My Glocks are officially paper weights....

Is it just me or am I in the smaller crowd that likes use an exposed hammer?

As I never hear from Glock owners saying they miss seeing the hammer position???

At first I did not like having no safety of the SIG design but the de-cocker and heavy single action pull converted me.

R
 
Was never a fan until i got a G20 Gen 4 & now the G19 😍😍😍.
 

Attachments

  • ImageUploadedByCanadianGunNutz1402458319.605046.jpg
    ImageUploadedByCanadianGunNutz1402458319.605046.jpg
    22.3 KB · Views: 442
I switched to striker fired pistols, nothing against the hammer, just my preference.
Oh, and I don't like glocks :)
 
On my side my Glock 17 is miles behind my Polymer Jericho and M&P9 in all aspect. Glock perfection.... certainly not, maybe as a paper weight.
 
silverfoxdj said:
True and understandable but the whole point of shooting is the shooter not the gun..

Our forefathers had limited technolgy but there were some fine shooters even then.

To me the challenge is to overcome the difficulties from gun to gun and excel..
The Glock is my constant reminder not to get so full of myself when I shoot a CZ Shadow or 1911 that is so easy to shoot accurately.
Click to expand...

caramel said:
We think different here, for me the goal of having a passion is having the most performing tool for the task, this way the best concentration from my part wont be limited by a tool that dont give me top shelve performance... Just saying... JP.
Click to expand...

I've seen a crown Vic out drive vipers and corvettes. I've seen stock glocks out shoot tuned guns of higher quality.

When it comes down to it, being proficient in the use of a tool comes down to the user, not the tool.
 
1911's - Making amateurs look like professionals for over 100 year ...

Just kidding. Glocks are good guns. I have sent a lot of lead downrange with them; but they just don't feel right in my hand ... and I sometimes thing that they are not really supposed to. Glocks are utility guns that were made to be reliable above all else. The fact that they are decently accurate, light and ugly are just coincidence.
 
fenceline said:
I've seen a crown Vic out drive vipers and corvettes. I've seen stock glocks out shoot tuned guns of higher quality.

When it comes down to it, being proficient in the use of a tool comes down to the user, not the tool.
Click to expand...
Im tired of hearing that here!!!
Although fundamentals are highly important, I disagree that its entirely fundamentals, having a poor trigger, bad grips, loose tolerances, and horrible sights are entirely the tools fault not the shooter.
Thats like saying if you cant shoot sub moa with your sks, thats the shooters fault....
come on guys, stop it with repeating stupid crap you hear from others...
 
mikethebike said:
Although fundamentals are highly important, I disagree that its entirely fundamentals, having a poor trigger, bad grips and horrible sights are entirely the tools fault not the shooter.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is, you can't just blame the tool. I've seen good with great be out classed by great with so so. It's about the time you put in to be proficient. The tool is what it is, no more, no less. The great variable is the user.
 
Glocks aren't meant to be used by people who own castles. Glocks aren't meant to be works of art to be admired while enjoying a glass of fine cognac. Glocks aren't meant to feel good in the hand like a custom golf club or a set of kid leather gloves. Glocks aren't meant to compete in fairweather bullseye competitions with overbred custom pistols. Glocks are meant to put rounds downrange very quickly, absolutely reliably, and reasonably accurately.
 
caramel said:
For a regular joe a Glock will never be a work tool... JP.
Click to expand...

Now I'm not a Glock guy, but even I see the fallacy of this statement. A regular joe would be a fellow who wants a gun for personal protection, but is in no way an enthusiast. A Glock platform provides him with an affordable, reliable gun that's ready to go out of the box, with no need for a 500 round break in (although we might might hope he would put a few hundred rounds down range so as to have developed a level of competency prior to having a problem which called for lethal response). Its simple to use and maintain and is accurate enough to engage an assailant across a couple of parking stalls at Walmart, or to defend his family should they be the target of a violent home invasion. So from the perspective of a regular joe, a Glock might well be the ideal daily carry tool.
 
I have a Louiseville Slugger for home protection, here in Kanada, handguns for a regular non policeman/soldier/agency, will be for range use, so if i have the choice of range tool, i will pickup what shoot best, this could change with more practice and time but for know, My LB 1911, S&W 627 PC- 8 times, my S&W Model 29 or even my Desert Eagle 44 mag have better triggers and are overall more accurate than my Glocks, even a Jericho will give better result on the paper target and i expect that my HK45 CT LEM ( should be here on wenesday) to be easier to shoot accuratly, i dont seem to have a solution to this Glock trigger...
In Canada we only have paper targets or steel targets for the regular joe, might as well go with the most accurate ones, since the size or the weight is irrelevant, if you have mastered your Glock and are a proeficient shooter with it, good for you... Just saying... JP.
 
Last edited:
Master-G said:
Glocks aren't meant to be used by people who own castles. Glocks aren't meant to be works of art to be admired while enjoying a glass of fine cognac. Glocks aren't meant to feel good in the hand like a custom golf club or a set of kid leather gloves. Glocks aren't meant to compete in fairweather bullseye competitions with overbred custom pistols. Glocks are meant to put rounds downrange very quickly, absolutely reliably, and reasonably accurately.
Click to expand...


100% agreed!!! Relatively accurate in stock form!!
I shot a ZEV 9mm last weekend, although it looked fantastic ,felt good in hand, and shot more accurate then any glock I tried,
It was still not the most accurate pistol on the table.
 
wicked_police said:
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.
Click to expand...

That doesn't sound very realistic!!! Is that of a bench with hands rested?
If you could actually get that kind of results out of a glock, imagine what groups you would get with a higher tier pistol.... Like a p7, p210, or even a p30..
 
caramel said:
I can use them to make a lesser cost alternative to a friend, in life the one that is at rush often make bad decisions... If you have something that is paid for, it cost you nothing to keep it... Just saying... JP.
Click to expand...

Seems Ritchie Rich is tapped out on funds and is selling his safe queens in the EE which according to this thread he doesn't do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom