After all, Glock isn't that innovative, is it?

[10mm4ever]

Gaston Glock has never 'designed' anything but curtain rods. He hired a design team headed by Wilhelm Bubits, to design the the original P80. Gaston has never been a small arms designer, just a business man with deep pockets and friends in the upper echelons of the austrian military.

[JohnKSa]

While Bubits worked for Glock, it's not clear how involved he was with the design of the original P80. His credentials and experience at the time suggest that it is unlikely he was the primary designer.

That said, it's not very likely that Glock was the primary designer either for the same reasons.

[Bluestarlizzard]

So? How many diffrent companies did JMB work for?

Wow, shocker! A business man hired someone to create a product for production and sale!

[Mystro]

Lets put it this way...J.Browning and G.Glock should not be in the same discussion when firearms design is the topic.

[James K]

Some of the thinking behind the Glock design (no matter who did the actual design) was based on the Roth-Steyr, so maybe there is something to the idea that the Glock used some old ideas.

Jim

[mitranoc]

Gaston Glock has never 'designed' anything but curtain rods. He hired a design team headed by Wilhelm Bubits, to design the the original P80. Gaston has never been a small arms designer, just a business man with deep pockets and friends in the upper echelons of the austrian military.

But without GG orchestrating the whole operation (Being a smart business man, hiring the team, raising capital, legal, management, etc.), how would all of this have happened? While manufacturing curtain rods, he was also an expert in plastics. No discredit to Bubits, because he is truly an innovative designer. It was all made possible with teamwork.

[6.8]

Glocks are yesterday's hot item. Their are so many better designs on the market now. Is it still 1993 ? Just checking

[amd6547]

I think that everyone who thinks Glocks are yesterday's news and surpassed by so many new designs should sell them off...
Then, with the low prices caused by the glut, I will buy more.
I am very happy with my G17 and G26, a combination I arrived at after decades of shooting 1911's and HiPowers and just about everything else.
But, I would like to add a few more...maybe a 17L, a 20...
In fact, a grail gun for me would be a Gen 1 G17 made as close to the introduction of the brand as possible.

[zincwarrior]

In a certain way Gaston Glock reminds me of Henry Ford. Ford didn't invent the automobile, but he figured out a way to build them efficiently and market them at a substantial profit. Glock designed a pistol for efficient high-volume production and had an excellent marketing plan. The OP validly points out that they are all the same basic mechanism, with the only changes being caliber and frame size. That is, of course, part of the efficiency, a lot like Ford's crack that his car could be had in any color you want, as long as it is black. Sometimes the most innovative things are the things that anyone COULD have done, but one person thought of it and DARED to do it.

Thats a lot of it right there. Remember at the time a lot of pistols required tweaking to be reliable. Glock was stock, relatively inexpensive, LIGHT, and it worked. A surefire winner.

Glock - the Toyota of firearms.

[mrray13]

Toyota= Japan's Chevy, lol.....


Shoot, pun intended, a lot of Today's firearms requiring tweaking to make them reliable, or several hundred rounds of break in, or something silly. My wife's g4 G17 hasn't had a single issue with almost 1000 rds down the tube and it's her duty weapon. (600rds of that in a weeks time during her mandatory 40hr training course)

I have moved on from Glock, but not because of any problem, just boredom with the platform. Glock is so easy to learn on, with and with excellent aftermarket support, there isn't nothing one can't do to a Glock. Who knows? Maybe one day a Glock will find it's way back into my duty holster...probably a 20sf with full power 10mm loads, lol....

[+1k ammo]

Glocks are yesterday's hot item. Their are so many better designs on the market now. Is it still 1993 ? Just checking

Do tell? What's your list of top polymer high capacity handguns?

You can't make a statement like that without some type of backup. No proof and your statement is rendered useless.

[Pond, James Pond]

I own a Glock.

I like it. There are things I'd change about it, and I could sell it as there are other guns out there that interest me, but the things I like about it outweigh those that I don't.

I say this to explain that whilst I am a fan of Glocks, based on my experience, I am by no means a fan of Glocks to the exclusion of everything else...

So now I come to this comment:

Glocks are yesterday's hot item. Their are so many better designs on the market now.

Which guns outperform the Glock, given what it is designed to do?
Do they outperform Glock to a greater degree than they do other products in this same category?

In other words, are Glocks outperformed by a given competitor to a greater degree than that same competitor outperforms other brands in this market?

Unless you can categorically say "yes" to those questions, you statement is just hot air.

Each brand has its strengths and weaknesses.
However, is there such a difference in the relative performance of M&P, Springfield, H&K, Sig, Walther, Ruger, Steyr, CZ, Beretta and Glock as to put Glock firmly in last place and by a sizeable margin...?

I don't think so.
The biggest variable is going to be buyer performance

Once again, I am amazed that we end up going over the same old ground with pro/antiGlock-ism.

[Gaerek]

1911's are yesterday's hot item. Their are so many better designs on the market now. Is it still 1935 ? Just checking

Seriously? The date determines whether a gun is relevant or not?

(kept your spelling and grammar intact for continuity)

[6.8]

How's about the M&P for starters. Especially with the new triggers. A. Superior chamber support B. Tougher build quality ( steel imbedded in polymer frame ) C. Grip and ergonomics not even close. I'll take an FNX or FNS over glock as well. Heck the current SR series beats it for less money. I get it, a reliable polymer gun with a constant trigger was an excellent idea. If it were 1993 I might even own a few. The industry has moved on. Their not even built in America. I can't think of one Reason to add a 2x4 to my gun Collection. Feel free to continue buying them, it keeps the Price down on the nicer Pistols.

[Pond, James Pond]

How's about the M&P for starters.

So you've found a product that you prefer: great!

My question wasn't is there one that outperforms Glock. It was does it out perform Glock to such an extent as to make Glock obsolete. I still don't see that in your example

I'd have to say to point B, that I see steel rails in my Glock too. It's great that M&P have them possibly to a greater extent, but I don't recall hearing of a Glock falling apart because it's rails had worn out so does that make M&P better in that respect?
If the M&P has more steel within its frame, it follows that it is also heavier. If not, then it has less material somewhere else in its construction.

Point C is a question of taste... simple as. I find the Steyr M9A1 more comfortable to hold, but that does not make the G19 uncomfortable, so I'm happy to stick to my G19 in spite of that.

So all I'm saying is that whatever your favourite and for whatever reason, the relative difference between these brands and models is not great, hence the quote I referenced above is still just hot air.

[6.8]

Those were all valid points, I bet 9 out of ten people would find the smith to have a far better grip. I noticed you didn't address the chamber support issue? Why not? Could it be you don't want to remind people of the ultimate Glock Design Flaw? The only Hot Air I'm worried about is the Mushroom cloud left behind after your Glock explodes.

[Justice06RR]

Which guns outperform the Glock, given what it is designed to do?
Do they outperform Glock to a greater degree than they do other products in this same category?

Its not so much outperforming the Glock, but just doing the same thing it does and adding more options to the end user.

Glocks are excellent guns, and their biggest accomplishment being able to secure LE contracts. But many other pistols like XD's, M&P, USP, M9 are just as good and offer other options like safeties, hammer, decocker, safer takedown procedure, etc.

Yes I currently own a Glock19 and got a steal for $360 because it was a LEO trade in. But my XD's and M&P's perform just as good, and they look nicer too..

[Pond, James Pond]

I noticed you didn't address the chamber support issue? Why not?

Because I know very little about it.
I see no point in addressing a point for the sake of it, unless I have something to offer on the subject.

However since you ask, the only thing I can say based on what I read is that the KB's, which I imagine are what you are referring to, seem to be large down to dubious reloading recipes rather than factory loads.
All in all it seems that most Glocks seem to go on and on...
That would imply to me that the chamber support is fine, provided the gun is used as recommended. If what I've said in factually inaccurate, or misinformed, tell me: I'm all for learning more.

I am not an advocate of Glock. I am an advocate of rational discourse.

The vehemence against Glock is, IMO, disproportionate to its shortcomings, especially in the context of the polymer handgun market. As such, I find these threads full of mud-slinging irrational discourse. I make that point generally, not in reference to your own post.
If you feel that a Glock might blow up in your face, that you could shoot one to the point of failure through wear but not the M&P, that the it is too uncomfortable to hold, then go for it: seems like the M&P makes the obvious choice

[Pond, James Pond]

offer other options like safeties, hammer, decocker, safer takedown procedure, etc.

Assuming you actually want those features.

Some don't, with the presumed exception of the safer take-down. But then, I don't find the Glock unsafe to take-down: I check the magwell and chamber, every time I handle it.

Yes I currently own a Glock19 and got a steal for $360 because it was a LEO trade in.

Exactly the same here: I bought my G19 Gen 3 used from a Police shooting instructor for €100 less than any I've seen advertised, including Gen 2's. That is part of the reason I am happy with it: I hadn't atually been so interested in Glock at the time. I felt they were fine, but the Steyr exciting me more, along with a Sig Pro 2009. The Sig got sold the day I went to buy it and the Steyr was €200 more than the Glock with fewer retailers supplying spares. No brainer really.
Of all my pistols/revolvers, I only shoot the Ruger MkIII better.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by 6.8

Glocks are yesterday's hot item. Their are so many better designs on the market now. Is it still 1993 ?

Glocks are excellent guns, and their biggest accomplishment being able to secure LE contracts. But many other pistols like XD's, M&P, USP, M9 are just as good and offer other options like safeties, hammer, decocker, safer takedown procedure, etc.

I've been researching buying a high-capacity pistol for quite some time and keep reading posts like the one above. However, all of my research based on facts rather than some internet yahoo's opinion keeps coming back that Glocks dominate every competitive event where they are legal to use. Maybe it's because I'm a scientist, but I have a hard time just taking someone's word that the earth is flat and all these other brands are better. I used to race cars when I was young and good-looking, and we had a saying that seemed particularly apt: "When the green flag drops, the BS stops!".

If (according to 6.8 and the internet) all of these other guns are so superior, why do Glocks still dominate handgun competitions like the IDPA when the green flag drops and actual performance is measured? At the 2012 Nationals there were 23% more Glocks than all of the other brands combined in the semi-auto classes! Do the Glocks have better triggers? Are they more reliable? Are they more accurate? Are the controls more ergonomic? Is the grip angle more comfortable? Why do so many top shooters prefer them?

You really believe that people shooting on a National Championship level don't select the best equipment available? Why wouldn't they shoot something else if it performed better for them? My use for a high-cap pistol would be similar, to make as many shots as possible as accurately as possible. Why would I want any of the other brands that have been repeatedly proven not to perform as well as a Glock?

2012 IDPA Nationals:

Glock - 108
S&W - 69
Springfield - 15
HK - 2
Beretta - 2

[Gaerek]

I've been researching buying a high-capacity pistol for quite some time and keep reading posts like the one above. However, all of my research based on facts rather than some internet yahoo's opinion keeps coming back that Glocks dominate every competitive event where they are legal to use. Maybe it's because I'm a scientist, but I have a hard time just taking someone's word that the earth is flat and all these other brands are better. I used to race cars when I was young and good-looking, and we had a saying that seemed particularly apt: "When the green flag drops, the BS stops!".

You've hit upon the Glock haters "Inconvenient Truth."

I noticed you didn't address the chamber support issue? Why not? Could it be you don't want to remind people of the ultimate Glock Design Flaw?

You mean the chamber support issue that has been fixed?

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x...Support2-1.jpg

Yep, it's still not a fully supported chamber but it's far better than it was. And as long as you aren't loading ultra hot reloads, you're not going to have a problem. If you're still unreasonably afraid of a grenade, get something else. But be careful, many other manufacturers don't use fully supported chambers! (Of course, the Glock haters like to inconveniently leave that fact out.)

http://dkirkpa.home.mchsi.com/40SWchmbr.jpg

Better stay away from Sigs and Berettas too!

I bet 9 out of ten people would find the smith to have a far better grip.

Hurray for Internet statistics! So 90% of shooters don't like the Glock grip? Hmm, in my informal survey of Glock shooters at my range, 100% liked the grip. And each of them said if they didn't like the grip, they would have had something else. When we take the popularity of the Glock, and combine it with my less than scientific survey, I'd say that your 90% number is complete BS.

Anecdotally, my Glock points naturally for me. When shooting something with a "Browning" grip angle, I have to physically lift the gun to shoot straight. Technically speaking, the Glock grip angle is more ergonomic for most people. Many people prefer other grip angles for a variety of reasons, however.

How's about the M&P for starters.

I'm very happy you've found a gun that works for you. Every M&P I've shot has had a crappy trigger, and didn't point naturally for me. Still a fine gun. But the differences between the two are negligible.

The industry has moved on.

Someone better tell the market leader, um, Glock, this news. I mean, they still outsell any other individual brand 3 to 1. They're doing something right. Maybe it's marketing? But I'd bet it's more about building a quality gun that people like to shoot.

Their not even built in America.

Really?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9gq0zzWUkx...0/IMG_0910.JPG

Not all are, but many are.

I can't think of one Reason to add a 2x4 to my gun Collection.

Ahh, and here it is. This is the proof that you have an irrational hate of Glocks. Like most people who dislike them. People who don't like Glocks, but can look at them rationally even say that they are good guns, they just don't like them. Unfortunately, it seems to be the cool think to bash the most popular product, no matter what industry we're talking about. I remember about 5 years when you had two types of car commercials. You had Toyota commercials, and commercials comparing their cars to Toyota's. The best, and most popular are also the ones that are most criticized.

Feel free to continue buying them, it keeps the Price down on the nicer Pistols.

Actually, that's not how economics works. If your particular brand were more popular, the price would eventually go down. But nice try.

You hate Glocks, I get it. Please find some actual problem to criticize. All your arguments are old and outdated...apparently like you claim the Glock is. You can't deny Glock's market share. I'm actually surprised you didn't mention Brass to Face...since that's the new Glock Hater's flavor of the month.

[zincwarrior]

I don't hate Glocks. I have nothing against them.

Here's why I chose S&W over Glock.
*Stainless steel sllide and barrel. In my location this is an important difference.
*Adjustable grips. At the time of initial purchase Glock didn't have this. This has now changed.
*Complete USA manufacture. Glock did not manufacture a comparable with the higher domestic content at the time.
*Capacity. Glock did not have a the capacity I was looking for, for the size.

Glock is fine, but the stainless steel and complete USA manufacture were the factors that put M&P over the top. Having said that had I gone with Glock I would doubt I would have regretted it.

Frankly I like the XDMs better than both.

[Dragline45]

Glocks are yesterday's hot item. Their are so many better designs on the market now. Is it still 1993 ? Just checking

I agree. There are plenty of semi-autos on the market that preform just as well if not better than Glocks in some aspects. Sure in 1993 it was probably the most reliable semi-auto handgun on the maket, but that's just not the case anymore. Personally I don't like Glocks, just being reliable isn't enough for me to like them. I think the ergo's suck and the grip angle is awful. They also need to expand their lineup, many who once favored the G26/27 are now moving to the much slimmer Shield and PPS. If they don't start producing new guns they are going to be left behind in the civilian market. Glock might be the only major company who has not yet put out an ultra small pocketable .380 for the civilian market, and I don't want to hear about the Glock 28 in .380, because I doubt anyone on this forum actually has one, and even so it's much larger than say the LCP or BG380.

You really believe that people shooting on a National Championship level don't select the best equipment available? Why wouldn't they shoot something else if it performed better for them?

Glocks have been around alot longer than the M&P which you are starting to see show up more frequently in competition. If you have been shooting Glock's in competition for 10 years chances are you are not going to change to a different gun regardless of how well it performs. Also due to the Glock being around for so much longer the availability of aftermarket parts is much larger. I don't see that as a testament to Glock's being superior, they just dominate the market due to being around for so long. Now I am not saying Glock is not a quality gun, it certainly is, but it is of no higher quality than other similar guns put out by reputable manufacturers.

Technically speaking, the Glock grip angle is more ergonomic for most people.

What technical data do you have to back that up?

[Gats Italian]

I've been researching buying a high-capacity pistol for quite some time and keep reading posts like the one above. However, all of my research based on facts rather than some internet yahoo's opinion keeps coming back that Glocks dominate every competitive event where they are legal to use. Maybe it's because I'm a scientist, but I have a hard time just taking someone's word that the earth is flat and all these other brands are better. I used to race cars when I was young and good-looking, and we had a saying that seemed particularly apt: "When the green flag drops, the BS stops!".

If (according to 6.8 and the internet) all of these other guns are so superior, why do Glocks still dominate handgun competitions like the IDPA when the green flag drops and actual performance is measured? At the 2012 Nationals there were 23% more Glocks than all of the other brands combined in the semi-auto classes! Do the Glocks have better triggers? Are they more reliable? Are they more accurate? Are the controls more ergonomic? Is the grip angle more comfortable? Why do so many top shooters prefer them?

You really believe that people shooting on a National Championship level don't select the best equipment available? Why wouldn't they shoot something else if it performed better for them? My use for a high-cap pistol would be similar, to make as many shots as possible as accurately as possible. Why would I want any of the other brands that have been repeatedly proven not to perform as well as a Glock?

2012 IDPA Nationals:

Glock - 108
S&W - 69
Springfield - 15
HK - 2
Beretta - 2

The answer is pretty simple actually—you've bought into a logical fallacy.

IDPA and other "competitions" are games, not combat. If the splits from the artificial world of gaming were so all important, no one or no agency that actually uses handguns on a two way range would use anything but a variant of the Glock.

And yet they do. Riding the reset against static targets on a known course of fire at top speed is about as correlated with real combat shooting as Formula One informs what is best to use to get through the Little Sluice on the Rubicon Trail.

[mavracer]

Anecdotally, my Glock points naturally for me. When shooting something with a "Browning" grip angle, I have to physically lift the gun to shoot straight. Technically speaking, the Glock grip angle is more ergonomic for most people

The plural of anecdote is not data.
Some people like Glocks others don't. The ones that don't shouldn't have to to make you feel better.
Glock doesn't have any innovative features other than the finish everthing else existed previously.
If Glock is innovative for taking pre-existing features and marketing a successful firearm, then surely you must agree that all the newer tupperware is even more innovative as they've taken pre-existing features and improved ergonomics and added other features to market successful firearms.