$650 budget handgun for beginner
- Thread starter compass
- Start date
Lolll, yea , that's a fact, to bad for them..., "we" (not Glock People) understand this.
I don't have a problem with glocks but the cult of glock is really quite bizarre. Plenty of polymer framed pistols that are just as good.
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
for what youve listed as your pre-req's id say youd want to look at S&W M&P or a Glock.
i own both and either would fit your bill for price and lightness and longevity.
a lot of it depends on whats comfy in your hand.
while i like sig and have a sig its a very thick gun in the hands and i dont consider it to be a comfy to shoot gun for my hand.
same with a CZ which isnt surprising as they are very simular guns.
personaly i loved my glock until the M&P came out and i tried it.
i just cant with a straight face tell anyone that a glock feels better in the hand then a M&P.
and while i love my 1911's i would never recommend one to carry as they are heavy.
i own both and either would fit your bill for price and lightness and longevity.
a lot of it depends on whats comfy in your hand.
while i like sig and have a sig its a very thick gun in the hands and i dont consider it to be a comfy to shoot gun for my hand.
same with a CZ which isnt surprising as they are very simular guns.
personaly i loved my glock until the M&P came out and i tried it.
i just cant with a straight face tell anyone that a glock feels better in the hand then a M&P.
and while i love my 1911's i would never recommend one to carry as they are heavy.
HK pistols are a lot more expensive than glocks, I would say they are even better but I can't prove that statement so I will not really push it. M&P not as good, almost, but not quite, can't blame anyone for buying one of those, and the 22 trainer for it is sublime. Steyrs. They are less expensive but they are very hard to support, they have had lots of issues and continue to have lots of issues. Springfield XD, generally seems to work in 9mm but has stupid features like grip safety and up here are more expensive than the glock, fn herstal fns can be argued to be equal to a glock but here in canada they are more expensive than HK handguns, and even harder to support. Sig 250s, well all us made sigs have recently been having major quality control issues. Walther PPQ, more expensive harder to support, and unproven reliability and durability. Ruger sr9 bwahahahahaha, sorry what was i saying? I nearly died laughing. cz shadow, out of the price budget of the OP, and I don't know how people recommend cz even though there is a new page of a cz having some sort of an issues every other week. Burrito PX4 storm, will be more than 650 when you purchase the quality mallet that is also required. Oh I forgot the Viking, it's the favourite these days. Coolest pistol ever to come out of soviet russia, best pistol ever. Wait that's not right. It's overweight and apparently cant hold its slide back after 200 rounds half the times. Along with no one making quality kydex holsters for them along with no night sights available. Alright, lets sum this up the few poly pistols that equal or in my opinion beat the glock are more expensive, and the ones that are not as good are either not that much cheaper or are the same to a little more expensive.
Yes there are other options. If you are shooting 200 rounds a year to be honest any and all of the above pistol will do just fine. If you are planning on shooting a reasonable amount of volume like 3-5k a year then yes the selection of a quality pistol is very important and no there arent that many good pistols around.
Given the options my ranking for the only pistols I would ever potentially buy with my money. Any HK pistol, I believe they are the best, but again I can't prove that yet, so I wont push that point too hard, Glock, M&P, German made Sig 226. that is my ranking in order from most preferred to least preferred. And I plan on keeping my pistols for a long time. So you might want to rephrase that statement. No there are not a lot of polymer pistols that are just as good.
Now whether you need your pistol to be that good is a different story. Like I said, you will shoot 200 rounds a year and sell it in a few years for something else buy whatever you see that looks the coolest to your eyes. Base it off frilly sh*t like fit and feel.
A bit contradictory no?
Ok let me rephrase comfort may not be trivial but it is not as important as the reliability durability and accuracy of a firearm. If you can have it all, have it all, if you have to compromise don't compromise on those three. Something else like aesthetics or ... comfort needs to take a back seat. Not to mention what is wrong with the m&p? How does it make you uncomfortable? A lot of people use this comfort as an excuse when they can't shoot a certain pistol well.
Last edited:
Actually I'm simply validating what he should purchase and why. not really a circle in the drain and not much to argue about, at his price point there are exactly two options, Glock 17 or S&W 9mm range kit. The end.
stevey3737
Regular
- Location
- Southern Interior
Hi there:
I own and have owned a lot of different pistols, I love the 45 ACP round but I have one pistol in my arsenal that when a newb grabs it ( take my buddies to range sometimes) they hit paper and that is the glock 22 in 40 S&W, I have springfields, S&W, Rugers, Norcs, LLama's, Milsurps and I love them all but out of the box hitting papers point and shoot Glock it is and there so very tuneable and interchangeable, I have a wolf 9mm barrel that drops right in now your blasting 9mm, as stated first I love the 45 but its pricier than the 9mm for sure, and my opinion on the 22 lr round is unless your kid or girlfriend is going to use it, it will give you no recoil management or follow up shot practice because there is zero recoil so a waste of time IMHO start with a 9 and learn it you'll love it just my two cents take it or leave it and have fun
Cheers
I own and have owned a lot of different pistols, I love the 45 ACP round but I have one pistol in my arsenal that when a newb grabs it ( take my buddies to range sometimes) they hit paper and that is the glock 22 in 40 S&W, I have springfields, S&W, Rugers, Norcs, LLama's, Milsurps and I love them all but out of the box hitting papers point and shoot Glock it is and there so very tuneable and interchangeable, I have a wolf 9mm barrel that drops right in now your blasting 9mm, as stated first I love the 45 but its pricier than the 9mm for sure, and my opinion on the 22 lr round is unless your kid or girlfriend is going to use it, it will give you no recoil management or follow up shot practice because there is zero recoil so a waste of time IMHO start with a 9 and learn it you'll love it just my two cents take it or leave it and have fun
Cheers
Ztunelover, thank you for that detailed analysis. The majority of posters on this thread answered that Glock is the way to go. I intend to be shooting more than 200 rounds a year. Maybe a thousand, but time will tell on that one. Now I have a questions of longevity of polymer guns vs metal. Are polymer guns, like Glocks for example, built for longevity? Will a properly maintained polymer gun such as a Glock truly hold up the test of time so I can use the gun all I want, and then pass it to my children, and so on?
Thanks again everyone.
I found this quote by searching:
"In the latest issue of Gun World, Chuck Taylor indicates that he has put 270,000 full-power rounds through his much "used and abused" Glock 17."
Replacement parts are relatively easy to come by. 35(?)parts in a Glock. 51(?) parts in a 1911.
Edit: forgot the low bore axis vs. most other handguns.
You don't need to be a gunsmith to work on a Glock. $625 for a G17 is quite inexpensive.
"In the latest issue of Gun World, Chuck Taylor indicates that he has put 270,000 full-power rounds through his much "used and abused" Glock 17."
Replacement parts are relatively easy to come by. 35(?)parts in a Glock. 51(?) parts in a 1911.
Edit: forgot the low bore axis vs. most other handguns.
You don't need to be a gunsmith to work on a Glock. $625 for a G17 is quite inexpensive.
Last edited:
I had an M&P .40cal. I liked it - but the length of pull was not long enough. The large backstrap makes it wider - not much deeper.
I had a Gen 3 Glock 21 - too big. Sold it at a loss and got a Gen 4 (like Gen 3 SF). Just right.
Lesson learned. Make sure the trigger is comfortably on the last segment on your index finger before you buy anything.
I had a Gen 3 Glock 21 - too big. Sold it at a loss and got a Gen 4 (like Gen 3 SF). Just right.
Lesson learned. Make sure the trigger is comfortably on the last segment on your index finger before you buy anything.
I haven't seen any $650 Gen 4 Glocks lately, some Gen 3's but no Gen 4's. The only CZ I can find is the polymer one, and having handled one, I'm not impressed. I don't know where anyone is finding HK's or the like in that price range. Then we have the M&P9, which can be had, with a decent holster, mag pouch and magazine loader for that price. Is the gun any good? I'm a bit biased, I'm a ways past 40,000 rounds through my M&P. The finish is starting to look pretty worn from holster presentations, incidentally, my Raven Holster is actually worn out from use, (I could get a warranty replacement, but I'm going to pay full pop for a new one, they're worth it) and the polymer inside the mouth of the mag well is gouged and scratched from thousands of mag changes. In 5 years of use I've replaced the striker (once @ 5,000 then not again until last month at around 40K - these are the 'unreliable' first and second designs) the recoil spring (once @ 5K then again @ 15K, then again last month) and I've rebuilt the mags (last month). At todays retail I've fired in excess $11,700 worth of ammo through the pistol - thank god for reloading. Incidentally, none of the parts replaced were broken, they're still in my spares bag.
PS, I should add that I'm confident enough in the guns reliability to take it, by itself, to courses (no back up) despite the fact I've basically flogged the gun hard for 5 + years. I did notice at the course I took last month that when we were told to put our pistols in front of us in the dirt, the Glocks and the M&P's were basically dropped, while the steel framed guns were carefully placed on the ground. I dropped mine, and kicked it forward.
PS, I should add that I'm confident enough in the guns reliability to take it, by itself, to courses (no back up) despite the fact I've basically flogged the gun hard for 5 + years. I did notice at the course I took last month that when we were told to put our pistols in front of us in the dirt, the Glocks and the M&P's were basically dropped, while the steel framed guns were carefully placed on the ground. I dropped mine, and kicked it forward.
Last edited:
