My Glocks are officially paper weights....
- Thread starter caramel
- Start date
This is good until you actually carry the pistol. Or until you want something reliable with enough capacity to defend yourself properly
1911s are good range toys but Glocks are working tools. There isn't anything special about them but they are reliable and trust worthy under most conditions.
This coming from a former Glock hater.
Pointless argument/point for us civi's up here in Canada.
Although I can't carry a 1911, w/ a proper belt and holster, it can be acceptable - but there's absolutely NO denying how stupidly reliable Glocks are, hense why they are so popular with LEOs.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
That might all be true, but recreational shooting is not what the Glock was designed for. Just because that's the game we choose to pursue in Canada, doesn't mean your shooting cannot replicate the training scenarios and drills associated with fighting. If it did, perhaps the advantages and limitations of the Glock platform would make a bit more sense to you. Again, I'm not a Glock guy; as far as I'm concerned the sun rises and sets on the 1911, but I get why the platform is attractive to some.
I have an expensive target rifle which has an exquisite trigger, much better than the triggers on any of my hunting rifles, yet that is not the rifle I choose to carry in the field. Why? Because despite that exquisite trigger, the triggers on those more practical rifles still allow me to use them in the role rifles for which they were intended. Yet I shoot those rifles on the range to maintain a level of familiarity and competence with them, despite having a dedicated target rifle which is more suitable for punching paper or ringing gongs in a shooting range environment.
I agree with Boomer, i did not know from the start, the special niche of the Glock, wich i dont need at all since i dont compete or work with it, i shoot for my satisfaction... I will have one of my Glock bubba by a friend to see if i can find it to my liking , after that, we will see, no rush here, the learning curve is a long process... JP.
mildcustom2
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Surrey, B.C.
If you can't watch a YouTube video and figure out how to swap it out yourself you shouldn't own firearms. I did a trigger kit and trigger stop in my glock in about 15 minutes.
Yup.
Waaaaaa.
The Glock doesn't have a poor trigger. It doesn't have bad grips. It doesn't have loose tolerances. It doesn't have horrible sights (not great sights, but perfectly serviceable for making holes in paper at the range on weekends). But when it does have ####ty results, 99.9% of the time it is the shooters fault, not the tool.
Yup again.
Glocks aren't meant to be used to impress others with because they cost a bunch of money, they aren't meant to help you feel superior to others because you can afford them, but they are meant to compete in disciplines which require accuracy and speed.
And if they weren't accurate, groups like 1st SFOD-D (and a canadian unit that is also held in extremely high regard, as well as countless european counter-terrorism units), who value not just extreme reliability but also extreme accuracy, wouldn't use them.
When a stock, unmodified (except for a set of duty night sights) 9mm service pistol can achieve 1.5"-2" groups at 25m, and make repeatable head shots at 50m, all with service (147gr JHP) ammunition, I consider it accurate.
Damn.... just imagine what a good shooter could do with the op's IWI Jericho!!!!
hummm ok, yah, sure, right...
1.5 inch group at 25 meters?
you should compete in for the olympic team and stop wasting your time on this forum.
Last edited:
how can the same shooter shooting two different handguns have such a difference in accuracy if its not firearm related?
If the shooter had a bad stance, bad shoulders, bad grip, bad trigger squeeze and follow through, peeping over the sights, and bad sight picture, he would get bad results with both firearms, not bad results with one firearm and great results with another.
Even the pros have different group sizes with different handguns, now how can that be if its not firearm related?
How come olympic shooters, ipsc shooters, all have their pistols customized to their hands, to their eyes, the trigger finger molded and the break short and crisp, reset short?
Im frankly getting fed up of the bullcrap that gets circulated on here.
There is a limit to the fitting of the barrel to the slide on a semi handgun, there is a limit of the grips being thick or too slim, there is a limit of a creepy grindy trigger with a long reset, there is a limit with dark greyish sights.
Yes fundamentals are first and foremost, but if fundamentals are applied and followed, why such diverging results from 2 firearms.
I have a cZ orange, its a target pistol, i get half the group size on the same day trip at the range than when firing my wife's cz 75 shadow. How can that be if both guns are EXACTLY similar except for the trigger, the barrel tolerances, the hammer, the sights.
If the shooter had a bad stance, bad shoulders, bad grip, bad trigger squeeze and follow through, peeping over the sights, and bad sight picture, he would get bad results with both firearms, not bad results with one firearm and great results with another.
Even the pros have different group sizes with different handguns, now how can that be if its not firearm related?
How come olympic shooters, ipsc shooters, all have their pistols customized to their hands, to their eyes, the trigger finger molded and the break short and crisp, reset short?
Im frankly getting fed up of the bullcrap that gets circulated on here.
There is a limit to the fitting of the barrel to the slide on a semi handgun, there is a limit of the grips being thick or too slim, there is a limit of a creepy grindy trigger with a long reset, there is a limit with dark greyish sights.
Yes fundamentals are first and foremost, but if fundamentals are applied and followed, why such diverging results from 2 firearms.
I have a cZ orange, its a target pistol, i get half the group size on the same day trip at the range than when firing my wife's cz 75 shadow. How can that be if both guns are EXACTLY similar except for the trigger, the barrel tolerances, the hammer, the sights.
I've refined and downsized my collection over the years to include HG's depending on the type of shooting I plan on doing…
When I'm in the mood for general plinking and lots of trigger time I shoot my Ruger MKIII Standard.
For holster work, defensive training/shooting drills and some rough use my G17 gets the nod (would never put my mint "T" series BHP thru this).
My revolvers give me the most satisfaction both in enjoyment and accuracy. Even here they are broken down from general blasting (S&W 625 45ACP) to pure Sh*ts & Giggles (44magnum & 460V)
I'm just glad there's so much variety and Gun cabinets are on sale…..YMMV
When I'm in the mood for general plinking and lots of trigger time I shoot my Ruger MKIII Standard.
For holster work, defensive training/shooting drills and some rough use my G17 gets the nod (would never put my mint "T" series BHP thru this).
My revolvers give me the most satisfaction both in enjoyment and accuracy. Even here they are broken down from general blasting (S&W 625 45ACP) to pure Sh*ts & Giggles (44magnum & 460V)
I'm just glad there's so much variety and Gun cabinets are on sale…..YMMV
I've been skimming through this thread off and on, perhaps someone has already said it, but if I paid out the kind of money that a Les Bauer ( any model ) costs, I would darnwell hope it would out-shoot a lot of guns.... Glocks included.
Having said that my old 45 GAP Glock has worked like a charm and will keep up with my tuned Gold Cup on a good day.
Congrats on your purchase and findings Caramel... ( wish I had 1/2 of your 'gun budget'.. ).
Having said that my old 45 GAP Glock has worked like a charm and will keep up with my tuned Gold Cup on a good day.
Congrats on your purchase and findings Caramel... ( wish I had 1/2 of your 'gun budget'.. ).
Most Compulsive buyers make a rash buy like you with the Glocks but most buy 1.
Now a person who buys almost three identical guns without really knowing much about them or restricteds in general is a whole different can of worms.
Why does everything have to be about money? JP has the ability to exercise his right to buy whatever he wants. If you don't like what you bought and can afford to put it into the safe and let it sit there then all the power to you. There are many choices when buying guns and there is a reason for that. We all like what we like. If you can only afford one gun then you better make the right choice, or you will have to lean to live with it. Shooting is a very individual sport and what works for you might not work for someone else. I think it is all in the head of the guy behind the trigger, if you feel good about what you are going to shoot it will be the best choice for you. If you don't like it for whatever the reason then you have a choice to make, sell it or put it in the safe. Pretty simple in my mind... Kind of strange that putting a few Glocks in the safe is winding so many people up. I'm still looking for the one that will be my last purchase...
Glocks are nice but I don't enjoy with the grips. Feels like a 2X4. It also doesn't line up as easily as other guns. I like the m&p 9 felt great. I just love my SOA triggers more.. Love my 1911, I like the CZ as well. The only thing I like shooting more is my Radom p35. Some people like white chocolate some like milk chocolate, some like dark chocolate.. All in the preferences I guess.
