Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Rabid Glock owners - Please explain???

Here is a rather remarkable collection of Glock incidents...

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/gindex2.html

For me, I did own a M22 some years ago - even handloaded for it . I never could get used to the lack of a manual safety, and eventually got rid of it. It was reliable, but not particularly accurate.

How 'bouts the XD .... or as I have often seen referred to as the Glock's Glock ....

Very well stated. We can't even carry 1911's off duty, because the Range Master has seen so many issues with them, he won't let us qualify with one.

The Springfield XD's are very nice weapons.

Glock's don't turn my crank. But I do respect them AND the folk's that own and cherish them.

BUT, to Attempt to elevate a good practical 'Glock' pistol unto 'Weapon-Of-The-Gods' status is nauseating ... IMO.

I'm not real big on S&W Revolver's either ... (Which are seemingly 'Sacrosanct' here on this Forum.) ... But the ONE S&W Revolver I do own - A little hammerless, S&W Air-weight, .32 H&R, Snubby ... "IS TO DIE FOR!"

I did see a PINK~Duracoat Glock in the Gunstore ...

THAT must be for Glock~Lovers.

Kev, you're in deep doo-doo! lols!

I must admit that I've had three Glocks, and they were all perfectly reliable. Got rid of them because I can't shoot them nearly as well as a 1911, and therefore couldn't justify carrying them.

PS I once met a Glock nut who had his gun, and was carrying and shooting it regularly, for many months. I asked him if he liked the easy take down characteristics, and his reply was that he had yet to take it down or clean it in any way, and didn't think you had to ever clean a Glock. I guess that's part of the mystique with Glock. So reliable, you never need to clean them other than wipe off the exterior, and that only to keep from making your clothes and hands filthy.

Let me guess,,,,mall cop?

Their not rabid .... 10 replies in 2 hours .... 30+ in four hours.

No ... not rabid.

I just love the polarization and brand loyalty.
Like another said about a Harley vs Honda debate.

Another example of ancient long time brand loyalty vs technological and material superiority.

It is comparing apples to oranges. Or maybe more like comparing Granny Smiths to Golden delicious.

Each has their own place and use.

A few weeks ago an engineer ( chemical scientist not mechanical eng.) here at work found out the i "shoot".
And he had some teenaged vandals around his home.
He said he wanted to buy a gun. His first ever gun.
And he asked for my advice. With no expereince ( and NO desire to learn ) I recomended a revolver. He said "No, I want one that goes 'bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang.. you know every time you pull the trigger"
Oh I said, semi automatic? " Yeah like the cops have"
Get a Glock 9mm .. and some instruction. was my recomendation.
I should go and see if he ever did.

back to the rabid debate!

I love it when people get hooked on an image instead of whats really best for them. People ask me the same thing and I give them the same response....get a revolver. If its just some random joe from work I'll tell him to get a glock, I tell my friends and family to get a Sig.

I ain't rabid, but I don't have any of my guns tricked out. My Colt Combat Commander bought new when the retail wuz 200 bucks, my sixguns and my Glock 20 ALL came accurate and dependable right outta the box. Powerful, accurate and dependable without having to send them away to trick them out.

You crack me up...

By the way, is your screen name from "Man on Fire?" (awesome movie)

Who cares?

And, no, I own more 1911s and revovlers than Glocks...

Dink,

Not anymore thank goodness. Your points are very valid; pistols that are carried all day every day have a rough life. When I did carry a gun professionally (for a 10 year stretch), I carried a hard chromed, very customized Browning Hi Power. When things get serious, I tend to �run home to momma� and start looking for a Hi Power. Not only is the Hi Power the most feed reliable pistol I�ve ever encountered, they also have an outstanding reputation for not breaking parts. And since I�ve worked on well over 10,000 Hi Powers, I�m intimately familiar with the design, and I know every last weakness and how to contend with those weaknesses.

I typically don�t like silver guns for defensive purposes, but in that decade I carried the Hi Power I learned exactly how tough Hard Chrome really is; impressive stuff. After a decade of carry, there were some internal parts with rust pitting, but the outside of the gun looked nearly new; that�s pretty cool. In that decade of carry, my Hi Power saw it all and it served with tremendous distinction; I�m still pissed I sold the damn thing (I can really be dumb sometimes).

FWIW, I also carried a Satin Nickle S&W 442 which didn�t hold up nearly as well as the Hi Power. The 442 never failed me, but the satin nickel finish looked like crap at the end of the decade, and internal parts all had rust pitting. Still, through all its ugliness, it worked and worked perfectly.

The Glock does make a good daily carry gun. The plastic frame is not only impervious to the elements, it�s extremely forgiving of bumps and dents. The Tenifer finish is truly remarkable stuff, almost as resistant of rust as hard chrome or electroless nickel. Glock, like every other pistol out there still has internal parts that are subject to the elements, but at that point you just need to properly maintain your gun.

I also would have recommended a Glock.

Well obviously I do. But your point is well taken.

As a writer, I feel it�s my God given calling to educate. Having such blind faith in something (anything), isn�t healthy. Since the nature of the Glock is a defensive pistol, the consequences of misplaced faith can have horrendous results. Just trying to open some eyes�It�s what I do; I can�t help myself.

No problem, but from here it looks like the anti Glock crowd is at least as rabid as the Glock crowd...carry on...grin

Yeah, not a bad choice, but one must keep in mind that the ultra light weight frame of the Glock (and others like it), lends itself to limp wrist malfunctions for those who don't properly hold the gun. And for someone with no experience and no desire to learn, you can assume they won't do what's necessary to ensure they don't limp wrist their gun. In such a case, I always point such people to a revolver, which is rarely ever a bad choice; even for the experts.

Even pistols with aluminum frames can be subject to the limp wrist phenominon.

Couple of years ago, at the range we have a very wide variety of pistols and we decided to see which ones were more susceptible to this phenomenon, and the results were a touch surprising. Most every pistol was susceptible to the limp wrist phenomenon, but especially those with light frames and heavy springs (duh!!). The Glock was perhaps the most susceptible, but I found that my personal S&W M1911PD could be induced to short stroke quite easily also. The one gun we could not get to malfunction under any circumstances was a WWII GI (Ithaca I think) M1911 with standard 16.5lb mainspring. It just shucked shells all day long. I did notice that many times the slide was very slow in closing. Each of us were expecting the gun to eventually fail to close all the way, but it never happened.

A Sig 229 seemed to be pretty close to �perfect� on that day, only failing to function twice from limp wristing. Oh and by the way, when I say limp wristing, I mean REALLY limp wristing. Generally, when trying to induce this sort of failure, I hold the gun with two fingers half way down the grip�I�m amazed that ANY gun functions under such circumstances.

But once you straightened up and began to shoot right, both the Glock�s and my M1911PD returned to perfect running, as did most everything else.