quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
https://x.com/SafetyNotorious/.../1991401866719269307

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe id="twitter-widget-1" scrolling="no" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&lang=en&theme=&id=1991401866719269307" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 550px; height: 753px; display: block; border: medium; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-image: url('https://codejanitor.net/embeds/images/bgmessage.png'); background-position: center 85px; background-size: 200px; overflow: hidden;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

To paraphrase Mr. Scott, “The more they mess with the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain.”
Or in this case, the spice is flowing.

quote:

Originally posted by Broadside:

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
Has Glock actually come out and said we have done this so a switch can’t be installed or because we’re being sued?

The only official thing I have seen states:

quote:

As part of GLOCK’s commitment to future innovations, we are making necessary updates to our product line to align with upcoming offerings…The GLOCK V Series is here to establish a baseline of products while simplifying our process.

Is it possible this has been in the works for awhile and has nothing to do with Cali law or any lawsuits??
I mean the design is not much different they had to know a switch would be made for these rather quickly.

I am not an attorney. But as an accountant I occasionally come in contact with legal things. I've been told by lawyers that courts take a dim view of companies doing things just so they don't get sued. For example, you don't want to say that you destroy all documents after five years so you don't get sued. Instead, you want to say that you are safeguarding your stakeholders' security and privacy by ensuring the destruction of documents after mandatory statutory limits have passed.

I think that after December 1st Glock will submit motions for all these lawsuits stating that they have complied with the intent and that the lawsuits are now mute so they should be dismissed. It would then be on the plaintiffs to refile, but to do that they would need evidence which would not come about until the Glock Gen V's start showing up in police evidence bags.

I've seen snippets of what is purported to be the California law posted on reddit. By my reading it appears that the California legislature included a one-time loophole to allow Glock, and other manufacturers, an opportunity to get back on the roster with their current design if they redesign their pistol to be compliant with the law.

Any how, that's just my non-lawyer opinion.

From the very beginning one thing glock has been very good at is staying ahead of legal boondoggle
The V is probably another example. There are a lot of stories from glocks early years in the US when the legal department was as busy as sales staving off threats in the market, mostly early on from negligent discharges cases.
I am not a fan boy, have a couple and they do the job and are a great moderate to low cost option for a lot of people and agencies. If the steps they have taken keep them viable in the market, good for them

Taran Tactical posting pictures on IG of what’s supposedly the Gen6.

Looks like a stippled 5

If real. Claims 9mm only, new Ergonomics, flat faced trigger, and REFINED optics system.
Appears all will be optics ready.
Grip texture looks quite aggressive

Well I’m in

I am very interested to see how all this plays out, that is for sure.
Lots of big changes quickly over there at Glock.

Pulling COAs from civilian markets, dropping all G5 and prior from civilian markets, and switching to the V that really makes no consequential changes, and now (possibly) the Gen 6.
All in what 4 months?

I grabbed a Glock 19 COA literally hours before that announcement and they all disappeared and have been very happy with it.

So are they killing the 47 and going back to the 17?

Also, it looks like there's links at distributor websites:

https://www.theshootingwarehou...ter_tab_id=undefined

https://www.theshootingwarehou...ter_tab_id=undefined

Also multiple pictures inbound:

Those pictures are a little small, DanH; any way to make them bigger to show more detail.

But but but, it’s not modular. Seriously I like the texture, the flat trigger, and am curious if the mounting system is better than MOS. (I don’t particularly like MOS)

I love my COA but I don’t see that as being the standard mount going forward. I would buy more A mount COA stuff though if it were to gain ground. Just need more rear sight options which would be easy if there was a market.

Gen6 doesn’t “seem” all that evolutionary though. Not enough info yet.

Edited: looks like a nice Glock knuckle undercut which I like and will save me some dremel time.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Those pictures are a little small, DanH; any way to make them bigger to show more detail.

I warned you ahead of time. If you find something smaller then post it.

I like what I’m seeing from a functional standpoint. Magazine release seems heightened and rounded a bit as well like the Tango Down releases. I’ll probably get one in a 47.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:


I warned you ahead of time. If you find something smaller then post it.

Thanks for the pics. Some people complain just to be complaining.

I missed the warning, but one example of a smaller size resized from the original:



I will nevertheless make note of what sorts of things are acceptable to comment about on the forum, so thanks for the admonition. I am still learning.

So it does appear like the patent pics with the “slide off grip” module are true, assuming the pics I keep seeing are real. You can see the “line” where it attaches. Maybe that line is a trick of light, I dunno.

I like the aggressive texturing.

The grip appears to be more “rounded” which I like.

I have read elsewhere there may be drop in trigger packs. No idea if these will just be trigger packs or the serialized part.

Looks to have the same shitty dovetail protectors.

Can COA be “modular” like made to work with other optics? I wonder if that will be the optic mounting solution or some variation of.

What is going on with the trigger? It almost looks like it has two “trigger safeties/Dinguses….dingui??? ).

Undercut looks good.

Gas pedal looks good.

I wonder if they will drop the 47 name and the G17 will really just be a 47 so to speak. The G17 name is legendary, I’d keep it even if I updated it to a 47 mechanically.

All in all I generally like what I am seeing but alas updating a Glock is like updating a Jeep or Porsche 911 or Mustang. So much legacy and a fine line between truly making it better or cocking it all up.

I don’t see two trigger dingus nor do I see any “line” where grip modules slide off/on.

I like it. On face value it doesn’t seem like a massive update. Texture, trigger shape, undercut, maybe new optics mount, rounded mag release. I like all that stuff but it’s literally nothing I can’t update myself with a gen4/5. Saves me time and money but I really thought it would support modularity.

Edited: I thought we don’t say “gas pedal” anymore because it makes that crazy guy reappear. lol

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
What is going on with the trigger? It almost looks like it has two “trigger safeties/Dinguses….dingui??? ).

From the side pic the trigger shoe splits into two in order to make room for the dingus, and it looks like the center of the shoe itself extends further back. Maybe when you press the dingus the rear disappears into the trigger shoe.

The optic cut has me guessing as it is massive if the pictures are right. Even if Glock went direct mount, you'll still need either pins or spacer plates to cover up the remaining space the optic doesn't.

Also, the original links to the distributor site are gone, but the pictures are still up. Looks like Glock still has a problem with people jumping the gun on announcements.

Yeah if I zoom in that line may be a trick of light/the texture. There is just something different to my eye past that top rear roll pin. Could just be the textures/light.

The dingus itself appears to be singular but the “triangular” rear of the dingus/trigger seems to have two things impeding the trigger on the frame. On closer look that might just be the trigger itself going into the frame. Another trick of light/flat picture thing.

Why can’t we say gas pedal? I missed that memo. I mean I just got my unitard in the mail.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
So it does appear like the patent pics with the “slide off grip” module are true, assuming the pics I keep seeing are real. You can see the “line” where it attaches. Maybe that line is a trick of light, I dunno.

I haven't seen anything about this. Share these pics with the class.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
The grip appears to be more “rounded” which I like.

I was noticing that also, less flat on the side.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
I have read elsewhere there may be drop in trigger packs. No idea if these will just be trigger packs or the serialized part.

You know, I'm curious about that also. Pedro says it's not modular, but I'm seeing some parts in the slide and frame gap that don't exist in my Gen 5's and I can't think of what they'd be, but they kind of have that "serialized chassis" vibe. Until we see a serial plate molded in the underside of the dust cover and a look at one of these pulled apart, I'm not going to rule it out. I'm also wondering what's going on with the extractor.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
Looks to have the same shitty dovetail protectors.

I know... I guess this is keeping with tradition, at least.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
What is going on with the trigger? It almost looks like it has two “trigger safeties/Dinguses….dingui??? ).

Pedro's wrong, I see it also. Interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
Gas pedal looks good.

Where are you seeing a "Gas pedal?" If you're talking about the texture on the thumb shelf, you're using the terminology wrong because a "Gas pedal" is totally different in terms of geometry and function.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Edited: I thought we don’t say “gas pedal” anymore because it makes that crazy guy reappear. lol

No, I seem to recall Para's position on that being that we can say whatever the fuck we want because he won't be bullied by an asshole... who got banned, and his sock puppet accounts along with his main.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
I wonder if they will drop the 47 name and the G17 will really just be a 47 so to speak. The G17 name is legendary, I’d keep it even if I updated it to a 47 mechanically.

I was just having that conversation with some friends. The 47 is too popular for them not to offer one, and they only mentioned introducing the 17, 19, 45, and inexplicably, the 49, which all three people who ever wanted that combo already bought one in the few months they offered one earlier this year. The simple explanation is that they rolled in the changes in the slide that made the 47 what it is into the 17 and discontinued the 47. The Glock 17 gets a new lease on life, Glock simplifies production to two frames and two slides, everything interchanges, and people can mix and match to their heart's content.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:
Looks like Glock still has a problem with people jumping the gun on announcements.

Yeah they do. I wonder what exactly they can do about huge distributors violating dealer agreements. Lenny Magill twice this year and now this. I'll bet none of this was supposed to come out until SHOT show.

You know, the more I look at those huge pics (thanks, DanH) with my G45 stripped down, the more I'm thinking there's a serialized chassis under there. There's a lot going on there that has no reason to exist otherwise, and too much from the traditional arrangement that's missing.

Boy, that new Glock looks, dare I say, Ergonomic...Said no one ever before in history!