jjc - so if you see a commercial saying Biden is the best thing that ever happened to the USA the night before the election, that means you would vote for him b/c everything you see and hear is correct?

I guess you never heard of the term Marketing. Bye, idiot.

A number of well designed, well functioning firearms are available on the market today. Lots of choices. Far too many to get your nose wrinkled over a given brand. Like Glock? Fine. Don't like Glock? Fine. Plenty of choices.

I travel a lot. A LOT. Globally, I see more Glocks in holsters than most other kinds of pistols; it's far from a forum thing, or a "fan" thing. Glock has very good marketing, makes economical offers to departments and agencies that sell a lot of their pistols. In the US, Glocks are found in federal, state, county, and municipal holsters in very large numbers. Glock supports them, and does a high volume of sales. Civil, too.

I haven't seen the PSA Dagger, so can't really comment on it, but there is no possibility that it will see the level of service and testing and use that Glock does. Ever. When I see pistols such as Chuck Taylor's 200,000 round. G19, and BigBore's 200,000 round G21 that was dragged down roads, run over by trucks, dropped from aircraft, frozen, boiled, and rolled in sand, and kept firing, it's encouraging. I haven't seen the PSA offerings do that, but whatever.

Glock doesn't make precision machinery. Glock makes mass produced tupperware that happens to work such that the most aggravating part of shooting a glock is the boring reliability. I'm not a fan, and I don't much care about slogans or sales campaigns, but I own a lot of firearms, and of those, my personal carry choice is a Glock. I was Mr. Not-Interested for a long time, and that's fine. My choice for life-preservation for personal use, and for home use, are Glocks. If you don't choose that, perfectly fine. I don't care. I don't think Glock cares, either.

The only firearm I've had that literally split in use within the first 200 rounds was a S&W (Shield), and it's the only manufacturer I've dealt with today who unabashedly lied about the product, refused to support it, and denied their warranty, then tried to sell me a replacement at more than retail, and tried to call it a "replacement under warranty." Glock didn't do that...they have a reputation for accepting basket case firearms and returning them completely refurbished...but then Glocks don't break much, either.

Perfection? No such thing. It's a marketing slogan. Get over it.

Good enough? Yes. Adequate? Quite. Satisfactory? Indeed. Capable? Unquestionably. Combat ready? Yes. Proven? Without dispute. Ubiquitous? Iconic, actually. Trust my life to it? I do.

If you don't, how does that matter to anyone else but you? It doesn't. Not to me. Not to anyone else. Not to Glock. But it matters to you. You post about it, make it your crusade, beat your chest about it, and are about to become your own martyr for it, in the sense that in this very thread you're shooting yourself in the foot, keyboard, and talking head. But, whatever.

I have no problem with differing, contrary points of view. More the merrier. However, I DO have a problem regarding uncivil pricks with an attitude.

My apologies for not screaming and putting this post in all caps.

Wow. Your arguments are fairly weak. So only US manufactured blocks count towards their “millions”. Gotcha. As for junk slides, have you ever had one fail? Seen one fail? Was it due to “junk steel”, which is kind of an idiotic term in this case? S&W only uses a hinged trigger because they lost the infringement lawsuit. Apex has made a fortune replacing them. Glocks get replaced because as this thread shows, the world loves Glocks, upgrading Glocks, building Glock killers, etc.

You are claiming it’s better but then demand we prove you are wrong. How about you prove your case? Have to do better than saying the slide is stainless though. I have lots of “junk steel” carbon slides across all the big manufacturers and none of them have failed, cracked, whatever junk steel is supposed to do.

I think you just want attention and unfortunately we are providing it. Oh well. Still looking forward to that range report.

I'm curious what makes stainless steel superior to carbon steel and what this guy's basis is for that opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by jjc:
Whether it's your forum means little to me...

Then, leave. Let me know if you have any trouble finding the door.

quote:

Of course I'm dealing with a bunch of Glock groupies...

Oh, yes, of course. That's what's going on. Glock groupies.

The members here own all sorts of pistols, including Glocks. If you think that makes us "Glock groupies", so be it.

Happy trails

/Looks at watch.

It'll be Sunday in about nine hours.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
/Looks at watch.

It'll be Sunday in about nine hours.

Don’t forget to spring forward.

Just go back to whatever hole you crawled out of and leave this site as it is. There may be fewer members on this site than on others, but that is the beauty of what it is. There are very few smarmy people here and those that continue to be, get the boot. The members here come from many walks of life and offer good info. and don't come off like a troublemaker as you are jjc.

First Glock was brilliant at marketing back in the day. Like they did an amazing job getting guns into holsters.

Second they made a good product and still do a. Albeit stagnant one.

An entire generation of shooters grew up on nothing but striker fired 9mm and anything outside of that seems to really throw them off.

The reality is I am not a huge Glock guy and frankly I prefer hammer fired DA/SA but it is intellectually dishonest to think Glock makes a crappy product. Cutting edge it isn’t. Perfection it sure as hell isn’t and frankly it’s designed for life size Lego mini fig hands but at the end of the day it has, for decades, proven to be an extremely reliable, durable firearm and that is nothing to sneeze at.

Are there a lot of Glock kool aid drinkers? Of course. But that can be said of any brand. Christ HK folks are like a cult. So it’s just not Glock, they just have a generation of folks who basically only know GLOCK.

I, personally, have been blessed to have a wide range of shooting experience and I will happily tell you the good and bad from my perspective of a vast number of guns and spoiler alert none are perfect but lot of them are damn good Glock included.

My cheap gun is as good as your Glock! It is it is.

Mommmy! Mommy! TELL THEM.

Glock was largely hated by most American gun owners in the beginning, what made the grade with municipal departments was a 20% price advantage over metal framed handguns, a very simple overall design, and the manual of arms of a revolver - not all departments had jumped on the DA/SA bandwagon that Smith and Wesson had copied from the Walther P38. Smiths design was a belated entry to the 1954 Army pistol trials cancelled because "we have 3 million 1911's and bunkers full of .45, so we can't." Same excuse why we didn't jump on the .276 Pederson or use a magazine in the Garand.

Glock did a great job hiring a staff of engineers and coming up with a game changing design, albeit polymer frames were already old hat, HK did them in the 1970s, and striker guns date back to before the 1911. What was new was the SAFE trigger - and after 45 years its mechanically copied by a lot of others, but now questioned as prone to being a magnet for poor self discipline. That's not an inherent flaw in mechanical engineering, but the argument remains if it's ergonomically safe in human interaction. As there are .Gov and departments who do insist on having a thumb operated safety, Glock can supply and will bid contracts that require them.

Glock did a great job of selling a firearm that met the needs of LEO's in America at the time it was offered. 45 years later, needs can change and methods of design to meet them can, too. There are also other requirements that get introduced which aren't insurmountable - the necessity of different grip sizes, or new views on how to control the activation of the trigger. If there is one thing I see as a problem for Glock right now, it's their delay in offering a separate FCU/grip unit - which may be a patent problem - and addressing the SAFE action trigger. Glock is selling a 45 year old design now. It's not the leading edge - its actually slipping into the role of being the 1911 vs SIG's "glock" knocking them off their pedestal.

History repeating itself.

If Glocks fit my hand well, and the sights lined up intuitively (as in - close my eyes, aim, open my eyes, and the sights are aligned) my life would be a lot easier.

I've owned maybe 10 Glocks and sold all of them. I tried. They are simple, reliable, durable, and ubiquitous. Holsters are readily available and magazines are cheap.

But they just don't fit my hand.

Friends of mine that have served in war, and know guns better than most of us here, prefer them over any fancy 1911. Because they work. Every time. For them, the perfect Mil sidearm is the G19. Nothing more, nothing less.

For me, the P320 and its modularity works. Good to have options.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lefty Sig,

Everyone owes it to themselves to try a G20, even if you only rent one for a range session.

I understand SW is gonna have a crack at a competitor, but I'd be mighty surprised if it shoots as softly as the G20.

America currently has a bumper crop of whiny men.
Kleenex must be selling a ton to keep the tears off their Gucci shirts.

Glocks are ugly, I know, but they are beautiful under the skin. They go bang every time IME. They are simple and revolutionary in their simplicity. I'm not advocating. I'm acknowledging. I want to like how they look, but I just can't. I buy them because they work. I'm not a Glock guy though.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
If Glocks fit my hand well, and the sights line up intuitively (as in - close my eyes, aim, open my eyes, and the sights are aligned) my life would be a lot easier.

I've owned maybe 10 Glocks and sold all of them. I tried. They are simple, reliable, durable, and ubiquitous. Holsters are readily available and magazines are cheap.

But they just don't fit my hand.

Friends of mine that have served in war, and know guns better than most of us here, prefer them over any fancy 1911. Because they work. Every time. For them, the perfect Mil sidearm is the G19. Nothing more, nothing less.

For me, the P320 and its modularity works. Good to have options.

Basically came here to say this. I carry a G45 at work because I’m required to carry a Glock. I’d carry an M&P 2.0 or a Staccato tomorrow if I could.

But I tell you what, every Glock I’ve owned has been well made, dead nuts reliable, and something I would bet my life on if I had to. You don’t have to love something to acknowledge it’s s quality product.

Anyway, where do I get some of the crack OP got into?

I read this thread and find I just wasted a few minutes of my life to come up with this.

Who gives a rats ass about blah blah blah about somebody that focuses so much about.....oh who gives a shit?

Don't like clocks... don't buy a clock. Like em...buy em. Get a freakin life or go play with the libturd whiners.... SMH

I had my choice between the Glock 43X, the Hellcat and the Sig 365 and the Glock had the edge over all of them. Each one had one single thing that was superior to the others, but the Glock did everything well enough at a practical cost.

I absolutely despise the Glock's trigger, but it works reliably. The gun just works. It hits where I point it, it's thin and fits my hand comfortably. Every time I get rid of one of them, I wind up going back.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Bore Lover:
Don't like clocks... don't buy a clock. Like em...buy em.

Is this a DST rant?