LAV & Company talk Glocks

misanthropist said:
And that Ken was a founder of IDPA and IPSC...

And that Dave is a IDPA and USPSA Master...



Frankly, if a person find that he can't benefit from anything I post - and I did post this video a week or two back, so this is a decent example - that's a pretty good indication that that individual is not reachable, and is insufficiently familiar with shooting to take advantage of the information I'm giving.

We're at a point in this thread where the theory is being put out there that Ken Hackathorn and Dave Harrington have appeared in this video to help Larry Vickers sell Glock accessories...despite the fact that they're all recommending slightly different stuff, the vast majority of which does not even benefit any of them to sell.

Ken lists off half a dozen sights, not one of which puts money in any of their pockets. In fact unless things have changed in the last year or two, he doesn't even get paid for the Ameriglo Hackathorn sights which he designed.

Does Larry Vickers get paid for recommending a stock glock trigger? I thought this was all about selling products! And when Ken talks about modding the trigger, what does he recommend? The Glock "dot" connector...who gets royalties for that?

The advice to keep your gun cleaned and lubed up? Who's getting paid there?

Or the grip texturing they like? Not one of these guys gets a penny for telling people how to improve the grip on their gun. And if I'm to understand this thread correctly, even the apparently unassailable Hickock45 apparently likes to improve the grip surface of his Glocks...amazing! But when these guys think grip texture could be improved, what, all of a sudden it's #### their egos are trying to sell?

Then when they get down to "if you could change just one thing, what does it need?" they all just say "sights". The Vickers mag release and slide lock get about fifteen seconds of coverage in this entire 17 minute discussion.



Anyone who has their head so far up their ass that they can't benefit from this advice is just not worth bothering with. Essentially what we're looking at here is some guy who for whatever reason has got his back up about taking advice from three of the most knowledgeable Glock shooters on the planet, who insists on discounting anything they say.

Hey, if anybody wants to blow off guys who know so much that they are hired by Heckler and Koch to help them DESIGN GUNS, knock yourself out. Ken is such an expert on the MP5 that HK flies him to Germany to train THEIR people.

But it doesn't make you smarter to block this knowledge out of your head. It makes you dumber. And admitting to doing it doesn't make you look smarter for reasons that I would HOPE would be obvious even to some of the posters in this thread.
Click to expand...

Yeah - that's what I meant to say...
 
I honestly can't believe that in over 30 years they have never put a better factory sight on their guns. I like how they said on the video the factory ones just fill in the dovetail until you get something decent. Most parts on a factory Glock are workable, and they managed to improve the mag release....but still have those abominable plastic sights. The factory installed night sights are at least ok, but a decent basic and adjustable STEEL sight should have been made available by now.
 
PapaHotel01 said:
I honestly can't believe that in over 30 years they have never put a better factory sight on their guns. I like how they said on the video the factory ones just fill in the dovetail until you get something decent. Most parts on a factory Glock are workable, and they managed to improve the mag release....but still have those abominable plastic sights. The factory installed night sights are at least ok, but a decent basic and adjustable STEEL sight should have been made available by now.
Click to expand...

The issue with stock sights is their construction. The design is doable although not ideal. Adjustable sights are not needed on a service gun and that is the market Glock primarily targets. (no pun intended)

TDC
 
chemo said:
misanthropist, why do you even bother with him?
Click to expand...

I don't have a good explanation for that.

All I can say in my defense is that the one thing I really love in life is aggregating and disseminating information. I should have been a teacher and I would probably be happier. But I always have the hope that some people will read the things I write and get something useful out of it, even if it's just in the explanation of "why you should realize post X has good information and post Y has bad information."

I remember when I was first learning about shooting and so on. It was hard for me to tell the difference between people who really knew what they were talking about, and random, opinionated people with high post counts and a bunch of friends.

I bought into various stupid theories just because I didn't know the subject matter well enough to distinguish between expert opinion, and internet pseudo-quackery mumbo-jumbo.

Now that I've had the benefit of time and training and experience, and exposure to people who really are some of the titans of this world, I am pretty good at seeing the difference between, say, Larry Vickers, and NutnFancy. And not only that, I often now personally know enough of the background of the people in question that I know WHY they know what they know.

I have nothing at all against Hickock45. He's a solid shooter and he is sure having a good time. And, like me, I think he really enjoys getting information out there, which is great. But you cannot compare his level of understanding to the men in this video. They represent some of the most highly trained organizations on the planet, whom they themselves train. Are they perfect? Of course not. Do I agree with everything every one of them has ever said or done? No, I do not. But running your mouth about a guy like Ken Hackathorn is like running your mouth about Albert Einstein. Is he the be-all and end-all of physics, forever? No, he is not. But he was a brilliant thinker who advanced his field tremendously and his impact is going to be felt for the foreseeable future. You want to take the word of Bill Nye the Science Guy over his? Knock yourself out...but remember that Bill Nye probably has the sense to know where he stands in relation to Albert Einstein. If you don't, you probably should stay quiet on the Einstein threads at canadianrelativitynutz.com.
 
TDC said:
The issue with stock sights is their construction. The design is doable although not ideal. Adjustable sights are not needed on a service gun and that is the market Glock primarily targets. (no pun intended)

TDC
Click to expand...

For a paper puncher/competition gun adjustables are necessary, you can get by without but you should really run them and have the gun sighted....and the adjustable plastic Glock sights are a joke. The factory fixed need to be steel and the front sight is just too wide. At any distance where I need good sight alignment they are just too coarse, anything closer I can just sight down the slide or I don't really need sights anyways.
 
Don't get me wrong...I like Bill Nye, just like I'm good with Hickock45. But nobody is really comparing Bill Nye to Einstein, let alone saying "this Einstein guy is all ego and sales...I'd rather take Bill Nye's word on how relativity works".

At least, nobody remotely in the loop on physics. Children, maybe. Or probably.

But nobody who will ever be competitive in any aspect of physics, that's for sure.
 
There are those fanboys who sponge up every little detail these guys say. There are the haters who just hate fanboys, and then I do believe there are still a few of us around, who has 'critical thinking' left in our brains with the smarts to discern the marketing from the truth. For every piece of marketing there is some truth or some reason why a product or service was made. Somebody deemed it a necessary thing to bring to market. Whether it'll make you a better shooter or just more lazy remains to be seen.

But I do believe there are some inherent inefficiencies with the glock. So do many distributers. Hence why the blue label glocks come with trijicon tritiums.

The glock is one of those one size fits all en masse type guns. Obviously it won't fill every role perfectly or every hand... But for most work, it works.

Just like you can do engine swaps with a civic si and the cr-v vtec, and replace all the innards do exhaust, intake, mags, spoilers, sound system...its still a honda. Yes you can slalom and rice rocket yourself to the finish line, but you better be a damn good driver. The same analogy to the glock...

All the best sights, awesome grip plugs, trigger job, rods and springs, disconnectors are just for waste if u actually suck monkey balls as a shot. Not to mention if u suck even more putting that stuff together. U must know the reason why, and how it affects the rest of the system, and more importantly how it affects your poa/poi and ergonomics.

Haha I just equated my glock to a honda.
 
I'm also a little baffled that Glock hasn't ditched the cheapo plastic stock sights. You only need to holster the pistol quickly a couple times before they start to get chewed up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom