I'm actually pretty ambivalent about Glocks. I have owned a couple (I'd sold my first Glock before the 22 and 23 became available) and they are decently accurate and highly reliable. As far as the kaboom "myth" goes, most guys who dismiss it haven't held an exploded Glock (I have, not pretty) so I guess really it comes down to what you want to buy into. I can tell you I would not shoot full power lead reloads in a Glock. The nicest Glock I've fired was an early Aerotek protoype, through-slide ported, laser in the guide rod and very, very light trigger with the laser wiring built into the frame and activated by a grip safety like switch. That gun recoiled downward with high-gas loads (165+P). So after all of that I'm still not as blown away by the Glock as many are, I guess I'm just not a Glock guy.
Accuracy is a function of the shooter. The gear involved has little to do with it. Sidearms/secondary's/handguns are primarily employed in short range work, 25 yards and under. At these ranges, any error in shot placement is attributed to the shooter and their skill or lack there of.
It amazes me how many "shooters" proclaim that pistol X with load Y won't shoot. In the same breathe, another shooter with the same setup has no issues cutting clean holes in the 10 ring or anywhere else s/he desires on the target. If the only change in the situation is the shooter. How can the firearm or ammunition be the cause of poor results? Answer: The shooter is the cause, not the gear. Do professional athletes/teams win games because of superior gear or superior skill? That's what I thought...
Aerotek is not Glock. They are an after market company who for the most part offer useless crap for those who feel that investing in "cool guy" gear will somehow improve their marksmanship. Ported barrels and/or slides on semi auto pistols is neither necessary nor useful. Lasers are probably the single most useless device one can attach, install, or mount on a firearm. Lasers are generally delicate instruments that rarely hold zero. Their visibility in daylight is minimal, they're visible only at short ranges,they require batteries which do fail and lasers are only visible if nothing is obstructing their line of sight. Lasers from a practical side indicate both your point of aim/impact as well as your location.
The stock triggers in Glock pistols are just fine. lightened triggers similar to those found in 1911 style pistols are desirable for those who do not understand the fundamentals of shooting or don't wish to spend the time to master them.
Glocks have blown up, so has every other make out there. The Glock KB's get a lot more attention simply because so many refuse to accept that Polymer framed firearms are here to stay and so is Glock. Hence why every manufacturer out there now offers a polymer firearm.
The Glock line of pistols often comes up short for a lot of peoples expectations. A lot of people seem to be less than humbled when they discover that Glocks are simple by design, rugged, and work. They won't make you a better marksman, they won't clean themselves, and they won't dazzle the ladies with their gorgeous lines or contrasting stainless parts. Glocks work, and do so regardless of whether you praise their design or despise it.
I don't care what anyone shoots, its your money and your choice. I do have an issue with folks who proceed to trash talk a particular brand or make when they know little or nothing about it. Someone above stated they would prefer a Hi-Power over a Glock due to sentimental reasons and their personal taste. I can respect that. Personal taste is very much a personal thing.
TDC
). However, a Glock is far less likely to fail than other firearms, or so has been the case. My Glock has seen a little over 27,000 rounds now and has never failed. My lack of failures is not a rare event for Glocks.
