In Glock we trust?

[elSquid]

No, actually they don't. They sit stationary when you fire the weapon.

By moving I'm not referring to the fact that you can remove the barrel when you dismantle the gun by the way.

Ok, I'll bite: what _do_ you mean then? My understanding is that a fixed barrel is just that: fixed. Like an HK P7 or Ruger 22 auto.

And how does the Glock barrel/slide/frame interaction differ from, say, a US military adopted SIG M11?

-- Michael

[Voo]

The qualities that make people prefer one handgun over another are mostly subjective. I certainly have my preferences, that is why I own handguns by Sig, H&K, Kimber and Les Baer.. I believe Glocks are a fine weapon and if you prefer it, great, that's what you should own and shoot. The best handgun is one that fits your hand well, that you can comfortably shoot in the worst of conditions and that you know will go bang every time you pull the trigger. I don't know of any major handgun manufacture that produces a weapon I would be concerned about...

Honestly, I would pick a shotgun or a rifle over any of my handguns if I had the choice... As for which of MY guns I prefer over the other, that depends... Which one is closest?

Brand loyalty is so over rated...

Here here! +1

[Once A Marine]

A Glock is not a gun designed for discriminatory fire. If you really study the engineering of the weapon, you start to realize that it was designed to be drawn from a holster and fired without the discriminatory process you would use in other situations like say, a cop or armed security might be involved in.

The discrimination process is entirely in the brain housing group, not any part or function of a handgun.

[dustoff31]

You see, here is the thing about Glocks that a lot of people lose sight of. Glocks are the ONLY handguns, in the history of all handguns, that are specifically designed for combat....

A Glock is not a gun designed for discriminatory fire. If you really study the engineering of the weapon, you start to realize that it was designed to be drawn from a holster and fired without the discriminatory process you would use in other situations like say, a cop or armed security might be involved in. Which is why, as much of a fan of Glocks as I am, I don't like to see LE and armed security with Glocks in their holsters. Those are two professions, operating amongst the civilian population, that require tremendous discrimination in the employment of a firearm. Transversely, I think Sigs are excellent handguns for LE and security.

OK, you've convinced me. Glocks should definitely NOT be in the hands of everyday citizens.

[Evo]

We'll I'm certainly glad to have such passionate opinions, I do appreciate it. I don't yet have much brand loyalty in firearms, I bought the USPc because it seemed from my research (including actually firing it) to be the best fit for me. I'm not sure I buy that the Glocks are more durable than the USP (that torture test seemed a bit biased, check this page out, about half way down Larry Vickers sand test) but either way I don't ever plan on having it in a situation I would need to worry about that. Not worrying about it is the reason I want the G26, so I can have a "Toyota" of guns that I really don't care much about, also I do like how cheap and ugly it is (the G26 is actually sort of cute) it makes not caring about it that much easier.

What I'm thinking is my .40 USPc will remain my primary discriminating/home defense pistol, and the baby Glock (once I have it) will be my CCW/SHTF pistol, I'll just have to learn to keep my finger to myself.

[walter]

We'll I'm certainly glad to have such passionate opinions, I do appreciate it. I don't yet have much brand loyalty in firearms, I bought the USPc because it seemed from my research (including actually firing it) to be the best fit for me. I'm not sure I buy that the Glocks are more durable than the USP (that torture test seemed a bit biased, check this page out, about half way down Larry Vickers sand test) but either way I don't ever plan on having it in a situation I would need to worry about that. Not worrying about it is the reason I want the G26, so I can have a "Toyota" of guns that I really don't care much about, also I do like how cheap and ugly it is (the G26 is actually sort of cute) it makes not caring about it that much easier.

What I'm thinking is my .40 USPc will remain my primary discriminating/home defense pistol, and the baby Glock (once I have it) will be my CCW/SHTF pistol, I'll just have to learn to keep my finger to myself.

in the first sentence of your post, you asked "what's the big deal with glocks?"

we gave you an answer, and for some reason you came back and talked about how your USPc is better suited for YOUR needs and this and that.

maybe you just wanna feel good about owning a USPc over a glock. (dont get me wrong, USPc is one sexy gun, no doubt about that.)

[Evo]

maybe you just wanna feel good about owning a USPc over a glock. (dont get me wrong, USPc is one sexy gun, no doubt about that.)

I feel great about owning the USPc, I'm just trying to justify buying the G26 as well
What I'm trying to understand with this thread is why there seems to be a certain devotion (certainly evident in some of those posting here) to the Glock as the end all be all of pistols. This partly came up because when I was at the range a few days ago this very nice guy came in with two pelican cases with big white Glock logos stenciled on them, he had three pistols in one, a G21, G19 and a G30 and like 20 loaded mags in the other case. At some point his guy really fell in love with Glocks! I handled his G30 and liked it's balance much better than the standard or compact size Glocks I have shot, and I've been thinking about a back up pistol in 9mm.

However you're not wrong in your psychological evaluation of me, I do want to feel like I made a good decision, I think we all do when we drop real $ on anything, even if it's a $500 Glock.

[walter]

ohh ok. well i think g26 is a great gun and you will not be dissappointed with it. i used to think why anyone would want 10 different glock versions of the same caliber. i really never understood. now i own a glock 19 which is a great compromise between g17 and g26. but for some reason, now i want a 17 AND 26. and i DONT wanna sell my 19. weird. and i kinda want a 21sf also. hahaha this is so weird. yea cant explain it.

[nick]

OK, you've convinced me. Glocks should definitely NOT be in the hands of everyday citizens.

Heh, good one

I'd like to see that said to the guy I took shooting for the first time yesterday. Of the 7 guns I had with me, he latched on to Glock 35. Took some time trying to detach him from it Many other people I introduced to shooting preferred other guns though.

Most of today's top brands are good. Pretending that personal preferences are anything more than personal preferences is just silly.

[nick]

I feel great about owning the USPc, I'm just trying to justify buying the G26 as well

So what's stopping you?

I think, its accuracy will surprise you, too, for something that small.

[nick]

ohh ok. well i think g26 is a great gun and you will not be dissappointed with it. i used to think why anyone would want 10 different glock versions of the same caliber. i really never understood. now i own a glock 19 which is a great compromise between g17 and g26. but for some reason, now i want a 17 AND 26. and i DONT wanna sell my 19. weird. and i kinda want a 21sf also. hahaha this is so weird. yea cant explain it.

Well, each one has a purpose. I'm at 5 Glocks so far (26, 27, 29, 34, 35) and looking for the 6th one (20). They just breed in the safe somehow.

[Eat Dirt]

I've had my Glock 26 and 19 for years now
Never a problem !!!!!!

I'm set in my ways !!!

[BamBam-31]

I own both Glocks and USPs. I don't have to find a reason to justify keeping my Glocks around, in fact my USPs are usually the safe queens.

I like my USPs though, it's tough to beat the stiff DA, the long trigger reset, the bump in the triggerguard that rubs my finger raw, or the high bore axis.

Don't forget the super wide grips, or the safety....oops, decocked!...lever.

Again, my old stainless USP40F was a very nice pistol. A looker for sure, and plenty accurate to boot. Sold it because I didn't like the caliber. If it were 9mm, it'd most likely still be in my stable today. Bought it back in the day when USP's were around $650 or so, however.

Nowadays, an OTD price on a USP will be in the neighborhood of $900, whereas a Glock will go for around $600 OTD. Does it really cost 50% more to manufacture USP slides and barrels (cuz it sure ain't the polymer frames)? And for that extra three bills, you can have a professionally installed Bar-Sto barrel to go w/ said Glock. Wouldn't that be a keeper, eh?

[alain209]

g19 no probs. no complaints. shoots every time.

[jumbopanda]

The essence of a Glock is its safety. It is, hands down, the safest, most reliable firearm ever created. It simply, absolutely will not fire with out the user squeezing the trigger.

You see, here is the thing about Glocks that a lot of people lose sight of. Glocks are the ONLY handguns, in the history of all handguns, that are specifically designed for combat. From the moment the pencil is put to paper, it is purposefully, specifically and ingeniously designed to be utilized in a combat environment. All other handguns have to have a parabellum version for combat use. Glocks are parabellum from the start. Oddly enough, our own military refuses to issue Glocks as a standard sidearm. The college graduates running our military think it's a great idea to issue fixed-barrel handguns like the Bereta and 1911 for combat. I won't ramble on about all of that. That is an entirely whole other conversation regarding the ridiculousness and shadiness of the military procurement and requisitioning program.

A Glock is not a gun designed for discriminatory fire. If you really study the engineering of the weapon, you start to realize that it was designed to be drawn from a holster and fired without the discriminatory process you would use in other situations like say, a cop or armed security might be involved in. Which is why, as much of a fan of Glocks as I am, I don't like to see LE and armed security with Glocks in their holsters. Those are two professions, operating amongst the civilian population, that require tremendous discrimination in the employment of a firearm. Transversely, I think Sigs are excellent handguns for LE and security.

I won't even get into the reliability factor and cost effectiveness of Glocks. Those are points that sell themselves. All I know is, I can buy three Glocks for the price of a Kimber and I get three handguns that will outperform anything out there even on a bad day.

Here is a link that pretty much says it all: http://www.theprepared.com/index.php...ask=view&id=90

1. How exactly are Glocks the only handguns designed for combat?
2. What the heck is discriminatory fire? Are you referring to the fact that Glocks have no manual safety?
3. The 1911 does not have a fixed barrel, and it was John Moses Browning who pioneered the tilting barrel design, which is used in Glocks.

Post #5000!!!