[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is GLOCK Outdated Technology? (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 9/1/2008 4:38:58 PM EDT
|
I bought a G19 fifteen years ago on the recommendation of highly respected firearms/self defense trainers. This was during the ban and they felt that it was the easiest to train with, most reliable, and one could get "pre-ban" magazines for it at a relatively reasonable cost. Since that time, I haven't so much as looked at any service type pistols. My GLOCK is my CCW and it works fine for that role. Now, it's hard to ignore the influx of new pistol designs from Springfield Armory, Ruger, Smith and Wesson, etc. I particularly like the small SA .45 pistols. Do the recent pistol designs offer any advantages over the old GLOCK system? (this is a serious question and not troll flame bait) |
A huge strength that often goes unmentioned. |
It works. But, technology changes. Pistols get smaller, lighter, better triggers, sights, etc. |
No, not really. Its a smaller Browning action in 9mm. I was being serious. Only packaging has changed since the introduction of the 1911 Colt. How many guns are in production right now that dont use Brownings dropping breech short recoil action? The Desert Eagle, MP7 and ?. Is Walther still making the P1/P38 family? The Colt AA2000 was dropped, the Styer GA is out of production, the HK P9s is gone... are they still selling Luger repliguns? |
| I am not a gunsmith or armorer, just an enthusiast. But, when I field strip my 3rd Gen G19 and M&P9 I can't tell the difference looking at the internals. So, the technology is not out dated. I think what Glock could do is offer more flexibility in grips like the M&P, P2000, etc. |
Picky, picky.  If it ain't broke... The trigger is fine, it's plenty small enough to conceal with almost no effort, the sights are okay (aftermarket sights are available, and this is a personal preference) and honestly...how much lighter do you really want it? My Glock is significantly lighter than my 1911, and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Both are comfortable to carry, and neither is particularly hard to shoot. Perhaps if I had MS or something, I might notice, but honestly... Personally, I just can't find anything wrong with it. It works for me, and this little fact doesn't change over the years. I still shoot it just fine, same as always. |
Well, when you look at what the other manufacturers are putting out you can see that they are copies of Glock's operating system, just changed to their own specifications. So the answer to your question is, no, Glock's are not outdated. In fact a anther way to look at it is that the other manufacturers are finally making up-to-date pistols. |
Glocks still use the Browning short recoil design, albeit simplified. Using the breech and the ejection port as the locking mechanism instead of seperate locking lugs on the barrel for example reduced the amount of machining needed on the barrel for example. Also getting rid of a hammer and using a rifle type firing pin, eliminating manual safties and decockers, all reduced the number of parts and the number of cuts that needed to be made in the frame, in turn making it easier to design a plastic frame. No single one of these items was new, Glock lifted them from other guns and combined them in a better package. |
+1. Especially considering most of the designs you mentioned were based on the Glock. |
|
I wouldn't call it outdated by any means, but I am glad that there are now more choices in the striker-fired polymer framed automatic market. IMHO, if you like the feel of the Glock, you aren't missing anything. If you don't, see if a M&P or XD feels better. They're all good guns AFAIK, and a M&P 9 rides on my hip. |
So they simplified an overly complicated design. Reduced un-needed parts, making an easier to manufacture firearm. Took the best features from other guns and put them in a better package........ Sounds pretty innovative to me. |
those recent "influx of weapons" are copies of original weapons from other manufacturers. Glock is the original. the .45 colt design has been around for almost 100 years. and it still needs to go to a smith to get running right, more often than not. |
YES. |
|
If your Glock works fine and you are happy with it, I would say that is about all that matters here. Why worry about what anyone else thinks? I like 1911s. Mine work fine and I am very happy with them. A lot of people hate them. I say more power to them if they hate them. That's their right and if a particular design doesn't work for someone then I would be the last person to tell them they are wrong for not liking it. Me, I'm sticking with my 1911. |
Yes. Particularly the M&P. The Glock isn't "obsolete" by any means. Still, they do need to catch up with companies like S&W if they hope to keep marketshare. Of course, Glock isn't known for being particularly forward thinking when it comes to changing their guns. |
+1. John you've always hit the nail on the head when it comes to glocks. |
|
Only the grip stinks. The 1911 grip is still the benchmark IMO. Its at a 74deg angle, I believe the same width could accomodate a double stack mag and it is straight top to bottom (with the flat mainspring housing). Why people have to get all stupid fancy with the grip irritates me, just copy the 1911 and get it over with  eta: I loved my G19 ............ except for the grip. I hate changing stuff that cannot be changed back so I sold it. |