I've used one for a few short months on my G26. I don't see anything significantly problematic with it yet. I do like the security in reholstering because I carry AIWB. The price point sucks. I got mine for a decent discount.

I honestly don't see it as an absolute necessity. Also, they aren't meant for aftermarket triggers, which is a bit of a letdown.

quote:

Originally posted by YVK:
But Glock's external safety options suck while Gadget doesn't. Easy call.

One of the best aspects of the Glock is that there's nothing between you and the target but the trigger.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by YVK:
But Glock's external safety options suck while Gadget doesn't. Easy call.

One of the best aspects of the Glock is that there's nothing between you and the target but the trigger.

And with this device there still isn't.

My wife and I were early beta testers of the Gadget, and have used them ever since on numerous Glock pistols in 9, .40, .357 Sig and 10mm. Waded rivers and marshes with them while hunting and fishing in Alaska, shot them above 100F in AZ and well below zero in Alaska and the west. Over the years, my wife and I have fired some tens of thousands of rounds with Gadget equipped Glock pistols. At this point, my wife and I are reluctant to carry a Glock without a Gadget, as thumb on the Gadget is ingrained in how we holster a Glock. While I frequently carry AIWB, my wife wears a G26 daily in a Mitch Rosen Upper Limit, and since that holster is tight to her body, and out of easy sight behind her hip, the Gadget is important to her. If you look critically, not just AIWB, but many OWB, and almost all traditional IWB holsters, cover your anatomy when holstering.

As pointed out previously, any mechanical device like the Gadget introduces a theoretical failure point, but in the case of the Gadget must be balanced against its potential safety benefit. For my wife and I, the upside of potentially avoiding a self inflicted wound when a garment or other foreign object enters the trigger guard while holstering, especially in remote Alaska far from medical assistance, is a good trade off against a theoretical point of failure.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by YVK:
But Glock's external safety options suck while Gadget doesn't. Easy call.

One of the best aspects of the Glock is that there's nothing between you and the target but the trigger.

As pointed out, the second my thumb leaves the Gadget, this better aspect of a Glock remains intact. As does my femoral artery when I reholster in AIWB with all the usual precautions required of such activity plus an additional temporary disabling of a striker. May sound redundant but the fundamental safety practices are built on overlapping redundancies.

quote:

Also, they aren't meant for aftermarket triggers, which is a bit of a letdown.

I have not tried, or even seen, an Apex trigger. If it doesn't reduce pre-travel, the regular SCD is OK to use with it. If it does reduce pre-travel, but no more than the triggers from Overwatch Precision, (which is the maximum amount that I'd consider safe) then the soon to be released reduced pre-travel compatible SCD would be OK. That's from Tom.

I would like to try it out, but not at 79 bucks.

I think I'm with Bruce and others. I think it has merit but does require more conscious effort during holstering to feel and think about if the gadget is activated.

Side note not long after we switched from gen 3 smiths to M&Ps, an older officer was wearing a coat on the range during a fall training session and shot the side off his shoe holstering his pistol. He had is coat unzipped and the zipper had landed just right to when he re-holstered it slid in the trigger guard and then got jammed in the holster, activating the trigger. So yeah train, train, train, but it can still happened.

This was nuclear security so we had big utility money and we were having week long range sessions 6 times a year or better, just incase some one crys lack of training.

quote:

Originally posted by GJM AK:
If you look critically, not just AIWB, but many OWB, and almost all traditional IWB holsters, cover your anatomy when holstering.

“Look critically” before expressing an opinion?! That’s just crazy talk.

I don’t own a holster of any type—inside waistband, outside waistband, duty, or drop leg “tactical”—that permits me to holster and carry without ever pointing the gun at some portion of my body.

quote:

Originally posted by YVK:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
Yes, depressing it disables the weapon. That is its purpose, and the point of the design. Most safeties on firearms do, too. Think about it.

Valid point. When Big Army adds a manual safety requirement on a striker fired M17, you barely hear about this being an additional failure point, a malfunction or mishandling of which can cause a failure to fire, or a solution in a search of a problem. Yet theoretical criticism should be identical in both cases.
If Glocks had a good quality, ergonomic, robust manual safety I personally wouldn't have needed a Gadget. I personally don't care how I achieve a direct and active control over a firing mechanism during admin handling, thumbing a hammer, engaging a safety and actively keeping it engaged, or pushing on a Gadget, as long as I have an option to exercise that control. But Glock's external safety options suck while Gadget doesn't. Easy call.

Sorry to drift, but did you read the news thread on manual safety 320s? Half of it was informative and the other half was a debate on whether or not there should be a manual safety at all, with a few "how could SIG DO such a thing?" drive by postings for good measure.

why would placing ones thumb on the back be any more difficult than placing an index finger on the slide ?

when you are not on target.
just curious, I am not a glock owner.

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
why would placing ones thumb on the back be any more difficult than placing an index finger on the slide ?

when you are not on target.
just curious, I am not a glock owner.

I don't think it's difficult to do, maybe difficult to remember if you were not trained with a DA/SA pistol. Since my first (and only) semi-auto pistol for over 15 years was a P229, that habit was well ingrained in me. It still makes me a bit nervous that I can't ride the hammer every time I holster my P320, which has been my carry gun for the past 2 years.

When I do find myself placing my thumb there on my P320, I remove it and stop at the first hint of extra resistance since I want to slide that gun into the holster with as little force as possible in case something did find its way into the trigger.

Also, regarding all of the worries about a possible failure point preventing the gun from firing when needed, I personally would be more worried about that rather delicate looking tab in the middle of the trigger.

I look where I'm holstering. Refusing to mindlessly shove it into the last remembered position does wonders for preventing snagging the trigger on something.

There are few, if any holstered positions that I've ever used which cover the body during holstering. Covering the body during holstering is usually improper handling. There are those that angle the firearm into the holster and thus cover their obdy with the muzzle; it's not necessary, and it's certainly not necessary to cover the body when drawing, at all.

I have used small of back holsters in the past and someone told me that it's impossible to draw or re-holster with SOB without covering one's self. With proper technique, it's not true.

Appendix carry covers much of the time its in use, which is why I don't do that. Even pocket carry doesn't require the muzzle plane to cross my body at any point, but again, care with the trigger during reholstering is what's important. I prefer to look at the weapon when reholstering. There are times when it's best to be looking at a threat, but if the threat is great enough to warrant a firearm, then someone else better have one out, or the threat had better no longer be a threat, if reholstering.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
I look where I'm holstering. Refusing to mindlessly shove it into the last remembered position does wonders for preventing snagging the trigger on something.

There are few, if any holstered positions that I've ever used which cover the body during holstering. Covering the body during holstering is usually improper handling. There are those that angle the firearm into the holster and thus cover their obdy with the muzzle; it's not necessary, and it's certainly not necessary to cover the body when drawing, at all.

I have used small of back holsters in the past and someone told me that it's impossible to draw or re-holster with SOB without covering one's self. With proper technique, it's not true.

Appendix carry covers much of the time its in use, which is why I don't do that. Even pocket carry doesn't require the muzzle plane to cross my body at any point, but again, care with the trigger during reholstering is what's important. I prefer to look at the weapon when reholstering. There are times when it's best to be looking at a threat, but if the threat is great enough to warrant a firearm, then someone else better have one out, or the threat had better no longer be a threat, if reholstering.

Utter hogwash.

Nearly EVERY holstered position covers the body at some point. Pocket carry routinely covers the thigh, knee, calf, and foot. Carrying on and behind the hip covers the buttock, and can cover the calf and foot kneeling. Hell, Safariland police duty holsters are all canted sightly inward, covering the calf, ankle, and foot depending on exact positioning on the belt.

Want proof? Place a long cleaning rod through the muzzle end of your gun, thread on a brush, and pull the rod back into the chamber. Now try your position of choice. The rod is going to touch you somewhere.

I can see where a good number of people (not L.E.) want less to remember , when you actually have to have it at the ready , and even when you have to have it holstered in a millisecond.

thats part of the reason you buy a point and shoot firearm. to alleviate ancillary encumbrances.

it makes sense

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:

Utter hogwash.

Nearly EVERY holstered position covers the body at some point. Pocket carry routinely covers the thigh, knee, calf, and foot. Carrying on and behind the hip covers the buttock, and can cover the calf and foot kneeling. Hell, Safariland police duty holsters are all canted sightly inward, covering the calf, ankle, and foot depending on exact positioning on the belt.

Want proof? Place a long cleaning rod through the muzzle end of your gun, thread on a brush, and pull the rod back into the chamber. Now try your position of choice. The rod is going to touch you somewhere.

Bullshit.

Not in anything I carry, or any mode in which I carry it.

Should you choose to carry in a method that puts your weapon covering you, that's your choice.

Ahh the Glock Gadget. The gun world equivalent of Jews and Arabs. I have followed this for years and boy does this optional piece of kit get folks panties in a twist on both sides.

For the record when I holster a Glock I always hold the "imaginary hammer" so the Gadget would probably work nicely for me.

Options are awesome.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
The gun world equivalent of Jews and Arabs

Just what exactly is your problem?

quote:

Covering the body during holstering is usually improper handling. There are those that angle the firearm into the holster and thus cover their obdy with the muzzle; it's not necessary, and it's certainly not necessary to cover the body when drawing, at all.

That it is correct on the holstering part. Appropriate holstering in AIWB doesn't muzzle a body, and neither does a draw in standing position.
Draw from a strong side position + lateral movement at the same time = almost universal muzzling of a leg. Have someone video you when you do that. This had been done and tested enough, there are even videos of such tests. Don't need to stick rods anywhere, we have lasers for that.

quote:

Appendix carry covers much of the time its in use, which is why I don't do that.

There is a distinct difference between passive muzzling, as in where a holstered gun is pointed, vs active muzzling, as in where a gun in hand is pointed during handling. What AIWB does or doesn't do is a subject to a technique, holster selection and other things, but, just speaking for myself, no active muzzling happens.

I don't know how many discharges during holstering result in injuries, but I've taken care of 2 since the early 1990's. The last one was an LEO, and he swore his finger was nowhere near the trigger when he holstered the weapon. He was using a striker fired handgun. I went home, took out a Glock 23, made sure it was unloaded, and was able to trigger it while holstering with loose clothing. Repeatedly. With my finger well away from the trigger.

I have also functioned as a range officer in USPSA matches, and a safety officer in IDPA matches. There are quite a few new (and some not so new) shooters wearing concealment garments with IDPA using Glocks and similar arms. I frequently see holstering, especially after a course of fire, with loose clothing. Many of us don't look at the holster when placing a weapon in it. At present, I usually carry a P model Sig, and I holster with my thumb on the hammer. If I decided to carry a Glock, I'd keep an open mind about this device.

Can the "it's completely safe crowd" explain how to draw from appendix carry while seated, so the muzzle isn't pointing at any part of your body during the draw?

Can you get out your rod/laser and make a video demoing that?

Can you demo how to do an aggressive, athletic draw, that won't have that muzzle pointed at your body during the draw? Not even while moving and drawing, just realistically drawing while standing, ie, not standing ramrod straight like a cadet making five points of contact when an officer passes them in the hall.

YVK said, "Appropriate holstering in AIWB doesn't muzzle a body, and neither does a draw in standing position."

Here is what a fairly aggressive, standing draw (not even doing it while moving), with appendix carry looks like:


His hand is on the gun, and it's definitely pointed at his body, and will be that way when the trigger is exposed, but the muzzle has not yet cleared the top of the holster.

For a very specific purpose I used to carry appendix (and would again if the need arose), but I accepted that there was an increased risk if you have an AD/ND with appendix carry.

A guy who (God rest his soul) loved appendix carry, taught a class specifically about appendix carry, and helped develop the Glock "Gadget," has said things like:

"the potential risk of aiwb is substantial." (sic)

and

. . .the AIWB Mantra, If you f*** up you will die. (sic)

http://pistol-training.com/archives/7768

http://pistol-training.com/archives/7180

He was right, the risks are substantial, and if there is an AD/ND there is an increased risk of dying. A shot to the pelvic girdle is very difficult (practically impossible) to fix before you die.

I am not one of the people who says it should never be done, but it's foolish to ignore the very real, and greatly increased, risks associated with appendix carry.