even if he was in the army, they do not do alot of pistol training or shooting.... in the "stress of combat" a rifle is the weapon of choice.... eiter that or an apache gunship
Curiosity - polarized opinions on Glocks?
- Thread starter Silver_wlf
- Start date
even if he was in the army, they do not do alot of pistol training or shooting.... in the "stress of combat" a rifle is the weapon of choice.... eiter that or an apache gunship
I wonder how many guys with Glocks have ever had the experience of accidentally only pulling the trigger halfway and having it not fire, but not figure out that if they continue pulling the trigger another eighth of an inch it will shoot just fine?
Under stress people jerk triggers, they don't pull them a third of an inch back and wonder why their gun won't go off!
The Glock is a very easy trigger to deal with IMO. Obviously it will never be a 1911 trigger but it's a pretty short reset, fairly light, and crisp enough and easy to make crisper. If they didn't work, guys like Larry Vickers et al wouldn't use them and recommend them.
The people to listen to on gun performance are the guys who put tens of thousands of rounds through their guns in demanding environments. Among those guys, there's not a whole lot of talk about how much Glocks blow...
Under stress people jerk triggers, they don't pull them a third of an inch back and wonder why their gun won't go off!
The Glock is a very easy trigger to deal with IMO. Obviously it will never be a 1911 trigger but it's a pretty short reset, fairly light, and crisp enough and easy to make crisper. If they didn't work, guys like Larry Vickers et al wouldn't use them and recommend them.
The people to listen to on gun performance are the guys who put tens of thousands of rounds through their guns in demanding environments. Among those guys, there's not a whole lot of talk about how much Glocks blow...
carsmovies
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Mississauga, Ontario
even if he was in the army, they do not do alot of pistol training or shooting.... in the "stress of combat" a rifle is the weapon of choice.... eiter that or an apache gunship
I agree. I meant more in the line of LE.
I don't own a Glock but didn't realize this was a feature of the Glock. I will look forward to Tim Cox demonstrating this when next we shoot together. I sure wish my M&P was capable of a double strike. No matter I guess because when I am next in combat and have a problem I'll just rack my slide.
Take Care
Bob
Bakercakes
Regular
- Location
- Kelowna, British Columbia
That's seems like a load of bull to me. I own a glock and you'd have to be pretty retarted if you're 'confused' when a bullet doesn't leave the gun... If you pull the trigger a certain distance and nothing happens, then the natural response would be to pull it further.
I don't own a Glock but didn't realize this was a feature of the Glock. I will look forward to Tim Cox demonstrating this when next we shoot together. I sure wish my M&P was capable of a double strike. No matter I guess because when I am next in combat and have a problem I'll just rack my slide.
Take Care
Bob
frankly I will just thumb #### the hammer on my glock and shoot it that way, the glock is one of the most deadliest of guns when you thumb #### the hammer on it....
No doubt! Hey and if the hammer doesn't send it, just pull the trigger again. I am enlightened. Oh to be in Combat armed with my trusty Glock...hey wait a minute I don't own a Glock. I guess I'll have to build a camp fire, find a tree to hug and just learn the words to Kumbaya.
Take Care
Bob
Oh, please, please, please let me join in! I've kept tabs on this entire discussion!
This (as far as I've seen), is plainly wrong.
And how does every pull after that differ?
Ah! And where did you get this Glock you speak of?
Wait! How did we get back there?!
Phew! So all I have to do is yank on the trigger & we're back to that OTHER pull? Thank goodness!
Ok! So all I have to do with a Glock is never take my finger off the trigger!.... Wait a minute, that doesn't seem right....
Well, Mr. Boomer, it allows you to fire a pistol that has been decocked. Some people (for appearances or political, among other, reasons) like to carry their pistols without the hammer cocked. (Would you like to talk about striker fired pistols? I don't think you're ready.)
(This will become important later...)
Right! Not at ALL like a Glock!
And, of course, I just HAVE to ask what you base this on. And not a single DA/SA in the bunch. Why, exactly?
Ooooh! I can't WAIT to hear about these!!!
Ummm, what if they were based on fantasy?
But I digress.... He goes on!
I gots nothing. Have you EVER fired a Glock?
(Again, he's talking about Glocks)
I can't wait for Glock to figure that out! (This is getting tiring.)
Really? What are those??
(I'm a SIG guy...) (I'm also anti-idiot.)
Well, genius, I'm thinking it'll reassure him a little bit that he'll won't have a squib. So if things don't go BANG, at least he can tap and rack and expect a bang next time without his hand leaving him.
You think that you can recognise a misfire and get to a backup faster than I can clear a misfire?
With a 1911? MORE INCLINED? Just out of curiosity, what happens with YOUR 1911s when you pull the trigger for a second time??
(At this point, I'm starting to think Airsoft commando...)
I bet I know!
OH! SOOOOO CLOSE! I'm glad you read ahead about the 1911, but before you call anyone "junior", you should probably be careful about stating that Glocks have a second strike capability.. So close..
And which department would this be?
Again, I'm glad you read about real firearms, but I'm thinking MAYBE before you actually handle one, you should find someone with actual experience.
Alright, there's more, but I've found this to be quite enough entertainment for one evening. I look forward to the response. As a last note, here's a quote I stole:
quote:
Originally posted by tanksoldier:
There is a difference between a rational threat assessment made by informed individuals who have been there and done that, and drivel posted from mommy's basement by someone who hasn't seen daylight in weeks.
Last edited:
For those of you that have never used Glock Simunition firing pistols the chance of a firing real ammo is about Nil. The ammo is based on an IVI 9mm case highly modified (I have a bunch as well as 38 Spl's). Given the fact that most police forces are equipped with 40's and the nice baby-blue training guns won't chamber anything but a Simunition round there's no worries.
I had a chance to be the bad guy once and those little plastic pellets filled with a soap based colored marking paste hurt! They are primer powered only but zip right along. This style of training is perhaps the best there is for teaching a person how quickly making a mistake or bad decision regarding cover, movement etc can hurt them. Example: hang half your body out from behind cover instead of slicing the pie and you get to yell ouch instead of falling to the ground wounded for real.
If you train how you'll fight, then when the time comes you will fight how you trained.
I really like the point someone made about how tightening up 1911 tolerances makes them jamamatics. Made perfect sense to me. I'm not a 1911 fan because of all the jams, ftf's etc that I see with modern versions. I consider myself a good student of history and weapons of war over the centuries. For all the reading I do I very rarely come across accounts of soldiers berating their 1911's. They all seem to love them and the stopping power in real combat conditions. It's almost like the original battle proven 1911's were made to what I call "Russian specs" that allowed them to fire, feed, fire again even when dirty. Accuracy was an after thought for CQB and reliability and stopping power were the primary concern. 1911's have been around this long for a reason and I think I'm getting it now. It's all the tweeking that actually takes a great design and ruins it as far a real fighting handgun is concerned.
Fighting pistols need to be reliable, have some power, and a certain level of accuracy. In that order.
The 1911, in it's orignal configuration and manufactured tolerances was essentially the Glock of it's era. And in this Century the Glock is the 1911 of the modern age. Both are designs of pure genius to achieve the requirements of CQB in real world battle conditions. And both designs fathered other pistols containing features brought to market from those parent pistols.
John Moses Browning and Gaston Glock would have had some very interesting conversations over a good glass of fine aged whisky. Oh how I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that.
I had a chance to be the bad guy once and those little plastic pellets filled with a soap based colored marking paste hurt! They are primer powered only but zip right along. This style of training is perhaps the best there is for teaching a person how quickly making a mistake or bad decision regarding cover, movement etc can hurt them. Example: hang half your body out from behind cover instead of slicing the pie and you get to yell ouch instead of falling to the ground wounded for real.
If you train how you'll fight, then when the time comes you will fight how you trained.
I really like the point someone made about how tightening up 1911 tolerances makes them jamamatics. Made perfect sense to me. I'm not a 1911 fan because of all the jams, ftf's etc that I see with modern versions. I consider myself a good student of history and weapons of war over the centuries. For all the reading I do I very rarely come across accounts of soldiers berating their 1911's. They all seem to love them and the stopping power in real combat conditions. It's almost like the original battle proven 1911's were made to what I call "Russian specs" that allowed them to fire, feed, fire again even when dirty. Accuracy was an after thought for CQB and reliability and stopping power were the primary concern. 1911's have been around this long for a reason and I think I'm getting it now. It's all the tweeking that actually takes a great design and ruins it as far a real fighting handgun is concerned.
Fighting pistols need to be reliable, have some power, and a certain level of accuracy. In that order.
The 1911, in it's orignal configuration and manufactured tolerances was essentially the Glock of it's era. And in this Century the Glock is the 1911 of the modern age. Both are designs of pure genius to achieve the requirements of CQB in real world battle conditions. And both designs fathered other pistols containing features brought to market from those parent pistols.
John Moses Browning and Gaston Glock would have had some very interesting conversations over a good glass of fine aged whisky. Oh how I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
This is going well. You got me on the fact that a Glock doesn't have a double strike capability once the trigger had been pulled without the piece firing. I incorrectly assumed it did, but as I said previously I don't own one. Thanks for straightening me out. Then again I didn't realize that a Thompson Contender had to be opened to reset the hammer, who knew? I do own DA/SA and SA auto pistols and both DA and SA revolvers. Swat magazine?? Never heard of it, but I don't get out much. The department that recently switched from .40 Glocks to 9mm SIGs was Manitoba DNR. I don't know why the decision was made, but I do know there was some local dissatisfaction with the issue Glocks. My combat experience is a little lacking by internet standards, as I have only twice had occasion to use a firearm to prevent death or serious injury by another, and both instances occurred quite some time ago. Only one resulted in an exchange of gunfire and neither incident resulted in loss of life on either side. I do have an ATC and carry regularly, though not daily, the stated purpose of which is defense from wildlife. I have enough dangerous bear experience to under stand stress and its effects. I have a life long interest in the use of firearms for personal defense. I carry a firearm in excess of 200 days a year, some years much more. I have over 35 years experience with handguns, although I admit a preference for the revolver.
IMHO, the Glock is a poor system, but if you like them, carry them. The perfect pistol has yet to be invented, all of them have short comings, and that includes the Glock and the 1911. The 1911s are just too large for many people, meaning the length from the rear of the grip frame to the face of the trigger. Out of the box they almost always require improvement. The Hi-Power and CZ-75 have very small safety switches that are not placed as conveniently as the 1911's. S&W autos have oversized handles, and the DA only models leave something to be desired DA/SA in a pistol adds nothing to the capability of the pistol, and requires some to adjust their grip from when the pistol is fired DA to when it is fired SA. The P-38 has an inconvenient magazine release, and this unfortunate design was popular with several Euro pistols. For every person who is uncomfortable with the sight of a cocked 1911 riding in a holster, I'll show you someone who is equally uncomfortable with the hammer dropping safety/ trigger disconnect of the DA auto. I fail to see the point of magazine safeties.
Apparently, some folks are overly sensitive when the short comings of their particular pistol, either chosen by themselves or mandated by their employer, is pointed out. I know what the short comings are of both my handguns and my long guns, and I adapt to those short comings so that I might use my firearms in a competent and effective manner within their design limitations; as must those who choose the Glock.
If you carry a firearm for personal defense and or the defense of others, you practice basic marksmanship and run drills which challenge you with various problem solving elements that you hope will prepare you for any potential lethal situation you might face. Should some little thing unexpectedly occur, a lag time occurs until such time as you can work out the problem and take action to correct it. For example, one day the adjustable rear sight fell off my Ruger .44, and it took me a moment to realize what happened, correct my sight picture and continue. The other fellows didn't realize I had experienced a problem, there was just a momentary delay during the shot string. As a result I changed to a more robust rear sight, and later changed to the gun I now carry with a fixed rear sight, not that I wasn't able to handle the unexpected change, but because I could eliminate the possibility of recurrence under more serious circumstances. IMHO, the Glock trigger design provides an element that can lead to a lag time, and because that is not something I would want to deal with, I would choose a different system if given the option.
IMHO, the Glock is a poor system, but if you like them, carry them. The perfect pistol has yet to be invented, all of them have short comings, and that includes the Glock and the 1911. The 1911s are just too large for many people, meaning the length from the rear of the grip frame to the face of the trigger. Out of the box they almost always require improvement. The Hi-Power and CZ-75 have very small safety switches that are not placed as conveniently as the 1911's. S&W autos have oversized handles, and the DA only models leave something to be desired DA/SA in a pistol adds nothing to the capability of the pistol, and requires some to adjust their grip from when the pistol is fired DA to when it is fired SA. The P-38 has an inconvenient magazine release, and this unfortunate design was popular with several Euro pistols. For every person who is uncomfortable with the sight of a cocked 1911 riding in a holster, I'll show you someone who is equally uncomfortable with the hammer dropping safety/ trigger disconnect of the DA auto. I fail to see the point of magazine safeties.
Apparently, some folks are overly sensitive when the short comings of their particular pistol, either chosen by themselves or mandated by their employer, is pointed out. I know what the short comings are of both my handguns and my long guns, and I adapt to those short comings so that I might use my firearms in a competent and effective manner within their design limitations; as must those who choose the Glock.
If you carry a firearm for personal defense and or the defense of others, you practice basic marksmanship and run drills which challenge you with various problem solving elements that you hope will prepare you for any potential lethal situation you might face. Should some little thing unexpectedly occur, a lag time occurs until such time as you can work out the problem and take action to correct it. For example, one day the adjustable rear sight fell off my Ruger .44, and it took me a moment to realize what happened, correct my sight picture and continue. The other fellows didn't realize I had experienced a problem, there was just a momentary delay during the shot string. As a result I changed to a more robust rear sight, and later changed to the gun I now carry with a fixed rear sight, not that I wasn't able to handle the unexpected change, but because I could eliminate the possibility of recurrence under more serious circumstances. IMHO, the Glock trigger design provides an element that can lead to a lag time, and because that is not something I would want to deal with, I would choose a different system if given the option.
Last edited:
carsmovies
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Mississauga, Ontario
^ I give props to your reply post. Much better written than previous posts imo. At least now we know where you're coming from.
and of course it was the glock to blame and not some crappy ammo....
I don't recall for certain which brand it was, but it was factory ammo (I THINK American Eagle ball, 115 or 124 gr), and the pistol less than a month old, and clean prior to shooting.
So, no, I don't suspect that it was the ammo, as opposed to the firearm.
That said, I have touched off hundreds of cordite .303 loads, and Lee Loader cartridges, without one of my WWI rifles exploding...
SERIOUSLY, you know nothing about glocks.... how many rounds have you put thru a glock ?? I shoot 5000-10,000 rounds thru a glock a year with no problem.... I just finished a 2 day fighting pistol course shooting 800 rounds of ammo and where 16 of the 21 shooters where shooting GLOCKS (the other guns where 2x S&W 5946/1x Taurus 1911/1x HK USP/1 CZ p-01) so during those 2 days that I was there at least 12,800 rounds where fired from glocks pistols without a hiccup..... then most of the guys stayed for the "advanced" course and the shotgun course which entailed another 1200 rounds each... and from what I hear all glocks made it thru without a hiccup.
I have been shooting glocks since 1995..... all shapes and sizes... 100's of thousands of rounds thru various models..... my current G17 has 25,000 rounds thru it and still looks new except for the holster wear on the nose... the only part I have changed is the recoil spring and the trigger spring every 10k
- Location
- Peace River, Alberta
Well I have a few comments on here. First is being a guy owning both multiply Sig' and Glock', both pistols are fairly reliable guns, however Sig has gone downhill in QC and it is a more complex system compared to a Glock. As well, there has been reports of spring failure with Sigs as of late. I have an ATC and my Glock is on it instead of my Sig.
Second, pistols do not require a safety switch on them to make them safe.
Third is there are a lot of interesting, dumb, and untrue comments in this thread. One that is untrue is Canuck44 saying he can't recall the words to his favourite song. I call bulls**t on that! I have heard Bob mumbling that song on more than one occasion at the range!
Greg
Second, pistols do not require a safety switch on them to make them safe.
Third is there are a lot of interesting, dumb, and untrue comments in this thread. One that is untrue is Canuck44 saying he can't recall the words to his favourite song. I call bulls**t on that! I have heard Bob mumbling that song on more than one occasion at the range!
Greg
Last edited:
so explain how a gun explodes and it is not the ammo's fault... a glock is physically incapable of firing out of battery UNLESS the striker channel has been oiled, which may create a hydralic pressure and allow the firing pin to protrude.... otherwise there is a safety that does not allow the striker to protrude from the breach face unless the trigger is pulled, as the trigger is pulled it moves the striker plunger up which allows the striker to travel the full distance needed to hit the primer.
frankly I suspect since this happened in a 9mm pistol (not the .40) that your buddy got a double charged round or he was using ammo that the bullet got set back on which would raise the chamber pressure, either improper crimp or multi rechamberings of the same cartridge. either way, factory ammo is not infallible.
