quote:

Originally posted by dcowboyscr:
TheNewbie, well said. I’ve often wondered the exact same thing.

Because the Glock is the perfect pistol, and adding or subtracting anything to it to make it "better" or "safer" is borderline heresy.

You see, it is a closely guarded guarded secret, but well known in the inner circle, that Gaston Glock did not "design" the Glock pistol in the usual manner. No, the Lord God Almighty himself emblazoned the original blueprints on his psyche in a dream.

Anyway, that's what I heard somewhere.

quote:

Originally posted by RichN:

quote:

Originally posted by dcowboyscr:
TheNewbie, well said. I’ve often wondered the exact same thing.

Because the Glock is the perfect pistol, and adding or subtracting anything to it to make it "better" or "safer" is borderline heresy.

You see, it is a closely guarded guarded secret, but well known in the inner circle, that Gaston Glock did not "design" the Glock pistol in the usual manner. No, the Lord God Almighty himself emblazoned the original blueprints on his psyche in a dream.

Anyway, that's what I heard somewhere.

Amen, and thank you ...

Just ordered a Glock Gadget from Tau. I have a 2000 round course with OpSpec training this fall, so it will be a good chance to try the gadget out.

It's going to get really expensive if I have to put them on all the Glocks, though. Not as bad as when I went to the Trijicon HD's...

quote:

Originally posted by RichN:

quote:

Originally posted by dcowboyscr:
TheNewbie, well said. I’ve often wondered the exact same thing.

Because the Glock is the perfect pistol, and adding or subtracting anything to it to make it "better" or "safer" is borderline heresy.

You see, it is a closely guarded guarded secret, but well known in the inner circle, that Gaston Glock did not "design" the Glock pistol in the usual manner. No, the Lord God Almighty himself emblazoned the original blueprints on his psyche in a dream.

Anyway, that's what I heard somewhere.

You heard wrong, and shouldn't peddle rumors.

It was written in stone tablets, and they're in a heavily guarded vault in the side of a mountain in the Austrian Alps.

Gaston's head was far too full of genius to hold anything more at the time.

Interesting, but not $80 interesting for me.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Interesting, but not $80 interesting for me.

Cosmetic "blems" are available for $60.

https://taudevgroup.myshopify....rol-device-blemished

quote:

Originally posted by Mark71:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Interesting, but not $80 interesting for me.

Cosmetic "blems" are available for $60.

https://taudevgroup.myshopify....rol-device-blemished

About halfway to a price point I'd consider - but thanks for the redirect.

I bought one of the "blems" and could find nothing wrong with it.

Ordered another from the Blem link. We shall see.

Acquiring the "Gadget" a choice made by each end user of Glock handguns. Personally I'm not going to make that modification to the example Glock pistols that I utilize. Each to their own applies.

quote:

Originally posted by lowflash:
Acquiring the "Gadget" a choice made by each end user of Glock handguns. Personally I'm not going to make that modification to the example Glock pistols that I utilize. Each to their own applies.

Wait just a minute. Are you saying that we have a choice, and are not required to buy and install these?

Dammit. I just bought two. Why didn't you post this information sooner?

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
Wait just a minute. Are you saying that we have a choice, and are not required to buy and install these?

Dammit. I just bought two. Why didn't you post this information sooner?

Stranger thinks in life have happened!

quote:

Originally posted by TheNewbie:
What amazes me are that people do not see value in this product. I can understand someone deciding not to purchase one, but I cannot understand the shallowness of the simple minded.


The gadget acts like a hammer on a hammer fired gun. It would be useless to me if it relied solely on tactile feed back. However it helps prevents the gun from firing if properly used, just like thumbing a hammer.

Again only an idiot would throw safe gun handling techniques out the window because they purchased a gadget. Use both.

Why would it be shallow or simple minded to not want to install a non-factory fire control piece on your gun that has the potential to disable it? For some people it makes sense, for others it doesnt.

For instance, I dont do a whole lot of live fire in and out of a holster. When I do, its generally owb anyways. If I was going in and out iwb, appendix, then yeah, maybe this would make sense to me.

Mech. What does it do when it malfunctions? What can go wrong?

The failure mode for the Glock Gadget, and they couldn't get them to fail in testing, is for the pistol to keep functioning normally. If the gadget fails, it simply doesn't block the action internally any more. The faildown mode is to function normally. Look at the way it's designed, and what it does, and you'll understand why.

I wouldn't call the "gadget" a fire control piece. It is basically a revised slide end plate. I think the only way it could fail is to break in such a way that the entire end plate well off, which would release tension on the striker.

I like it. I like it a lot.

I plan to be down to a single Glock, my G34, soon, but I may add it to that. I don't carry that pistol, but I may do USPSA or the like with it.

quote:

Originally posted by pblanc:
I wouldn't call the "gadget" a fire control piece. It is basically a revised slide end plate. I think the only way it could fail is to break in such a way that the entire end plate well off, which would release tension on the striker.

The manufacturers call it a gadget. In fact, that's the actual name of the part.

The failure point on the device is the hinge. If it's going to fail, that's where its going to fail. If that fails and that assembly were to completely leave the pistol, the pistol would function normally. It was designed that way. The end plate remains. You'd be able to see the striker assembly through the hole in the back of the end plate, but enough end plate exists around that to retain the striker and keep the pistol functioning normally, which is the idea.

The gadget comes into play only when holstering, and as soon as released, no longer has any impact on pistol operation.

The developers note over 300,000 rounds of testing, with 50,000 on some of the units, no failures of any kind. A good start.

It was originally called the Glock Gadget, and is still referred to by that title, of course.

But I believe that the official name is now the "Glock Striker Control Device".

You won't find the term "gadget" anywhere on this web page:

http://taudevgroup.myshopify.c...riker-control-device

Yeah.

Maybe they should take this site down then...

https://www.indiegogo.com/proj...ker-control-device#/

Interesting idea I've never heard of until now.

I may try one out, although it is way pricy, even blem-ed, for what it is.

I would try it on my G42...when they finally make one for the G42, since I carry that appendix with regularity.