Glocks becoming irrelevant?

[Blade Gunner]

A well maintained Glock should last a lifetime. The concern with Glocks is eventually the Gen3 will no longer be profitable to produce. All major firearm manufacturers rely on some type of institutional purchases to achieve economies of scale and rapid recovery of design and developement costs. These developement costs for the Gen 3 where recovered long ago. However molds and machining eventually wear out. At some point sales of Gen 3 fall below a profitable threshold. ( Glock just released for retail sale their stock of warranty replacement Gen 3 as they no longer have institutional clients for Gen 3.) While Glock won't tell you when that is going to occur, it may be in the very near future.

[bob.dakeelstripe]

They're so irrelevant that all their rivals have tried to make their version of a Glock for almost two decades now with limited success

And many law suits ... most won by Glock. ... LoL

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[whtl]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[jimmykan]

They aren't cars that need to keep up,with style changes.

Exhibit a, the Colt 1911.

I understand your point, but even the 1911 has been evolving incrementally.

Over the 100+ years of existence been updated with better sights, longer trigger, checkered front straps, picatinny rails, beavertail grip safeties, ambidextrous thumb safeties etc. Some of the same things that the OP has suggested for Glocks.

... but they can make changes such as putting on better sights, make a full 1913 picatinny rails, a better trigger shoe are some of the changes.

[onelonehorseman]

hello all, Before you start flaming me, I am not a Glock fan boy but I do like them.

I was watching a video from "TheYankeemarshal" and he talks about why Glock filed a lawsuit for losing the contract to the US Army over the SIG P320. He said something that made me think about Glock. He states that Glocks are becoming irrelevant because they don't change very much, and I am starting to agree with him. Glock made little changes from generation to generations, but I do understand that they want to keep the handguns simple; but they can make changes such as putting on better sights, make a full 1913 picatinny rails, a better trigger shoe are some of the changes. I thought it was interesting.


What do you guys think?

https://youtu.be/MRA3ZvYh1z4

I stopped reading at the bolded part. YM makes a false assumption in believing that change is necessary for relevancy; simply not true. A good design can remain applicable, and relevant, for a very long time.

[Tere_Hanges]

Glock has been producing a quality polymer framed striker fired gun for over 30 years. Sig finally decided to play catch up and all of a sudden Glocks are "irrelevant"? Haha, what a joke.

I had P320 and traded it away after a year because it didnt do anything the Glock, VP9, and even the M&P9 doesnt already do better.

The CZ P10 looks like a much better gun than the 320.

[Juhani]

a G40 MOS is on my short list once my move to America is complete in 3 months

[Spawn]

I can't stand Yankee Marshall. It's funny how people can get away with saying Glocks are irrelevant, but when you say the 1911 or revolvers are irrelevant, everyone goes crazy.

[Bad Caselaw]

GLOCKs are Hammers.

Let us know when THEY go out of style.




Caselaw

[Calguns77]

Some guns are "form over function". There are people who will happily pay a premium for a gun that looks cooler. Nothing wrong with that. But that's not who Glock is trying to be. They are purely a "function over form" company. They made a list of qualities they want their guns to have, then they had an engineer (not an artist) draw those features into a gun. The end result can only look like what it looks like - anything else added to it would be "fluff". Glocks don't need "fluff" any more than the hammer in your toolbox needs "fluff".

What, exactly, could glock "add" to their pistols to make them more modern? I can't think of anything. They have everything that a modern pistol should have. Should they add fancy grooves and swooshes and vents to make it look prettier? Why? It's a tool. You want that nonsense, buy something else.

Most models do have rails, and you can upgrade the sights to whatever you want. They give you basic cheap sights and a basic cheap trigger, and let you decide whether to keep it that way or change them to something different. People who like changing sights and triggers are going to do it anyways regardless of what a Glock comes with.

No matter what kind of exhaust an automaker puts on their cars, someone who likes aftermarket exhausts is just going to swap it out anyways, so why would a manufacturer waste time and money making a nicer exhaust. People who don't care will keep the factory exhaust, people who care will swap it for something shinier and louder. It's just the way it is. Glock gets it - YM clearly doesn't.

I can - ambi magazine release, ambi slide lock. Improved grip texture and swappable palm swells, and a serialized fire control unit like a sig.

They give you basic cheap sights and a basic cheap trigger, and let you decide whether to keep it that way or change them to something different.

They do that to maximize their profits. It amazes me that they've tricked people into thinking its a desirable feature. The savings aren't passed onto you. Somehow other companys manage to make polymer firearms for the same or less with sights that don't break off if you sneeze on them.

[CandG]

Point me towards an on-roster 10mm concealed carry handgun that isn't a Glock

Or even off-roster for that matter, why limit ourselves. I'll wait right here.

I'm still waiting

[CandG]

I can - ambi magazine release, ambi slide lock. Improved grip texture and swappable palm swells, and a serialized fire control unit like a sig.

Ambi controls are a negative attribute for most right-handed users. Though I agree that having the option to switch from one side to the other might be relevant. Gen4 already has a mag release that does that. "improved" grip texture is subjective - no matter what texture they pick, some people are going to hate it. Swappable "palm swells" (backstrap?) is already a gen4 feature. Serialized FCG is cool, but irrelevant for agencies and military.

[Teachu2]

Many popular models of Glocks are backordered. Used ones hold their value well if Gen3, inflate if Gen4 in CA, and hardly anyone wants to sell older ones.

Glock is doing just fine.

[CandG]

Somehow other companys manage to make polymer firearms for the same or less with sights that don't break off if you sneeze on them.

I've sneezed around my factory Glock sights lots of times and they're still in one piece.

Any sight is going to get damaged when it lands on concrete.

The rear U sight sucks, I'll give you that... but again, that's a preference thing. There are lots of different types of sights, Glock just picked one and applied it to all their pistols. No matter what they picked, people would complain.

[Calguns77]

Ambi controls are a negative attribute for most right-handed users. Though I agree that having the option to switch from one side to the other might be relevant. Gen4 already has a mag release that does that. "improved" grip texture is subjective - no matter what texture they pick, some people are going to hate it. Swappable "palm swells" (backstrap?) is already a gen4 feature. Serialized FCG is cool, but irrelevant for agencies and military.

I meant an M&P style interchangeable backstrap that fills the palm. I think its a benefeit to mil to be able to cheaply and easily replace a damaged frame, but I'm only concerned about civilian use and I'd like to be able to pay $40 and throw a g26 height grip onto my g19 slide.