Not a Glock Fan

GLOCK 42 profile view

The most controversial phrase I have ever put in print is this: I’m not a fan of Glocks. I never have been. I have always liked attractive guns. For handguns, that meant things like the venerable Browning Hi-Power with wood grips, the 1911 Colt in blue with rosewood trim and even James Bond’s Walter PPK because of its unique lines. I always found Glocks a bit ugly.

Strip down view of the Glock 42.
Strip down view of the GLOCK 42.

When introduced back in the ’80s, the plastic gun with metal barrel and parts made quite a stir, especially among the gun-control crowd. The fear was that current metal detecting technology at airports and such would not be able to detect these new guns, however, this induced hysteria quickly proved wrong. As the Glock became more widely used, it proved itself as a lightweight and exceptionally reliable handgun, going on to become the number one most carried firearm by law enforcement by a significant margin.

The party I was with at the 2014 SHOT Show media day dragged me into the Glock shooting area with the promise of something new that might change my mind. Did it ever. You see, since I becoming a concealed weapons holder, I have come to appreciate more than ever a lightweight firearm that is exceptionally reliable. I regularly carry an easily concealable lightweight polymer .380 even if I am wearing a suit and tie. Now Glock makes one.

Additionally, Glock added a full-size .45 automatic. I shot both of handguns and would consider myself a convert. The small-framed Glock G42 .380 is large enough to feel comfortable and point well from my hand; it shoots exceptionally well with great accuracy and almost no recoil or muzzle jump. There are arguments everywhere about the potency of a .380, the superior stopping power of a .40 or .45 caliber, even some that are against the carry of semiautomatics at all in favor of a .38 or even .357 revolver. I take heed of all of them but respectfully decline them.

Glock 42 profile view
Small enough to carry comfortably, but large enough for proper hand purchase.

I tried carrying a medium-framed 9mm, a small .40 caliber and, on occasion, a shoulder-holstered .38-caliber Colt Diamondback revolver. None was comfortable. There were times when I felt like taking them off for a break—just for a little bit. That’s the most dangerous thing you can do, because it doesn’t matter how much stopping power you have if it’s in the truck while you’re at the ATM.

With a standard capacity of 6+1 and a loaded weight of 14.36 ounces, Glock’s G42 is a gun that is both potent and a pleasure to carry. I found it exceptionally accurate for such a small gun, and plan it as an addition to my collection. Cheaper than Dirt! not only offers great prices on Glocks, it also provides free shipping on all firearms, and by purchasing online, I will not have to pay sales tax.

“What’s your favorite carry gun?” Have you ever taken it off for comfort/concealment issues? Tell us about your choice in the comment section.


The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (90)

  1. I am also a fan of Star pistols. In 1984 I had sold my S&W Model 39 and was looking for a new pistol. I had some extra cash and was set to buy a Colt 1911 or a High Power 9mm, both of which were close to a thousand dollars. The gun store guy showed me a Star Model BM in all stainless steel for under $300. and I fell in love with it. It has been a reliable and accurate gun. It is too bad Star (Spain) went out of business.

  2. OK ACE you have to be happy with you gun or it won’t work for you. I am sure you will be pleased with it. There’s no denying that Glock makes a great gun. The truth is, because I want to move into 10MM I will be buying a Glock 20. It’s killing me but in 10mm there are few choices. You can get 1911 platform, EAA or Glock. If Ruger made a 10MM that’s what I’d be buying but they don’t. It is a little easier now that Glock is making guns in US but I have been reading a fair amount about Glock gen4s have some problems. What’s up with that?

    1. The Glock 20 is my choice in 10mm,also, and I usually don’t like Glocks.

  3. WHEW!
    Well, now that some of the mayhem has died down, I will ring in again…
    I believe that a gun is a personal choice.
    I think that “fit and function” are two of the most important criteria to choose a firearm.
    There is no denying that the Glock is an excellent firearm. More people that carry a gun for their primary career choose Glock than ANY OTHER WEAPON.
    I was also a slow adopter of the iPhone.
    Stay with me here…
    I have now made the entire conversion to Apple and Mac for ONE reason…
    They just work.
    That’s what Glock does best.
    They work.
    And my Model 42 just came in.

  4. Okay, I know this will piss off ALL camps!
    I like spanish made Star Firestars, ever since I bought my first M43 9mm in Starvel (electroless nickel) in 1993.
    It is a solid, compact. accurate. reliable all steel, hunk of 1911 external safety, single action goodness.
    I currently have 3 M43’s (plus a M40 slide/barrel/recoil spring to convert any of them to 40 S&W)
    Plus armorer’s kit parts (they are no longer made – alas Star is out of business due to US gun import laws) .
    I recently added the Firsestar M45 (plus another slide/barrel/parts kit) to my stable.
    Besides my 1911’s and two TTC Tokarevs and two 1860 Army’s, it is the only type of pistol I have multiples of.
    I like them that much. They are underated (although the Firestar was Gun of teh Year in 1994), bad mouthed (“poor steel” – couldn’t prove it by me, several thousand rounds through the 9mm’s) and “too heavy” (eat your Wheaties)
    And they are pretty (except for the rubber grips, which can be replaced by some nice grained wood ones)
    I have shot my friend’s Glocks since the 90’s, if you GAVE me a Glock, I would sell it and buy TWO Firestars..

    1. Hey Roger, it is good to know that I am not the only one who likes the Star pistols. I had sold my S&W Model 39 9mm back in the mid-80’s and was looking for the ideal gun. With budget not an issue, I looked at quite a few handguns and was shown the Star Model BM 9mm in stainless steel. It was love at first sight. The gun has been described as a cross between the Browning Hi-Power and the Colt 1911 designs. Have owned it for over 20 years now and it still shoots well and looks beautiful. It is milled from a solid block of stainless steel and therefore a little heavy for a CCW at 2.2 pounds. But the weight makes it a pleasure to shoot at the range. The down side is that parts supply is limited due to Star going out of business.

    2. Hey Tom!
      I have heard a lot of people endorse the larger Stars like the BM, but personally have no experiene with them. The Firestars are more compact (1.88 lbs) and are really not a problem for CCW. Continued good luck with the BM!

    3. You wouldn’t happen to know where I could get a slide stop for a Firestar M43 would you?

    4. Star made great hand guns, and for the money were hard to beat, I bought my Star M30 9mm in 1984, at that time it was out shooting the Berretta 92f hands down, a couple of German gunsmiths at my local gun store ( Pony Express) sold me on this gun, and told to check out a range gun at the Firing Line, ( indoor range ) that had over 100,000 rounds through it and it still grouped, the M30 is an all steel gun with 1911 slide safety’s AMBI, and held 15 in the mag. and 1 in the tube, as of this day, with all the new 9mm I own, and I own most of what is offered today, my M30 out shoots them all, I was told you won’t see these guns in stores , because the owners wont let them go…


    1. Mc Ruger.

      There are more people out there then even you might suspect. But more-over-than-not, their more likely to be Passive/ Aggressive as oppose to being less likely to be Active/Aggressive.

  6. True enough and point taken… made in USA comes in degrees. It is a global economy and I am not a union man. I simply do not care to own a gun that says Made in Croatia, Brazil, Germany, Austria etc. When I can own one that is equal or better that was at least made in America. Yes I know, Jeep is owned by a French company and mine assembled in Canada, my TV was made in Hong Kong and my shoes in Taiwan. However when I came to guns, as much as I can, I want it made in America by an American Company. It is one of the few products I can by anymore where I have a choice.
    I can’t explain it but I know my feeling on where my guns come from has something to do with the part guns have played in our history and the Uniqueness of our 2nd amendment. Somehow the thought of defending my Rights with a Gun that comes from a country where they can’t even own a gun or a country that may for political reasons stop manufacturing guns and parts tomorrow just bothers me. The funny thing is, I really don’t care where your gun was made, just mine.
    OK go ahead and take your shots…………..

    1. Hey McR,,
      From my point of view anybody wants to take a swing at this because for some out of left field reason they think your ….wrong …. Is an idiot. It will be apperent that they didn’t read your comment carefully or are unable to understand simple English. One may not agree with your position, but you have a right to it. They can disagree but have the responsibility to defend your right to think and speak that opinion regardless. So if their going to take a shot I hope they come with an extra magazine . . . I like the way you have thought this out.

  7. Sorry Carl P. I forgot to answer your question about what other guns I considered before buying my Ruger LC-9. Well I spent several months doing research on the WWW and reading gun magazines. I looked at dozens of guns at Academy and Cabela’s. and eliminated the Kimber Solo because of it’s high cost and 6-round mag. I like Smith & Wesson guns but the S&W Shield had too much light showing between slide and frame and was not as good looking to me as the LC-9. The Kel-tec guns were very affordable but did not appeal to me. I really liked the price and looks of the second generation SCCY, but wanted to stay with the well established brand names. Went to my gun range for a “Springfield Event” and shot the XDS (was told the XDM was the best gun around) Not impressed with them. Also took a close look at the Nano, but did not like it, So my selection was based on a desire for a 9mm with a least 7+1 capacity, small and light weight for all day carry, and it needed to look good to me. I know some people will question why I did not list reliability and accuracy and that is because most modern handguns meet these requirements.

  8. Thanks to Carl P. for responding to my post. You have agreed with most of the points I made, but seem to take exception to my “made in the USA” preference. I believe that in order to turn this country back to the manufacturing giant we once were, we must all try to buy as much “made in the USA” products as we can. Otherwise we will continue on the road to more low paid (mostly service) jobs. It is not always possible to buy quality low cost products that are made in the USA, but I will keep looking.

  9. I have looked at and held several Glocks, but never shot one. They don’t feel right in my hand and they are not attractive guns in my view. They are also made in Austria and not in the USA. The Glock 42 was just coming out when I was shopping for a CCW and were not available. For years I have carried my Dad’s S&W 38 Special Airweight, which is light, concealable, reliable, and a beautiful revolver. But times have changed and a 5-shot gun is not enough bullets for the dangers now present. A 6-shot magazine in a small semi-auto is not much improvement over the S&W as for as bullet count. I feel a 7-shot magazine plus one in the barrel is the minimum one should have for CCW plus a second magazine in a belt holder. I also agree with the gun experts that recommend a minimum caliber of 9mm. Therefore, I purchased the Ruger LC-9 for my CCW of choice. It is a shame that Ruger put a long heavy trigger pull on the gun (for safety reasons they say) but this was corrected with a new trigger, trigger bar, and springs.

    1. Hey Thomas,
      I’m just curious but what other offerings did you consider? Springfield XD, MRI Baby Eagle, Browning Hi-Popwer? Considering the number of non USA made parts and piices that go into the majority of “Made in USA” firearms these days its kinda hard to really find a died in the wool 100% US made firearm currently on the market. I’m sure there there . . . maybe but it’s also got to do with what defines that little “Made in USA” tag on the box. Is it considered “MiUSA” if 70% of it only comes from US manufactures and if all the parts are assemblies in the US?? And the other 40%? Given that most if not nearly all of us shop at places like WalMart, COSTCO, FredMyers, Lowes, BB&B and other large box stores in this country it seems kinda odd to me that we still say ” I’ll only buy USA made products” odd indeed. I’m pretty sure that if you at some point have to use deadly force that the receiver of such action will not care in the least if your weapon I’d USA or foreign made! ”

      STOP! That 1911 is made in the Philippines! You can’t shoot me with that its not made in the USA!! What?? The ammo is?? Really? USA made? Your sure? Let me see the box ….. Well, its a fine point to be sure but go ahead and fire I think its OK” LOL . . . .NOT!

      Maybe “Made in USA” isn’t really true any more. How about ” Mostly ….” or better yet … ” XXX% of this product is 100% made in USA” to long, huh? Truth in advertising, would be nice!
      The LC-9 is a fine choice for CC and used by many as I understand the trend. I agree with you about how a Glock fits the hand too, main reason I don’t carry one. I could never find a sweet spot in my palm for it to settle. There are by the way US marked, made and marketed Glocks in the USA. Their made in Smyrna GA, the Glock 17 and several other models are produced there.
      Nothing wrong with a .38, 5 shot Airweight. I imagine that there are still a number of ankle holsters in use out there that support this backup platform.
      One can’t argue with you “round count assessment” either as far as I’m concerned. The current touted rule of thumb is “more is better” I’m not going to argue with the basic truth of that except to add that accuracy and control makes having more much better, learning to have good Situational Awareness will often leave you with ammo remaining.
      Enjoy that LC-9 several of my friends like them very much!

  10. @ To GLOCK!

    The thing I hate the most about Glock Pistols. They all look alike! There’s no variations in the design patterns. There Clone Copies of each other. If it weren’t for the Model Number, I wouldn’t, couldn’t and/or can’t. tell them apart.

    Know I understand there planning to a color dyes to the model designs. After a while you start getting sick of the same Battleship Gray Color Scheme. At least, it’s a start.

    Why don’t you give them some design features too! Stop using the same standard molding patterns

    1. I’ve TRIED! Homestly I’ve TRIED!! Flirted with my friends Glocks, fondled them at the LGS, but to no avail. If it aint wood and steel, it dont get my muzzle up.’

  11. A quote from a new article written by Colion Noir, (NRA News Commentator) in reference to multiple uses for a handgun other than basic defensive function and how aesthetics come into play. I feel much the same way and this keeps me away from Glocks.

    “Because I identify as an athlete, I view guns from that perspective. I have my self-defense guns, and I take them very seriously. I also appreciate them from a collector/enthusiast perspective. I’ll buy guns based simply on looks. I’ll spend hours just tinkering with my guns, swapping parts and admiring them aesthetically. But I also view them as, for all intents and purposes, sports equipment.”

  12. SS1,
    I understand what your saying. Having spent a few more hours considering this further and I talked to a friend who’s an IT programmer I’ve decided that I most likly haven’t enough productive years left to attempt this on my own! He supported my presumsion that the program, to run, the interconnective information sharing alone would be a major work for several programmers. He thought the idea has merit and that he dosnt know of such a data library currently existing of the manner that I suggested. But he did say that there are several spreadsheet data bases that exist which work much like I described to him that might be used as a foundation and cut the development time. Way more work than I’d consider doing just for fun, maybe one of the younger readers would like to take on such a project. Thanks for your reply SS1! I’ll look of you on the playground!

  13. Hey SS1,
    As I commented to McR I was sort of picking a stick at our forgetting that this was all meant to be fun not another beat down but persons unknown! Wasn’t trying to be serious but as it turns out …..
    Yes, I’m an engineer, but I’m sorry I’m not an IT guy at least to the degree that a spreadsheet like this would have to operate at. I could explain to one what I wanted and how I’d like it to work and even make suggested relationships of the data. However, I suspect the the interconnection between info cells and collocating the amount of data that might or would have to be considered would be a fair to monumental programming task. One that I am certainly not qualified to attempt. The Bat Testing however might be fairly simple. I have a fairly good idea as to how I’d like to see something like this, what information that is important and that additional info that might not be quite so but included. It would be quite an accomplishment to actually build a user friendly, end user focused, data base where not only the function and mechanics of the firearm may be evaluated from single person, everyday world data but also all the extraneous data related to it. “How does it function in extreme environments”,” is it high maintenance”‘, what’s it weigh with a full
    mag and Sherpa holster” ….. I mean the questions could go on and on. But, I’d bet that if you limited yourself to 100 columns of data and got fairly selective and not to much cross over info one might come up with a very informative and useful compilation of data on single firearms that would be useful to any end user and might all be nearly in one place. The upside is that once such a directory of data was established and working it becomes a simple thing to add or delete data as needed to refine the process. I think think that a spectrum of data sources and people would be needed to segment something lied this up. It would need to reflect a clear cross section of shooters and end users if its to not become a biased source. If your interested in giving it a go or want to participate let me know and I’ll send you a secure cutout email address where we can talk further about it. Could be fun, we could meet in one of the unused corners of the playground!

    1. Carl I’m a software engineer and I’ve had to prepare reports for big companies with the complexity you’re referring to . I have zero interest in doing such things with guns, but if a company like Remington, or CTD, etc., did a spreadsheet like that, of course I would view it and analyze it.

      I guess if you look around the web there are men who have taken time to analyze things, like Box Of Truth, Chuck Hawkes, and also many various YouTube contributors.

      I just asked you what your profession was because your email looked different than what I usually see around here. So I guessed correctly with you 🙂

  14. Beautifully done my friend. Just don’t pretend to be shooting on the playground or we’ll get kicked out of school. All smiles

  15. Lighten up man. You take everything that serious.. There are lots of guys out there that still have FUN arguing Ford vs Chevy. You go right ahead with your chart and have fun. While your at it you could pros and cons of all calibers. Chances are you chart, or a similar one would tell me I should be driving a Toyota, but I drive a Jeep. It’s not the paper, its what’s right for me. Feels right, functions right, looks right, doesn’t fail when needed, it’s mine. Now smile it’s back to recess.

    1. McR,
      I didn’t thing anyone would get this and you got it in one! In its convoluted manner what I was driving at was that this needs to be an enjoyable and FUN and we seem to forget that. Doing a spreadsheet might be a fun thing to attempt but I only know the first four things and what should be the last thing, I’m thinking the middle part would be huge! Don’t think I’ve got a winters worth of evenings that could complete this.
      As to “should be driving a Toyota but drive. jeep” I can’t help you as I drive a Jeep on the weekends and a Durango durning the week. For what its worth stick with the Jeep! As to your last two sentences. No one is in a position to disagree with personal choice, it’s just has to be right . . . For you. End of discussion by the swing set, you, wanna have a catch? I’m smiling!

    2. These tools we are discussing have more than one function. Main function for me and most others is self and family protection. But there are more functions. Some of these functions cost more money but not always. Aesthetics as a function need to go in the top 10 of a real “PPPS”. People like to show me their guns. I like to show people mine.

      I will not buy an ugly vehicle for driving from point A to point B. I will not buy ugly clothing to keep me warm. I am not going to put beige siding on my house even though it’s half the price. I’ll keep my preferences about the ladies out of this but some principles apply.

      I have a side savings going for my next handgun. Will probably be my first 1911. I already have enough in the fund to buy 70% of what’s out there but not enough to make sure no one else is going to show up at the range or league with the same gun.

    3. Maybe I’m just not understanding the logic. What would be your ten (columns 5 thru 14) requirments be and in what order of importance? What would be in column (C)15?
      I’m not saying your wrong, because for you this is an important factor that you feel carries enough weight to be front loaded in such a data base. For me it wouldn’t be the case. But, it dosnt mean your wrong. I might be incorrect in presupposing that “looks” are of so little importance that they could only be placed C100. I’m not going to be that arrgont. What it might mean is that instead of placing it in C100 we move it up in importance to say C55. More or less splitting the distance between our two opinions until someone else chimes in with their thoughts on the matter. It gets complicated from this point on but at some point it should become clear where its average position within the data base should be.
      Maybe the answer should be several PPPS’s instead of an all encompassing one? One for function / build / serviceability, let’s say and one for Design / Aesthetics which would only intersect at the make and model of the firearm. This way the grading stays true without impacting one or the other. That actually seems to me to be a solution. This becomes two separate information sources but both sources connected to a single specific platform without one source degrading or impacting the other yet providing as real a data picture as might be obtained from multiple independent input sources.
      I understand your position concerning cars and clothing. My view concerning siding might be summed up in the terms Dull and Boring regardless of cost, but that’s just my view.
      Women are indeed a completely different data base to which I have been adding information to for some years and still don’t have a complete picture of how this complicated lifeform works or how I may best function with it! They may be the steepest learning curve of all. Isn’t learning fun?

  16. Not sure but something happened and ally he comment did not get printed so gonna try again ….

    I feel like I just walked thru a grade school playground with all the kids yelling ” YES IT IS!!!!” or “NO IT ISNT!!!” and “CUZ I SAID SO THATS WHY!!” as well as “YOUR A STUPID FACE IF THATS WHAT YOU THINK!!” and let’s not forget “MINE IS BIGGER, BADDER, AN BETTER THAN YOURS”. One would have thought that as adults, hello . . . Any adults out there? …. that we might have grown up a bit in the manner in which our discussions take place. But apparently …… Not always. Then we turn around and expect an adult response from our elected officials and seem surprised that their standing in the same school yard, just in an out of the way corner. Pretty funny stuff! Haven’t laughed this hard in a long time. There is a lot of well presented information to be gleaned from this and other blogs if we could just get past some of the BS that gas to be slogged thru. Sorry back to the issue at hand.
    How about lets make a column list??
    In the first column we put the name and manufacture of a specific pistol (exp.: Springfield, XD or Glock, 17) The next column would be type and style (exp.- Auto/Full Size) the third column would be caliber and the forth column a general cost ($). Forth column might be “ignition mechanics” (hammer, striker, etc.) How is everybody doing so far?
    Each of the NEXT hundred or so columns would be the important features and functions in descending order of importance ( don’t know how that will be determined!) that should be considered critical to use and function by an end user. (I put a hundred here so that everyone can have some input into what they consider to be critical to function more may be added if necessary)
    The first top ten or twenty columns starting with column 5 might include: action type(SA,DA,ECT.),”mechanical simplicity” (field stripping and re assembly) , construction, construction materials, function, ergonomics, sights, grips, magazine size or rounds in cylinder and so forth. Barrel leant, factual function history (The apple for apples, nuts and bolts, real world important facts and considerations are what were aiming at here)
    Ok, columns 26 thru say 99 (still in descending order of importance) might include considerations such as: interior finish (rough, polished, smooth, etc.) exterior finish, exterior color, availability of aftermarket accessories and parts, carry options, and so on and so forth and the like. ALL the things that do and do not so much and may or may not so much impact actual use or function but may be something to consider anyway by an individual and end user.
    Column 100 – “is it Pretty or Handsome”? This column will should ALWAYS be the last column regardless of the number of columns that precede it. As it has nothing to do with the firearms ability function, history, current use, current production, engagement envelope,. . . . Well, you get the idea and, further more, I’m pretty sure that a thousand out of a thousand individuals that have been wounded or killed by a handgun, last thought wasn’t ” WOW, now THAT’S a pretty good looking pistol!” Its a good bet that was NOT their last thought!
    To continue with our “Personal Pistol Perceptions Spreadsheet”, here after known as the PPPS, each column header would include “grading options”. They might be something like : 1 – 5 (with 5 being best or excellent an so on) or 1 – 10, or poor, ok, fair, better, best, excellent (P O, F, B2, B1, E). Something along simple lines that might level the playing field a bit but still provide a fairly accurate picture of the firearm being graded and considered.
    Of course we would have to be honest in our grading of those firearms in question and not give high marks or low ones because we like or dislike a product for some unimportant or snobby reason. As its likely that this would happen any way a 5% or so down grade might have to be added in to the mix.
    We would also need to account for the number of participants that input grading on each pistol too so that there was a real idea for who’s talking about what.
    Might be a great undertaking for a web sight designer of far greater skill then myself! Maybe there is already such a comprehensive grading list out there. Something for the guy on the street to the dedicated collector, or end user that might give rise to discussion beyond schoolyard posturing, perhaps become a valuable industry information source! Anyone interested in partnering up? Sorry, again I digress . . .

    Is it Ugly???? Yes,….Maybe…. or…. not……no. It really is in the eye of the beholder and all that. Is it an important factor that one needs to depend on when it counts?. . . . . . NOT. …. EVER.
    What you carry or what the FBI choose or the percentage of PD’s that use a particular firearm, even how the military makes these choices is in no way a be all end all for any platform.
    If one is making their decisions based only on available data, production numbers that have been fielded, testimonials by other owners, end users and manufactures, hearsay or just over-a-beer-with-the-guys BS session . . . . . And not taken the time to actually find a way to FIRE one or two or more before making their choice . . . Is doing themselves a disservice.

    Ok, tear me up guys! Its RECESS time again! But, thanks for taking the time to read this cause it was fun to write!

    1. Carl a list like this could be very helpful for those of us who are very analytical. The list would have to be created by the right group or person, otherwise it’s garbage in/garbage out.

      Are you an IT professional or Engineer?

  17. WOW!!
    I feel like I just walked thru a grade school playground with all the kids yelling ” YES IT IS!!!!” or “NO IT ISNT!!!” and “CUZ I SAID SO THATS WHY!!” as well as “YOUR A STUPID FACE IF THATS WHAT YOU THINK!!” and let’s not forget “MINE IS BIGGER, BADDER, AN BETTER THAN YOURS”. One would have thought that as adults, hello… that we might have grown up a bit in the manner in which our discussions take place. But apparently …… Not always.

  18. Glock is a fine tool. Works great, very dependable if not aesthetically pleasing. I does not fit most hands right off …takes some getting use to, although the Gen4 is better. I personally prefer to buy American made guns from American owned companies when I can get the same quality. I will say it again the biggest problem with Glock are the Glock snobs. Trust me, shoot something else. There really are several just as good.

    1. David as far as snobs go, I’m detecting the same vibe from 1911 owners. I think they have a lot more to get uptight about because they paid more money (RIA excluded) for an architecture that was invented in 1911. Just one of the many things that perplexes me about American gun enthusiasts since starting to read these forums.

      What is there for a Glock owner to get snobbish about? They are so basic and natural.

  19. So, Anthony, you don’t believe a gun should haver sleek lines. If that’s true why are custom gunsmiths receiving such high prices for their work?
    No one likes anything ugly, or big and blocky when they can get something else that looks as good, functions as well, and conceals as well. I’ll take a Sig 938 over any 9mm Glunk….

    1. Ross, you, or anyone else, are free to value whatever you like in a firearm. I wouldn’t buy a hammer or a pipe wrench because it was pretty, and I wouldn’t buy a gun for that reason, either. It’s a tool. The problem is that it in general the combination of features, function, reliability, ergonomics, and price are *not* identical between guns. I pick what I use based on those attributes and how well they fit what I am after – not “looks”. I am not a collector nor would I pay a fortune for a gunsmith to make me a pretty weapon. If you would, great – it is your money. A Glock is not intended for that application.

      Glocks are reliable, durable, light, decently priced, very easy to clean and maintain, parts are cheap, they have no difference in the trigger from the first shot, they have a great trigger reset… and most importantly I can shoot mine well. Its looks? I could care less. It’s for defending my life, not admiring as a piece of art.

      I hope your Sig serves you well. I’m sure it’s a fine weapon. Personally, I don’t find that a 938 suits what I need at all. Neither does a Glock 26 for that matter. I am not interested in either. I use a G23, and compared it to a Sig 229 DAK, because I don’t like the standard Sig DA/SA trigger. The Glock was a better choice for me, for functional reasons and price. The pull seemed too heavy, the reset of the Sig was just weird, and it cost more money. Are these things more important than looks? Well, yes… they are. Years and thousands of rounds later, I have no regrets. Again, it has to do its job when called upon, and that job does not involve looking pretty. I am confident the G23 will fire and hit what I aim at.

  20. I have to say I chuckled at all the comments about how the Glock is too ugly. You bet they are. So are the jumper cables that I carry in the trunk. Like the jumper cables, (a) the functionality needs to be up to the task and (b) it needs to work when I need it. Whatever floats your boat, of course… but personally, “styling” is not on my list when considering a new firearm. Ugly is just fine.

    A friend shoots long guns and is looking to get a handgun for camping trips and such. He pointed out that Glocks have a lot of unintended discharges. I read in this thread about someone that had a Glock go off as he pulled it from his range bag. With all respect, I chalk these incidents up to grey matter malfunction. LEO or military should carry their *holstered* Glock with a round chambered. IMO, though, you are asking for disaster if you have a chambered round in a Glock tossed into into a range bag or in a drawer in your nightstand! The pistol has no lever operated safety. It has a trigger safety. Reaching into a range bag, or nightstand drawer, puts you at great risk of having a finger or other object inadvertently operate the trigger safety. Boom. Not so good.

    Very reliable, mid-priced, light, easy to clean, smooth outline that won’t snag on anything, cheap parts (no broken parts in years of use, though). What’s not to like? Too ugly? It’s a gun, not your date for Saturday night.

  21. In reference to the discussion right above, any change or use of certain calibers by law enforcement, the Federal Govt., and military is of great interest to me in these precarious political times. Any caliber these entities are using will ensure it’s production. I purchased my first handgun during the ammunition shortage soon after Sandy Hook. I chose my first handgun to be a 9mm because there was limited ammunition available at the time and because I felt due to it’s world wide use, I could scrape up ammunition in times of government over-reach or civil unrest.

    I have since picked up a revolver and am considering other purchases. If any of the largest handgun using entities adopt .357Sig, I might be more likely to get one as well. Right now, I rarely see a box of .357Sig on a shelf. I can’t just go get some in any immediate time frame.

    Who on here knows some handguns that are easily converted back and forth between calibers. Do 10mm and .40S&W convert easily? 9mm and .38Super? Which manufacturers design models with this in mind? Who’s 1911’s swap easily?

    1. Stephen, I am certainly NOT an expert on any handgun, but I do have some experience with caliber conversions. For my money, the easiest & least expensive way to go was to buy a Glock 22 (LEO Standard, actually). Once you own a G-22, you have conversion options available from Lone Wolf Mfg. as well as others… convert to 9mm by simply changing barrels & using G-17 mags; convert to .357sig likewise, although the G-22 mags Might work (dunno!); you can increase accuracy by going to a G-35 conversion (or not – just standard .40cal) barrel, which will fit the G-22 just fine – except the barrel protrudes just under an inch beyond the frame; or even a G-35 threaded barrel, for that matter.

      If you’ve ever seen that barrel that is engraved right on the face of the crown that states: “Smile”… “Wait for Flash”… that’s a 9mm conversion barrel in a G-22 or G-35… it’s what gives the engraver enough ‘meat’ to engrave in that area!


    2. So, is it pistol, pistol caliber, the type of round being used, or substandard marksmanship with a handgun?
      Why not change the type of round used?
      Or better yet, switch to the Glock 17, use ammo other than 9 mm FMJ?

    3. Silversides: The topic here towards the end of this thread has to do with handgun models that easily convert between calibers. I am really not interested in Glocks but Jim right above was genuinely trying to help with my questions. I would like a SAO or SA/DA that can shoot at least 2 different rounds. One round being a common one such as used by the military, Feds or Law Enforcement (9mm or more preferably .40) This round would be used for training and competition. I would like another caliber to come from the same gun as I am likely to make a purchase at the very top of my budget. Maybe beyond budget. I would a high pressure, harder hitting round such as 10mm. Is my thinking at all logical that, lets say a 1911 in 10mm can easily convert and shoot .40 S&W? Which manufacturers are ones to look to? Not interested in a striker fired gun.

    4. …Adding on to my last post… .357 Sig is also a harder hitting round I would consider in the mix.

    5. Considera Star Firestar M43 (9mm) or M40 (40 S&W) Slides/barrels/recoil springs of both will interchange and are regularly sold on from seized guns where the frame has been desroyed..The Firestar is a well made SAO, all steel, 1911 style firearm, but because Star is out of business (due more to US gun regs than anyhing), you will welcome the misc parts that usually come with the the kits less frame I mentioned, even though personally I have yet to break a single part on any of my Firestars). Also you can find the Star Firestar’s relatively cheap the $200+ range..

  22. Interesting article Stephen. I would very much like to see some actual numbers on the damage from the 40S&W. I have 4 40s and love them. I wonder if the real problem is Public Safety Officers that can’t handle the snap of the 40. The Article mentions three contenders for military replacement, 357 Sig, .40 S&W and .45 ACP. I will offer as a guess that although the 357 Sig is known for a lot of flash that they will end up with the 357. Just my guess. Anyone else care to offer a guess I would love to see it.

  23. Here is a news article from today regarding the U.S. Army’s desire to move away from 9MM and how Law Enforcement is trending back to it as a result of the Glock not holding up to long term use of .40 S&W.: And here is a quote from the article.: “The FBI and several major police departments recently decided to return to using the 9mm round after finding that .40 caliber ammunition was causing excessive wear on its service pistols. The heavier bullet and greater recoil over time resulted in frame damage to well respected makes such as Glock and Beretta, according to Ernest Langdon, a shooting instructor and respected competitive pistol shooter who has worked for gun makers such as Beretta, Smith & Wesson, and Sig Sauer.”

  24. You mean ” Don’t ask me what I think of you, you might not get the answer that you want me to”

  25. Come on guys, let’s not get personal here. We’re supposed to comment on: if we are a Glock fan or if we are not and why. Let’s not make this a urinating contest.

    After reading your comments I’ve got to tell you I’m still not sold. I’m not a Glock fan. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and for me Glock doesn’t have it. It’s no more beautiful than the Edsel and Corvair my neighbor bought years ago.

    As far as functionality is concerned, the one I tried did not have a comfortable grip, but it all fairness, neither did my R. I. 1911 right out of the box until I installed a set of Hogue wrap around rubber grips so I’ll give you a pass on that.

    I’ve heard of too many horror stories of people blowing their foot off drawing it from a holster and frankly I was told that most of them were cops, I don’t like to beat a dead horse here, but I don’t like their safety, if that’s what you want to call it. And if they’re going to void the warranty for the additional installation of a sensible thumb safety then you can have it. I want to go home with all my body parts in tact.

    If Daffy Duck really was their ‘head of engineering’ at Glock then he and the mice at Mattel did a hell of a job producing a plastic gun. If that doesn’t piss off the Glock fans then I don’t know what will. Let me leave you with one closing point: At the Magnum Range at Riverside, California we have, Dave, “The Glock Doctor.” He’s a very personable guy who has been there most days that I was, and he never seems to be short on work. There are Glock owners lined up. To me that’s not just popularity and it certainly isn’t a good sign..

  26. I have to admit I never anticipated my credentials being called into question. Given that this is my life, I know I am legitimate and never gave it a second thought. I actually find it somewhat interesting that this even came up. It has never happened before and I am on several forums with government brass.

    After reading the several comments that raised issue with my background I had to sit back and imagine just what it would be like for you folks to read these things from someone in my position. However, I am still not fully relating as to why this would be worthy of comment. I suppose it is because I am who I am, and have become comfortable with it.

    For a moment I suppose I felt somewhat flattered. But in the end I am a person no different than any of you. It’s not like I am some celebrity. I put my pants on the same way anyone else does. There are no government policies that prohibits such off-duty hobbies; so why the doubt?

    I have the same hopes and desires as anyone else should for this country. I also share your particular passion for guns and the interest in protecting our God given rights to bear them. So no matter the position I hold, why does it seem a stretch to believe I would want to join in the same conversations to feel normal during my free time like any other citizen?

    I will go so far as to admit that my mouth has put delays on my career path at certain points along the way. However, in the end it was always my ability to make compelling arguments for what is right that allowed me to prevail and move up to where I am today. So any time I smell bullsh*t, nothing is going to stop me from calling it as I see fit. That includes this forum.

    I want to say I could care less who believes who I am, but I actually do care. I need you all to know there really are people high up in government that thinks the same way you all do and constantly fights the good fight.

    That’s it. I really don’t know what else to say other than to ask for you all to trust that I am who I say I am, and for you to treat me no differently than any other forum member. Oh, there is one more thing… SS1, Carl P, and David, next time please have the courtesy to address me directly rather than carry on dialogue as if I’m not here, thanks. I’m out.

  27. I think this guy is a very good writer however he still says nothing of any importance. It appears that he is trying to impress someone and thought we would like reading his resume. I would be willing to bet a bright shinny nickel he does not work for the government. If he does we are in more trouble then I thought.
    Truth is Glock is a great and unattractive gun. I am sure many people are comfortable with it right out of the box. My only real problem are glock owners that think if you don’t own a glock you own a second class gun. Glock Snobes. There are many guns out there just as good as Glock look better and are American owned companies.

  28. I have only shot one Glock. A 20something in .40. I was all over the place as the ergonomics were not in my natural point. I would need to form new muscle memory in my trigger pull with a Glock. With my Walther PPQ, my trigger pull and natural point are in the same place. I hit a bullseye with my first magazine ever fired through my PPQ. That first magazine through my PPQ were my first shots with any handgun in over 25 years. Those first shots were not random as all of my shots were in a circle at 21 ft. At that “first in 25 yr” day, I also shot a Ruger LC9 and it was the worst trigger I Have used so far in all of my handgun experience. I have a little Ruger LCR (.357 mag revolver) as my EDC and it’s natural point is very good. It’s smooth, non-stacking trigger pull allowed me to learn it’s totally different feel such that it is now an easy gun for me to hit with. It took about 1,000 rounds of practice to form the muscle memory for the snubbie. I am guessing a Glock would be a repetitive practice situation for me to dial in where as other handguns have not been this way.

  29. That was beautifully written but much like our Commander in Chief said little. Here’s a fact for ya. Glocks Chief Ergonomics engineer is Daffy Duck. I have never talk to anyone that feels natural comfort the first time they pick up a Glock.

  30. WOW, quite the word master.
    I’ve given this some thought and decided to suspend further comment here.
    It’s not that I think that there is nothing further to say its just that nothing of any constructive content may be gained here with addition comments.

  31. @ Pete in AK: If you knew the government office I hold with the responsibilities I bear, you would not be impressed by my, “extensive knowlage [sic] and catlog [sic] of facts, historical stories, and numbers”. You would demand it. And though I am not at liberty to disclose my position in a forum such as this, trust me when I say I am an extremely dedicated public servant in an office that wields great power over public policy that affects all citizens. I do not take my responsibilities lightly and thus explains my never ending quest for accurate knowledge and a continuously expansive education. If I make a mistake, people die.

    And for the record, my knowledge is not derived from open source resources such as Wikipedia or Google. While a fine set of tools, my knowledge has been acquired through years of formal education, study, and 32 years (and counting) of hands-on military and law enforcement experience. But when I do need to conduct research, my office is equipped with unfettered access to vast government electronic information stores with unlimited resources.

    But to the point – I will not mince words with you. My intended goal was not so much as to edify you, as it was to ensure other readers become better educated with facts in spite of your opinionated inaccuracies. I cannot say I am sorry you took offense, because I believe a person should possess the dignity and responsibility to educate oneself before delivering opinions solely based on their extremely limited knowledge or experience with a topic.

    That said, it was painfully obvious based on your several posts that you were sorely lacking in Glock knowledge, and it showed. So after I corrected you, all of a sudden your responses are brimming full of copy and pasted anecdotes to make you appear more knowledgeable in an effort to recover your pride and save face.

    Originally you didn’t even know the FBI’s primary issue weapon was Glock, and now you expect me to believe you all of a sudden possess this infinite memory, clarity, and recall on their weapons trials? Stop embarrassing yourself, because any halfwit can see right through you.

    Using inserts like: “if I remember right…” or, “my understanding was …” and, “I think they… “, and “…if memory serves” or, “I belive [sic] it was…” is ridiculous. Seriously give me a break. Rearranging copied Internet content and inserting the occasional memory clause is not fooling anyone; especially once it is compared to your extreme lack of knowledge as displayed in your comments from previous pages.

    Worse is your fuss over irrelevant aspects you cherry picked from content in our dialogue. This is a clear sign of desperation, and is a pointless tactic often seen used when one finds themselves on the losing end of an argument. Such was the case when you chose to employ ad hominem reasoning to nitpick my choice of decades. A classic tactic used by amateur debaters.

    However, you should be enlightened to know that a reference to a series of decades is appropriately applicable given our particular context, meaning that – as long as an event occurs at any time within a decade, it is allowed to be said that it spanned that time period. Similar to one’s birthdate – people continue to maintain a statement of age all year long without defining the months, weeks, days or hours that have actually accumulated since the actual birthdate in any given year. Applying such logic to the number of decades in which dominant Glock events spanned would in fact make it 4 decades.

    Regardless, injecting a new argument over the exactitudes of such a trivial aspect is petty at best, and had no relevant bearing or effect on the final outcome; especially when contrasted against your own inaccuracies which became the primary subject matter to begin with.

    If you recall, this all started when you inserted yourself into my conversation with another forum member. In your comment you addressed me by asking what Glock tests I was referring to. My reply cited several government agency testing sources for you to research on your own. Instead, your next response was, “As in most things industrial, products that are successful are under constant testing.”

    However, that statement was completely out of context within the specifics of our dialogue. As such, your remark continues to expose the vast extent by which you lack understanding in the differences between internal product improvement-testing versus government controlled standards-testing, the latter of which is required to win contracts.

    You also thought it appropriate to correct me as to when Glock “got its big start”. Claiming it was “1982, not 86”. Again you’ve displayed an act of desperation with another petty point of trivia with no bearing in the context of our specific dialogue.

    Our contextual focus was first set by you when you inquired about two very distinct elements: 1.) You asked me what testing supposedly proved Glock’s reputation to win law enforcement contracts, and 2.) You ask if the Glock reputation were true, then why isn’t Glock used more by agencies like FBI [Paraphrased].

    Aside from clearly showing your lack of Glock knowledge at the time, it also set the stage for our continued dialogue. My responses were accurate and quite appropriate within the context you set. 1986 is THE milestone for Glock within the parameters you established by your specific questions.

    I initially thought your questions were legitimate and that you actually desired a response for self-edification. I now realize they were meant to be rhetorical while you thought you were making a point; albeit an incredibly inaccurate point.

    I wanted to respect you, but I simply cannot after your hallow demeanor towards me. Your false politeness and subtly hidden innuendoes of sarcasm scattered throughout your responses to me are a detestable trait. I simply choose not to continue dialogue with anyone that enjoys such despicable tactics.

  32. G-M,
    Sorry to have pulled your chain so hard. Your extensive knowlage and catlog of facts, historical stories, and numbers is impressive, not to mention your ability to read Wikipedia and use Google. Facts are fact after all. Yes, “urban ledgend” was a bit of a reach and I’m sorry that it offended your deep felt sensabilities.
    However, there was quite the add campain by Glock after it was asked to participate in the Joint Service Small Arms Program in 1983 followed directly with an invitation to the XM9 PDP Trials both overseen by the DOD. Glock didn’t participate in the XM9 Trials due to some unrealistic time constraints and requests by the DOD that could not be resolved, so Glock declined the entry offer. The JSSAP however showed a lot of interest in Glock but at that time the lack of an external safety was a deal breaker if I remember right. DOD was still blindly requiring and holding on to the need for an Ext. safety. It was after these trails and a not small interest by several federal and larger urban LE groups that Glock put its public relations machine into gear. Their success with that campain coupled with European successes at that time proved out for them in the US market as by 1993, 2/3rds or so of their world sales was in the US.
    On a historical note, my understanding was that Glock got its big start in 1982, not 86, with the #17 for the Austrian Services? I think they called it the P-80(?), first production run was like 25 or 30 thousand, if memory serves. Lot of interest after that followed in the US and Europe. I belive it was Norway and Sweden that put them in service next which broke into the NATO network. Glock’s havent been around for quite 4 decades yet, a few more years to go. As in most things industrial, products that are successful are under constant testing. This remains ongoing always, for the very least to improve them.
    What I’m coming away with from your offering is the idea that Glock is, from your POV, now nearly the sole provider of side arm’s to a majority of (the important) LE and Militaries around the world and I’m presuming that’s your point? They do have a nice slice of the market share, perticularly in the US. Guess I’m going to have to start looking for all those trade-in deals on surplus/used Sig’s, Colt, Browning and the like. Maybe I’ll “treat” myself to a Google search for that.
    Just to be sure in my own mind of my I pulled out my dads 17, 20, an 23 today as I haven’t had a Glock in hand for awhile, and am away from my home collection. They still have an uncomfortable feel in my hands as if they are not quite settled in and secure, no “sweet spot” so to speak. Strangely they feel better in my weak left hand then in the dominant right. That’s just me. I’m sure that every shooter has had this expierance at some point with some platform or another.
    The Glock is not a “handsome” or “pretty” firearm but it wasn’t designed to be I think. Its “beauty” is found in its functional, simple lines and purpose defined design. As stated before, Glock, is not the only manufacture to have followed these guidelines and produce an exceptional firearm.
    Pete sends . . .

    1. Regarding all this talk among multiple people about Glocks not being pretty, I think they look pretty damn cool. I don’t like the dark earth ones, but the black ones are easy to look at. Also, with the lack of levers and bulky adjustable sights, their simplicity makes them easy to slide in and out of your pocket.

      Regarding the feud between Pete and G-man, I’m in shock that people know this much about Glock history and usage by different agencies. Personally I believe that none of that matters. It’s performance in your own hand that counts. Many of these agencies and countries have adopted different makes of weapons for political reasons.

    2. SS1,
      I like the Glock for the most part. I don’t know that it matters if its pretty or not and I don’t think it was made to be anyway. Had an early 17 which I wasn’t so fond of mostly cause it didn’t feel right in the heal of my hand. Put a glove on it and that fixed it. Bought a ported 20, 10mm later that I like very much. When it comes to out of the box ergonomics and just plain pleasure I have to put the XD’s at the head of the class at least from what I have come across. I don’t really know how the stack up against the Glocks but I’d think they would do pretty well.
      Been following this G-Man and Pete’s side line, tit for tat, here and it’s been a fun ride! I got the feeling that one has sort of been having fun baiting the other to see where it would all go! That was fun for awhile but kinda gave me pause with this last comment segway. Was a bit unsettling to me.
      Does it seem kinda odd to anybody else that someone in a government position would write an paragraph like this in any forum? Or am I reading to much into this?

      ” @ Pete in AK: If you knew the government office I hold with the responsibilities I bear, you would not be impressed by my, “extensive knowlage [sic] and catlog [sic] of facts, historical stories, and numbers”. You would demand it. And though I am not at liberty to disclose my position in a forum such as this, trust me when I say I am an extremely dedicated public servant in an office that wields great power over public policy that affects all citizens. I do not take my responsibilities lightly and thus explains my never ending quest for accurate knowledge and a continuously expansive education. If I make a mistake, people die.”

      Seems kinda odd to me that such a person in a position like this would make statements like “if I make mistakes, people die”. Sounds kinda bogus to my mind, I mean, if you can’t or shouldn’t be discussing this in a public forum (and I’m thinking one wouldn’t if they were really in this position) then why are you hanging it out in a public forum and making comments like this? From my way of thinking anyone who has this kind of stated power effecting all citizens wouldn’t be saying it out loud anywhere, that’s just not what a political animal or I’d think someone in this kind of position would do. It seems to me that they would stay behind the lights and out of view. Just dosn’t feel right. Seems to defeat the purpose, seems irresponsible, and looks to show more than a flash or two of an unstable personality. Kinda sounds like an anger management problem too maybe? No question that he knows his stuff, information on the Glock anyway, but he just dosn’t ring true to me. I guess that in the long an the short of it is that it just dosn’t matter really but I’m uncomfortable with a personality that acts so blantenly (?) in an open forum if they are a public servant holding any power in this country. I just seems odd and wrong to me that these kinds of statements would be made by someone in public service at all in any forum, anywhere. Perhaps this is a form of transparency?? Dosnt seem so. Has the ring of more like “wannabe posturing” than anything else. Just one old mans wandering thoughts on this.

    3. Carl P,

      Regarding your “seem kinda odd to anybody else” comment, I totally agree with you 100%. I thought the same thing even before you posted. If I was in any government position with any credentials, I would NOT hang out on this forum. There’s too much paranoia and anti-government stuff here.

      But I will say, in reference to G-Man, he’s very educated and I enjoy reading his comments. Anyone can get upset on a forum if someone rubs them the wrong way, as exemplified in the recent M1 Garand Korean import forum.

  33. If you get one with the heavier California or New York trigger pull, its not much different than a revolver with a heavy trigger pull.

  34. The well was poisoned long before I came to drink. Our range coach’s daughter is in a wheel chair because a cop friend accidentally shot her while pulling his Glock out of his range bag. We all know that should have never happened but that was enough for me not to buy one.

    Then I had second thoughts when I saw one at a gun show with an after market thumb safety that could be installed for about $125. I thought maybe until I talked to my gunsmith who said if you do you void the warranty. Thanks, but I’ll stay with what I’ve got.

    1. Hank, although I like many of the comments you make, and you seem to be a fair minded guy, I’m not sure if you can blame Glocks for that incident.

      He should not have had a loaded Glock in his range bag. If he’s a cop, then maybe in his holster. Also, maybe he had the trigger lightened, and if so, should have known you can’t have one in the chamber. I lightened the trigger on one of my Glocks last year, and then quickly realized I can no longer carry with one in the chamber. I wish I wouldn’t have done it, but at least I’m wise enough to realize how I must use it now.

  35. I use to work at a large LEO rifle / pistol range where officers from all across the state came to train. We had 1,000’s of officers there firing probably 1 million+ rounds a year collectively. The officers carried all calibers & models/ manufacture offerings in semi autos & wheel guns….including Ruger, Taurus, S&W, Colt, Sig & Glock.

    Seemed like the Armorers were always working on the other manufacturer’s guns… changing broken extractors, bent ejector rods, broken firing pins, broken springs, fixing trigger issues… a wide range of issues. But when it came to the Glocks, about the only work they ever did was install night sights and change out the crappy heavy California / New York triggers for the lighter 5 pound triggers. The dependability was the reason I now own several models & calibers of Glock handguns.

  36. If Lone Wolf Distributors made a 9mm-.380 conversion barrel for the Glock 19 / 26 I’d buy one for my Gen 3’s. Might possibly have to change out the recoil spring to make it a tad lighter, but that would be a cheap fix. As for a dedicated .380, I already have a Ruger LCP w/ laser… so I can’t see buying the G42 for concealment. Looks like it wouldn’t be hard to manufacture a 9mm-.380 conversion barrel as the .380 is just a 9-short. The ejector and magazines should work with each caliber.

  37. @ Pete in AK: My apologies, I would have responded sooner, but somehow initially missed the email. I was truly taken aback by your question on the previous page, “Why isn’t it [Glock] used more by Agencies like the FBI…” [?]

    Are you not aware that for 4 decades now the standard issue by the FBI is the Glock? Other prominent law enforcement agencies that issue Glocks include the U.S. Marshals Service, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATF), and that just names a few.

    There are hundreds of additional federal law enforcement agencies within, for example, the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security with acronyms most citizens have never even heard of, and they also issue nothing but the Glock.

    However, all of this pales in comparison to the largest police department in the U.S. – the New York City Police Department which employs 35,000 officers and has authorized them to choose between 3 different handguns, the overwhelming majority of which chose to carry none other than the Glock.

    And no, Glock’s success was not from, as you put it, “a highly effective add [sic] campaign on the part of Glock to corner the market share with a new and advanced product before anyone else could.”

    While that is generally the overall point of running any competitive business, there was also extensive testing done, of which still continues in sophisticated labs, real world field trials, and institutions to this day. All of which continues to win Glock these continued contracts. So there is no “Urban Legend”, as you put it, which keeps awarding these contracts. Glock is the real deal – tested, tried, and true through-and-through.

    You also asked me which “tests and so-forth” I was referring to; you should treat yourself to a Google search that should lead you through a host of educating articles on the numerous Glock tests done by the FBI, the Department of Justice’s – National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Military, NYPD and many other agencies and police departments over the past 4 decades.

    A very interesting read should be from where it all first started for Glock back in 1986, when the largest sheriff’s department in the Southeastern United States was urged by then Lt. John H. Rutherford of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office, and who made a very wise choice to re-assess the department’s issued sidearm upon learning about the bloodiest day in FBI history.

    It was April 11, 1986 in Miami when two bank robbers trailed by seven FBI agents managed to outshoot the under-gunned agents with superior weaponry. The shootout lasted 4 minutes and left two agents dead, three permanently disabled, and two severely injured.

    This single incident sparked the launch of nationwide weapons testing and assessments throughout law enforcement agencies across the nation. But it would all primarily start with the huge Jacksonville S.O., the FBI, and the NYPD. They chose Glock as did 65 percent of the remaining law enforcement community… and the rest was history.

  38. Stephen,
    I’m pretty sure that all of us have been or will be at some point in precisely the same place you are now. What’s nice is that this is an easly solved! May just take some time and a piggy bank but I’m pretty sure you’ll get to you next piece of your collection. Don’t count out the Glock just cause some of us arn’t fans. Shoot one first, put it up against a Springfiels XD or a 1911 maybe.the point being all the reading is a good thing and will give you everything that everybody else thinks. That’s OK but when all is said and done its you that has to be comfortable with it in your hand. Good luck!

  39. I’ve liked Glocks from the first time I bought one, I’ve never had an issue with the plastic, trusting the engineering from Austria.

    My generation 4 model 20 10mm shoots fantastic and has a feeling of confidence moreso than other pistols I’ve owned. The Underwood ammo I use makes it even more powerful yet still controlled.

    1. ss1, I’m jealous. I don’t like many Glocks, but I do care for much about the Glock 20 and my brother’s .45. I will get a 20 someday.

  40. Pete in Ak and the rest of you on this thread are pretty good reads. “I would think that better descriptions of the Glocks might be more along the lines of . . Square, Utilitarian, Plain, Industrial, Functional, Unimaginative Presentation, and like that and I would be right. ….. “. Last year I needed a protection gun (like now) so at the beginning of 2013 I shopped the striker guns that were all over TV and in the gun cases. I researched all of them. Every review and video I could find for a whole month. I had $700. I couldn’t get past how b*** ugly the Glocks were. There were no reviews or videos with anything negative on the Walther PPQ and it had a few distinctive lines and that is what I chose. And most said it shot nicer than Glocks because of the (Q)uick trigger. The “Q” in the PPQ. I like my PPQ. I like it better than every other stiker gun I’ve fired. I would not trade it for any other striker gun I know of. But NOW I sure wish I had bought a 1911, Beretta, Sig or some other DA/SA or SA only gun.

  41. Thanks for your input, G-M. Very enlighting. Another friend just reminded me of GB’s change to the Glock platform from the Browning. I was aware this was in the works for them over the past few years but didn’t pay attention to the details. I was aware that many of the security forces in the nations you note were to one degree or another end users of Glocks, the 17 seeming to be a faveroit. I don’t dispute that Glock has a world following, we’ll see where its place in history falls and I would not expect it to have the same place of Colt of Browning but that may be just my likes and dislikes showing. Thanks for your reply, always good to get another prespective.

  42. @ Pete in Alaska: With all due respect, I’m not sure where you get your information, but our U.S. Military does use Glock. As a matter-of-fact it is well established and maintains a high reputation as an extremely proven and reliable combat pistol series around the world.

    Of the many military examples I could cite, the most impressionable one is that of the U.S. Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta which carries Glock 22s, as they were found to dependably function better in the sand than their 1911s.

    We also cannot dismiss the other 38 Glock carrying militaries from other countries around the world – namely the United Kingdom’s Military that just last year ditched the Browning after 40 years for 25,000 new Glock 17s.

    Add to this the other militaries from counties such as: Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Colombia, Denmark, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Georgia, Greenland, Iceland, India, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Yemen.

    This list would grow 5 fold if I were to add the two thirds of the U.S. Law Enforcement agencies that use Glock, along with the hundreds of law enforcement agencies throughout the rest of the world.

    I’d say Glock has solidified its place throughout the military ranks and history books as a combat proven and highly effective weapons platform; and continues to be adopted by additional countries for both LEA and Military functions as I speak.

  43. Hey Ace! I’ll stand with you on this one!
    UGLY! Ugly. . . . . .say it with me now, uuuugggggglllllyyyyyy!! . . . Hmmmmm, I’m not sure this is the best descriptor for the Glock line. They are ugly, but I think that needs qualifying a bit.

    UPFRONT: I to am not a fan, and never have been of the Glocks, including their new offerings.
    WHY: A) They simply don’t fit comfortably in my hand B) The comfort issue has been evident from scores on several occasions on the range and in the shoot house. C) I, just my experience here, also didn’t find them as reliable when asked to function in extreme, and dirty environments as I require and expect my sidearm to be.

    From what I have seen and can deduce they are well made, safe, fairly accurate and well serve their purpose as a civilian sidearm and as a more or less acceptable LE firearm. There do seem to be a number of LE officers who don’t seem to like them but are forced to carry one and, maybe its just me, but I don’t see Glocks much in the real life military world. I see Sig’s, Colts, Colt Variants and Clones, Hi-Powers, Beretta’s, Walther, FN, IMI/Desert Eagles, XD’s and several Russian models (to name a few) but rarely and I mean like, I’ve never seen one [Glock], in the possession of a combatant in the field. Ever. Now I haven’t been everywhere, or meet everyone but that seemingly glaring omission always made me wonder over the years.
    The general feeling within those circles when such discussions have come up in my presents is two-fold, 1) a general dislike for 9mm as a combat round (valid or not and a discussion for another day) and 2) the negative head shakes, smirks and eye rolling when it’s suggested that a “Glock” might be a good field weapon. Nobody, operators, contractors, or grunts, seems to want to depend on a Glock. I don’t know where this mindset come from or why. Is it early history? There is no solid facts that are offered other than 2nd/3rd hand comments and the occasional personal experience to support this negative position and that they need to be “cleaned” all the time and yet it persists. Have there been any extensive military tests done that involve Glock as a product participant? Have there been any tests? Is there data out there that supports this “negative” feeling? Is it a groundless passed along opinion that has become an urban like legend? I don’t know, anybody??
    My experience, my personal experience, is that when they [Glocks] get dirty that their reliability decreases, again its just me, for me reliability is a must-have, deal breaker. Maybe its something I’m overlooking. I know from first hand experience that there are platforms that seem to be designed and manufactured for this kind of extreme use.

    I’m sure that Glock fans at this time are name calling, and remarking on my perceived lack of intelligence and inability to know a “real” handgun when I see one. It’s not a pissing match worth my time. They need to chill and get a bit more flexible in their mindset too.

    I would think that better descriptions of the Glocks might be more along the lines of . . Square, Utilitarian, Plain, Industrial, Functional, Unimaginative Presentation, and like that and I would be right. ….. However, these descriptions also exactly apply to my Springfield XD’s and XDm’s ,which from my point of view, is the fundamentally better platform of the two manufactures. They might also be applied to other product lines as well, just saying. UGLY exterior design does not a BADLY engineered and functioning design make!! The reverse also applies.
    I have a passion for simple yet well designed products. Such a description would include Classic designs such as those of the 1911 family or Browning Hi-Power (perhaps the father of HiCap pistols) and certainly Colt and S&W wheel guns going back to the Volcanic, Navy Model cap & ball and Peacemaker’s. Barretta, Walther, Ruger and FN to throw out a few names.
    Some platforms show more consideration for their finish, presentation, furniture, lines and features, and, frankly when sitting around with the guys looking at the collection those are the points of interest most discussed anyway.
    When it comes to being in the dust, dirt, mud and mayhem it only needs to be comfortable and familiar in my hand, have reliability that I trust, and the accuracy that I have come to expect. Beyond that . . . Nothing else matters at all. Nothing at all.
    Determine Threat, point, shoot, shoot aquire next target, Repeat. The target doesn’t care at all how good looking your hand gun is or isn’t. Not at all.
    I’m not even sure that this is worth a penny let along my two cents worth. Knowledge is power so I guess there’s a nugget in everything. Pete sends . . .

  44. I purchased a Glock to carry for several reasons, not least of which is the fact that I believe I can stake my life on the fact that it will work if I need to rely on it… but it will be a cold day in hell when I give up my “old slabsides”. In my opinion, it is the best pistol ever made!

  45. Glocks, like sushi and escargot, are really exercises in acquired taste. While I admire its businesslike attitude, I’m still a big fan of the S & W Model 29 and like models. For sheer poetry of image in semi-autos, the venerable 1911 still holds top-place as far as I’m concerned. The now-defunct Ruger P95 in 9mm is another piece that I like, primarily for its 1930s-type muzzle area, which looks like a mid-20th-century railroad engine. Retro, but still forward-thinking. Quality-wise, the Glock is (to me, at least) on a par with Colt, S & W and Ruger models. It all boils down to what you see when you hold the firearm. The Glock gets the job done, but boy, it’s still puts me off on its looks…!!

  46. Stephen you are right about a lack of .380 designs,however I picked up an almost new Sig 230( true,it us an ever copied PPK design)that I have worn on my ankle on and off duty ever since.Loaded with Critical Defense it serves well and is a sweet shooting weapon.
    As for being a PPK clone, thats true but Sig engineers tweaked it and, really, what was ever wrong with a PPK?
    The sub-Glocks dont feel right to me and dont like ankle carry at all.

  47. In 1988 was the first time I held a Glock pistol in my hand. Was in a Gun Store in Northern Virginia. The store Manager, told me this is The Gun of the Future. It was a Glock 17 (9x19mm Luger/Parabellum), for some reason to my thinking. It didn’t feel real, it actually felt like toy. Like one of those toys kids played with in the ’60’s and ’70’s. The one’s that emulated TV shows like, The Man from U.N.C.L.E. or the FBI. I don’t know, I just can’t describe the feeling. It felt unnatural, fake, toyish and unreal. And the price tag, was to say the least Marked-Up To The Hilt. I wound up leaving with a Colt Government issue 1911 .45ACP instead. And at 1/3 the price, Now that was a real gun too me, it felt real, it looked real. And it felt good in my hands.

    1. @ Secundius: Wow, you’ve brought back memories. Once you mentioned it, I completely recalled the toy gun feeling being my first impression as well. The gun just didn’t feel like a real working weapon. Great descriptors.

    2. Secundius. I did buy the 17 back then because my friends said it was the thing to get. Well, I knew it was ugly, but it felt good in the hand. I kind of liked the ugly beast until I shot it. It’s hard to put into words, but, I guess because it is “plastic” it reverberated like a plastic toy might if it could shoot. It had the funniest sound I’ve ever heard from a real gun when the slide racked “against” the plastic body. My wife, who grew up as a hunter, shooting her first deer at 12 yro, hated the damned thing. Of course, she has had a Sig 228, made in Germany, for many years. How do you compete with that?

  48. Yeah… Glock is ugly. Too ugly for me. I have an appreciation for design as art. Truth is… there are not many (any?) attractive .380’s. Just the ever copied PPK and Colt Mustang. A few Sig’s are better than some. This design vacuum keeps me in a snubbie and 9MM.

  49. I do not like Glocks. I had a 9mm and traded it for a CZ, and never regretted it. Right now my carry gun choice is a Sig 938. I’ve never seen anything to equal the 938. I like the M&P Shield and tried it out first and liked it, then I was shown a 938, I couldn’t believe it felt better in my hand even though it is a smaller gun. Of course, I’m talking 9mm here, so that might differ with fans of the .40 or .45 which I have no experience with, except in the bigger guns like my 1911 Colt stainless custom, which I don’t think is a good carry gun. I have no .40s, even though I realize it is a great caliber.

  50. I don’t think that my Glock is particularly attractive either. My biggest problem with the Glock was the simple fact that it was plastic, a fact that I just couldn’t bring myself to accept. After years of buying into all the criticism of the plastic gun and avoiding the “G”, I came to realize that perhaps I was being a bit narrow minded and never gave Glock a fair chance at all. Could all these Glock fans be wrong? I finally gave in and purchased a 23 recently for carry and I have to admit, after putting the gun through its paces and hauling it around for a while, it has exceeded my expectations. It is simple, reliable, easy to maintain and best of all light weight and comfortable to wear. I still think its ugly as hell but if I ever do need to rely on it, I don’t think aesthetics will be my main concern.

  51. Yes it is an ugly, ugly gun. Yes it is also a reliable gun. However the 2 biggest problems with Glock is that they do not fit my hand like most other guns and arrogant Glock owners. There are many guns out there just as reliable as Glock and actually look good. I’ve shot my Ruger SRs and SRCs and M&Ps next to Glocks with no functional problems and shot better groups. The truth is most people that own Glocks do so because they have never tried anything else.

    1. I agree. I don’t think the Glock is as accurate as many other guns. The Gen 4 (illegal in Commiefornia) has a barrel that will shoot hard cast lead bullets, but before the Gen 4 it wasn’t recommended and that’s why we have companies making aftermarket barrels for the earlier ones.

      I do have to admit I would like to own a Glock 20 in 10mm for my trips into the mountains of Montana. Yes, I know 10mm isn’t as powerful as a .44 mag, for example, but it holds a lot more bullets and is lighter to carry in the mountains.

    2. @ David D: The last sentence you wrote, “The truth is most people that own Glocks do so because they have never tried anything else.”; While your statement is factually inaccurate and unsubstantiated by anything scientific, I’m sure there is some truth to your statement for at least a percentage of Glock owners.

      So your statement got me thinking as to why that is the case – for some Glock owners at least. Why would the Glock be a gun owner’s first choice without ever having “tried anything else” first, as you put it?

      Are the gun counters void of other guns for prospective buyers to handle at decision time? Does knowledgeable sales staff inappropriately advise their customers? Are prospective buyers unable to consult and test fire other weapons owned by their friends first?

      What exactly is it that makes a person walk right past any other gun and slap hundreds of dollars down on a Glock?

      I will speculate that it is for the same reason that makes more than two thirds of all U.S. police departments embrace this ugly firearm. Test after test the Glock has proven, won, and earned its reputation and right to be where it is today.

      So for the novice prospective gun owner that walks into a gun store with limited knowledge, and whom will probably only ever own one gun in their lifetime… it only makes sense to demand what they’ve consistently heard is the best and most reliable across all weapons platforms: That would be the Glock.

    3. Hey G-Man,
      I don’t disagree with you for the most part as what you say has substance and truth to it. I am however curious as to what tests and so-forth you are referring to? If this is the case and there have been all these tests that supposedly have “proven, won and earned it’s reputation and right….” Why isn’t it used more by Agencies like the FBI, Secret Service, NCIS, or by contractors.
      It sounds more to me more like it was a highly effective add campaign on the part of Glock to corner the market share with a new and advanced product before anyone else could. Which they did, and now the fallout of that campaign is Urban Legend not nessessarly the truth.

  52. When the title of this article popped up in my email notification I thought – this author isn’t just stirring up a hornets nest, he’s wearing it as a hat.

    I wish to thank the author for reminding me how ugly I used to find the Glocks to be. I hated them at introduction and thought they were ugly as sin. I didn’t care how great they were supposed to be, nobody in their right mind should carry something this stupid looking. Then I had to carry it. It grew on me and eventually I’d forgotten how ugly I used to think they were. Until now! So thanks for making my service piece ugly again.

    No but seriously, I too remember the stigma you cited in your article when it was reported these guns could make it past metal detectors. There was also a big concern about its lack of an actual safety lever.

    However, this concern turned into a reality back in the ‘80s when we had to investigate a local shooting by an airport officer that decided to conduct a vehicle stop off airport property. Unfamiliar with this officer’s airport patrol car markings and uniform, the female operator refused to roll down her window upon command.

    The frustrated (and undertrained) officer opted to draw his newly issued Glock and proceeded to tap on her window with the barrel for effect. Forgetting the new weapon did not have an active safety, this officer managed to squeeze the trigger and shot the woman in the face while shattering glass everywhere. Unbelievable she survived. The officer’s career did not.

  53. Im not a Glockite either,although Ive been forced to carry a G21 on duty since 2004.
    But, Man, are you stirring the fire with this article.
    Glockite’s will try to hurt you if you blaspheme their baby’s.
    You have cojones the size of basketballs writing this.
    I love it.

    1. I gotta start proofreading better…should be “babies”,not ” baby’s”..
      Seriously,Glocks perform as advertised,Ive always shot High Expert at quals….They just dont glove with me….guess its “one of those things” that reflect the saying” it is what it is”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.