an unofficial gen4.5. Basically a gen4 with no finger grooves.

Any chance they went back to a finish that is more durable the the black on a Shoot and See target?

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
Any chance they went back to a finish that is more durable the the black on a Shoot and See target?

The slide finish in the pics looks the same as on the current guns .

I'd like to know if the crappy ejection has been fixed .

I too am curious about the finish change. My Gen 4 has seen a lot of use and still looks excellent...hard to see how the finish could be "improved".

My Gen 4 has been in and out of kydex a handful of times and is scratched up. My Gen 3s can basically be drug behind a car over a gravel road made of glass and not show a thing.

Chris.