Ordered the coolest new Glock available.

[Idaho45guy]

Seems like if you put the word "Glock" somewhere in a post, it produces strong responses.

Yep. I went through a few of them and never really warmed up to them about two decades ago. I liked the M&Ps better, or Walthers, or XDs.

Then the Gen 4 came out and now the Gen 5. Now I like them.

But I never felt the need to go into any thread about Glocks and badmouth them.

Same as 1911s. I think they are obsolete and stupid for carry pistols, yet I don't go into threads of people who just bought one and trash them. I have class. Glock haters typically don't.

[str8wal]

Cool and glock are mutually exclusive.

Thinking alike

[roysha]

Yep. I went through a few of them and never really warmed up to them about two decades ago. I liked the M&Ps better, or Walthers, or XDs.

Then the Gen 4 came out and now the Gen 5. Now I like them.

But I never felt the need to go into any thread about Glocks and badmouth them.

Same as 1911s. I think they are obsolete and stupid for carry pistols, yet I don't go into threads of people who just bought one and trash them. I have class. Glock haters typically don't.

I didn't realize I wasn't allowed to dislike some guns and like others on this site. I guess I just DON'T have any class. Oh well. Perhaps those that do will have enough to negate my classlessness.

[Love Life]

Glock pistols are great tools, and have a beauty of their own.

[9.3X62AL]

I don't get wrapped around an axle if someone likes or dislikes a given make of pistol that I like or dislike. That Ford/Chevy/Mopar-type banter is fun if it's good-natured, but really has no place in an earnest discussion of "good" and "bad" design features. Just those descriptors alone state the obvious--that the matter involves subjective impressions and personal tastes. I worked in a unique environment for one of the venues I was assigned to--firearms trainer. My shop authorized 300 make/model/caliber variants of revolver and autopistol after 1994, and in order to help the guys and gals that came to train and qualify with that array of authorized sideiron and holsterplastic I made it my business to be abundantly familiar with just about all of them.

My conclusions? All of the makes we authorized (and a few others) are really good, reliable sidearms. They all run well if fed with good ammo from good magazines, their failure rates are negligible, and they almost never "break". Compared to the autopistol landscape of, say, 1970--the gunmakers came a long way.

Do I have "favorites"? Of course I do--Glock 23 is my most common EDC, and a SIG P-220 or P-226 goes along in town in cooler weather. Back-country travel sees me with a S&W 686 x 4", and often a levergun or 223 gas gun of some kind behind the truck seat. These are products of "tastes" and "preferences", which may or may not correspond to your needs and environments. As during my days as a LE trainer, it wasn't my place to criticize the choices made by others--my tasking was to get the folks comfy with their choices if at all possible, and to know enough to send folks in other directions if their needs and preferences showed a problem. That rubric prevails for me on this hobby site as well.

[Petrol & Powder]

Al wrote: "I don't get wrapped around an axle if someone likes or dislikes a given make of pistol that I like or dislike......."


/\ Ditto /\

[Idaho45guy]

I don't get wrapped around an axle if someone likes or dislikes a given make of pistol that I like or dislike. That Ford/Chevy/Mopar-type banter is fun if it's good-natured, but really has no place in an earnest discussion of "good" and "bad" design features. Just those descriptors alone state the obvious--that the matter involves subjective impressions and personal tastes. I worked in a unique environment for one of the venues I was assigned to--firearms trainer. My shop authorized 300 make/model/caliber variants of revolver and autopistol after 1994, and in order to help the guys and gals that came to train and qualify with that array of authorized sideiron and holsterplastic I made it my business to be abundantly familiar with just about all of them.

My conclusions? All of the makes we authorized (and a few others) are really good, reliable sidearms. They all run well if fed with good ammo from good magazines, their failure rates are negligible, and they almost never "break". Compared to the autopistol landscape of, say, 1970--the gunmakers came a long way.

Do I have "favorites"? Of course I do--Glock 23 is my most common EDC, and a SIG P-220 or P-226 goes along in town in cooler weather. Back-country travel sees me with a S&W 686 x 4", and often a levergun or 223 gas gun of some kind behind the truck seat. These are products of "tastes" and "preferences", which may or may not correspond to your needs and environments. As during my days as a LE trainer, it wasn't my place to criticize the choices made by others--my tasking was to get the folks comfy with their choices if at all possible, and to know enough to send folks in other directions if their needs and preferences showed a problem. That rubric prevails for me on this hobby site as well.

Now that's class...

[44MAG#1]

When they make a grip frame that doesn't cause the front sight to be up in the treeline somewhere, I may consider one. I *HATE* having to remember to cant my wrist forward to align the sights. My Kahr or any 1911 just sights naturally, if I was in total darkness the shot would hit where my forearm was pointed. Not so with the Glock grip frame.

I have both Glocks and 1911's. While the 1911's will point somewhat more naturally neither one is the "cats meow".
Have shot both fast and slow. I have done the draw and shoot from the hip with my Glock M30 and can shoot quite rapidly and keep them well inside the 8 inch ring on an IDPA target at close distances and can also do the same and have kept the majority of 20 rounds in the head of the target. None were misses. Just a few in the neck area but they would have taken out the spine. 4 series of 5 shots each.
At 7 yards I can do well with the Glocks with either hand. And I am not a left hand shooter.
Across a room, unless one lives in a mansion where the rooms are grreeaatt big, either one will drop an intruder unless one is totally out of practice. In that case practice will help no matter what gun one uses.
To each his own, and I am the one that about 14 years ago after owning 2 Glocks said I would never own another.
Guess what, I own some now. Shoot them more than the 1911's which is my most favorite Semi Auto. Carry a Glock too.
Life is a learning process, especially about oneself.
45 Auto, thats where its at.

Again I mean no hurt, harm, anguish or turmoil by my post I have posted on this posted subject. I am not baiting, trolling or calling out anyone. I am making a post based on my experience, knowledge and/or belief or opinion. That is all.

[El Bibliotecario]

lI assume many users of Browning system pistols do not like Glocks because they do not have ducktail grip safeties long enough to double as shoehorns.

My complaint is the Glock's coarsely checkered front strap and the cutout at the bottom of the front strap, both of which abrade my hand. I solved this problem with an unserviceable inner tube from a bicycle shop which provided a lifetime supply of slip-on grips which eliminated both my complaints. The tire company logo is now displayed on the grip, which I find appropriate for such an industrial-looking weapon.

[dkf]

The MOS is a nice idea but in reality the way Glock went about it with spacers is not ideal. You are much better off getting the slide milled ot the optic you want to run and then you can use tall sights to cowitness with the RD. As for the Gen5 there are some things I like about but not that much. I like the grip with no finger grooves, the texture and dehorning the front of the slide but that is about it. Almost none of the Gen5 parts will fit my Gen3 and Gen4 Glocks and vice versa. The way Glock did the front cutout for the mag and the flared well is stupid. When you are trying to pull a mag out you naturally grab it at the sides, not the front. Magwells are not stupid per se just the way Glock designed it. Glock triggers have always varied some in my experience, I know they do on mine.(all bought new) One is fairly light and has a nice crisp break, put all the internals from that one into another Glock with not as nice of a break and nothing changed.(must be something in the frame) Nothing a connector can't greatly improve. I like some of the configurations the newer Gen5s come in but there is no way I am buying a Gen5.

[Idaho45guy]

The MOS is a nice idea but in reality the way Glock went about it with spacers is not ideal. You are much better off getting the slide milled ot the optic you want to run and then you can use tall sights to cowitness with the RD. As for the Gen5 there are some things I like about but not that much. I like the grip with no finger grooves, the texture and dehorning the front of the slide but that is about it. Almost none of the Gen5 parts will fit my Gen3 and Gen4 Glocks and vice versa. The way Glock did the front cutout for the mag and the flared well is stupid. When you are trying to pull a mag out you naturally grab it at the sides, not the front. Magwells are not stupid per se just the way Glock designed it. Glock triggers have always varied some in my experience, I know they do on mine.(all bought new) One is fairly light and has a nice crisp break, put all the internals from that one into another Glock with not as nice of a break and nothing changed.(must be something in the frame) Nothing a connector can't greatly improve. I like some of the configurations the newer Gen5s come in but there is no way I am buying a Gen5.

The MOS version does not have the front grip cutout, which was a specification of the FBI, BTW. That cutout was annoying to me as well.

As for the trigger, I disagree about improving the trigger being as simple as swapping connectors (which are interchangeable between the Gen 4 and Gen 5s).

Sure, you can put in an aftermarket connector, but getting a lighter pull means trading off crispness and reset. Some connectors are better at that than others, but there is always a trade-off. I've had three Gen 4 Glock pistols the last three years and all have had different trigger pulls. Every Gen 5 I've fondled in gun shops has had the same lighter and crisper trigger than the majority of Gen 4s. I like that the baseline Gen 5 trigger feel is better than the Gen 4 out of the box.

The Gen 5 NDLC coating is also much better than the scratch N' sniff Gen 4 coating.

And the barrels are more accurate, which for folks like me that enjoy 25yd shooting in matches, can make a difference.

I actually liked the finger grooves on the Gen 4 models as they fit me perfectly.

But, I get your points and understand them.

[dkf]

Its a duty/combat handgun. Connectors that reduce pull weight by a good bit can feel mushy. They are not the only connectors available. The coating on the Gen5 is Ionbond and is proving to be far less durable than the previous finishes even the Gen4. There are numerous threads complaining about the rather rapid finish wear on many forums. The coating was a marketing ploy by Glock just like the "marksman" barrel. But at least Glock extended the throat some now on the newer barrels due to chambering issues owners were having. Reviewers like MAC have saw no accuracy improvement with the new barrels vs other Gens. Until I see head to head ransom rest tests with at least 5 or 6 different types of ammo I am not buying the accuracy improvement.

[dverna]

Finding a pistol that fits your hand and you can shoot well can be challenging but worth the journey. And then finding a holster very complicates matters. Advice from others can help but no matter what the internet commandos say, in the end, find what works for you.

I carry either the Gen 4 Glock or Kahr and I went though a lot of guns getting there, and about two shoe boxes of holsters.

Glad you found a good gun for you sir...enjoy it!

[gnostic]

CZ will have the full line of the P-10 in stores very shortly. They’re being made in the US and will come optics ready. I don’t know if the initial ones be OR or not. No grip angle problems w/ them. I admit that I’m biased towards CZ.

CZ points where I'm looking and that's a big deal to me...

[Idaho45guy]

New Glock arrived today and it is now prepped for a range trip tomorrow.

It arrived with the factory rear night sight way off. So I centered it, added the medium beavertail grip insert, took it apart and polished the trigger connector and bar, and checked the trigger pull. Box says 5.5lbs on it and it broke at 5.5lbs. Will likely add a factory Glock (-) connector to get it to 4.5lbs.

I have 6 different reload recipes to try tomorrow and 3 various factory loads; trying to find the most accurate target round and most accurate defensive round.

Attachment 231495

Attachment 231496

Attachment 231497

[43PU]

That’s a nice looking rig up there I have never tried the GEN five I have about five Gen 4s. But never have shot a Gen 5

[Moonie]

When they make a grip frame that doesn't cause the front sight to be up in the treeline somewhere, I may consider one. I *HATE* having to remember to cant my wrist forward to align the sights. My Kahr or any 1911 just sights naturally, if I was in total darkness the shot would hit where my forearm was pointed. Not so with the Glock grip frame.

I unerstand DougGuy, I actually built a 940 ghost gun, not for the ghost gun bit but because it has the 1911 grip angle with the glock upper and internals. I don't care for the grip angle on glocks, my middle son loves them and I have shot them but like you, just can't stand it. The 940v2 I have points just like a 1911, I really enjoy shooting it (it is a G17 upper).

[Idaho45guy]

I unerstand DougGuy, I actually built a 940 ghost gun, not for the ghost gun bit but because it has the 1911 grip angle with the glock upper and internals. I don't care for the grip angle on glocks, my middle son loves them and I have shot them but like you, just can't stand it. The 940v2 I have points just like a 1911, I really enjoy shooting it (it is a G17 upper).

I find them to be the most naturally pointing pistol I've found.

Took mine to the range and the combat drill shooting results were quite impressive. Drew and fired 15 rounds in 5 seconds at 7yds and got a 4.5" group. Extremely happy with the results...

Attachment 231559

[Petrol & Powder]

I have always found the Glocks to point well for me.

I don't think the grip angle issue is anything new. If I extend my arm out with my thumb up and fingers out (like to shake hands) and then close my fingers - the corresponding grip angle is far closer to that of a Glock, Luger P-08, H&K P7, Ruger Standard, etc. I think the Glock grip angle is anatomically closer to a human's natural grip angle. However, that's not the end of the story.

I think people raised on 1911's, S&W 39's, Colt 1903, etc. just have an ingrained grip angle that corresponds to the Browning pattern. That muscle memory is hard to override. So while the Browning pattern is not as natural, it can become the individual's default.

In any event, The Glock is an outstanding combat pistol.

As for trigger pull, after shooting DA revolvers for many, many years; I don't think one needs a 2 pound single action trigger to shoot a handgun well. The factory 5.5 lb Glock trigger is fine and I wouldn't want to go any lower on a combat pistol with that system. I've shot the NY-1 and NY-2 Glock triggers and believe it or not, they're entirely serviceable too.

Steel sights with night sight inserts are about the only thing you may need to add to a Glock, IMO. Other than that possible modification, leave it alone !

Idaho45guy - congrats on your new pistol ! Looks like you have a winner.

[mozeppa]

don't forget the snap on lid for glock accessory ....it keeps deviled eggs fresh til you get to the picnic!