Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Jeff Cooper and the Glock-Update

From the November Commentary:

* * * * * *
"The Glock pistol seems to be doing what is necessary. It is not a weapon for the master, but it seems to work well and, of course, reliability is a major consideration with a defensive weapon. So we see more Glocks all the time in school and in competition. The marvelous 1911 and its clones continue to be the first choice of the expert, but only a few pistoleros have the intention or the ability to become truly expert. "

* * *

So I Guess the Glock is OK, but the 1911-A1 is "better."

No Flame wars intended or sought. But I thought it would be an interesting update.

BMT (Flame suit on) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Hey, the 1911 is the Cadillac and the Glock is the Toyota Corrolla. They both do the job, just one is "sexier" than the other.

And the Glocks almost never break dammit. (T LEE the certified Glock Armorer)

Terry:

You nailed it, the 1911 is classic and proven, the Glock is functional, reliable and UGLY.

BMT

Everyone should have at least one Glock ... so you never have to loan your 1911 to anyone.

I like thatt.

However, Jeff's opinion holds a lot of sway, I suspect his grudging acceptance of the Glock will sell a few pistols.

BMT

Transition to the Glock from Gods pistol involves nothing more terrifying than "Where to put ones thumbs".

After that, it's very framilliar.

The Good Colonel seldom conceedes a point of contention, and rarely gives ground on the matter of trust.

Some might worry about his health these days, as I do.

But it is obvious that the weapon that he has sharpened for so many years, is still razor sharp.

Glocks work.

Even if they ain't a 1911!!!!!!!

Semper Fi!
E4E

I have owned several examples of both pistols. The only 1911 that I have owned that seemed to fit my hand is my current Kimber. I have owned Brolin Arms (short time, ditched that POS quick), a Series 70 Colt, a Colt Delta Elite, and my Kimber. The kimber really is the only one that when I threw it up the sights are alligned.

Glocks without finger grooves fit my hand just as well as the Kimber does. I have owned a G-23 and a G-17. The 23 I sold to a good friend because he really wanted it. He knows I get first crack at buying it back. The 17 was sold because it is a 9mm. I took it in trade on a 458 that I had built. It shot really fine but I had no need for a 9mm.

The thing about a Glock is that it will always work, right from the box or full of crud. Most 1911s need some tweaking of some sort, or they at least need to be broken in good. Sean

BMT - I've never had a Glock fail out of the box or after much shooting. I've had high end 1911's that did not work out of the box - PO, EB and K as examples.

I had to go to the mat, I'd certainly choose Glock over and 1911.

I don't want to get into a Glock bashing dispute, however, they aren't fail proof. I'm a certified Glock Armorer also and a LEO. My former agency issued Glock and I was a member of a high risk entry team. We shot reguarily and the G22's we carried all began to suffer from extractor breakage at around the 2,500 round mark. Simple enough fix, and I think the design has been tweaked since then, the fact remains they did consistently break at near that round count. I've seen other malfunctions and assorted problems with them. My point is this, they're very good handguns - just not indestructable as some think.

I think Colonel Cooper issued a very fair assessment.

I've tried Glocks, and I don't care for them. For one thing, the grip angle is wrong for me, and the rest of my objections I won't go into........

I've been shooting 1911s and Browning HPs since I was a very young man, and that's what I'm sticking with from here on out, as well as S&W J-Frames for belly-gun purposes.

AD

John Dean "Jeff" Cooper has correctly stated that a handgun is the most personal of weapons because of ergonomic considerations. For example, I let a fine S&W M-28 go down the road because its square-butt grip was and is too big for my hands, regardless of which aftermarket grip I tried. I get along fine with a Pachmayr Gripper on square-butt S&W K-frame revolvers. My hand gets along with the 1911A1 grip and the Browning P-35, but only the relatively light recoil of the 9 x 19 cartridge makes my factory nickel S&W M-59 comfortably usable. The trigger reach of a Ruger MK II is too short for me, but a friend finds it's just right for him. Mind you, I'm only mentioning "weapon in hand" ergonomics. But each of us will find certain weapons more usable than others that are tactically and functionally equivalent: I find the classic Colt SAA grip or its Ruger variant unusable, but I can use a Bisley grip fairly well. For handguns, "one size fits all" is unworkable; the best that any organization can hope to attain is "one size more or less fits most."

Very true, what works for one is totally wrong for another, you just have to find out for yourself.

I love that old 1911 but unless you remember to raise it correctly it points way downward for me. At a gunshow I once picked up a bunch of handguns to see which one pointed most naturally for me and lo and behold it was the much maligned Beretta 96 - the civilian .40 version of the military M9. Look at a spot, close the eyes, grab the gun off of the table and stick it out there and voila - sights perfectly aligned on the target. So that's the one I bought.

Glocks were second best - they point just a teeny tiny bit high but close enough to be very usable.

If you remember to keep the thumb high, arm straight and bring arm and pistol up as a unit the .45 points very well, but that takes a lot of training when the natural thing to do is to thrust the gun toward the target in a high stress situation.

FWIW, that awkward looking Ruger Bisley grip points more naturally when brought to eye level than any other single action I've tried.

Gosh - to have to go into a gun store and handle two or three dozen guns to see which one is best for you, what a miserable chore. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Well said. I shoot Glocks like I do my 1911s----------thumbs stacked in the Cooper fashion. It looks weird to the "Glock only" crowd, but it keeps things simple and orderly in my little brain, and I shoot best that way.

Other than the fact that Glocks wrote the book on fugly, they're a very good gun. They've got a low bore axis, a natural pointability, and the plastic frame seems to take up some shock. All of this helps to offset the Spray 'n Wash triggerpull, which can be dealt with through lots of practice.
222

222Rem,

That's the part I never understand - if a handgun's utility is based on ergonomics, why accept a lousy trigger pull?

I'd rather not spend my practice time becoming tolerant of crappiness...

JOG,
Because the triggerpull is the ONLY fly in the ergo ointment. Granted, it's a very large fly, but as a combat tool I'd be lying if I said the Glock wasn't a very capable pistol.

My heart and loyalty lie with the 1911, but after being forced to use a Glock for the last 10yrs I've developed a respect for it. And unless faced with the 11lb NY trigger, the pull can be mastered pretty quickly.
222

been to a few gunschools,shot a lot not some whizbang fartpocket seal/delta/entry team dealer of destruction&mayhem with approved practical/tactical bells and whistles...just a simple Redneck whose beaten aneroxia own both carry both like both shoot both about equal am i a heretic for likeing both of'em? sorry but i likes my Glockies and my 1911's(.9 and.45 in 1911/.40/.45 in Glock)

No, you're not a heretic, just an honest redneck (your words). <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Just about every gun out there has it's own kind of charm if you look hard enough. Glocks charm lies in it's simple, reliable, durable, and shootable (lots of ables huh?) nature. For someone who doesn't care a whit about asthetics or tradition, the Glock is a no-brainer, hands down winner choice for a pistol. Many (dare say most?) gun owners eventually want to somehow make their guns unique and special to them, which is hard when owning a Glock. Even the hardcore cool-aid Glockophiles at Glocktalk have to search for ways to take a perfectly utilitarian and practical pistol, and make it "better" with express sights, different springs, and extended mag and slide releases. For those shooters willing to accept the fact they don't want to be sheep, and want their pistol to have some class and character, (not to mention be a superb design with most of the same "ables" glock has), the 1911 makes a MUCH better place to start when creating a daily carry baby.

In the end, it's up to the individual to buy, shoot, and carry what they want. It's one of the many things that makes the USA the best country in the world-----------that's NOT open for debate.
222

222Rem,

The Glock is a capable pistol, which returns us to the point of this thread - even Cooper feels they have a place in the world. My opinion is that Glock made too many tradeoffs to achieve it. Times have never been better in the firearms world and with a multitude of great handguns out there to choose from I don't have to put up with tradeoffs. I can have my cake and eat it too.

Yep, the Glock is capable, but a guy doesn't have to think very hard to name pistols that outshine the Glock in every category and every use without even mentioning "1911".

The Glock being an ugly gun that works puts me in mind of another gun taht answers to that description, the SMLE.

As far as rifles go, the only gun close to being that ugly that works as well is an SKS.

Well I remember the first time I worked the trigger on a Glock G20 11 years ago. Major disappointment. "Spray 'n Wash" (222Rem's description) fits perfectly.

That was 1995, and I now have 5 ugly Glocks that I shoot regularly. I've shot them enough to appreciate that whichever Glock I pick up the trigger feels is the same. And to me it has become just what a trigger should be, especially when attached to a pistol that is so dependable that a misfire is almost reason enough to send the pistol back to Smyrna.

Form follows function & for me that is beauty.