Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Dean,
I thoroughly enjoy your website and your point of view. Nothing is perfect, but I do believe that Glock pistols are good enough to trust my life with. I personally carry a Glock 26 almost everyday while at work and play. I wonder how many people actually carry a pistol and not just talk about it. Mine has holster wear and a little ding on the end of the barrel where I dropped it once. Yes, it was unloaded when I dropped it. I am a former Marine who was guaranteed Security Forces from 1994-1998. I did not see any combat and thank God for it. I had extensive firearm training in bootcamp, the School of Infantry, and then Marine Corps Security Force School & CQB School. We always used the Beretta M9 as I am sure you know. I always like it and if you were issued a decent one, it was capable of being as accurate as you are. All this talk about accuracy and groups is a moot point to me, since I think most pistols are more accurate than their shooters. I liked the Beretta enough to recommend it to my wife and mother in law. They both got one and love them. I'm not much on the caliber wars either, since I think anything .380 and up will do the job with a well placed shot or multiple hits, which is my focus and what my friends concentrate on. Saturday while at the range two of my friends were firing GLock 21's. One is a 2nd gen and the other a 3rd. An older gentleman (late 60's - early 70's) was on the end of the range shooting 3 1911's. One of his pistols he would fire very fast, one he would fire very slow and the third I didn't see. I did notice that he was a reloader and offered my friends spent brass to him since neither of them reload. He thanked me and asked what they were shooting, like he didn't know since they were right next to him. When I informed him they were Glocks, he quipped that oh, those are 1000 round guns. Apparently he baited me into this conversation. I said really, and he said yes. That they are horrible and he works on allot of them and they are 1000 round guns. I said that's funny since this one right here my friend is firing he has had since 1994ish and has to be close to 10,000 rounds without even a hiccup. The older gentleman said that well, allot of people he knows that shoot them in competition have had theirs fire out of battery and when they send them in, sometimes they get a whole new pistol back (new serials). I said well I have shot my little 26 over 10,000 rounds and have never had a problem as well. He quickly qualified his statement that only .45's that were the problem children. I suspect personally that allot of people, especially older folks who are stuck in their ways, simply hate Glocks, especially the .45's because they are better than the 1911. I say that because in my experience you can buy a $500 Glock and take it into combat and it will perform. Whereas is seems to me that all these 1911cost more to begin with, and then you have to drop another 1000 bucks at least to have it be reliable and accurate. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't allot of the debate over 1911 versus other models, especially the Glocks a little Horse and buggy versus the Steam engine mentality? I find it hard to believe that a 100 year old design of anything could be as good a something using new technology. I'm sure there are cases, but I don't think the 1911 is one of them. Maybe the M2 .50 bmg, but even it was updated a little. I'm just tired of people saying that Glocks suck, and while I know they aren't perfect, I know they are better than most, and as good as the Beretta. Anyway, besides this little rant, what is your opinion on the whole thing, and specifically on the Model 21's firing out of battery after 1000 rounds.
Thanks in advance for any commentary.
Buddy Smith
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
I would concur.

I have 6 1911's and 5 Glocks. My Glock 21 is a first Generation and NEVER a hiccup.

I love it and would probably be the first I grab. Super accurate, super reliable. The only thing I did was add night sights and a Hogue wrap around.

NUFF said.


Triggerman
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,290 Posts
To be quite frank, I don't like the way a Glock balances in my hand. I have nothing against them, they just don't fit me well enough to justify my owning one.

As for the 1911, I own a few. None of them have ever given me a problem. That includes Springfield, Colt, Para Ordnance, Randall, and others. The most that I've modified any was to install grips, and in one case, three-dot sights.

I believe that there are so many parts out there, and it's so easy to install many of them, that people just personalize the weapon. The 1911 has withstood the test of time, and is still one of the easiest weapons to shoot, and hit with. :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,935 Posts
Whew! Fertile ground, indeed!

Buddy Smith said:
I do believe that Glock pistols are good enough to trust my life with. I personally carry a Glock 26 almost everyday while at work and play. I wonder how many people actually carry a pistol and not just talk about it.

…​

I am a former Marine who was guaranteed Security Forces from 1994-1998.

…​

We always used the Beretta M9 as I am sure you know.

…​

When I informed him they were Glocks, he quipped that oh, those are 1000 round guns. Apparently he baited me into this conversation.

…​

…people he knows that shoot them in competition have had theirs fire out of battery and when they send them in, sometimes they get a whole new pistol back (new serials).

…​

…especially older folks who are stuck in their ways…

…​

I find it hard to believe that a 100 year old design of anything could be as good a something using new technology. I'm sure there are cases, but I don't think the 1911 is one of them.

…​

I'm just tired of people saying that Glocks suck….
Thanks for the gracious words, Buddy… appreciated.

That said, let's get to it:
  1. I think that Glocks are more than "good enough to trust my life with," but I firmly believe that within a certain specific set of conditions, they are unnecessarily problematic. Problem is, for my part, is that the "Tenifer Twinks" in the Glock Flock, many of whom shouldn't be allowed near a modem let alone a reloading bench, have convinced themselves that I am the Anti-Gaston and that I have some sort of personal jihad against Glock pistols. ('Tain't so!)

    Like Triggerman, I have a first generation Model 21, upgraded with the Six-Parts, the never-announced modification unique to the Models 21, and the newer non-drop-free magazines. Since it was returned to the Smyrna "factory" in 1992, it has performed flawlessly with everything save the factory 185-grain FMC-SWC rounds with which I used to try to shoot GSSF… GSSF's Chris Edwards told me that it was his experience that those "target" loads just didn't have enough juice to reliably cycle and eject, and after I moved to the similarly-profiled 200-grain PMC, I've never had that problem again.[/*:so9qn9hj]
  2. I'm not familiar with the term "guaranteed Security Forces" in a Corps context. Could you clarify?[/*:so9qn9hj]
  3. You seem to have gotten in right about the time USMC was first issuing the M9s… and only reluctantly after two (2!) Congressional directives, first to accept the pistols, and then a year later, to actually start issuing them![/*:so9qn9hj]
  4. Aye-yup! I think he gotcha, didn't he? After all, here you are, aren't you?![/*:so9qn9hj]
  5. This "out-of-battery" condition is not limited to the Models 21, of course, but the language you're reciting from (recent) memory is suggestive, and I wonder if we (the original team of Glock FAQers) might not have missed something… I've always noted that in my own "out-of-battery event," that I felt fortunate that Black Hills' OEM rounds that I was shooting were using Winchester primed brass rather than, say, something with the more sensitive Federal primers. If the elderly gentleman's frame of reference was competition shooting… and it's pretty much a given that most competitive shooters of necessity reload, could it be that, as with revolver-shooting Action Shooters (cf: Bianchi Cup) who prefer Federal primers for the reliability with ultra-light triggers, could this not extend to Glock shooters who reload and have "tweaked" their guns? This would, in my never-quite-humble-enough-opinion, put such Glock shooters at even greater risk of kB!s. (It was for this very reason that I took such vehement exception to Glock's introduction of the Model 24 back in the early '90s… a strictly competition pistol chambered for an especially volatile cartridge for which virtually everyone and their 11-toed cousin was going to reload!)[/*:so9qn9hj]
  6. Uh uh uh! Watch yo' tongue, you young whipper-snapper![/*:so9qn9hj]
  7. You perhaps need to think about this issue a bit more… for decades and decades, Colt's was, for all intents and purposes, the "only 1911 game in town," and they certainly didn't feel the need to make any significant advancements in that design, and they didn't give a rusty rodent's rump what guys like Austin Behlert, Jim Clark (Senior), Frank Pachmayr and Armand Swenson were doing. "Little guys" like Essex and Randall, etc., came and went until Fratelli Reese came and didn't went!

    But Springfield Armory didn't make any big advancements other than offer (very competitively) a non-Series 80 1911-pattern pistol when the pants-wetters in the corporate offices of West Hartford wouldn't. That took the likes of (this one pains me!) Lester Gawddamned Baer and Kimber to really put to rest the time-worn perception that one couldn't get a reliable and reasonably accurate Colt's-Browning pattern pistol out-of-the-factory. (If I neglected any of the important ol' timers, I'm sure that CeePee or Dan'l Watters'll address that deficiency.) [/*:so9qn9hj]
  8. I can understand your impatience with such a sentiment… Glocks don't suck! (If anything sucks, it's corporate Glock itself, for being arrogant weenies.)

    I think that most of the shooters who say things like "Glocks suck!" do it more to get a rise out of the Kool Aid-drinkers, because they are such a relentlessly devout claque, and treat their ownership of a Glock pistol as admittance into an exclusive cult.[/*:so9qn9hj]
I hope this addresses your main points… if I've missed something, I'm sure you'll mention it.
Triggerman said:
NUFF said.
What are you, some comic character from the '60s?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Dean,
Thanks for the info. The term guaranteed Security Forces just means that I did 2 years of Barracks duty guarding "special weapons" for the Navy, after that they kicked me back to the FMF (Fleet Marine Force) where I carried out my remaining 13+ months as a Machinegunner (0331) Ooh Rah! I think that they started issuing the M9 around the late 1980's (1986?), but don't hold me to that. I don't consider myself to be a Glock Clique Member, although I do like them, and can't wait to buy another (G34 or G21). I own and recommend the Beretta to others as well. My best friend has a full size H&K in .45 that I find a very high quality weapon. I guess the reason I like the Glocks are: no external safeties so to speak and the ruggedness. I have to admit that this older gentleman did get under my skin. Personally, I have never found it necessary at the range to tell anyone that their gun sucks. I thought we were all in the same like-mindedness. I plan on, with 2 other friends, to get into this competition shooting thing, GSSF in December, and whatever else we can find around here. I thought I would get a G34 or G21 for this purpose, and I guess this man of many years ticked me off. So...what should I do, forfeit the learning process, and plop down 2K for a Wilson and call it a day? I still can't get over the 7+1 thing either? I do practice magazine changes and carry spares, but it bothers me still. What if it is 3 against one, and you have some obstacles in the way? You might be trying to shoot through those obstacles or only at a head and shoulders popping out once in a while. I know all this is probably ridiculous, but I tend to think though that in skilled hands that a handgun is alot more effective than alot of people think. Back in the day we never shot anything closer than 25yards unless it was moving, or we were moving. I like the idea of having close to or more than 7 rounds in that situation. I think I need to scrap all the handguns and carry a MP5N...that would be nice. I guess I am going to have to borrow a nice 1911 from somebody and give it a try again. I keep hoping though that after the 2005 SHOT show, Glock will introduce a longslide .45 in which case they would get my money. I have also found Para Ordinance .45's interesting because of their capacity. Again, Dean, thanks for the conversation and insight. If you can't learn from others then your in a world of hurt.
Buddy
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,758 Posts
heat762 said:
I find it hard to believe that a 100 year old design of anything could be as good a something using new technology. I'm sure there are cases, but I don't think the 1911 is one of them.
Buddy Smith
Yiou might want to take another look at your Glock and figure out just what technology in it isn't a hundred or so years old and what isn't based on a JMB innovation.

Yeah, there's the finish and maybe the manufacturing process but other than that, there really isn't much new.

And those .45 cartridges you fire in it?

Ed
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,935 Posts
Buddy said:
Thanks for the info. The term guaranteed Security Forces just means that I did 2 years of Barracks duty guarding "special weapons" for the Navy…

•​

I think that they started issuing the M9 around the late 1980's (1986?), but don't hold me to that.

•​

I plan … to get into this competition shooting thing, GSSF in December, and whatever else we can find around here. I thought I would get a G34 or G21 for this purpose…

•​

I still can't get over the 7+1 thing either? I do practice magazine changes and carry spares, but it bothers me still. What if it is 3 against one, and you have some obstacles in the way? You might be trying to shoot through those obstacles or only at a head and shoulders popping out once in a while. I know all this is probably ridiculous, but I tend to think though that in skilled hands that a handgun is alot more effective than alot of people think. Back in the day we never shot anything closer than 25yards unless it was moving, or we were moving. I like the idea of having close to or more than 7 rounds in that situation. I think I need to scrap all the handguns and carry a MP5N...that would be nice. I guess I am going to have to borrow a nice 1911 from somebody and give it a try again. I keep hoping though that after the 2005 SHOT show, Glock will introduce a longslide .45 in which case they would get my money. I have also found Para Ordinance .45's interesting because of their capacity.
  1. No problem, and thanks for the clarification.[/*:1bc639la]
  2. The M9 was adopted in early 1985, but USMC declined to accept them until so ordered by a Congressional directive circa 1990-1. When it was learned the following year that USMC had complied and accepted them but was not issuing them, another Congressional directive was forthcoming stating that "warehousing" the pistols was not what they had in mind, but they had damn well better commence issuance of the M9 forthwith and with a good right will! That was, upon recollection and belief, 1992.[/*:1bc639la]
  3. I'd opt for one of the "box-stock competition models," the 34 or 35… pleasing looking pistols with good balance, and very versatile for the purposes of GSSF, IPSC or IDPA.[/*:1bc639la]
  4. Your "ammunition capacity" issues are something you need to resolve on your own… I'll not gainsay your concerns as my friend Dean Caputo (Arcadia PD MOS) is the very model of a modern martial artist, and in the post-Rodney King trial dust-up, the first time he had a moment to contact me, was that Monday evening when he'd stopped off home to get more magazines because, as he noted at the time, they "were coming at the store-keepers in waves!" But he was paid to be there, otherwise he would counsel that avoidance is the best policy. (BTW: less than a year later, while off-duty he took on five gang-bangers on a dark street with a Government Model and two magazines; it took him exactly four rounds to terminate one, take another out of the fight, and dissuade the rest from pursuing their nocturnal depredations.)[/*:1bc639la]
  5. For the afore-mentioned reasons, I'll decline any biting commentary about your MP5 suggestion, but I think a long-slide (5½-6 inches?) .45 ACP Glock is a splendid idea, but only if Gaston will relent and offer a more "supportive" barrel. However, I think it more likely that we'll see one of those in .45 G.A.P. first! [/*:1bc639la]
Stick around, why doncha?!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
We hear a lot of talk and, IMNSHO, speculation, about the role of out of battery striker impacts contributing to Glock kB!s, but I am really beginning to doubt what role that could possibly play in the chamber breach kB!s.

Seems like a case letting go at the feed ramp, or the slide unlocking and resulting in a case blowing out the frame and locking block, would *reduce* the barrel's time exposure to high pressure and/or release that peak pressure, making a chamber failure *less* likely.

Anyone willing to apply critical thinking to the pressure/time curve of blastoid overloaded ammo, and the yeild characteristics of pistol barrels?

BTW, the thinnest portion of a .40 S&W Glock chamber is at the 5 and 7 o'clock positions rather than the 3 and 9 o'clock sides--and the H&K rifled .40 barrel I've examined was a tad thicker than the Glock's at its thinnest areas...and it was "fully supported." Fewer kB!s in those, but still a few case failures. Any chamber breaches on H&Ks?????
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top