ah the elusive 24, I've always wondered what that would do with a 357 conversion.

I'm lovin' that G17 Gen4 with the slide serrations!

I'm hoping front serrations will only be an option and not standard. A Gen 4 version of the 17L would've gotten me excited.

Not bad. Not enough to make me go buy a new one, but all good improvements

A finish that doesn't suck would be great.

I don't usually rack a slide from the front so why would I need serrations there? The further my hand is from the business end of a gun, the better. Am I crazy?

Also, the two other extras (sights and extended controls) are things many people already change. I guess this is nice cuz it's already done at the stock price.

I have a 27 gen 4 with the old teflon finish, bought it early on. Best gun ever. 5 years of backup and off duty carry and it still looks brand new. Got a new 22 gen 4 about a year ago as we replaced our duty guns. It looks like it has seen action in WWII and ever war since! I know....it's a glock and a duty gun, but the old finish was better!

As for front serrations, all I can say was s why really?

quote:

Originally posted by aparoche:
I don't usually rack a slide from the front so why would I need serrations there?

I think these particular models are distributor exclusives. I would say that the forward serrations are there to give the pistols a distinctive appearance.

I'm glad the front serrations are there. I had to buy aftermarket slides to get the front serrations.
Despite all the naysayers in the 1911 community, they do serve a purpose. For me running optics on my guns, overhand grabbing the slide, my hand will ride closer to the front of the gun.

Also if you're inclined to press check (not starting a debate) they help open the slide slightly.

More than anything, I use the front slide when I'm dry firing to reset the trigger rather than doing a full rack.

They look funny and make me feel icky.

quote:

Originally posted by agony:
I'm glad the front serrations are there. I had to buy aftermarket slides to get the front serrations.
Despite all the naysayers in the 1911 community, they do serve a purpose. For me running optics on my guns, overhand grabbing the slide, my hand will ride closer to the front of the gun.

Also if you're inclined to press check (not starting a debate) they help open the slide slightly.

More than anything, I use the front slide when I'm dry firing to reset the trigger rather than doing a full rack.

I used to work with a guy, fantastic cop, who we called "Sharty", for imaginable reasons... That boy would press check his damn HK USP .45 every time we went into the housing projects. While he was driving. Across the damn train tracks.

It's a wonder he never shot a nut off.


It's about time they upgraded the sights. I'm a fan of the Gen 4 as it was, personally. But whatever helps them sell guns.

As has been pointed out by many people here, every major an lots of minor gun manufacturers have come out with Glock-a-like poly-striker pistols. While Glock has sold millions of guns, it's possible they're now feeling sales pressure This may be why Glock is putting out what appears to be a set of fairly minor face lifted models.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BBMW,

Good news I would say. As far as serrations, I have taken to putting Vicker's slide rackers on mine, even the G42. They're tough and low-profile, and give me a lot more to grab on to...

Saw the article yesterday. Ho hum; no GxxM versions, no Gen5.

So how is it that the G17L is suddenly a 2017 return release when the model have been (somewhat) available through distribution since last summer? And the compensated models also have been out for a while; guess Glock neglected to issue some previous press release perhaps? Interesting that Glock decided to release the G24 again in this current era of anti-FO-TAYism. The last time the G17L was brought out of hiatus in 2014, Glock didn't bother with bringing back the sibling G24. And now they do when the move away from 40S&W is even higher than three years ago. Makes perfect sense to me.

Slide serrations forward; generally I use them on other guns that I have that come with them, and I've stuck plenty of grip tape forward on some of my Glocks in the past so it doesn't bug me that the factory is now providing them right out of the box. But honesty the actual implementation DOES look kinda weird seeing those stodgy "fence posts" up front. For press checks they don't need to be that tall. Partial height old school P229ish serration height would've sufficed.

Or revisiting the fish gills, up front and forward style. That would've been so much kewler...

<sigh> And still they keep making the bloody finger grooves!

quote:

Originally posted by SecurityGeek:
<sigh> And still they keep making the bloody finger grooves!

You will be happy with the 17M and 19M

Glock in my opinion could go a long way at staving off market share complaints by doing 2 easy things and one more difficult.

1-Ditch the dovetail protectors totally and ship EVERY damn gun with a set of serviceable steel sights.

2-Go back to a more durable exterior coating. The Gen 4 coating, I am fairly sure, is applied with one of the grays from a Crayola 64 pack.

3-New frame or at least frame option. Could be as simple as ditching the finger grooves to as complex as taking notes from the manufacturers who have splooged out plastic frames designed for human hands.

Honestly I would be scrambling to copy the whole SIG style serialized trigger group and while I am musing release it with a rifle type host when released as the GEN 92 pistols.

Ugh.. I don't care for those new forward slide serrations.

It looks like two Glock slides after a head-on collision.

If I had a nickel for every thread I have read on one firearms board or another over the years where somebody lists out their "perfect" Glock and then says "it wouldn't even be that hard."

Extra cocking serrations, no finger grooves, different frame textures, different finishes, different this, different that. The fact is that it IS that difficult to make it and that part of what makes the system work is its simplicity. I personally don't get these models. You take a streamlined, consistent production line and diverge it by making all of these random variations and sub-models that only serve to complicate things. When I first attended a Glock armorer school in 2006 the biggest takeaway was just how simple the system was. At that time, the Glock 36 was the only model that was truly "odd" in the parts, but since then, the introduction of the Gen 4 (with maintenance of Gen 3) and all of the associated parts, especially all of the different RSAs, the 42/43 (that in and of themselves have many differences), the FBI "M" models coming, and now this, make me mourn the death of parts commonality.

Goofy sub-models like this are really reminiscent to me of some of the stuff that Sig was putting out five years ago, although those were mostly finish variations.

So as I said on another forum, I'm not going to get excited about this until the rainbow diamond plate MOS FS C XYZ model drops.