quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
The damn thing might be more easily accepted were it not full covered with serrations, slots, holes and other useless features. Maybe I'm just a little plain wrapper. Most Glocks actually apeal to me. Yes, a service tool. Perhaps Zev could have made a model with less of the exterior machine work which would sell for less and attract a regular kind of customer base. All this extra machining simply turns me off. Just my thoughts.

Same. Their duty models have far fewer serrations though. Still too many up front for my personal taste, since this is all about personal taste and what sells.

quote:

Originally posted by amc:
It looks like the accessory rail is part of the chassis. Does that mean you have a g17 length regardless of grip size? Or does the accessory rail separate from the rest of the chassis to accommodate different length?

The Pic rail and locking block are part of the internal receiver/chassis. That means the OZ9 receiver is limited to full length slides, and the OZ9c is limited to compact length slides. For a modular design, it's not very modular compared to something like P320 or P365 FCUs.

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
See monobloks post back on page 4. Pretty well covers this pistol for me. The damn thing might be more easily accepted were it not full covered with serrations, slots, holes and other useless features. Maybe I'm just a little plain wrapper. Most Glocks actually apeal to me. Yes, a service tool. Perhaps Zev could have made a model with less of the exterior machine work which would sell for less and attract a regular kind of customer base. All this extra machining simply turns me off. Just my thoughts.

The OZ9 series is subdivided into Combat, Duty, & Elite line variants. The Combat line has a lot of slide serrations, grooves, & is milled for optic. They do not have slide cutouts, porting, or TiN gold coating. Don't know if they're plain enough for you, but that's as plain as you'll get for Zev.

https://www.zevtechnologies.co...p/Pistols/OZ9-Combat

There was some grumbling a few months back over a press release about the OZ9 Combat X being selected for US Dept of Energy Office of Secure Transportation agents, b/c what is their justification for $1500 Gucci Glocks?

https://www.thefirearmblog.com...s-zev-oz-9-x-combat/

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:

quote:

Originally posted by amc:
It looks like the accessory rail is part of the chassis. Does that mean you have a g17 length regardless of grip size? Or does the accessory rail separate from the rest of the chassis to accommodate different length?

The Pic rail and locking block are part of the internal receiver/chassis. That means the OZ9 receiver is limited to full length slides, and the OZ9c is limited to compact length slides. For a modular design, it's not very modular compared to something like P320 or P365 FCUs.

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
See monobloks post back on page 4. Pretty well covers this pistol for me. The damn thing might be more easily accepted were it not full covered with serrations, slots, holes and other useless features. Maybe I'm just a little plain wrapper. Most Glocks actually apeal to me. Yes, a service tool. Perhaps Zev could have made a model with less of the exterior machine work which would sell for less and attract a regular kind of customer base. All this extra machining simply turns me off. Just my thoughts.

The OZ9 series is subdivided into Combat, Duty, & Elite line variants. The Combat line has a lot of slide serrations, grooves, & is milled for optic. They do not have slide cutouts, porting, or TiN gold coating. Don't know if they're plain enough for you, but that's as plain as you'll get for Zev.

https://www.zevtechnologies.co...p/Pistols/OZ9-Combat

There was some grumbling a few months back over a press release about the OZ9 Combat X being selected for US Dept of Energy Office of Secure Transportation agents, b/c what is their justification for $1500 Gucci Glocks?

https://www.thefirearmblog.com...s-zev-oz-9-x-combat/

They used to have a Competition model also..

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
It’s not a fancy Glock. It’s a high end pistol using Glock’s design.

A distinction without a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
It’s not a fancy Glock. It’s a high end pistol using Glock’s design.

A distinction without a difference.

Oh yeah? How is that? I guess my Ed Browns, Wilsons, Baers, Cabots, Nighthawks, etc, etc are fancy Colts.

Tell me the difference please. Enlighten me, because I’m confused here.

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Oh yeah? How is that? I guess my Ed Browns, Wilsons, Baers, Cabots, Nighthawks, etc, etc are fancy Colts.

Twice now, I have explained this to you and yet you persist. You are beginning to try my patience. My suggestion to you is to let this go. You're not doing yourself any favors.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Oh yeah? How is that? I guess my Ed Browns, Wilsons, Baers, Cabots, Nighthawks, etc, etc are fancy Colts.

Twice now, I have explained this to you and yet you persist. You are beginning to try my patience. My suggestion to you is to let this go. You're not doing yourself any favors.

Oh damn ok. I better stop in that case.

Call it whatever you like.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
The damn thing might be more easily accepted were it not full covered with serrations, slots, holes and other useless features. Maybe I'm just a little plain wrapper. Most Glocks actually apeal to me. Yes, a service tool. Perhaps Zev could have made a model with less of the exterior machine work which would sell for less and attract a regular kind of customer base. All this extra machining simply turns me off. Just my thoughts.

Same. Their duty models have far fewer serrations though. Still too many up front for my personal taste, since this is all about personal taste and what sells.

Nice deal on the duty models at $1100 MSRP. I think it’s a lot of gun for the money

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Call it whatever you like.

That's what I've been saying to you in this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Is a Cabot 1911 a Colt? How about Wilson Combat?

Now we're going in circles. You are free to think of these pistols however you wish, but as far as I am concerned, they're nothing but gaudy Glocks, for the very good reason that that's what they are.

Fixing your reading comprehension issues would go a long way towards smoothing our path.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Call it whatever you like.

That's what I've been saying to you in this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Is a Cabot 1911 a Colt? How about Wilson Combat?

Now we're going in circles. You are free to think of these pistols however you wish, but as far as I am concerned, they're nothing but gaudy Glocks, for the very good reason that that's what they are.

Fixing your reading comprehension issues would go a long way towards smoothing our path.

Pretty funny. My path is already plenty smooth, but thanks.

Considering I write and process tons of documents for a living, I’m plenty confident with my reading comprehension. I also like to keep things real. Since I experience every high end gun on the market, I’m also confident I know what these guns are and what they aren’t. Not you or anyone else on this forum is going to teach me anything about rare and/or high end pistols.

I’m done with this. Sorry for trying to do some educating on your forum.

You want to see a "fancy Glock", take a look at the DC Precision DC9R.

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
I’m done with this. Sorry for trying to do some educating on your forum.

Is that it? You're here to teach us something? All I see is someone getting their undies in a bunch because someone else has a different opinion.

And if you don't like being razzed about your reading skills- well, instead of crowing about what you do for a living how 'bout you just read what I've posted so that I don't have to repeat it to you?

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Oh yeah? How is that? I guess my Ed Browns, Wilsons, Baers, Cabots, Nighthawks, etc, etc are fancy Colts.

Tell me the difference please. Enlighten me, because I’m confused here.

You're obtuse, it would be a waste of my time. You list a bunch of 1911's and act like they're not all 1911's. "Ooooh, but they're not! This one says Ed Brown on it, and this one says Cabot on it, and this one says...." Yeah, no matter who slaps their name on it, it's still a John Browning design. Gaston Glock has now achieved similar status. Nobody else is confused about it, just you and the OP. That's an interesting correlation.

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
Considering I write and process tons of documents for a living, I’m plenty confident with my reading comprehension.

For a claim like that, your grasp on the English language is comically weak. "A difference without a distinction" is pretty straightforward. Do you write grants or something? Technical legalese with no imagination?

quote:

Originally posted by bac1023:
I also like to keep things real. Since I experience every high end gun on the market, I’m also confident I know what these guns are and what they aren’t. Not you or anyone else on this forum is going to teach me anything about rare and/or high end pistols.

I’m done with this. Sorry for trying to do some educating on your forum.

Is that what you call that? Because it comes across for all the world like fantastic arrogance, overwhelming impudence, effete snobbery. You act like you're trying to explain quantum physics to the ants on your sidewalk. You care about the differences between a stock Glock and a Zev because you're cubic dollars into the Huggy Bear version of a $500 gun. Those other pistols? Even more dollars. You're not here to "educate us" and Jesus Christ, what a thing to say. You're here to justify those expenditures and pretend like anyone who isn't also singing their praises, well... it's all just pearls before swine, isn't it?

"educating" SIGforumites. That deserves an internet award, Snob of The Year. No, make it Snob of The Decade, because I'm pretty confident no one will be able to surpass that. Lol.

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:
The Pic rail and locking block are part of the internal receiver/chassis. That means the OZ9 receiver is limited to full length slides, and the OZ9c is limited to compact length slides. For a modular design, it's not very modular compared to something like P320 or P365 FCUs.

That's actually incorrect. If you get the compact length chassis, Zev sells slides and barrels that will let you go to 17 and 34 length much like the Gen 5 19/45/47. If you go with the regular chassis, you're stuck with the 17 as the shortest it will go.

It would be interesting to see what difference the fancy Glock makes compared to a stock factory version on a well-designed course of fire under a timer. To add to the experiment, it would be cool to see how the results of different shooters at various skill levels are impacted by the different guns. Take the theory out of discussion and put it into practice....put a measurable result to the dollar value of the "upgrades".

I'm not your guy for this one, though...I don't even own a factory Glock anymore, and the fancy gold-plated stuff doesn't interest me enough to spend the money.

The only logical reason companies produce these "Fancy" Glocks, with ports, lightening cuts, TIN parts, etc. is because reproducing a basic model would mean you're competing against the same market as Glock.

PSA Dagger for example.

Probably not the best market to go after since well, Glock already owns it.

If you look at this, like some forum members have mentioned, and say, "if it weren't for all the bells and whistles I would be interested", then youre simply interested in a Glock.

quote:

Originally posted by OttoSig:
The only logical reason companies produce these "Fancy" Glocks, with ports, lightening cuts, TIN parts, etc. is because reproducing a basic model would mean you're competing against the same market as Glock.

PSA Dagger for example.

Agreed.

However, the PSA Dagger is specifically trying to undercut Glock by coming in at a lower price point, for those who want a Glock but can't/won't spend the money for a "real Glock".

But your basic premise is sound. You either go high, or go low, since you can't really compete with Glock within Glock's price range with a Glock clone.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

Agreed.

However, the PSA Dagger is specifically trying to undercut Glock by coming in at a lower price point, for those who want a Glock but can't/won't spend the money for a "real Glock".

But your basic premise is sound. You either go high, or go low, since you can't really compete with Glock within Glock's price range with a Glock clone.

You're absolutely right, thinking about it, after reading your point, I suppose I may not be in a majority that think, "why wouldn't I just buy the proven Glock, since it's already a low priced pistol?"

Perhaps to more folks than I would assume think a Glock is not a low priced pistol.

I still don't see the point of a four-figure Glock clone, no matter HOW GOOD the end result may be. What's the target market for something like this? The 'connoisseurs' of fine firearms? With a pistol formed from the bones of a Glock? Dissatisfied Glock owners wishing that there was an spendy tuner alternative to the pedestrian factory riff-raff? But still can rely upon a healthy supply of cheap parts and magazines?

That's the mental disconnect that I have with guns like the OZ-9. Lipstick<=>Pig syndrome. No matter how refined the end product might be it's still based upon the platform AND market of a parent gun that's perfectly suited at being what it is and is not pretending to be something that it was never intended to be.

Yeah the 1911 once upon a time was cut from a very similar mold. And now they too have arguably become teased and preened over to the point of ridiculousness. But I think the 1911 is also very different. It's HAD its time in the limelight. It's had its 110+ years steeped history, particularly tied to its country of origin. In service it's been superseded by newer designs, including Glock. So why not put the old gal on a pedestal? It kinda deserves it, doncha think?

But does the Glock really deserve such similar treatment? Has it in its basic form outlived its purpose, its usefulness, that it needs to be redefined just to somehow make it more relevant to the marketplace? Because if it doesn't, then what's the whole point of exercises like the OZ-9?

This reminds me of a small scale version of the Singer 911. For those who aren't familiar, Singer is an outfit that makes a VERY Guccified 1970ish 911, something that Porsche of that early never could make themselves. Singer takes the bones of a 20-year younger 911 (1990s vintage), tears almost everything off of its bones (but keeping the all-important VIN of course), then rebuilds the cars using state-of-the-art-for-the-2020s technologies, techniques and materials into a car that could've been sort-of mistaken as being from 50 years ago (well not really). Then slap a (moving) six-figure price tag on it, get YT influencers like Jay Leno to review and slather accolades...and all the filthy rich sheep come a-runnin', waving wads of cash and pining with even more cash to be put at the front of the waitlist. Never mind that a current, modern Porsche 911 will wax the pretender for a fraction of the price.

Yeah, in many respects a Wilson Combat 1911 is a lot like that Singer. So is the OZ-9. More power to ZEV, but I still don't see the point. Most rich dudes don't see Glocks as collectibles. And as a group I doubt that they'll make the distinction between the Gucci OZ-9s and the factory originals to justify the price discrepancy.