quote:

Still no optic cut by default. I get it that not everyone wants an optic

I'm glad they don't default an optics cut. I'm not interested in optics and I'm happy to pay less for the standard gun than pay extra for a feature I have no intention of using.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Since they're playing mix and match, why not do the G26 upper on the G19 lower. That would be ideal for me. The G17 upper on G19 lower really does nothing more than what the G19 can already do.

And no, I don't want the 43X that I have to fork out extra cash for the Shield Arms S15, plus their mag catch.

The M&P Compact 3.6" scratches that itch.

I would like a 23 upper on a 22 lower.

There is an entirely different rumor mill that thinks a Glock 49 is a single stack 10mm. Silly.

A G45 profiled single stack in .45acp with 8-10 round mags would get my money.

quote:

Originally posted by copaup:
I seem to remember something about this being made for a Fed LE contract, but I might be thinking of something else entirely. Border Patrol maybe?

You're thinking of the 47, which was essentially a 17 slide with extended dust cover to go on a 19/45 frame.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:

quote:

Originally posted by copaup:
I seem to remember something about this being made for a Fed LE contract, but I might be thinking of something else entirely. Border Patrol maybe?

You're thinking of the 47, which was essentially a 17 slide with extended dust cover to go on a 19/45 frame.

It looks like they named the 47/19 variant as the 49 to simplify things

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Probably real, but what I'd really like to see is a G19-length slide mated to a G26-length frame with a dustcover extended and configured as a rail, and I imagine Glock will eventually get around to this.

This 100 percent I would like to see.

I adore my 3rd gen g26, but, I have fat worn out hands these days. On a stock g26 if I grip high to get the proper 2 finger hold I get bit by the slide. If I grip low to avoid that my second finger will eventually slide off leaving only my "fuck you" finger and trigger finger contacting the gun.

I know this has been addressed on later gen guns, but I like my gen 3 pistols (parts are easy and I have a lot of spares and the frying pan finish is near indestructible). I've been able to overcome these issues using Grip Force beaver tails (modified) and GAP and Gee-Plate mag adapters.

A factory g-19/g-26 hybrid would get my attention right quick.

I'm excited about this possibility. A G19 frame with 15-round mags and a G17 slide would be a perfect combo for me. I hope this is true and we see it introduced soon. I'll buy one.

I'd be interested, if I could hit the side of a barn, from inside, with a 19 or 17.
Have tried multiple times with a few different models & just don't shoot them as well/naturally as just about every Sig I've shot.

There are probably more savings in production and distribution from not having two SKUs for every gun (optic vs non) than it costs to mill in the optic cut.

quote:

Originally posted by sigarms229:

quote:

Still no optic cut by default. I get it that not everyone wants an optic

I'm glad they don't default an optics cut. I'm not interested in optics and I'm happy to pay less for the standard gun than pay extra for a feature I have no intention of using.

I think this is an awesome idea. Remember when I said I didn't need any more Glocks... I was wrong.

Meh, everyone says they want one, barely anyone carried one when all you had to do was cut down a 17 grip.
I bet they don’t sell any where near as many as the 19x and 45. Still, if it’s real maybe the one thing it will do is stop that insipid comment every time someone talks about a 19 or a 45
“What they otta make is a..” well here it is. Now shut up lol.

A 19 Long Slide?

That’ll fit my 17’s holsters?

Take my money!

quote:

There are probably more savings in production and distribution from not having two SKUs for every gun (optic vs non) than it costs to mill in the optic cut.

If that was true I bet Glock would already be doing it. More likely is that they make a higher profit percentage on MOS guns than they do on standard guns, thus why they don't put an optics cut on as standard.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
A G45 profiled single stack in .45acp with 8-10 round mags would get my money.

Extremely unlikely to happen.

The lackluster market performance of the Glock 36 over the previous two decades since its introduction has already demonstrated to Glock that there's minimal demand for a single stack .45 Glock.

In fact, the G36 was such a flop that they haven't even bothered upgrading the G36 to a 4th Gen model, let alone the even newer 5th Gen. It's one of only a handful of Glock models not to be upgraded past 3rd Gen (the others being stuff like the uber-longslide 17L, the basically-defunct-caliber .45 GAP compact/subcombat G38/G39, the non-US-importable double-stacked .380 G25/G28, and the full auto G18, which also each have had very minimal market demand).

Glock modularity....still I'm more curious what the Glock 50 will be.

I already built one like that with a clone kit. It is a real nice shooter too. They will sell well.

quote:

Originally posted by sigarms229:
More likely is that they make a higher profit percentage on MOS guns than they do on standard guns, thus why they don't put an optics cut on as standard.

As I see it that's exactly the logic for why they do it. Relatively speaking, it's always been a sizable bump in price to get a MOS vs the base non-OR version. But that marketing model has past, thanks to guns like the PDP where the cut is standard and yet is still maintaining price-competitiveness with the comparable non-MOS Glock model, or guns like the Hellcat where the upcharge to an OR version is only $20-30, not the customary $80-90 that Glock forces a dealer to charge (thanks to MAP) for the same kind of privilege. Customers see that kind of differential, and more than some are concluding that it's price gouging, either by us or by Glock. And I can assuredly tell them it's not us.

Enough customers are now asking or even expecting handguns to be optic-ready that it now makes more sense to just get with the program, instead of continuing milking max dollars for an "extra" feature that should by now be standard equipment. Sure it'll cost a bit more to mill and tap every slide, but that'll just get rolled into the price and the economies of scale should more or less minimize any serious impact to the cost of producing those slides. I mean if Springfield can keep their upgrade cost to such a relatively minor upcharge, why can't Glock?

quote:

why can't Glock?

Because they are in business to make money, period. The standard joe schmoe gun buyer doesn't care about an optics cut.

On the other hand, gun people (like us or the people that go to gun forums) are more than likely to care (ok, I'm the exception).

Don't know if you noticed but Glock has a cult like following. Don't get me wrong, its kinda deserved as they are great guns. The people that fall into this group will pay more than likely for extra's

As an example 2 guys from my firehouse have Gen 5 Glock 19's. When gun discussions come up at the firehouse, they pound their chests and declare their Glocks are the best on the planet, yet these 2 could care less about the optics cut and if you asked them what an MOS version is, they would have no idea.

Having worked in a gun shop many years ago, it's my opinion that the majority of gun owners aren't like us (gun people). Don't get me wrong, they visit shops, love to look around, but in my area (PA) more came in to look at hunting rifles and shotguns than they did to look at handguns.

Bottom line, if someone is a Glock fan and wants and optic on their gun, they will pay whatever Gaston says is the up charge. That's my 2 cents on the issue.

Cheers

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigarms229,