The top 3 polymer striker fired pistols

[Sam]

And when only ONE make requires that much compensation to point properly is where the problem comes in. I don't want to own a gun where I have to consciously think "point lower" if I ever had to draw. It's adding inconsistency into the mix. Sigs, HKs, 1911s, Walthers, S&Ws, and just about everything else out there points naturally within 1-2 inches at 15 yards. The Glock is on average high about 10 inches. That is a huge difference and while I'm sure it's something I could get used to and not even think about anymore, it would also mean all the other guns would start feeling awkward. Given that a Glock offers nothing special except a huge aftermarket of upgrade parts and gear, there is no reason why I should ruin my ability to shoot every other gun just so I can say I can shoot a Glock. From my experience those with huge bear claw hands don't notice much difference with the grip angle, but for the other 70-80% of the population it is a large difference.

And whoever brought up the teenage girl comment... what an idiot thing to say. There are very few teenage girls who even know how to shoot properly much less know whether or not the way the gun sits in their hand promotes efficient rates of fire.

All in all the Glock is very similar to an Apple product with the exception of pricing. Amazing marketing and owned vastly by ignorant idiots who don't understand what they're spending their money on. I could pick another manufacturer and get a better product for around the same cost plus or minus $100.

Looking for lower bore axis? M&P
Looking for great ergos? PPQ
Looking for reliability under the most adverse conditions? FNS
Looking for aesthetics? Pretty much anything else

When the Glock first came out they were amazing for what they were. Reliable, lightweight, accurate, and cheap. But now they're more expensive, there are guns just as reliable, lightweight, and accurate, if not more so.

As for bore axis, felt recoil, and running the gun. Go prove it with an unbiased shooter and a shot timer. When I lived in WA, I timed one of my IPSC friends shooting a practice stage with various guns. With an M&P with an upgraded Apex competition trigger and a HK USP with a LEM trigger he was on average slower by .02 seconds with the USP. In other words, the difference is so small between perceived recoil and the effects of higher vs. lower bore axis that 99% of gun owners won't even have a measureable difference thus pointless to review a firearm based on such metrics.

In fact the more important metrics of measuring felt recoil, feel, and time back on target should be based on unlocking times, recoil spring weight, slight weight, and hammer spring weight. Funny enough, 2 of those 4 can be changed very easily and the other 2 can also be changed with a little effort if the user was so inclined.

So yes, the original review was biased, pertaining little to no important useful facts about the firearms being reviewed, and near worthless for the casual shooter who was the target audience.

If you are switching between shooting an M&P one day, a Sig another day, a 1911 a third day and a Glock a fourth day, then you will have some issues shooting the Glock. Sure, I've got no argument with that. My belief is that I'm going to stick with one platform for my serious handgun work. If I throw a different handgun platform in the mix occasionally that's for pure enjoyment. Overall though, the vast majority of handgun shooting I do tends to be with one platform at a time. Due to this fact, adjusting for elevation has become second nature and I don't consciously notice I do it. I will also add that a Grip Force Adapter has to a large extent taken grip angle issues out of the platform for me.

I think the teenage girl comment was directed at the fact that since teenage girls can shoot Glocks so can grown men. My fiance is not a teenage girl, but she has no problem getting good hits at speed with a Glock. She's not an experienced shooter by any means. If ergos were as bad and as important as many claim, I'd imagine she wouldn't do as well with a Glock. I'll agree that this is a case study of one, but she shoots well with a Glock and has yet to complain about the blockiness of the frame.

I find it interesting that in the same post you allude to the fact a low bore axis is important and then claim bore axis height is of no consequence to the average shooter. Further you mention changing out spring weights to achieve more of an effect than low bore axis. Seems like the average shooter wouldn't even begin to mess around with spring weights. I'm surely not going to mess around with spring weights on a serious use gun anyway.

Now, I'm not saying the Glock is the end all be all of handguns, but the Glock's supposed shortcomings I think are really overblown.

[JoshuaS]

Personally, I like the XD-40 subcompact better than the Glock 27. For me the extra weight is actually a benefit. Fits my hand better too. Longer reset on the trigger though.

[mshill]

1) M&P

Cause that I all I have.

[9mmlove]

G19 ftw

[Xanatos]

There is no right or wrong grip angle, some prefer Glock like and some prefer Sig/H&K like (BTW, the M&P is about in the middle). You shooting horrible with a Glock is 100% a problem with you. The only truly ignorant person in this thread is you. I know that many of the other Glock aficionados here have or do own most of the guns discussed so far.

And since you live in a bubble, here's an example of a teenage girl that has no problem with the blocky grip or its angle:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tori_Nonaka

Tori Nonaka is one of two members of Team GLOCK and a junior shooting champion. She hails from Woodbridge, Virginia, where she began shooting at age 3. At age 12, Tori attended the US Shooting Academy, which sparked her interest in becoming a professional shooter which led her to begin shooting competitively. On March 2, 2011, GLOCK, Inc announced that 15 year old Tori would be a member of Team GLOCK Shooting Squad.
Tori has competed in various disciplines, including USPSA, SSCA, IPSC, IDPA, Bianchi & GSSF. In 2010, Tori earned the titles of USPSA National Juniors Champion in Limited 10 competition, the US Steel National Super Junior, and IDPA National Junior Champion. Already in 2011, Tori has taken home the titles of USPSA Area 6 Top Production Lady and High Junior, Pro AM High Junior and High A Class in the Limited Division.
In October 2011, Tori will be competing on the Ladies Standard Team at the IPSC World Shoot XVI in Rhodes, Greece, where she will be one of 44 shooters from the 11 squads representing the US.

Let's try and break down the absurd amount of ignorance in your post.

Point of ignorance #1: There is most definitely a right and wrong grip angle. The right grip angle is what works you as an individual. The wrong grip angle is one that doesn't work for a human hand. Between these two extremes is a continuum. The fact that Glock grip angles are significantly different from EVERYTHING else definitely puts it further on the wrong side of the continuum for most people.

Point of ignorance #2: Just because everyone who owns an Apple iPhone says it's God's gift to consumers doesn't make it true. Same goes for Glocks. Just because people who own a Glock say they love it doesn't mean it's practical or reasonable for most people.

Point of ignorance #3: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/few

Congratulations on being a dip****. There are approximately 20,000,000 teenage females in America. You found one which I believe still qualifies as "very few". You can find another 10,000 Tori's and my qualification of "very true" still would be a true statement.

Just because you were dumb enough to fall for Glock's marketing and now feel a need to justify your buyer's remorse doesn't make the rest of us ignorant for not liking Glocks based on actual facts.

If you are switching between shooting an M&P one day, a Sig another day, a 1911 a third day and a Glock a fourth day, then you will have some issues shooting the Glock. Sure, I've got no argument with that. My belief is that I'm going to stick with one platform for my serious handgun work. If I throw a different handgun platform in the mix occasionally that's for pure enjoyment. Overall though, the vast majority of handgun shooting I do tends to be with one platform at a time. Due to this fact, adjusting for elevation has become second nature and I don't consciously notice I do it. I will also add that a Grip Force Adapter has to a large extent taken grip angle issues out of the platform for me.

I think the teenage girl comment was directed at the fact that since teenage girls can shoot Glocks so can grown men. My fiance is not a teenage girl, but she has no problem getting good hits at speed with a Glock. She's not an experienced shooter by any means. If ergos were as bad and as important as many claim, I'd imagine she wouldn't do as well with a Glock. I'll agree that this is a case study of one, but she shoots well with a Glock and has yet to complain about the blockiness of the frame.

I find it interesting that in the same post you allude to the fact a low bore axis is important and then claim bore axis height is of no consequence to the average shooter. Further you mention changing out spring weights to achieve more of an effect than low bore axis. Seems like the average shooter wouldn't even begin to mess around with spring weights. I'm surely not going to mess around with spring weights on a serious use gun anyway.

Now, I'm not saying the Glock is the end all be all of handguns, but the Glock's supposed shortcomings I think are really overblown.

You I can at least have a reasoned discussion with unlike the above poster who just sprouted misinformation and the generic Glock fanboy diatribe.

For me, since I'm no longer military and they have no say on what I can or cannot carry, firearms are like shoes. Some days I like wearing my Reebok Nano. Other days I like wearing my Vibram FiveFingers. Same with guns. Some days I feel like carrying my HK. Other days my 1911. And yet other days I'll gravitate towards my Sig. Therefore, I need something that has consistent grip angles or else that's added liability if I ever need to draw and quickly point shoot. We practice consistency in just about every aspect of marksmanship whether it's clearing misfeeds, drawing out of the holster, presenting to the target, or reloads. Why purposefully throw in an inconsistency like grip angle? I know that I can pick up most firearms irregardless of brand and it will operate for me in a consistent manner because most firearms share a very similar grip angle. But if you use and only depend on Glocks that's great for you. However I'd rather not depend on my instinctive skills only applying to ONE make.

Teenage girls can also menstruate and yet grown men can't. Teenage girls can create drama while most grown men can't (OK, this one was rather subjective). Teenage girls can get pregnant while most grown men can't. Whoever brought up the whole teenage girl argument obviously didn't think it through. What it boils down to though is comfort. As a grown *** man, it is my right to go choose a firearm that molds to the contours of my hand and works with my wrist. Glocks do NOT satisfy this in any way, shape, or form not just for me, but for a significant amount of people. Sure, I can shoot a Glock just fine, but then I might get used to it which takes us back to the paragraph above.

I personally could give a **** less about bore axis in relation to my hand. The original reviewer included bore axis like it was some heavily weighted aspect to consider when purchasing a firearm AND quoted the bore axis relationships inaccurately. My post only served to address the same issues that was originally brought up and fix the inaccuracies. My personal collection has weapons spanning all sorts of low to high bore axes.

Changing out springs for production handguns to tune felt recoil isn't nearly as complex as most people tend to believe. I'll grant you that if you were to fine tune the felt recoil for something like a custom 1911 or just get such fine adjustments out of your tuning to achieve perfect tuning efficiency than yes, it is beyond what is capable of average shooters. Nowadays, all I have to do is type into Google "What's the recommended recoil spring strength for ___" and I know exactly how I can improve felt recoil. Will it be perfect? Doubtful, but it will improve the felt recoil and aid recoil management more than a few millimeters of bore axis discrepancy.

To be honest, I have nothing against Glock except its grip angle. In fact a project gun that has been in my mind is to build a Glock from the ground up from ALL aftermarket parts (maybe it won't even be considered a Glock anymore). I'm thinking a Lone Wolf frame (comes with grip reduction), Storm Lake threaded barrel, and all aftermarket internals. What I do have a problem with is ignorant people posting up clearly biased threads promoting the Glock based entirely on inaccurate, inappropriate, or irrelevant information to justify why the Glock is better than all the other striker fired pistols.

[925topher]

M&P 9
M&P 40
M&P 45

[toyzilla]

M&P is my top choice. With the new ones now, the trigger is very good!

[gorenut]

I agree pretty much with what the OP posted. I put Glock and M&P up there with striker fired guns and I've tried pretty much all of them. The exception is.. I'd put the Glock's ergo even higher than the M&P's for me if I put on a Grip Force "beavertail" adapter on my Glock. While the M&P generally feels better in my hands (same goes with Walther), the Glock just feels better when I'm actually shooting. I have a strange grip and ride the gun really high with my hands so all that flat surface on the Glock really helps my support hand and thumb. The Walther is one of those guns that I really wanted to like, but in practice, the weird muzzle flip turned me off. I owned a P99, while not the same trigger, the overall ergos are the same as the PPQ.

Pretty much for me, the only handgun that beats out the Glock for me in ergos are probably revolvers. Even CZs and 1911s feel kind of lacking clear estate for my support hand. Again, thats just me and its mainly attributed to the way I grip the gun and having meaty palms.

[Shenaniguns]

Let's try and break down the absurd amount of ignorance in your post.

Point of ignorance #1: There is most definitely a right and wrong grip angle. The right grip angle is what works you as an individual. The wrong grip angle is one that doesn't work for a human hand. Between these two extremes is a continuum. The fact that Glock grip angles are significantly different from EVERYTHING else definitely puts it further on the wrong side of the continuum for most people.

Point of ignorance #2: Just because everyone who owns an Apple iPhone says it's God's gift to consumers doesn't make it true. Same goes for Glocks. Just because people who own a Glock say they love it doesn't mean it's practical or reasonable for most people.

Point of ignorance #3: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/few

Congratulations on being a dip****. There are approximately 20,000,000 teenage females in America. You found one which I believe still qualifies as "very few". You can find another 10,000 Tori's and my qualification of "very true" still would be a true statement.

Just because you were dumb enough to fall for Glock's marketing and now feel a need to justify your buyer's remorse doesn't make the rest of us ignorant for not liking Glocks based on actual facts.

Just because you disagree, it does not make me ignorant. You seem to have a difficult time understanding this topic, yet call others ignorant
Here's the definition since you don't know what the meaning of the word is:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ignorance

Your preference or even the preference of 1,000,000 others does not make my preference wrong.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/preference

The bottom line is that YOU can't shoot a Glock and think there's a physical or mechanical problem with them, yet the only problem is user error.

[Shenaniguns]

I agree pretty much with what the OP posted. I put Glock and M&P up there with striker fired guns and I've tried pretty much all of them. The exception is.. I'd put the Glock's ergo even higher than the M&P's for me if I put on a Grip Force "beavertail" adapter on my Glock. While the M&P generally feels better in my hands (same goes with Walther), the Glock just feels better when I'm actually shooting. I have a strange grip and ride the gun really high with my hands so all that flat surface on the Glock really helps my support hand and thumb. The Walther is one of those guns that I really wanted to like, but in practice, the weird muzzle flip turned me off. I owned a P99, while not the same trigger, the overall ergos are the same as the PPQ.

Pretty much for me, the only handgun that beats out the Glock for me in ergos are probably revolvers. Even CZs and 1911s feel kind of lacking clear estate for my support hand. Again, thats just me and its mainly attributed to the way I grip the gun and having meaty palms.

Same here, I've tried multiple platforms and always come back to Glock... Especially with the Gen 4 models.

[gorenut]

Same here, I've tried multiple platforms and always come back to Glock... Especially with the Gen 4 models.

Yea, when I shoot my friend's Gen 4s.. they feel just as good without the Grip Force adapters.

Xanatos: I understand your contention with extreme fanboys.. but I just don't see how you saw the original post as a fanboy post. It seemed like a very reasonable post which he assessed each gun that he felt fit HIM best.

Sometimes, what I find more annoying than fanboys are the anti-fanboys. I liken them to "zealous atheists" that take every chance to bash religion in the most annoying and "fervor" way possible (and I'm not even religious). Does it really affect you that much that someone else has a different belief/like than you?

[BoJackUSMC]

Gen 4th ftw

[mhill6761]

Kahr P9 nuff said

[RollingCode3]

Yea, when I shoot my friend's Gen 4s.. they feel just as good without the Grip Force adapters.

Xanatos: I understand your contention with extreme fanboys.. but I just don't see how you saw the original post as a fanboy post. It seemed like a very reasonable post which he assessed each gun that he felt fit HIM best.

Sometimes, what I find more annoying than fanboys are the anti-fanboys. I liken them to "zealous atheists" that take every chance to bash religion in the most annoying and "fervor" way possible (and I'm not even religious). Does it really affect you that much that someone else has a different belief/like than you?

Thank you. Xanatos is already on my ignore list. He is hostile towards ANYONE that doesn't agree with him. But he continues to post on this thread.

Back on topic. I like the Gen 4 better because of the grip texture, the mag release and the smaller grip. Had over half a dozen gen 3 Glocks but sold them all, the gen 4 just fits my hand much better. Like I said before, I love them all. Each has unique characteristics and none are perfect.

[Xanatos]

Yea, when I shoot my friend's Gen 4s.. they feel just as good without the Grip Force adapters.

Xanatos: I understand your contention with extreme fanboys.. but I just don't see how you saw the original post as a fanboy post. It seemed like a very reasonable post which he assessed each gun that he felt fit HIM best.

Sometimes, what I find more annoying than fanboys are the anti-fanboys. I liken them to "zealous atheists" that take every chance to bash religion in the most annoying and "fervor" way possible (and I'm not even religious). Does it really affect you that much that someone else has a different belief/like than you?

The fact of the matter is he wasn't trying to say these are the top three best polymer striker fired guns for him. He was saying these are the best three and here's why by making certain inaccurate and false statements. And while certain ranking is subjective, it's plain to see that the way the OP tried to grade the guns was from a personal perspective, not from an unbiased, information giving standpoint. He wasn't saying these are the best 3 striker fired handguns for me. He flat out and said these are the best 3 period and then biased the scoring based on what works for him (but not for MOST people) giving Glock points that are undeserved.

Why it really bothers me? Because someone who doesn't know any better may end up wasting $600 on a Glock to find out holy crap this gun doesn't fit in my hands at all. Or worse yet only think these 3 striker fired polymer pistols are the only ones worth looking at. If the OP came in and posted saying these are my top 3 favorite polymer striker fired pistols I couldn't give a flying **** less, but by blatantly stating these are the best period and defending his reasoning with false information is LYING (whether intentional or otherwise).

Hell there was hardly a review. Just a recap justifying why the OP thinks the Glock is better than everything else despite the fact that he had to inflate its scores in certain categories. An example of a good review would be something on par with Nutnfancy (regardless of what you think of him as a person, he does give unbiased reviews covering many aspects of the firearm) or those posted on http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com.