[Terry G]

I was A Colt 1911 man for 20 years, until the "wondernine" craze started, and then I packed a Ruger P89 on duty, and a Taurus PT92 or 99 off duty. I was pleased with all these firearms. I was aware of the Glock pistol line, but since I had what I needed to have, I really paid them no attention. Then one day at the range a Deputy U.S. Marshall offered to let me shoot his Model 21. I was hooked. I got one for Christmas from my darling wife, and it has performed as well or better than any other pistol I have carried. And Geez, it's a .45! Now I see these guns are being scorned as "tupperware guns", "plastic crap". I don't see this. My G21 is reliable, ergonomic, (at least for my hand), and very accurate. I have shot probably a half a dozen different kinds of ammunition through it without any problems. Why all the animosity? Is it the old "if it ain't wood and steel, it's junk" syndrome? I just don't get it.

 

[Wylycoyte]

Dogmatists rarely convert, they just die off over time.

Honestly, I don't know what the deal is. I've shot Glocks and I've shot 1911-style .45s. I like them both, and shoot them both just fine. I chose the Glock for a primary carry gun because it was lightweight, reliable, and durable. If I get a nice Kimber or Springfield I might just decide to carry that one day instead.

From the ballistic gelatin tests I've seen of defense ammo, a decent hollowpoint in either 9mm, .45, 10mm, .357 magnum, .357 SIG or .40 pretty much performs the same. To paraphrase David DiFabio of Ammolab.com, "Pick the gun you like as long as it shoots a major defense caliber." I like the Glock. Seems like you do, too.

 

[Hard Rock]

I had two come apart in my hands while shooting... these weren't Kb's, they were parts breakages. I'll never own another Glock again.

Mike

 

[Rich Z]

I bought a Glock 17 back when there was talk of banning them. Heck, I just never warmed up to it for some reason. Shot OK, but it was just one of those things where the gun and I didn't mesh well. I eventually traded it for a Colt Delta Elite 10mm, even up. Maybe a different model Glock would mesh better with me, but never really had the desire to try. I guess it's just personal preferences. Some people like Chevys and hate Fords. Others love Fords and hate Chevys. Who knows?

 

[Hard Ball]

The problem with Glocks is that they are subject to having mysterious problems, every year or two another problem surfaces. Glock always stonewalls and denies that the problem exists untill thtreatened with law suits by large law enforcement organizations, On the basis of this history I do not trust Glocks or Glock.

 

[andy]

If u aint very good with a pistol, u do about as poorly with one as you do with all the others. With a lot of pointless extra work, guys manage to do good work with DA triggers. Guys who really work at being good with a Glock even manage ALMOST beat the top men who use 1911's.

I don't trust Glock's unsupported case, for hot loads, and if you aint got lots of power in your belt gun, it's pointless. Just carry a pocket gun instead. No double stack gun amounts to a crap as a front pants pocket gun, much less one that's so squarecornered, bulky and heavy as a Glock is.

 

[Magnum88C]

1.) the trigger sucks
2.) finger grooves are too small for my hands, and unlike those that ship with Hogue or some other grip, I can't take these off.
3.) they are top-heavy (this is a problem with any lightweight-framed gun), contributing to more muzzle rise than is necessary.
4.) the .40-cals had a tendency to hand grenade with 180-gr ammo
5.) unsupported chambers.

So really, besides having sh!tty ergonomics (for me) and the possibility of blowing up in my hand, they're fine guns! :dgrin:

 

[RIKA]

I have the Colts and I blew the money that I would have spent on the Glocks for a 45-70 and deer hunting stuff. Guess I'll just have to crip along with the 1911's.

RIKA

 

[krept]

I'm at a standstill between Glocks and 1911s. Have neither, but going to commit to one platform sooner or later, depending on the funds.

Any gun can kaboom with double charged loads. Many people see the spectacular failures in Glocks and interestingly, it's usually ended with "the guy was lucky he didn't get more hurt!" It's because they are tough, and fail down the magwell, like the USPs do. I've heard of 1911s kabooming and the grip panels coming off, doing more damage to shooting hands than Glocks.

Unsupported cases. I compared a USP .45 to a G30 (IIRC) and the amount of unsupported case above the feedramp appeared very similar. If you're worried, why not just use standard pressure loads and see if there is any brass bulging. If you reload, you've got to be extra careful with Glocks (actually, et. al) because of this.

180gr .40s, because of the OAL of the bullet and the high press. nature ofthe cartridge leave very little room for extra gunpowder, very easy to blow them up for that reason.

Have heard of very few kabooms with factory ammo.

Parts breaking. Have read about some, yup. Have also read about the MIM failures in some $900+ 1911s. Yikes, that'd be a bummer. Of course, the more you spend, the more you expect your weapon not only to hold up to abuse, but to be RELIABLE.

That's the hangup with me. My first pistol ever was a Para 1911. It choked like turd, every kind of malf imaginable with separate shooters and different magazines, failure to go into battery, failure to slidelock, stovepipes on empties, on LIVE rounds. Granted, 1911s are probably the most "tuneable" pistol out there, but if they can be easily tuned, doesn't it follow that they can be easily UNtuned? Every (every) rental 1911 I've ever fired (probably around 5) has malfunctioned at least once in one box of ammo. The only other rental gun besides those that has jammed on me was a Desert Eagle .44 Mag. Even a DE .50AE didn't choke once in twenty shots fired.

The trigger. The reason why a lot of people poo-poo the trigger is because they didn't get to understand the short, tactile reset. Magnum, not saying this is you, this is just my observation... when friends have shot Glocks and I showed them to ease up on the trigger return, SLOWLY until they feel the "click" then NO more, that's when they begin to see the light. Even great triggers on 1911s and P7s don't have as noticeable a reset as a Glock. Groups easily improve. If you hit what you're aiming at, even a crappy trigger is OK - I much prefer the Glock trigger to SIG, HK USP and Beretta double action triggers. Reset of the Glock trigger is far superior to all three of those, hands down. A swap of two items, a 5lb to 3lb spring or connector and use of NY1 leaf spring I've heard gives awesome pulls, and both are OEM parts. Probably a $30 trigger job that's TRULY drop in and not 1911 "drop in" which usually means some stoning required.

Low bore axis and lack of external hammer means you can get a really high grip, honestly, I'd say the Glock has probably the least amount of muzzle flip of all other platforms in similar caliber, save the P7 (which is also top heavy). Key is to really choke up on them, same thing with the beavertail on the 1911. If you don't have that beaver tail, I'm sure the muzzle flip will be significantly more.

Despite this, I have to say the 1911 is probably the superior platform for gunfighting. Most people find it easier to make fast hits with, repeatedly, with them. I'd put Glocks right up there as well. One thing about Glocks, I can detail strip them in a couple minutes using a nail and instructions on the net. Replace any part I want, know it'll work, and be on my way. With a 1911... jeez... I used what I thought were good instructions, got the grip safety off and... well, an hour later ended up going to a gunsmith with a bag of parts.

Bottom line for me, I'd be happy with either one, absolutely both will do the job. It's a matter of deciding on one of the manuals of arms and committing to it.

cheers

 

[andy]

sheesh, dude. The 1911 is a pc of cake to detail and reassemble. Takes about a minute, total. j

 

[Wylycoyte]

My girlfriend refers to the Glock 26 as "that little gun with no recoil". As such, I really don't see excessive muzzle flip as an issue, at least with the 9mms.

One of the selling points of the Glock for me was that the gun shot exactly where I pointed it, making target acquisition much faster. There are other pistols, such as the Sig 226, that I always have to correct for using the sights. A friend of mine has a similar, though worse, problem with 1911s. They always point way low for him, as in bullet-striking-the-dirt-6-feet-in- front-of-him low. With the sights, of course, he can shoot well, but it takes him an extra few moments to line them up on the target properly, unlike with his Glock.

A similar phenomenon is mentioned in the Close Combat Files of Rex Applegate. His testing indicated that most people point shot the Hi Power much better than the 1911, and therefore the Hi Power was the more desireable sidearm for the reactive point shooting that he espoused for close distances.

Likewise, in Shooting to Live by Fairbairn and Sykes, it was related that .45s were given to those who had larger hands, and .380s to those, such as the Chinese, who tended to be physically smaller. In their experience, the caliber mattered little compared to the better shot placement and gunhandling that could be achieved by equipping people with the platform that they found to be most ergonomic.

 

[krept]

andy, that was about 6 years ago and the first handgun I owned. Looking at the exploded drawing of the Glock:

http://glockmeister.com/images/intparts.gif

vs. the 1911


http://www.marstar.ca/images/colt1911b1a.gif

it makes a lot more sense.

An interesting thing about the grip angles. 1911s and many others that share their grip angle seem to point well if you hold it with the angle as if you simply make a fist. Glocks seem to point as if you made a fist and were going to do a Wing Chun (or whatever) strike with thumb up, first two knuckles canted a little forward. Hard to explain.

The good thing about a 1911 is that through the use of thin/thick grip panels, flat or arched mainspring housing and short or long trigger, you can tailor the grip to suit your hand.

cheers

 

[Glenn Bartley]

The problem with Glocks is that they are subject to having mysterious problems, every year or two another problem surfaces. Glock always stonewalls and denies that the problem exists untill thtreatened with law suits by large law enforcement organizations, On the basis of this history I do not trust Glocks or Glock.

I cannot speak to the Glock in .45 caliber, but I can regarding 9mm. Over the years I have been shooting the Glock 19 and 26 there habve been problems that requirred parts repalcement and magazine replacement. The mags for our government issued Glocks are now on the 4th or 5th generation because of design flaws that led to problems. Glock replaced them all free of charge each time. Government contracts hold some punch I guess.

Problems like this are to be found in other guns too. My guess is that the Colt 1911 is one of them. overall I think though that the Glock requires far less tuning than any 45 I have ever seen anyone shoot - unless it is a an overly high priced custom job that barely resembles the original Colt design on the outside and in some places on the inside.

 

[brass hammer]

i 'lust mightly' for a glock#31 in .357 sig [it's a flat out nasty round, kiddies]

almost to the point, of caving in and 'trading' a handgun [or two]



but fought the urge![brass recovery would not even be fun]


regardless, a .40/.357 glock, and a marlin lever in 500.10smith/wesson/nasa!

are the only things that float my boat to date!


thanks.

 

[Magnum88C]

Krept, let me state for the record that just because I don't really like Glocks, doesn't mean that:
a.) I hate them and wouldn't carry them (Thinking hard about a G36)
b.) Prefer 1911s.

The 1911 is a sweet pistol, great for the target range. But, for me unreliable enough to not trust my life to. Only one I had that didn't jam constantly was a cheapo Springfield Mil-Spec, with NO modifications. It shot great, and no, I DON'T use a beavertail, it severely hampers the concealability the way I carry, and I've never had a problem with hammer bite, even choking up properly on the grip.

I do prefer the Ruger P-90 and Sig P220 to either then 1911 or Glock. For me, they've been the Energizer pistols, they keep going and going. The reliability test that they all (2 P-90s 1 P220) passed was Fire 500 rounds, no cleaning, no jams. Clean, fire another 500 rounds no cleaning, had to function limp-wristed, held on either side, and held upside down, no jams. Fire 200 rounds carry ammo (230-gr Hydra-Shoks for the P-90s, 200-gr +p Gold Dots for the Sig), no jams.

As for increased muzzle rise, I can't speak for the 9mm (no recoil round to begin with) versions. My comparison was between the G36 and a Detonics. The metal gun simply had less muzzle rise with its heavier frame. It's not enough difference to make the Glock uncontrollable (as some would assert), but it is a negative.

But see, what it boils down to, is use what works for you. If Glocks are the thing, use 'em. If it's 1911s, use 'em. If it's Sigs, use 'em. If it's a Phoenix Arms HP-22, you're a dumbass. . .:dgrin:

 

[brass hammer]

Krept, let me state for the record that just because I don't really like Glocks, doesn't mean that:hat it boils down to, is use what works for you. If Glocks are the thing, use 'em. If it's 1911s, use 'em. If it's Sigs, use 'em. If it's a Phoenix Arms HP-22, you're a dumbass. . .:dgrin:

HAR,HARDY, HAR1 :kill: :roflmao1: :roflmao1: :rofl: :laugh: :wavey: :nyah: :dancer01:


b.t.w how many of these kiddie icons can a man post at one time!
and still be ligit' the wavey dude has cracked me up from day#1 :wavey:

apparantly [10] is the axe/cut-off


this 'IS ONLY A TEST' 'ONLY A TEST' mind you.

 

[Hard Ball]

Here is a brief summary of the Glock problems condensed from The Gun Zone,

"Glock's Gravest Problem

A potentially ruinous event strikes the popular police pistol
First it was the April 1992 Product Upgrade, public disclosure of which was spurred by the AD Heard 'Round The World, but which had its origins in Glock's 1991 failure in the DEA "frisbee test."

Then it was the contentious issue of the Glock kB!s which the Smyrna, Georgia importer of the immensely popular Austrian-manufactured handgun has yet, more than 11 years after the catastrophic failures started happening on a regular basis, to properly address.

Next up were the defective guide rods of the Models 26 and 27 built between mid-September and late-October, 1999.

Then came the mysterious "Phase 3 Malfunctions" for which Glock, Inc. staunchly denied responsibility for almost six years before sucking it up and sending a mini-machine shop to City Island, NY to retro-machine over 26,000 of NYPD's Models 19.

Now things look grim indeed for the company which, in just 16 years, has not only captured a lion's share of the United States law enforcement market, but revolutionized the handgun industry.

First word reached public notice the week of 7 October 2002 with the story out of the Bernalillo County (New Mexico) that the Sheriff's Department had discovered a problem in some newer .40-caliber Glock pistols that could lead to breakages after prolonged use.

The Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department has discovered a problem with its new Glock .40-caliber semi-automatic handguns.

Deputy Robert Ray, the armorer who runs the department's shooting range, he says the department scrambled to inspect all of its Glocks on Monday after two weapons broke.

The inspection turned up two more broken guns. Ray says that on some newer versions of the gun, two pieces of steel in the lower portion of the weapon were improperly machined. Those pieces may be prone to breaking under the stress of repeated firing. (see sidebar for complete text)
The days after this news broke, a tip from a source in the 703 area code reached TGZ that "Glock has a big problem:"

Glock has recently discovered a serious structual problem with their guns. They redesigned their rear slide rails many years ago to make them longer, but for some reason shortened them again in the last couple of years©ˆ. This shorter rail, coupled with some bad steel and a machine that stamped the rails incorrectly, is now causing some rear rails to break off the guns©˜. When the rail breaks, it can lock up the gun. Not a good thing in a gunfight.

Glock recently went to the FBI and told them about this problem and quietly replaced over 700 frames. They apparently have no intention to tell their other customers about this problem. This problem affects ALL models of Glocks and TENS OF THOUSANDS OF GUNS. What about the DC Police with 4000 guns, NYPD with 35000 guns.

They have a major recall situation on their hands, but like their infamous "upgrade," this will never be called a recall. This needs to be investigated and publicized to make Glock take care of their other customers and not give preference to the big FBI.
And investigated it is, first with the FBI's Firearms Training Unit in Quantico, Virginia, and then with Glock, Inc. which has been telling its 9mm-issuing agencies that it was only the .40 S&W pistols, due to the higher pressure, which are at risk. Although the same defect is present on all the polymer pistols, the company doesn't think the 9 x 19mm cartridge "is powerful enough" to break the rail.

Glock Inc.'s initial solution, curiously published on the Glock Shooting Sports Foundation site as opposed to the official Glock site, offered the following:

We have made the decision that in the interest of customer service, replacement frames will be offered to anyone who has a firearm in this range ("a very small percentage of GLOCK pistols produced between September of 2001 and May of 2002") and decides to take advantage of this offer. The replacement frames will have identical serial numbers to our customer's original firearm except the numeral 1 will be added as a prefix.

 

[krept]

yes, I've been a member of Glocktalk (under same name), the firingline, the highroad, etc. for years and have followed the problems closely. Thanks for the info though.

My only two handguns are a USP .45 and P7M8. Love both of them, but just can't warm up to the USP because, well, long story. P7M8 I love, but because of the unique manual of arms, and my desire for a full size and CCW piece with the same MOA I haven't trained with it nearly as much as I should. Biggest problem with P7 is that in extended shooting sessions it gets really hot, not a real life worry, but enough of one to make me think twice at bringing it to an 8hr class where 500 rounds are burned.

Rugers, SIGs, etc. a great. I just prefer a consistant trigger stroke, would absolutely never poo poo anyone who likes DAs, especially SIGs, which I feel are superior to USPs in that respect.

Still looking for the one true sword, so to speak, for me. Have it narrowed down to 1911 or Glock, willing to accept their faults.

thanks for the comments

cheers

 

[andy]

I"d never touch one, given Gaston's reticence at standing behind his product, and the "unfixability" of Glocks, by the local smith, given such catastrophic problems, and no ability to Tig weld, etc, to fix plastic. I've welded up, recut, made viable-again some of the most horrid things you can imagine on 1911's, even alloy frames.

 

[TODD 3465]

From personal experience Glocks and Rugers have been the ONLY handguns that I've owned several of that have had ZERO zip nad mechanical problems. I can't say that for 1911's either Colt or copies or the S&W revolvers I've owned.

Do I think Glocks are 100% perfect as a whole? Nope, but neither is any other brand of firearm.

As far as general "feel" that's an individual matter.