Most Abusable handgun

Our firearms instructor has a Smith and Wesson M&P .40 that he has put over 2000 rounds through without cleaning it. He wants to find out when it will malfunction because of the abuse, but he says it still shoots tight groups after all that useage. He is "torture testing" this pistol because it will be the weapon that our (armored car) company will be transitioning over to from the old Model 10 .38 revolver.
I feel pretty good about this choice of weapon....
 
I don't quite know about all the talk about the Rugers taking more abuse than Glocks. I guess it depends on your definition of abuse. I do know that my Single Six, Super Blackhawk, and MKIII, all required a really good cleaning after I shot them in the rain. There wasn't any actual rust, but they really looked like they NEEDED to be cleaned NOW. The Glock on the other hand, I wiped the slide with a towel, and put it away.

Now, if abuse means running hot loads through them, I use a pretty wild load through the SuperBlackhawk, and it eats it all day long without blinking. However, I'd only need to make a couple minor mods, to shoot 45 super, through the Glock. I could even shoot 10mm, with a new barrel and magazines. Honestly, I'd say that one is a wash, they're both really tough guns, that'll eat the hottest loads.

If I could only choose one, that I needed to take to the end of earth and back, it'd be the Glock.
 
With all of the endorsements for Glock, it makes me wonder if the examples I've fired were even from the same manufacture. I think they suck! A pistol needs to be more than just accurate and reliable. It must also be fast and simple to use when you are in a hurry. The long creepy pull of the DA trigger for the initial shot is neither fast, nor likely to be accurate if you are under stress. The Glock makes this even worse in that you cannot manually #### the hammer to over ride the DA, so the first shot might as well be fired in the air, but then you have to remember not to take too much pressure off the trigger. This unnecessary complexity is unwelcome in a fighting gun. The only guns worse are the DA only designs.

The pistol with the longest proven track record for reliability under difficult conditions, with a design that was so good little can be done to improve it, that is accurate enough for the purpose it was designed for, and that has all of the controls where they can be reached without adjusting your grip on the gun, is the 1911. Suggesting that any DA pistol, never mind a Glock or a DA only, is better reveals that the speaker does not understand the problem, and the problem is winning and surviving the fight.
 
Boomer said:
With all of the endorsements for Glock, it makes me wonder if the examples I've fired were even from the same manufacture. I think they suck! A pistol needs to be more than just accurate and reliable. It must also be fast and simple to use when you are in a hurry. The long creepy pull of the DA trigger for the initial shot is neither fast, nor likely to be accurate if you are under stress. The Glock makes this even worse in that you cannot manually #### the hammer to over ride the DA, so the first shot might as well be fired in the air, but then you have to remember not to take too much pressure off the trigger. This unnecessary complexity is unwelcome in a fighting gun. The only guns worse are the DA only designs.

The pistol with the longest proven track record for reliability under difficult conditions, with a design that was so good little can be done to improve it, that is accurate enough for the purpose it was designed for, and that has all of the controls where they can be reached without adjusting your grip on the gun, is the 1911. Suggesting that any DA pistol, never mind a Glock or a DA only, is better reveals that the speaker does not understand the problem, and the problem is winning and surviving the fight.
Click to expand...

I am not a Glock fan,..but I would not put any 1911 over a Glock for taking abuse and still working. HK or Glock are purposely meant to be abused and keep working. THIS is a fact.
 
Boomer said:
With all of the endorsements for Glock, it makes me wonder if the examples I've fired were even from the same manufacture. I think they suck! A pistol needs to be more than just accurate and reliable. It must also be fast and simple to use when you are in a hurry. The long creepy pull of the DA trigger for the initial shot is neither fast, nor likely to be accurate if you are under stress. The Glock makes this even worse in that you cannot manually #### the hammer to over ride the DA, so the first shot might as well be fired in the air, but then you have to remember not to take too much pressure off the trigger. This unnecessary complexity is unwelcome in a fighting gun. The only guns worse are the DA only designs.

The pistol with the longest proven track record for reliability under difficult conditions, with a design that was so good little can be done to improve it, that is accurate enough for the purpose it was designed for, and that has all of the controls where they can be reached without adjusting your grip on the gun, is the 1911. Suggesting that any DA pistol, never mind a Glock or a DA only, is better reveals that the speaker does not understand the problem, and the problem is winning and surviving the fight.
Click to expand...

Do you own a Glock? Cause I find your response a little contradictory. Ie, you say you want 'fast and simple' to use, but complain of not having a hammer to override the DA? A glock is one of the easiest and fastest pistols to use, it only has a slide lock level and mag release, no other controls other than the trigger. You can't get much simpler than that for a semi auto pistol. You also can't get much faster than that, in a survival situation (moreso in the USA) speed will be more important as it relates to draw time and sights on target than the difference in a double action/single action trigger.

And your complaints about long, mushy trigger pull, (which may be correct) are not a problem in a survival situation because the limiting factor will be your adrenaline and 'calm under pressure'. Nevertheless, two options exist, upgrade the internals to produce a better trigger pull (approx $30) or train yourself to shoot under stress with the stock trigger. I suspect, in a life or death situation, trigger pull weight and creep are completely irrelevant.

Also, AFAIK, glock is a DA only pistol, I am not sure what you meant by this

Suggesting that any DA pistol, never mind a Glock or a DA only, is better reveals that the speaker does not understand the problem, and the problem is winning and surviving the fight.
Click to expand...

On top of that, the OP only posted about the most abusable handgun, not the 'best handgun to have in a survival situation" albeit, some have concluded the answer to both questions is the same gun.
 
Boomer said:
With all of the endorsements for Glock, it makes me wonder if the examples I've fired were even from the same manufacture. I think they suck! A pistol needs to be more than just accurate and reliable. It must also be fast and simple to use when you are in a hurry. The long creepy pull of the DA trigger for the initial shot is neither fast, nor likely to be accurate if you are under stress. The Glock makes this even worse in that you cannot manually #### the hammer to over ride the DA, so the first shot might as well be fired in the air, but then you have to remember not to take too much pressure off the trigger. This unnecessary complexity is unwelcome in a fighting gun. The only guns worse are the DA only designs.

The pistol with the longest proven track record for reliability under difficult conditions, with a design that was so good little can be done to improve it, that is accurate enough for the purpose it was designed for, and that has all of the controls where they can be reached without adjusting your grip on the gun, is the 1911. Suggesting that any DA pistol, never mind a Glock or a DA only, is better reveals that the speaker does not understand the problem, and the problem is winning and surviving the fight.
Click to expand...

I don't think the OP was asking your opinion on whether or not you like the characteristics of Glocks or any other DA pistol.:p

He asked "What handgun seems to be able to take the most abuse?
Like being shot for a few thousand rounds without being cleaned or oiled?"

I'd say the GLOCKS are pretty tough, personal anecdotes praising the "to hell and back" qualities of this pistol are are all over the web. Videos and pictures of its operation under intentionally harsh conditions support the fact that they fire no matter what you do to them.

It doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me...I keep my guns clean and lubed. My Glock is cleaner than most dishes in my cupboards. I think most people take pretty good care of their guns and just about any pistol will take the level of "abuse" most shooters subject their equipment to. Though I suppose their is something comforting about knowing that I can throw my Glock off a 10th story balcony, have it land in a swamp, leave it there over the winter, dig it up in the spring, rinse it off under the hose and then shoot it.:p
 
I have fired enough rounds through a number of Glocks to know they are not for me. Accuracy is good, reliability is good, but the triggers are so bad that I will never own one. If I was mandated to carry a Glock, I would work with it and gain some level of comfort with it, but to say the a Glock is more durable than a 1911 defies logic.

An exposed hammer on a DA pistol is less complex than the Glock trigger, so there is no contradiction here. If you like you could carry the DA cocked, but I wouldn't, but cocked and locked is safe and functional for the 1911. Both the DA pistol and the Glock require the shooter to change his grip after the intial DA shot.

In terms of abuse, fire a 1911 chambered for .45 under water, now do the same with your Glock, just don't expect to be able to use you fingers to count with after the test.
 
Boomer said:
...but to say the a Glock is more durable than a 1911 defies logic.

Both the DA pistol and the Glock require the shooter to change his grip after the intial DA shot.
Click to expand...

I am not sure the first statement defies logic, no doubt both are decent, very durable pistols. Obviously, opinions will go one way or the other, but I don't think you can say that glock being more reliable than the 1911 defies logic, but perhaps you can't say the same about the opposite case as well.

Your second statement, I disagree with. I have never had to change my grip after the first shot, why do you think this?
 
Rugerman said:
:agree::agree::agree::agree:

Just substitute any Ruger model you want in place of GP100. (Just like the Glock guy said- substitute any # or model you want.) I would place Glocks second after RUGERS!! But a distant second!!!
Click to expand...

Plus! The GP100 is a multi-tool. You can plant a nail with it.

Friggin' built like a tank :rockOn:
 
Most abouse

LTR308 said:
Glock 21
http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90

Glock 21 Again (30 Videos)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f6LP54zecg&feature=channel_page
Click to expand...
Wow,that is A LOT of abuse ,after he shot it with a .22 i thought that was it !
Throwing it out of a plane ? crazy tough . I wonder how a p220 would hold up?
I never been a clock fan , but if those test are real .... that's impressive !
Ruger 10/22
Ruger MK111 hunter
S&W 686 .357 mag
Sig p226 in 9mm
Rem 700 30.06
Rem 870 express
 
I've posted this before many times,

First thing I'd like to say is I've owned many Glocks and still have one. They are very tough and I like them alot.

Now to burst everyone's bubble. Department of Homeland Security did one of the most detailed and expensive tests of combat handguns in history a few years back. Every major company submitted guns for the testing. Millions of dollars were spent on the test (realy stupid money by the way). Only 2 handguns passed the testing:

1. Sig
2. HK

Contracts were awarded to both makes (some of the biggests in history by the way). I still can't believe that Glock didn't do better but they failed, broke and fell apart. Details of the testing are Law Enforcement sensitive so they can't be posted here and most here will not be able to obtain copies. I still love my Glock and think it's one of the best combat handguns out there, it's just not as good or tough as Sig and HK.

Rich
 
The Desert Eagle must be the one that can take the most verbal abuse, certainly.

After all, it's widely mocked, but still around LOL
 
There are a lot of tough pistols around and will behave differently depending on what type of abuse you subject them to. It seems that Glock, SIG and some eastern Bloc designs have proven themselves over the years.

BTW, the HK Homeland Security chose was the P2000.

Generally, if you want a pistol to be reliable under harsh conditions, it often means that tolerances are intentionally large, so that some little piece of grit doesn't stop them. A pistol is a close range defensive weapon of last resort, reliability is far more important than accuracy.
 
BKP99 said:
One of the reason's I bought my HK P2000 was the Department of Homeland Security testing.
Click to expand...
Heh, did you see the "Break my P2000" thread on HKPro? That guy ended up putting 5000+ rounds through his P2000 without cleaning or lube without failure before he got bored with it.
 
I defer to the posts on Glocks, I have shot one & it printed very well considering it was my first time with it. Model 17, I think......
However it's appeal to me is non-existant. That doesnt mean it's not a good gun, it is just not my 'cup of tea.'

I fall into the camp of old school & would feel much more at home, with any well made 1911, in a calibre starting with .4, or a Dan Wesson revolver, Model 44 or 744.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom