Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns What's wrong with the World's Finest Combat Handgun?

if the Chit ever hits the fan, I'll be toting a couple of 1911's as a backup to either my 870 or SP101

the Glocks will be distributed to those I choose to arm.

I am an American you know.

When I had Glocks, that was my plan too.

If I don't chime in, someone's bound to call me on it...



What happened to "Glock perfection"? Wasn't that good enough?



I think this is just so much bunk. Even IF the plastic absorbs recoil, the reduced weight also must increase felt recoil. We used to hear that marketspeak about plastic rifle stocks too, and I'm here to tell ya it just doesn't translate to lower felt recoil for a given stock shape. Any actual reduction of felt recoil has more to do with mechanical design, leverage, and grip angle than anything else. My Kahr K9 has less felt recoil than a Glock 26. If the K9 was a double-stack, the difference would likely be even greater.



I don't know about 10mm, but maybe you can explain to me why a box-stock Hi-Power feels much more pleasant in recoil to me than any Glock. I haven't shot a 9mmm 1911, so I can't attest to that. Someone has been advertising an aluminum frame conversion for Glocks. That's a recoil comparison I'd like to see. OBTW - my box-stock Hi-Power (which I foolishly sold and will replace someday) was 100% reliable, even with crappy reloads.



I invite you to make an effort to see what you can do with custom grips - on guns that will accept them. Glocks need not apply.

Obviously, I don't care for Glocks. I don't particularly enjoy shooting them. They don't fit my hand well (and making one fit is an expensive proposition). I hate staple-gun triggers. I prefer a heavier material for handguns that will be carried in a holster. I like the ability to custom fit with inexpensive grip changes. I could go on, but I won't.

The Glock is a good service pistol that works as well as anything. It ain't perfect (you proved that point) and it ain't the best for everybody. It has many good points that would be a plus if I could stand to use one, and if I were required to use one I wouldn't cry about it - especially if I were allowed some of the many available modifications. But it certainly ain't at the top of my list.

That's about it.

Sooo, which handgun is?

That's rhetorical question, isn't it?

Well.......I guess it's a three-way tie. Depending on what kind of hair day I'm having, it's either a 1911, a Hi-Power, or a 4"-5" DA revolver. Any of these three would be the handgun I would prefer to be carrying when I really need one.

Okay, okay.....you noticed I listed the 1911 first, eh?

I have a Glock 21 and I like it fine� I have a HK USP in 45 and I like it much better� for a number of reasons� I have a Sig P220 and I like it best� for carry.
For carry in a field or a car or Hunting or being cool or just shooting I still pick my 1911. But for everything else I want I want the safety of a double action.

For real carry Well� that�s a different story all together

So, just so I am straight on your original post: since "E" doesn't agree with your opinion of a handgun his affinity for Leupold rifle scopes somehow proves that they are mediocre and everyone not agreeing with you has twisted logic. Got it.

No no...I should have made this clear originally; Leupold scopes are mediocre regardless of E's idolatry of them.

With regard to the twisted logic; yes.

Jog,

Since you've made the biggest ruckus over the title containing the word combat, are you former or current military?

Have you been in combat?

No.

No doubt, my lack of military experience puts certain limits on my opinions. I am a former competitive shooter (about 30-years worth), so I try to approach things from the standpoint of total 'shootability' of the platform.

Ruckus? I don't think so. To me there's a big difference between defensive and combat weapons. The latter connotes an offensive and more intense scenario.

That's why they make vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry

Leupold scopes are mediocre? HA!

Ah, Dood. Are you really interested in what I think or are you just trying to start a fight ? Looks to me like all you want to do is fight.
Just how much street time, and in how many fights did you use your Glock ? Sure doesn't sound like much. If you had any, you'd already know some of the things I'd say about them. E

Even though I was on a somewhat small department(28 uniformed), none of our guys liked the ergo's on the Glock as well. We were doing a switch from S&W 686's at the time and most agreed that the Sig 226 was the nicer of the weapons we had on hand for testing. The second choice of the crew was a S&W Sigma 40 cal which was pretty nice as well. Me, I'm a Beretta guy. I'm sure the Glock is a well proven gun, but if it doesn't fit your hand correctly, it's not of much use from my POV.

If handguns matter, in a military sense, usually something has gone horribly wrong.
Bill

Which happens from time to time.

Seventeen street years altogether E, and 9 of them with the Glock 20. Contrary to popular belief, use of lethal force by the police is a relatively rare occurrence. Thank God I never had to shoot anyone.

How many years have you served on a police force or a Sheriff's department?

And what are your gripes about Glocks?

Really? While I've never shot at anyone I have been shot at twice, cut three times with a knife and been in countless scuffles arresting people. I can tell you from experience, your sphincter pucker factor would be the same regardless of which situation (defensive vs. combat) put you in mortal danger. That is a fact. And you would use your pistol the same way; shoot for center mass of the largest portion of the offender's/combatants body that is available. That is a fact too.

I own a G19 and a G21SF. I think the ergos on the Glock 19 are great! the G21SF... maybe I need to get used to it, maybe I need more practice, maybe the recoil transfer is different, I don't know... I'm not as accurate with it. Both wear a Hogue grip sleeve and "feel" pretty good in my hand when not firing.

I did not serve, but all the deputies that trained me and I worked with were Viet Nam vets who all saw extensive combat. To a person they would agree with the above statement. If you're down to just a handgun something has gone horribly awry. You're totally defensive. I'm sure there are exceptions, but you don't see our troops patrolling in Afghanistan and Iraq with pistols at low-ready; they have their ARs slung UP and ready.

Where we seem to be disagreeing is on the size and distance of the target the bad guys offers. You mentioned a man-sized target at a maximum of 30-feet. I hope that's true, but I will be preparing for a lot tougher target than that.