Glock 19/23 MHS

States that along with European submissions the MHS variant will be available on the commercial market. I imagine it will be a strong submission to LEA's that require manual safeties.

Also a blurb about Federal barrier blind expanding pistol ammo.

quote:

Originally posted by smithnsig:
the MHS variant will be available on the commercial market

I'm going to laugh if the big reveal slated by Glock for this Saturday is the commercial release of the MHS, rather than the M Series/Gen 5 like most people assume. (I'm also going to be very disappointed, because I really want a G19M.)

I have no use for a manual safety on a Glock. And the G19-length slide paired with the G17-length grip (similar to the P320 Carry) may make some sense as a military or law enforcement duty gun, but is less ideal for concealed carry.

Reading the comments on the TFB article, the speculation tossed around there has the MHS with a fire control group similar to the 320, APX, 509, etc. I would buy the MHS just for that alone.

If true about the internals being contained in an all-in-one module, that one of those proverbial game changers for an otherwise slothlike company like Glock. Just like with the SIG, no more freaking out about stippling the frame. Plus no need to grind off the finger groove ridges. Damn shame about that stupid thumb safety, though.

Now I've become interested in what happens on the 26th.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
. . . the G19-length slide paired with the G17-length grip . . .

The worst of both worlds.

You are right, many people will be greatly disappointed if this is the big "reveal" on the 26th.

quote:

Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
Reading the comments on the TFB article, the speculation tossed around there has the MHS with a fire control group similar to the 320, APX, 509, etc. I would buy the MHS just for that alone.

If true about the internals being contained in an all-in-one module, that one of those proverbial game changers for an otherwise slothlike company like Glock. Just like with the SIG, no more freaking out about stippling the frame.

The hands-on review of the G19 MHS at European Security and Defense makes no mention of any P320-style swappable FCU. So that doesn't appear to be the case.

http://www.euro-sd.com/esd/arc...ar-handgun-system-1/

The MHS's requirement for grip modularity only required a minimum of swappable backstraps, which is what the Glock MHS appears to have, just like the Gen 4 Glocks. It looks like only a quarter of the MHS submissions (3 out of 12) had completely modular grip shells and self-contained FCUs.

I continue to be astounded by the negative comments here about a safety on a Glock - or any other pistol. It's there as an option - don't use it if you choose not too!! I know that the tactical elite will say that a safety could add a nano-second of delay to their very frequent encounters with all the bad guys out there - but I like having the option. I hope they do release it because I would like to have one ...

I'm sorry, but it's a great option for them to offer. While there are a lot of things I like about the Glock design, I've always considered it tantamount to a 1911 with no manual safety.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
I have no use for a manual safety on a Glock.

Interesting pistol. Got one in black?

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
I'm sorry, but it's a great option for them to offer. While there are a lot of things I like about the Glock design, I've always considered it tantamount to a 1911 with no manual safety.

I agree with this.

If they did this, it's not the gun in the picture. I can look at the takedown lever and the pin placement, and see that the action is standard issue Glock (with the addition of the safety, which is a pretty minor modification to the structure of the action.)

quote:

Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
Reading the comments on the TFB article, the speculation tossed around there has the MHS with a fire control group similar to the 320, APX, 509, etc. I would buy the MHS just for that alone.

If true about the internals being contained in an all-in-one module, that one of those proverbial game changers for an otherwise slothlike company like Glock. Just like with the SIG, no more freaking out about stippling the frame. Plus no need to grind off the finger groove ridges. Damn shame about that stupid thumb safety, though.

Now I've become interested in what happens on the 26th.

quote:

Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
Reading the comments on the TFB article, the speculation tossed around there has the MHS with a fire control group similar to the 320, APX, 509, etc. I would buy the MHS just for that alone.

If true about the internals being contained in an all-in-one module, that one of those proverbial game changers for an otherwise slothlike company like Glock. Just like with the SIG, no more freaking out about stippling the frame. Plus no need to grind off the finger groove ridges. Damn shame about that stupid thumb safety, though.

Now I've become interested in what happens on the 26th.

I think the modularity Glock went with is common geometry with the barrel, locking block, locking lug etc. to make the 17 and 19 compatible. I think the Gen5/M is this way also.

quote:

Originally posted by DMF:

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
. . . the G19-length slide paired with the G17-length grip . . .

The worst of both worlds.

You are right, many people will be greatly disappointed if this is the big "reveal" on the 26th.

Agree.

What happened to all the "smaller statured law enforcement recruits" business that we were getting in the last couple of decades? Not everyone has bear paws for hands or needs the extra 1/2 inch of grip.

A G17 slide with G19 length grip would have been more preferable and applicable in my opinion.

Also (addressing other comments made in this thread), even if the FCU is removable, it still looks like the serial number is integrated into the frame/dustcover rails. So the fame is still the firearm--swapping the FCU gets you nothing more than a new trigger until, just like the Glocks of ages past.

Also, while I'm glad to see the finger grooves finally go, it's asinine that it's taken them this long to do it.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
I'm sorry, but it's a great option for them to offer. While there are a lot of things I like about the Glock design, I've always considered it tantamount to a 1911 with no manual safety.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
I have no use for a manual safety on a Glock.

I agree it is a nice option for people to have. The M&P line has had the option forever and I don't see people getting nearly as worked up about it.

Don't get me wrong, I have no objection to them offering a manual safety as an option. As stated, other Glock competitors like the P320, XD, M&P have had it as an option for a while, and I have no problem with that.

What I meant with my earlier post was that personally, I don't want or need a manual safety. And compared to a 19M, the 19MHS configuration (with its manual safety and longer grip) is not what I'm wanting.

So I'm hoping that's not the big reveal this weekend.

That lip on the front and lanyard loop seem like they would up the difficulty of a reload...

The subcompact Glocks have a similar lip on the front, and it doesn't make them difficult to reload.

Another thought is that this gun won't fit 90 percent of the holsters out there without modification. It won't fit any of the Safariland duty holsters from the picture presented.

The other side is even more dramatically different, with an ambi slide lock lever along with an elongated safety lever. So it certainly looks like holster compatibility will be an issue.

G19:


G19 MHS:

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
The subcompact Glocks have a similar lip on the front, and it doesn't make them difficult to reload.

the size of my hands make those difficult for me to reload. im probably too spoiled by magwells.

The regular G19 already has a lanyard hole, so why the big lanyard loop in the MHS, that might interfere with reloading?