Torture tests, tactical tupperwear and truth

[Jack Malloy]

You see these postings all the time about how the Glock or other tactical tupperwear can be dropped out of a helicoptor, ran over by a hummer, frozen solid in ice and will still fire.
That all sounds impressive till you realize their aint a man alive who can be dropped out of a helicoptor, run over by a hummer and frozen in a block of ice and come up shooting, except Captain America and he only exists in comic books.

As for freezing your gun, burying it in the sand, dropping it four stories off a building and so on, GET REAL!!!!
If you fell four stories off a building, I think you would have other things to worry about than your darn gun. Like a compound fracture, concussion or hematoma. That is assuming you are still conscious.
When was the last time somebody lost a gunfight when their peice had been dunked under water, or frozen in a block of ice for six weeks or so on?

Remember when Chuck Taylor used to toss his 1911 on the ground and kick it around? Or the Ruger reps running over the Security Sixes?
Come on fellas, get real when it comes to these "torture tests' for the high tech tactical tupperwear.
I am more impressed when a gun sits in a pocket or a clothes drawer for two years collecting dust, lint and having it's springs take a set and still functions.

Or when a gun lasts and works after having been tossed in the glove box of a logging truck and ridden over rough terrain year in and year out.
Or doesn't fail or discharge despite the fact it gets knocked around by getting whacked into cruiser door handles on a daily basis by law enforcement.
Or doesn't get a bent frame when dropped out of a holster onto the concrete when booking a suspect....

Or when it just doesn't rust up despite the fact somebody did not do their cleaning and maintenance on it than these unrealistic throw it out the window and run a hummer over it tests.
None of those tests are gonna be encountered in the real world by 99 percent of the public.
Next time some wide eyed fanatic starts boasting about how tough his tactical tupperwear is, point out to him that it doesn't do any good to have a super gun when you are just a mere mortal who can't fall fifty feet off a biulding, get run over by a hummer and frozen in a block of ice and come up shooting.

[Handy]

Jack,

Are you saying that having a gun that could survive falling down a concrete stairwell has no value? No one could possibly drop their pistol without falling with it? :confused:

[Jungle Work]

JM,
You said "Chuck Taylor", now you have to buy the beer.

Jungle Work

[OBIWAN]

A gun on my hip on the frozen tundra will be much colder than I am ...snug in my parka

It will also be more exposed to the very fine desert sand than I am..assuming I layer correctly.

I know it gets darn hot in the sun...or at least my hand says so.

It may also....as Handy pointed out...take a much larger fall than I do onto real hard stuff.

( I may actually win that one...I am pretty durable)

Are you opposed to all torture testing or only the "extreme abuse"

I only asked since you left out the "only clean it every 10,000 rounds part"

I mean...99% of the buying public won't even have to shoot the darn thing at another person :confused:

So if they want to keep it frozen in a block of ice it is no big deal :eek:

Maybe he just thinks pictures of Glocks in ice blocks are more interesting than some flash photography of your pocket lint???

So...sit back...relax.... and tell us what is really bothering you....we are here to help.

[dolanp]

Having 'tactical tupperwear' nightmares? Don't worry, you can keep your 'tactical silverwear'. :)

[Avizpls]

Or doesn't get a bent frame when dropped out of a holster onto the concrete when booking a suspect....

If it were a "tupperware" frame, it wouldnt bend :-P

[jburtonpdx]

"So if they want to keep it frozen in a block of ice it is no big deal"

Funny I store most of the things I own this way. My microwave gets a heck of a workout. Funny though I have to replace so many remote controls... :D

[OBIWAN]

Thieves NEVER look in the block of ice :D

[USP45usp]

Jack,

The purpose of the test is to show that even though we can't survive in those conditions and work, the guns can.

I don't know, this post really seems like a way to call owners of "tupperwear" stupid, that's okay with me, this stupid tupperwear owner loves his as well as loves his 1911, his C&R's, his AR, every gun that I own.

As for "banging around a gun", I would throw my "tupperwear" into a sock drawer, in a glove box, etc.. and it's not going to bend the frame, or do anything that any other steel frame can't do.

I think that someone has "tupperwear envy" :D

Wayne

[Tom2]

Well I would think it would be nice if you dropped your pistol off a mountain, say in Afghanistan, in a combat situation, and you went to recover it, it still worked. Or if you were a policeman and you dropped your gun and the armed suspects car ran over it, it would still work. Nice, pretty guns can set in a drawer at home for two years and still work. That is maybe the difference between a nightstand gun and a field combat gun, maybe. But even then, if a 300 pound burglar came in your bedroom and stepped on your nightstand gun that you dropped beside the bed, with hobnail boots, it would be nice if it still worked for you! OR that you could hide your gun in the freezer, hoping that burglars don't look there, and it still worked, that would be cool! :p

[Gonzo_308]

since somebody mentioned tactical silverware and bent guns. I remember a recent event where an LEO's duty weapon took a round broadside while in the holster and he was still able to draw and fire it.

Now, when the more tactical-er guns of the poly-ish variety can take that I might be more inclined to listen to the hype.

Even if they were frozen. :rolleyes:

[Cryptoboy]

Hey Jack,

Most items sold out there are put through pretty rigorous stress tests (not talking about guns per se here). The purpose is to go above and beyond what would normally be expected out of a weapon, not if you (and your gun) will survive a 4 story drop!

A good example (I've always thought), water-resistant watches. A watch that is water resistant to 100m for example, isn't going to shatter or stop functioning just because you've gone 101m! They typically will test it down to say 150m or 200m (depending on the quality of the company), and from there certifies it will work to 100m.

In the case of Glock, they might have gone a little extreme in some of their testing, but a good portion of that is marketing ("Guaranteed to survive being frozen in a block of ice!") It adds that wow effect. I'm not sure why that bothers you so much......but to each their own. :rolleyes:

[USP45usp]

Gonzo,

What makes you think that a polymer gun would "break" if it took a round? Also, The leather will take most of the impact.

So dropping the gun from four (or more) stories should have about the same impact as being hit with a round (of whose caliber you did not mention).

Hey, I'm just saying that any gun is prone to malfunction or damage but the only guns that have been put through this testing (and yes, they had guns of all makes and models, including the famed 1911 (of which I own one and love it)) that made it all the way through were the Glock and the HK.

And in case you think that I'm only saying this because I "love HK's and Glock's", then you are wrong. I don't like Glocks but I'm not going to spin the truth on them being able to pass these tests while others couldn't except the HK.

And I'm still trying to figure out exactly what I should make of the original post, trolling for a fight or a serious discussion.

Wayne

[Gonzo_308]

Leather is an effective bullet stopper? a four story fall is equivalent to a bullet strike? I can drop a baseball from a four story building and it will bounce. I can hit it with a .25 auto round and it will not bounce.

If I remember correctly it was a 9mm round. the impact was low on the slide where it meets the rail. The slide was bent but functioned with a forward assist (slap on the rear of slide to return to battery. I own a USP45c. I like it alot but freezing, truck driving and all that crap mean nothing, nothing, nothing.

Sorry your feelings were hurt by that but the truth is sometimes hard.

[BreacherUp!]

Uuhh, where have we gone with this, fellas?

[xXStarScreamXx]

The gun that was broadsided was a Sig, and shot in the slide. My tupperware gun has a metal slide as well. I cant CCW yet but ive gone around the house with my metal gun and my polymer gun on my hip, damn need cant feel the p99, I can tell the sig is there. A gun that is so light you dont notice it would be great for ccw I imagine as it inst yanking down your pants or gaining momentum from movement and flopping around.

[9mmsnoopy]

me thinks jack malloy doesnt like polymer guns :rolleyes:

[OBIWAN]

And he does not appear to be alone

Another vain attempt to to find some humor in the rather ugly side of Glock hating:(

[seeker_two]

Or when it just doesn't rust up despite the fact somebody did not do their cleaning and maintenance on it than these unrealistic throw it out the window and run a hummer over it tests.

That's been a big selling point for AK-47's for over 50 years... :cool:

[Jack Malloy]

Think practical fellows, not tactical.
All these ads about torture tests and the likes, are aimed at selling something by appealing to the Walter Mitty's of the world. I'm not one of them.

I don't plan on falling off a mountain in Afghanisan, nor would I drop my pistol off one, so that doesn't matter to me.
I think a gun that can hit what it is aimed at, and can be carried easily concealed and ready for action and is safe, is a LOT more important than a gun that can be dropped off a mountain and ran over by a tank.
How many of you have dropped your gun off a mountian in Afghanistan, by the way?
Anyone?
Anyone?
A gun that will fire after having been left unatended in a drawer or coat pocket for a year is more important -IN THE REAL WORLD BAD SCENARIOS- than a gun that can be frozen in a block of ice, or tossed out of a helicoptor.
Those things impress Mail Order Ninjas and Chairborn Rangers, as my uncle calls them, but they do not impress me.
If you work behind a desk in the civillian world, the chances of your needing a sidearm that could be ran over by a tank, dropped off a mountain and frozen solid are not very great. In fact, in your life, a .44 snubby might be more suited to the level of threat you are apt to encounter (muggers, thieves or druggies) than a laser sighted high capacity 9mm polypistol.
If you are in the military, and you get run over by a tank, tossed out of a helicoptor and frozen solid in a block of ice, you probably have much bigger problems than whether or not your sidearm works.


I do own a Glock and carry it often. Its advantage is that it is rust free and lightweight. I dont plan on driving over it with a hummer any time soon or throwing it down a stairwell. My Glock has a fairly decent trigger, but it's no 1911, or revolver for that matter.
Most of the time, I pack a J-frame or a compact 1911. Were I going to swim upriver beneath the surface for two miles and kill two sentries, I might choose something else. Chances of that happening are slim to none, however, so I choose my armaments based on real world factors, not paramilitary fantasies.

[Handy]

Jack, you just restated your first post without addressing ANY of the responses you elicited with it. Was it a question, or just a sermon?

"Toughness" and broad reliability are two of the MANY things we all prize in a functional object. And since those two attributes aren't mutually exclusive of other positive points, what's the problem?


What exactly are you campaigning against?

[Mike Irwin]

There's a thread here, posted several years ago, referencing the Glock's ability to survive plunges from the stratosphere, while a revolver will fail after being dropped a few inches.

So, to test the theory that revolvers will fail this way, I started throwing my cheapest revolver, a Charter Arms Off Duty, out the window and onto my concrete patio, a drop of between probably 15-18 feet.

I dropped it repeatedly, and never could get it to fail.

You can see the results of the test here: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72856&highlight=charter+arms+patio

[OBIWAN]

First off I don't think a vast majority of people buy weapons because they will survive a nuclear blast.

But....

In todays world ...where most all production weapons work pretty darn good, (at least for the round counts the average consumer engages in) and are as intrinsically accurate as most people need

Just saying..."Ours Works Too" won't sell many weapons

I see the "torture tests" more as entertainment..which may attract attention and sell some guns.

Kind of like the elephant stepping on the guys chest....didn't make me run out and buy the same shirt

Since I don't have an elephant

So come on...what is really bothering you

Besides me :eek:

[Jack Malloy]

Its about common sense, not hype.


The point is that people actually waste time worrying about these goofy "abilities" that are never going to come in handy in the real world, and will carry guns that are unreliable or underpowered, or overly thick, or bulky or what have you, because some hyped up sales maven has convinced them that they need a gun that can be run over by a tank or dropped off a mountain, when in reality, they probably just need something small enough to carry everywhere and reliable enough that it won't jam despite not being cleaned in nine months.
The folks who get obsessed over these extreme durability tests don't think twice about a practical self defense sidearm as they appear to be overly concerned about "tactical" aspects, which are in fact, marketing and advertising related, not tactical related.
I think it's bad tactics to fall off a building, get tossed out of a helicoptor or get frozen in a block of ice, myself.

How many of you have seen some guy rush into a gunshop to buy his first gun for self defense and demand the clerk give him whatever superpistol is popular in paramilitary fantasy movies at the moment, when, in reality, he probably would be better served with a Cheif, Dick's Special or SP 101?

[HKGuns]

"Tactical Tupperware"????

I think you mean polymer, however, by using that term you are obviously trying to pick a fight.

What is your point? Look around, plenty of guns being made from "tactical tupperware" as you call it.

Oh, now I see......you are a revolver boy.......Different strokes for different folks.

[GunsnRovers]

Why are you so angry with marketing and advertising people? :D

[Handy]

Jack,

I don't think anyone understands the nature of your argument. None of the guns popularly styled as "torture proof" are bad guns - in fact, most of them are excellent guns that deliver the reliability, accuracy, size efficiency and safety that rivals any other gun out there.


You've created a false conflict. There is no downside to the "tactical" nature of many current guns, aside from possibly price. I don't think all of us are huge Glock or USP fans, but none of us understand what "truth" you are getting at, aside from disliking certain advertising trends.

Just what are these foolish "tactical tupperware" buyers losing out on???? :confused:

[xXStarScreamXx]

Just what are these foolish "tactical tupperware" buyers losing out on????


Odds are: owning 1911

[Jeff Loveless]

it's just a matter of time ...

[xXStarScreamXx]

Naw. I like my sig and walther. My next planned gun is a 226 X-5, Baby Eagle, or a hunting rifle.

[P-990]

I think this analogy might not be perfect, but I'll give it a shot.

The "tactical torture tested" firearms are like having race tested and approved gear while riding a street motorcycle, right? I mean, is it really necessary that the armor will protect your bones if you have a getoff at 150-per (or knowing my Glock will function even if I leave it hanging out in the snowbank for a day or two)? What are the odds of needing to have either function for my uses? Not very high, but it IS comforting. Same as dropping a pistol down 4 stories or having a helmet that is effective to XX pounds of force (assuming XX pounds of impact force being higher than normal impact forces in an accident). Would a lower standard suffice for our uses? Most definitely. But if we have the money and desire, why can't we have the better stuff?

[Mike Irwin]

Be sure to burp your tactical tupperware before putting it away for the evening.

It keeps the bullets fresher longer.

[univtxattorney]

You mean I am not supposed to store my guns in my deep freezer? Damn. :rolleyes:

[Jack Malloy]

No,
The nickname goes back several years, in fact, it probably goes back to before firearms forums were popular on the internet. I didn't coin the term, but I do think it's valid, considering the old tests of tupperwear on those tv ads and the tests that appeal most to the Walter Mitty/Mail Order Ninja sorts.

Its not about provoking anything, except to ask why are some people so concerned about these highly unlikely happenings when it comes to firearms tests, instead of being more concerned about things like Mean Rounds Between Failures and such. Honestly, when was the last time somebody got thrown out of a helicoptor or tossed off the top of a biulding and won a gunfight? Remember, we ain't talking rappelling here.
Remember, one of the Glock's biggest weaknesses despite the many brutal "torture tests" is a flimsy trigger spring leakage that has been known to break...Best example being in some law enforcement tests a few years ago, (I think it might have been in Denny Henson's SWAT magazine), where a gun was assembled from parts and fired about 3K times.
As a consumer, I am more impressed with reliabilty tests where they just see how many rounds the gun will fire before it breaks or jams than I am with whether or not it appears structurally sound after you drive a tank over it.

Drawer or pocket lint tests are probably more valid for most folks than deep mud tests, unless you ride an atv a lot with your peice in the open.

[k_dawg]

Quote:
Just what are these foolish "tactical tupperware" buyers losing out on????


Odds are: owning 1911

how "tactical" are your 1911's?

mine have seen combat in four different wars..

who needs "tactical" gimmicks..

[eka]

Jack,

Just like every other company out there, Glock is looking to attract attention to their product. It's called advertising. Glock is in the firearms business to make a profit from the sale of their products. Just like Nike, Pepsi, etc. As I'm sure you and everyone else knows, Glocks were initially designed to compete for a military contract. In military operations, extreme conditions do exist. The advertisements that you are speaking of are in my opinion aimed at law enforcement administrators seeking weapons for their department. Again, extreme conditions exist there also. I'm sure nobody at Glock actually thinks their pistols are going to be subjected to those kinds of abuses on a routine basis. The point being made is if the pistol can withstand those types of abuses, then you can feel confident in assigning it the task of protecting your life. If you are the type of person that routinely falls off of high places, gets run over, buried alive, or whatever, you probably have more to worry about than your choice of firearms. Glocks work extremely well at their designed purpose, but won't turn you into Superman anymore than wearing Nike Air tennis shoes will enable you to fly. Look at advertising for what it really is, a way to attract attention to a product and boost sales.

[Handy]

Jack,

Again, the guns that seem to run longest between failures are the Tupperware you are deriding. What auto are you recommending that will shoot more than a 9mm Glock?


Like the Beretta, the Glock trigger spring is fragile. Trade it for a NY1 spring and there's nothing to break.

[Ramcharger]

When I had my Glock I loved it for what it was....
A 10MM.
To me a Glock is a good tool but just a tool. Nothing more. An avilable 10mm launcher. I wanted a 10MM and that was the only game in town back then.
But I was impressed how well it stood up to all those full house 10mms.
But when I moved on from the 10mm I moved on from the Glock.
It was that ugly/fat chick that got you through that dry spell.

[abelew]

I don't get why people get so upset about "tactical tupperware." This is why we have something called "free choice," "free enterprize," and the ability to choose products based upon what we deem necessary for our situation. Just because 99.999% of civilians will never even drop their pistol in sand, let alone bury it does not mean that these "torture tests" are without merit. Would I willingly do this to any gun, nope! However, they do illustrate that they are tough. If you are looking for a carry weapon, then you might use common sense, and think "if it can take being buried in sand, then lint and grit that a carry gun does accumulate won't be a problem eithor. I have a HK usp 45 that has something like a 1,000 hour salt water emersion rating for the finish. Will I ever leave my gun in saltwater for even an hour, nope. However, I live on the coast of florida, and if I go boating and take my gun, and it gets hit by spray from the boat, or something like that, I know that if it can take 1,000 hours of it, then I don't have to worry about wiping my gun off that very moment, for fear that it will be rusted by the time I got home, like a blued gun would. I tend to look at things like this with a grain of salt. Just because the exact circumstances that occurred in the "torture test" are very unlikely to happen, they can be informative, depending on the needs for the gun you are buying at the time.

[Jack Malloy]

Truth be told,
If I was gonna take a second job working behind the counter of a liquer store or some such real world dangerous occupation, I would not carry my Glock, as it's a 9mm. I have owned and used tactical tupperwear myself and while it has some advantages (light weight, corrosion resistant) most examples I have used also have some liabilities....
That Glock safe action (more accurately half cock action) is not as smooth as a single action trigger pull from a 1911 or for that matter the DA pull of most of my wheelguns.... And my own M19 Glock has a lighter trigger pull than most I have examined, mind you.
My old G-17 was more jam prone, and it had a trigger pull that could only be called abysmal. The Glock .45s feel funky in the hand and are less reliable than the 9s. The Glock .40s I have fired (over a dozen and counting) are woefully innacurate. The .40 USP and that Croatiion/ Springfield are even worse.
I have fired a .45 USP and its accurate and the trigger was about on par with a very rough and heavy revolver trigger, but the thing was not much smaller than a Desert Eagle, size wise. Only a Sumo could carry one concealed.....A four inch Smith model 29 is heavier but has a better trigger pull and is more concealable....So I passed on the .45 USP and got one of those for when I want to pack a big gun......
So, what would I carry if I was working one of those behind the counter human target jobs?
In real world /regular harms way, I would carry my .357 snub, or my 1911 compact simply because of the stopping power factor and the concealability/comfort factor, as well as ease of hitting the target.
Day before yesterday, the tobacco store up the road from me got robbed at gunpoint. The owner of the store chased the robber down and captured them at gunpoint. That's a real world scenario, folks.
Notice that nothing in it involved being frozen in a block of ice or dropping yourself or your gun out of a helicopter or anybody falling off a hill in Afghanistan.

Now, I doubt that either my wheelgun or my compact. 45 would withstand being run over by a tank or other such foolishness, but I don't doubt in the least that were I working behind the counter of a store being robbed, the magnum or .45 auto (and better trigger pull of either weapon) would definitely give me a better chance of stopping the bad guy before he got a chance to shoot me.
Sorry fellers, but the idea of taking a round or two from some cheap pot metal .25 or .380 due to stopping power failure (or missing the target because your plastic .40 is woefully innacurate) is something to be MORE CONCERNED WITH than whether or not your polymer piece can stand up to rigours that even a comic book hero would have a hard time being able withstand.
Some time back, I got to shoot a bunch of .40 caliber tactical tupperwear with some LE guys. At the end of the shooting, one of the older officers who was a devout wheelgunner sneered at everybody "What good does it do you to have a dozen rounds in your weapon when you can't hit the target with any of them?"
He was exaggerating of course, but not by much. ... The guns were so innacurate that the only chance the guys had of hitting targets at fairly close range was by going the "spray and pray" route. Weaver stance, bullseye, etc. nothing worked. IT was the guns, not the shooters, trust me.

It may be nice (in an unimportant way) that a gun can be frozen in a block of ice, or dropped out of an airplane or ran over by a tank and not be destroyed, but those attributes don't mean CRAP in the real world.
Things like stopping power, accuracy, reliability, safety and concealability are much more important to the pragmatic fellow, who most likely is not going to get frozen in a block of ice, tossed from a chopper or run over by a tank when he needs a self defense peice to save his bacon.
Having explained that, would somebody explain just what it is about the sillier 'torture tests" that cause the Mail Order Ninja types to be so fascinated to the point they overlook things like stopping power, reliability or accuracy?
To me a "good" carry gun is about real world, save my bacon self defense, not paramilitary fantasies. So why are those who go on and on about the punishment absorbing capability of the latest high tech tupperware pieces so blase about things like stopping power, accuracy, reliability and concealability?
I think that's the real question that needs to be addressed when judging "combat handguns" and that is my point. For 99 percent of us guys, a five shot .44 special is probably a better choice for self defense than a high tech, laser sighted polymer framed Ubershuetzen special with a flashlight mount, peep sight and laser sighting guide rod, and high capacity broad beam magazine and detachable compensator with night strike non reflective finish with optional bayonette mount.

[Warbow]

Odd. My Springfield XD-9 has been reliable and very accurate. The trigger isn't what it would be on a nicely tuned 1911, but it works fine for me and many others. The grip on it is also very nice. Maybe the ones you were shooting needed cleaning?

I don't believe in "stopping power" unless it's 20mm HE and up. :)

[xXStarScreamXx]

Another preachy 1911 thread....

[xrageofangelsx]

What about Tactical 1911s like the Springfield Armory Operator!??!?!

The best of those who love the weekend warrior tactical ninja stealth suits and those who mistake the 1911 as a divine relic from the holy prophet JMB.

[Jack Malloy]

Hardly a 1911 thread.
Some people have a tendancy to make a virtue out of a vice and 1911 enthusaists are guilty there too. Best example being Col. Cooper claiming (circa 1980s) that a double action trigger pull was the "solution to a non-existant problem" which sort of counters what he had said earlier about the single action .45 auto being the best of what was to be had at that time (circa 1960s).
A snub nosed model 66 is probably a more "practical" pistol than a full house 5 inch 1911, which requires the thumb safety to be snapped off, or the hammer cocked before it will fire in a defensive scenario, which is slower than just yanking a snubby revolver out and pulling the trigger.

The point was, of course, about what real life attributes are important in a self defense or "combat" pistol, and that most "X-Treme" torture tests don't have much to do with combat pistols, self defense needs or reality.
Speed, stopping power, reliability and accuracy, are where we as intelligent pistoleros need to focus on in terms of worthy attributes, not "can I run over this thing with a hummer and freeze it in a block of ice?"

Possibly those new Para Ordnance LDA compacts are better choices for a defense auto than my old Springfield. But I don't own one, and have not shot one yet. Those trigger linkages just flat out confuse and bewilder me too.
The Smith .45 autos showed some promise, but every one I ever handled had a rough trigger pull and they tended to be thicker through the slide and frame than a Govt. model....and heavier....

I think in full size service pistols, there may be something in the 10 mm that has been overlooked by manufacturers in the race for .40 polymer high capacity bullet hoses.

So, till somebody comes out with a .45 that is as slim through the slide and frame as a 1911 and has a DA trigger, and fits my budget, I will stick with compact .45s and wheelguns for serious self defense purposes.

[Warbow]

A lot of people prefer Glocks and the like, and not because they heard about the "torture tests." The people who drone on about "torture tests" are a small percentage. They don't really matter because every firearm out there has its fanboy club who think everything else is junk. I really think you overestimate their numbers. Who cares what they say? Just ignore them.

I chose my XD-9 because it fits my hand very well and is accurate and reliable (plus it was affordable). Not because of anything else. Pretty much the same criteria you use. I think that's how most people go about it.

[Jack Malloy]

Those are good reasons to choose a gun.
Too bad that a lot of manufacturers dont' dwell on them, along with durability, safety and so forth when putting together those ads with a Navy Seal coming out of the water with a knife in his teeth and a roscoe in his fist on a Search and Destroy mission.....

>>>I chose my XD-9 because it fits my hand very well and is accurate and reliable (plus it was affordable). Not because of anything else.<<<

[Tamara]

Too bad that a lot of manufacturers dont' dwell on them, along with durability, safety and so forth when putting together those ads with a Navy Seal coming out of the water with a knife in his teeth and a roscoe in his fist on a Search and Destroy mission.....

Funny, but Porsche ads don't show a lot of idling in traffic jams or maneuvering in parking garages, either. F-350 ads show the big 4x4 bouncing through the mud of a construction site in a manly fashion, not backing over suburban mailboxes while moving the in-law's sofa and sitting at the gas pump for thirty minutes. ;)

It's advertising, Jack; it's supposed to be full of hype. That's why people buy stuff. If it was all about pure practicality, there'd be about two different kinds of pistols and one color paint job on our cars. If only for a moment, in the privacy of his own mind, the guy in the Monte Carlo in the next lane is edging out Junior in turn three, and the guy shooting the P-226 in lane seven gets to feel like "Alpha Two". :p

[Jack Malloy]

4x4 ads also don't show me standing at the garage with a sour look on my face buying another set of wheel bearings either, LOL.....

And I don't go bumping over logging roads either! I just drove home for six months when the public service district tore up the road in front of my house to put in a sewer system....

I don't think the references to sports cars and such is a valid metaphor, though. Fast excelleration and speed are performance factors. For a gun, speed of presentation and firing, accuracy and ballistics would be comparible performance factors.
Freezing something in a block of ice (possibly the silliest of torture tests) and dropping something out of a helicopter have nothing to do with performance.

I don't mind realistic 'torture' tests. Years ago, Chuck Taylor did a test where he left a bunch of guns out in a snow bank, picked them up and shot them.
He found that the 1911, the High Power and the S&W M-27 wheelgun were all more reliable than most "modern" designs. If I remember right, he redid that test when it came out and found the Glock passed it too.

That and mud testing are realistic. Covering a gun in sand is realistic too. Things like that can happen.

The idiot that started dropping guns out of helicopters and freezing them in chunks of ice should be shot for his stupidity, as things like that have nothing to do with reality.....

Sometimes, when I am blue, I get to thinking about middle age tax accountants swimming through a jungle river with a knife clenched in their teeth and an H&K pistol with a laser sight, optical sight and optional bayonette mount under the dust cover on his way to take out a hostile sentry so he can get to a helicopter which will fly him to afghanistan where he will be tossed out and fall down a hill and run over by a tank, and it makes me laugh out loud.

[Handy]

Jack,

Another long winded statement about... nothing. You have yet to demonstrate the downside to the tupperware you decry.

Those same guns you find offensive for being torture proof do a great job in all the other categories you vaguely alude to.


Do you have any idea what you are protesting? I can't tell.

[Rojoe67]

I am glad we all can pick what tools work best for ourselves. ;)

I hate to do it but I will anyways..... When I was a kid the rest of the fella's on my baseball team had the new aluminum bats & best gloves and so on..... I will blow my own horn and tell ya they didn't bat or catch as well as I did.... Maybe the tool doesn't make someone that much better if practice and ablility isn't there. When I grew up I noticed hammers had wood handles and fiberglass and steel with rubber grips. Again, the tool or it's newer upgrade didn't make me swing it any better. I think modern technology and upgrades over the years are both market driven and ergonomic and labor minded driven. Well, with that said I have both composite stock and walnut stock rifles. I love them both and both have different spots in my mind for what they will do for me and why I pick one over another for a day afield or at the range. The reason I like the poly pistol is the weight for concealed carry. In many cases it's only a few ounces but for me and a long days carry it makes a huge difference. Example if I were going to carry a Kel-Tec P11 at just around 14 ounces I would notice it less and be more able to conceal comfortable than if I took the Taurus model 65 at some 32? ounces. Both tools have the ability but what works best for me on a given day and weather condition. I see no reason other than my own; after research and hands on, why I would find fault with poly guns vs. stainless.......what is the real point.... Both pistols will work as designed as long as user has maintained it and no technology hardware breaks or malfunctions. I have seen both types fail. Most of all my hands on findings have resulted in ammunition issues. ;)

[Jack Malloy]

I have yet to see the wide slide polymer monstrocity that is as concealable as say, a .357 model 60.
The most concealable of the new polymer pop guns are the Kahrs and Grendall type guns, the biggest of which are now in .40 caliber.
I still think a snub nose .357 or .44 spl is going to provide more "stopping power" than a 9 or .40.

This makes me ask, just why are these clunkers so fat through the slide? I know the Beretta 92 series and Walthers which utilize locking blocks have to have a wide slide. But it just seems to me that just about every semi auto since the Browning High Power has been a gigantic step backwards vis a vis thickness. The highpower has a narrower slide than a 1911, and it's double column grip is still narrower and better feeling in the hand than any high capacity peice since.

I also doubt that any autoloader is as reliable as a good revolver. As my uncle points out, a wheelgun rotates, locks up it's cylinder and drops it's hammer. An autoloader fires, unlocks, extracts, ejects and reloads. Five seperate chances of failure.
These new plastic popguns may be great for dropping off buildings and running over with tanks, but those are factors that are practically useless in real world self defense.
Revolvers seem to be able to be drawn and fired faster thanks to the shape of their grip and that whole lack of a thumb safety.
Of course, I am not so keen on these new wheelguns with cheap two peice barrels, keylocks on the frame and MIM parts......

What I am protesting is seeing gullible and walter mitty type folks buying this "torture test" hype crap so that good guns get discontinued while more of these generic tactical tupperwear peices clog up the market.
Something is just wrong when you go into any gunstore in america to buy a self defense peice and you can't find a snub nose .44, but there are racks of plastic service pistols in minimal calibers.




>>>You have yet to demonstrate the downside to the tupperware you decry.

Those same guns you find offensive for being torture proof do a great job in all the other categories you vaguely alude to.


Do you have any idea what you are protesting? I can't tell.
>>>>

[Handy]

Again, another non-sequiter. Tactical guns aren't good because they aren't .44s? They aren't good because some of them are wider, but others aren't?


I really think you need to think about your thesis, here. You aren't able to make a consistant comparison that makes any sense. It would go a little like this:

"Tactical tupperware is bad compared to other autos because they all don't ______ as well."


I've asked you to do this several times now, and your newest response is mainly a put down of auto pistols in general. DO YOU HAVE A POINT?

[Jack Malloy]

I have a point and it's not on my cap either, unlike the Walter Mitty's of the world who think there is a difference between a handgun and a "tactical" gun.
Tactics are what you do. Not something you can buy that has a light mount.
I think the most rediculous example of that type of thinking I have seen lately is a compact Officers model .45 that had a light rail...Come on. you carry a compact gun like that BECAUSE it is small, flat and concealable, not so you can hang stuff off of it.
A handgun is a self defense tool. As such, there are factors that can improve its utility or remove from it.

Lets see what the maven of the self defense auto (Jeff Cooper) told us that a good practical pistol should have?

•Power
•Speed
•Accuracy

Thats all find and dandy. Sounds like a good DA .45 or a wheelgun don't it?
Now what can we add to that list?
How about concealability? As Cooper pointed out, the primary attribute of any handgun is that it is portable. Why carry the H&K Mk 23 as a self defense peice when you can get the same ballistics performance from a Springfield Armoury Micro Compact? Oh yeah, because it's not "Tactical!" LOL....

So, among full size 'service' autos, what are the most concealable ones?
Hmmm The Govt. .45 and the Browning High Power. Why? Because they are trim for their calibers and fairly FLAT. Just about everything else is wider through the frame or slide. Some, like the Rugers, the USPs and the Glocks, rediculously so. I carrie d a full size 1911 for YEARS concealed in an IWB rig.
"When my shooting buddy showed me his full size USP .45 that he bought for self defense, I thought, well it shoots good, its not too heavy, but its about as concealable as a Vulcan chain gun....."

All those modern "compact" polymer popguns that are so popular may be short through the slide and butt, but they are still wide through the slide. If you are going to carry something that bulky, why not a .41 magnum?

Could it be that marketing types hype these polymer wonders so that the Chairborn Ranger/Mail Order Ninja/Walter Mitty types will overlook those facts and fantasize about taking out hostile sentries, or fighting it out with a terrorist strike force?
Could be.....

It would be nice to see manufacturers focus more on "real world" self defense guns and leave the paramilitary fantasies to Sylvester Stallone's screenwriters.
How about a focus on self defense autos that are FLAT through the slide, as well as shortened fore and aft?

[Handy]

It seems your problem is not with "tactical tupperware", but with guns that aren't flat. I think it funny you confuse the two.

Some guns are bulky because there was no reason to make them flat and there were benefits to making them this way. Often it just comes down to mag capacity. What you seem to be ignoring is that these newer guns are often much more compact and carryable then older guns of similiar capacity. The Glock 19 is certainly more concealable than a BHP, and holds MORE rounds.


Again, it just sounds like you don't like certain guns, and can't come up with any clear explanation why that is, or even which guns they are.

[xXStarScreamXx]

Ok so do you have an issue with my Walther having a polymer fram or being 1.125 inches thick at its thickest?

I live in California so I can't carry but I've put the gun on my hip quite a few times around the houseand used mirrors and my webcam to get opinions an whether the way I'm wearing it is noticeable. It blends in very well with my style of clothing and I could undoubtably carry it with no problems.

On carrying a wheelgun in it's place; why? I could put magnum bullets in it I guess but i'd be down to six from thirteen. Hell with an extra clip I'd be up to 25 shots on hand or a full cylinder and 3 speed loaders plus one in case some serious **** went down.

[Biff007]

"Something is just wrong when you go into any gunstore in america to buy a self defense peice and you can't find a snub nose .44, but there are racks of plastic service pistols in minimal calibers."

Sounds like there's a lot of "morons" out there buying these "Tupperware" guns and then going back and wasting money on buying another. Pure economics. There aren't any .44 snub noses out there because what sells is the plastic gun. Suppliers are out to make money. These "plastic" guns sell for some reason.

Anyways, getting back to the point at hand. I recently purchased my first Glock. Why did I do something so stupid as this? While I don't plan on throwing my gun at anything (unless I am out of rounds) I like the idea of knowing that my gun is "DURABLE". I don't find myself as concerned about getting a scratch on my Glock and worrying about it rusting as I do my 1911. I also like the idea that I could spend my lifetime trying to wear my Glock out and quite possibly never succeed. I also wanted to point out the obvious here. Your claim was about the torture tests being ridiculous and you argued that they have nothing to do with reliability. I beg to differ. While the ice block, sand, etc tests are a bit extreme, you missed what they are telling you. The froze a Glock and it came out firing. They dropped a Glock 4 stories and it came out firing. While I'll never do those things, I like knowing that my investment of $600 is secure if I did accidently drop my gun in the creek or on the pavement.

[abelew]

Jack, it seems to me, and I may be wrong, is that you aren't against tactical 'ware, but the high speed lw drag guy that is used to advertize it. You aren't against it because it's plastic, your against it because its "fat." Your not against it because it has a very tough tennifer finish, but because the company has "torture tested" it. My question to you is .............SO WHAT????? Let them do their thing, its the same gun if they have fuzzy bunnies running around advertizing it, or some big name celeb advertizing it. If its too fat for your needs, there are other options to solve that problem. So, again, I am confused, what is your complaint about tactical tupperware? People buying them because of advertizing? I can't really remember the last time I saw a gun add on tv, or anywhere but the internet and dedicated gun mags, where even the 1911's are being advertized that way. Look at Kimber's LAPD Swat gun, imagine that, a good ol' 1911 being sold as a piece of tactical steel (and aluminum). I had a Glock, and it was a good gun. Trigger wasn't all that, but it wasn't near as bad as some make it to be. It had a good capacity, and it felt good in my hands. Would I buy another, yep, if I was looking for the things that Glock offers. So, maybe instead of trying to rip on it because its plastic and not what you want gun makers to be advertizing, and not being advertized in your way, you can just quit whining, and buy a different gun.

[Desertscout1]

I think this is a case of 'ignore it and maybe it will go away'. Ya'll are just feeding him and he's eatin' it up.

Jack, I'm not convinced that you [color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color] about guns, accuracy, triggers, stopping power, maintenance or anything else that you have been spewing about.

[Jack Malloy]

I own a Glock 19 and a P-35 and no mail order ninja or chairborn ranger can convince me that the Glock is more concealable ,cuz it's not.
Its wider through the slide and the slide is the part that goes inside your IWB rig, not the handle. It has that big, square trigger guard too. Its lighter than the HP and shorter, maybe, but thicker and blockier and less comfortable to wear concealed.
Considering that the Glock and about 90 percent of what is out there utilizes a browning tilting barrell lock up, I have to wonder why the fat slides? With a locking block you can't get around the width factor.
I am guessing its because manufacturers don't want to machine a locking lug on a standard barrell and slide and prefer to go the cheaper route of SIG/Glock and have the barrell lock up on the ejection port.

Thats got more to do with ease of manufacturing and cost than it does with performance or quality in my book.

The point which some people who have been too blinded by 'Tactimania runnin' wild in the gun crank world' is that while some of these fat slide monstrosities are decent enough OPEN CARRY service sidearms meant for the garrison belt, or 'car guns' (the modern equivallent of horse pistols) they are not all that realistic for plain ole self defense.
But because of the alleged ' morons' out there are too impressed by the whole, 'Hey I can run my truck over it and freeze it solid' advertising baloney people who really are old enough to know better run around boasting about
Freezing a gun in a block of ice and running it over with a truck, which has NOTHING TO DO WITH DEFENSIVE PISTOLCRAFT.
And as long as the gullible Walter Mittys keep snapping up the newest and latest polymer parabellum pukers, we are going to see less and less emphasis on what I like to think of as "defensiveware" and more and more wide body slides with underbarrel laser mount paramilitary fantasy peices.

There are two types of handguns. Sporting purpose guns (long barrel hunting peices and comped gamesmens guns) and defensive guns. Of the defensive types, the service pistols are okay for open carry, but not realistic for real world self defense peices for anybody who does not wear a garrison belt.

Most of these horsecrap "torture tests" that the gullible are impressed with are nothing less than foolish. The judge of a defensive gun is that its small enough to get the job done and carry constantly, reliable enough to function in REAL WORLD defensive situations, and powerful enough to put down an agressor.
Freezing, falls and hilicopter antics have nothing to do with it.

[Handy]

Ah, so you don't like wide guns.

[Bo Hunter]

Luckily, those revolvers are good and narrow...

[monco]

For 99 percent of us guys, a five shot .44 special is probably a better choice for self defense than a high tech, laser sighted polymer framed Ubershuetzen special with a flashlight mount, peep sight and laser sighting guide rod, and high capacity broad beam magazine and detachable compensator with night strike non reflective finish with optional bayonette mount.

Anyone have an extra bayonet mount for a Glock 17 I can borrow? I'd like to try it out before I buy one. ASAP, as I've noticed a terrorist strike force casing my home. Grenade launcher, too, if you got one.

[monco]

FYI, a fullsize Glock 17 can be easily and comfortable concealed in a "deep concealment" holster like SmartCarry or ThunderWear. Even in gym shorts and a tank top.

So that part's a non-issue.

[Warbow]

Of the defensive types, the service pistols are okay for open carry, but not realistic for real world self defense peices for anybody who does not wear a garrison belt.

Yeah. I guess the thousands of people who successfully carry concealed Glocks and similiar handguns everyday need to be directed to this thread so they can drink from the fount of "practical information" that is Jack Malloy and realize that they aren't realistic.

[Control Group]

I have to wonder why the fat slides?
???

Because there's no point to making the slide narrower than the grip, and double-stacks are wider? My friend's USP .45 holds 12 rounds in the mag, his 1911 7. You might not think that adding width to gain five more rounds is a worthwhile tradeoff, but don't you think it might be to some people?

[Netzapper]

Hi, I'm one of those people who was sucked in by tupperware advertising...

I bought a USP9 after shooting a zillion things, including revolvers. Want to know what did it for me? It wasn't the torture tests, believe me.

It's because, at the end of the day, when I compared the test targets from the various pistols I'd shot, the USP had more holes in the 10 ring.

I don't claim to be anything even remotely resembling an experienced shooter (I've had a safety course, some instruction from friends, and about 300 rounds downrange). But, it seems logical to me that the best gun for me is the one that I can shoot the best. If the bullet doesn't go where I want it, then I may as well be shooting blanks.

Of course, there're other factors (concealability and quickness spring to mind), but the first and foremost thing on my mind was whether or not, when I pull the trigger, the shot goes where I want it to. I'd rather figure out how to conceal a Desert Eagle, if necessary, than carry a gun I'm uncomfortable shooting.

[abelew]

Well, Im beginning to feel as if I know jack crap about pistols. Apparently, because I have a USP, that is plastic, holds 12 rounds of .45 acp in the mag, has a flashlight mount (which I dont even bother to use), that I am now a mall ninja, who would be better served by a walther ppk in .380, that holds maybe half of what mine does. I see my misguided ways, and crap, I feel moronic, because someone else thinks that because my usp is plastic, and has been "torture tested", and therefore is completely unable to function in pristine condition. I better go out and freeze it before I use it, or it won't work. Crap! Is it big, yep, do I expect to carry it concealed, not in your life. Do I expect to carry it, you bet your mouse guns I do. Im going into law enforcement, and so I do have a reason for that "monstrocity" of a pistol. Does everyone have this particular need, I don't think so. Do other people buy a pistol like this for their own reasons, you bet. Most guns bought by people here are for fun, not for a particular need, which is probably fufilled by another gun that they already own for that reason. Give it a break, not all guns need to fill any need, except the reason for which they were purchased. Get off your soap box, because the water is running, and the soap that was once in it, has left. You are standing on a stool, which is missing a leg, and will soon fall down. Remember, just because you don't like something, doesn't mean that others that disagree with you, dont have points that are just as, or more valid than your own. Be gone, go away, and keep your narrow minded "know all" opinions to yourself.

[stephen426]

The way I see it, Glock had to go to extremes to prove that their polymer framed guns are as tough if not tougher than many steel or alloy framed guns. Part of this is marketing, but the idea that demonstrating reliability by going so far above and beyond normal wear and tear has merit. People have to learn that this isn't some cheapo plastic toy that will fail on then or crack in their hands if it is exposed to heat, cold, abuse... What better way than to carry it beyond what it will be subjected to in the real world without failure.

I own a Glock 26 and I can carry that thing concealed very easily. The slide is a lot slimmer than any wheel gun and more accurate than any wheel gun of the same OVERALL length. Take a look at the actual barrel length of a snub nose revolver copared to a semi auto of the same size. The action and cylinder take up a lot of the length. How concealable are speed loaders for revolvers compared to a spare mag in the pocket or holster? I can gaurantee that I can reload faster with my Glock 26 that you can with a speed loader. Besides, I don't have to let go of the gun with my shooting hand or worrying about twisting or pushing the speed loader to release the rounds.

As for accuracy, just because some cops can't hit the broad side of a barn doesn't mean the gun isn't accurate. Most cops can't shoot worth a crap. You know what though, it doesn't really matter all that much since only a small percentage will ever have to use their guns. When I had my USP, I was getting groups worthy of a target pistol. This is a combat weapon, not a target pistol. I will admit that the slide is huge though. As for accuracy with the Glocks, my "baby" Glock will shoot sub 2 inch groups all day long at 7 yards. If I Ransom Rested it, I'm sure it would be even better. My point is that it does the job as a combat pistol. By the way, my Glock sits around in the South Florida heat and humidity without any problems. I won't worry about it if I take it to the beach even if I get salt water on it and some sand. Will I use it in that manner? No but would you bring a non-stainless Sig to the beach and try the same thing? I can tell you that my P245 got rust spots just sitting in its case.

I understand your point that Glock and other poly frame manufacturers use lots of unrealistic scenarios to sell their products. Reliability and durability are key factors for deciding what gun to buy. To me, their marketing is right on target.

You are allowed to have you preference and you can carry what you want. Many people trust their lives to their Tupperwear gun and I am one of them. Don't knock it just because you prefer other guns.

[Jack Malloy]

That big magazine capacity comes in handy if you plan on missing a lot.

Statistics on gunfights remain pretty consistant over the past thirty years. To wit, most of them are over with about three rounds fired, and take place at 10 feet or less.
In other words, with a seven shot .45, you can get into two gunfights a week and have a round left over before reloading, LOL....

Excuses excuses. Let me get this straight. These polymer wonders have big, blocky fat slides because the manufacturer is too lazy to make it smaller than the diameter of the grip frame?
(Scratches head and sighs...)

I know lots of people who started out carrying Glocks and Ruger p-85s and such and to a man they all went with a 1911, or a high power or a J-frame.

I dont have a problem with big guns, per se. I carried a 29 for years, myself. I just think its silly that some people focus on such crap as these unrealistic torture tests instead of real world concerns — things like speed, power, accuracy, safety, reliability, concealability etc. ...
I am sure that somewhere out there there are Mail Order Ninjas toting around Mark 23s and are consoling themselves that their personal concealed carry peice is the ultimate whiz bang....and don't realize that to the average bystander, bad guy or cop that they appear as if they are obviously packing, or are wearing a colostomy bag.


>>>My friend's USP .45 holds 12 rounds in the mag, his 1911 7. You might not think that adding width to gain five more rounds is a worthwhile tradeoff, but don't you think it might be to some people?
<<<

[monco]

Jack - You seem to be going out of your way to rationalize some decision you've made regarding wheel guns. I bought my Glock because I shoot it well and it's got a reputation for reliability. The fact that it has more capacity than a revolver wasn't a factor in my decision, but I'll take it. If you don't like it I'm sorry.

Now is the part where you call me a bunch of cute-sounding names...

[Control Group]

That big magazine capacity comes in handy if you plan on missing a lot.

Statistics on gunfights remain pretty consistant over the past thirty years. To wit, most of them are over with about three rounds fired, and take place at 10 feet or less.
In other words, with a seven shot .45, you can get into two gunfights a week and have a round left over before reloading, LOL....

What? By that logic, I shouldn't carry ammunition at all, because more encounters end by just pulling a gun than by firing it. I could save the weight and not have a full mag, so I could draw faster. Better yet, given the odds of actually needing a gun at any point, why should I even bother with the gun?

You're right, very few people have lost real-world gunfights because they had too few rounds. On the other hand, no one has ever lost a gunfight because they had too many rounds. At the risk of being offensive, your argument here is specious at best and idiotic at worst. Frankly, it's the kind of thing I expect from the Brady Campaign: we should make magazines holding more than 10 rounds illegal, because you never need more firepower than that!

Excuses excuses. Let me get this straight. These polymer wonders have big, blocky fat slides because the manufacturer is too lazy to make it smaller than the diameter of the grip frame?
What does laziness have to do with anything? Why on earth should the slide be narrower than the grip?

[Desertscout1]

Depending on manufacturer and model, a 1911 slide is one TENTH of an inch narrower than 9/40/357 Glocks. I REALLY don't think that that makes any difference to the average ADULT.

[arp415]

"I know lots of people who started out carrying Glocks and Ruger p-85s and such and to a man they all went with a 1911, or a high power or a J-frame."

Jack, maybe they just couldn't take the nagging, it reminded them of there wives!


Jack, you crack me up. This has to be one of the funniest posts I have read. Do you have a drinking problem? jk (barely though) I have no argument for you really becasue everyone but you seems to get it, and I realize that no one will ever convince or out argue you, becasue you have no argument. For those who have been reading and posting, I just wanted to point out one of my favorite "jackisms" (can i say that on tfl, it sounds a bit dirty!) The part where he proves "tactical tuperware" is too big becasue the hk mk23 is frickin huge (desert eagle and dirty harry revolvers may be big, but they shoot a man stoppin' bullet!(but lets not get into media hype if it involves a giant revolver!) didn't you see clin eastwood in that one?) That 45 acp isn't going to do jack like a .44 mag, unless it is in my vintage 1911 that is the bomb!. He got me! I totaly thought that plastic guns came in all shapes and sizes. The kahr pm9 and pm40 just looks small. Also, they arn't quite as slim as the manufacture would dare to put on there website!(don't the kahrs have one of the smoothest DA triggers out there? oh wait thats blaspheme!) And for such a small gun (well we know now that they are actually quite large) they sure don't hold as many rounds as a revolver, I mean the pm9 can only hold like 6 or 7 rounds and fit in your front pocket without a trace. I'd like to see you do that with your "tactical tuperwar"! er.....wait..um....yeah


Everyone, jack will likey respond to my comments, no matter how stupid what i just said was (it will be equaled or bettered by his post i am sure!) But do everyone here at tfl a favor, and NO LONGER RESPOND TO THIS POST. eventually it will just fall away down the line, unless jack starts talking to himself that is.....

[FirstFreedom]

I own a Glock 19 and a P-35 and no mail order ninja or chairborn ranger can convince me that the Glock is more concealable ,cuz it's not.
Its wider through the slide and the slide is the part that goes inside your IWB rig, not the handle. It has that big, square trigger guard too. Its lighter than the HP and shorter, maybe, but thicker and blockier and less comfortable to wear concealed.

I agree, Jack. I think Jack has some substance to his views, actually, although I don't agree with the idea that "if you're going to carry something as bulky as a glock, then why not carry a .41 mag K frame", because, just as a glock is bulkier *where it counts for IWB carry* than say, a BHP, in the slide area, as Jack correctly points out, a wheelgun is bulkier still in the cylinder than a glock or hk, and the cylinder has to be shoved into the holster to retain it properly. There is a lot to be said for gun thin-ness in the slide area for CCW, particularl for IWB CCW, but the fact that a frame is plastic has nothing to do with it, of course.

[abelew]

First, let me appologize for posting to this thread again, however I feel I must reiterate something.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All of the pistols mentioned are very good pistols, with good reliability, and offer things that people want. Just because you don't like them, or the people's reasons, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE WRONG, OR YOU ARE RIGHT, OR THEY ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG!!

BUYING A GUN, AND ANYTHING ELSE, IS A DECISION BASED ON AN OPINION ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT/NEED/DESIRE/ETC

YOU DON'T HAVE A SAY IN WHAT THIER OPINION IS, SO GROW UP, AND STOP TRYING TO ARGUE A POINT THAT IS ONLY AN OPINION, THEREFORE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR VIEWS ON THIS SUBJECT

[38Mike]

Wait, the Glock is "Gunny Approved"........... :)








( I own and am very pleased with a Glock 26..... :)

[Jack Malloy]

No,
the original point was that the various "torture tests" such as freezing, dropping from a chopper and running over it with a tank had NOTHING to do with real world self defense gun uses.

Only Mail Order Ninjas and Chairborn Rangers who live in a Stallone induced fantasly land are impressed by such nonsense. Common sense tells people of average intelligence and above that the shooter would never survive any of those silly tests, so if the pistol did, it is pointless. Only the saltwater immersion tests are based on reality ....
Sensible people choose a self defense peice based on other factors, like reliability, stopping power, concealability, etc....Not whether or not it is tank tread proof.
I don't dislike any of these guns per se. I just dislike the goofy attitude that the High Tech Tactical Twits have that somehow, because some oversized service pistol can withstand a goofy torture test that has NOTHING to do with real world gunfighting that somehow everything else is "obsolete."

Personally, I bought a Glock because it was fairly rust proof and light weight. High capacity had nothing to do with it, as I found the G-19 is a lot lighter with the 10 round Clinton clip for IWB carry than the high capacity magazine. Of course, I seldom loaded more than 12 rounds in my old G-17 or Beretta 92 for that matter, or my High Power. One of my stainless .45s has lots of rust on it by the way from carrying IWB on hot sweaty muggy days.

When I bought a USP it was because I liked the idea of a DA auto that had a CZ 75 style thumb safety and at that time, there was no large caliber CZ-75 with stainless finish and a decocking lever. After wearing it for a self defenese peice for awhile, I wound up switching over to a .44 magnum revolver which was no less concealable, but lots more powerful and accurate.

If anybody has a problem, drinking or otherwise, it is the Walter Mitty types who can't cope with the fact that thier wide slide polymer popguns can withstand all the silly arse "torture tests" in the world, but that none of those silly tests has a thing to do with real world self defense capabilities.

How many mountains in Aghanistan have you fallen off of Arp?
Desert, when was the last time you were out scouting in the saharas and got frozen in a block of ice?
Abelew, have you jumped out of a helicoptor lately or for that matter, have you been tossed out a fourth story window?
When have any of you guys been run over by a tank?
See what I mean?

It may be nice that a gun can withstand such tortures, but that in and of itself will not make any of them a good choice for self defense.

What about the cracking frames on the Glocks about two years ago?
Or the tendancy of some H&K slide stops to snap? Things like that bug me. I could care less that either pistol can be run over by a tank and not get squashed flat. I am not likely to get run over by a tank, and if I did, I doubt I would be able to shoot back, or that shooting back at the tank would do much good from any pistol, ya know?

I am much more concerned about the possibility of things like jams or frame or slide stop failures than I am freeze testing and drop from a helicopter testing.

If some guys who choose their ordnance because of fantasy land torture tests want to focus on that silly crap, more power to em. But why reward the market for focusing on the wrong direction?

[Desertscout1]

My kids like Looney Toons in the morning too. I'll have to show them this thread.

[Jack Malloy]

Show em this thread?
Before or after you get tossed out of a helicopter, frozen in a block of ice and then run over by the tank?

[Jack Malloy]

I just had a brilliant idea....

I think I will start up my own gun company.
Our first product will be called the Wiley-Ki-Ote Tactical Terminator.
Its gonna be a 19 shot .40 caliber with a three inch wide slide. It will have a gigantic trigger guard that you can mount a bayonette to, biult in laser sight and under barrel flashlight mount...and a double action trigger pull of 23 pounds guaranteed to be as smooth as hauling a piano over a railroad track.
Who cares about how reliable or accurate it is, when all the Mail Order Ninjas see me dropping a Piano on it from the top of a biulding, followed by a bank safe!
Then, I will have an add showing it dropped off the top of the grand canyon.
I may even have it dropped out of the space shuttle as one of the tests.
Maybe I can get the Roadrunner to appear in these ads?

[Handy]

Jack,

The chances of anyone dropping their gun out of helo are low. How about dropping a gun down a stairwell? You seem to have missed this point I made awhile ago. Funny.



The problem with your "logic" is that you seem to believe that the majority of these guns are sold for the reasons you're ranting about. They aren't. Some owners site their toughness as a BONUS to buying a lightweight and easy to care for gun that often works better than the the prewar guns that impress you.


BTW, many self defense experts strongly caution against downloading the mag on a carry gun. After an incident you'll have to account for those "missing rounds". But I'm sure it's a great idea in Jack Malloy World.




I wish we all would have taken ARP's advice, but this thread is like a car accident. Jack, please understand that no one on this board cares about the tank-worthiness of their pistol. They are just trying to demonstrate to you that your obsession is meaningless and without merit. Your multi-page rant isn't going to change any minds because you haven't come up with a point that relates to anyone on this forum. We are arguing with you because this board membership enjoys logic and accuracy - and we're not finding that in your rants.

[xXStarScreamXx]

So how thick across the slide is too thick? My Sig is an inch thick and my p99 is 1.125".

[Mahalaleel]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Malloy
Or when it just doesn't rust up despite the fact somebody did not do their cleaning and maintenance on it than these unrealistic throw it out the window and run a hummer over it tests.


That's been a big selling point for AK-47's for over 50 years... "

Roflmao!

[Desertscout1]

This Jack Malloy sounds a whole lot like Gun Kid from another board. He's been banned more times under more names than anyone in internet history.

[RonnieB]

That saltwater immersion test is a lifesaver, because One time (at band camp)I fell out of a helicopter onto a mountaintop in Afghanistan. It was so cold that I froze into a block of ice, with my cold, almost dead fingers grasping my
Walter Mitty WM38995678, chambered in in chairborne Super Tall Ultra Penetrating Incindiary Di-polymer .17, but I digress....
A huge wind came up and blew my frozen solid body down the mountainside, where upon, I fell into the ocean, and thawed. My WM38995678 saved my life, because I was able to shoot a couple of Great White terrorist sharks to death underwater! at 35.3 yards.
This whole thread is one of my daily internet highlights for its amusement factor.
Products are tested to higher standards than what the 9xth percentile user may ever encounter. That's why you can freeze, run over, and drop from the ionosphere, many of these guns in testing, and still have them work. Do you honestly think that people fantasize about having gunbattles while frozen solid in a block of ice???
As far as the revolver versus the auto, and width, height, length arguments, it all comes down to that tiny little bullet even being available at all, and if you can react as quick to defend yourself as you think you'll be able (which I'll bet is a huge over-estimate in most people's mind). Use what you want cowboy, but I bet when you're practicing the quickdraw in front of your uncle's mirror, you'll still only tie yourself every time, and that's when you're expecting the other guy to draw.

[Jack Malloy]

I don't know about you , but I have never dropped my gun down a stairwell either. Do you make a habit of that or something?
Phil Engledrum once mentioned in an article that he had a lot of friends who were prone to dropping their shooting iron when they went home after playing cards as they drank too much.
I have known of people who dropped their piece, but never down a stairwell.
I did once drop a gun out of my coat pocket and onto the concrete and thank goodness it was the Glock. One of my LE friends dropped his Model 66 in a scuffle with a suspect on PCP.
I also accidentally had my stainless .45 slide off a sink edge onetime into a sink where it did get scuffed up. I wish it had been the Glock that day, LOL...In fact, that was what caused me to buy a G-17. Not so much that it would withstand a spill in the sink as it was because the gun was so homely if it got scuffed up, I wouldn't mind so much.
In fact when I dropped it on the sidewalk out side my house it left a huge scar on the "indestructible" polymer frame. Of course a dent on an aluminum frame would likely have been worse, I admit. Generally I prefer a steel frame.

Few authorities other than Cooper and Ayoob have ever mentioned anything about what to do with your carry peice in the bathroom, by the way. This is another real world scenario that the Chairborn Rangers and Mall Ninjas never think about. Possibly because most of 'em don't even carry concealed as a 140 pound man can't hide a .45 Glock in a nylon rig very well.

Most people who carry a gun (on their person) regularly are more apt to get a handle caught on a chair arm wrest and drop it on the ground, not out of a helicopter or down a stairwell.
I think the only problem some folks having with my logic is that it is reality based, not fantasy based and like so many other people they seem to be impressed more by the fantasy and dissapointed with reality.
Reality isn't that exciting, after all.
In the real world, most self defense shootings are over in less than three rounds fired at ten feet or less.
Not exactly an episode of Miami Vice now is it?
In the real world, what to do with your peice in the crapper at Barnes and Noble is a bigger concern for folks who carry than whether or not it will survive being frozen.
In the real world, corrossion resistance is of greater importance than freezing or tank proofing a gun.
Can you really name two self defense experts who caution against downloading magazines? I mean valid authorities, not "my cousin's sisters brother" types.
Most caution you to download to avoid spring compression, except for Jeff Cooper who keeps coming up with examples of WWII era mags that sat fully loaded for years. And Ken Hackathorn who was impressed by mag capacity.
The reality is that in any post shooting investigation, they police up the brass to determine how many rounds were fired, and look at the number of bullet holes. You would know this if you ever sat through a shooting trial.
I recommend any US citizen sit through at least one homicide trial by the way. Its not the same as an episode of Law and Order or what have you, but it lets you see how our system works.
Not even the worst prosecutor in the world would say "this is a ten round magazine and it is empty therefore ten rounds were fired."
Hate to break it to you fellas, but the Jack Malloy World is the real world. No chairborn ranger aliases for me, notice? Im not AquaScout1, or AR15Guy or DesertLurp or any of that. Im ole Jack. Of course, EvilNinja1 sounds pretty fun. Maybe I shoulda thought of that, LOL...



Face facts fellas.
These BS torture tests only impress the Walter Mitty's of the gun world who go around giving the rest of us law abiding gun owners a proverbial black eye with their silly paramilitary fantasies, imagewise.
The types who show up at the range in full Rambo gear boasting about their imaginary bloodthirsty adventures and how their newest latest high tech piece can withstand bazooka fire, freezing and being dropped off the empire state biulding.

>>>The chances of anyone dropping their gun out of helo are low. How about dropping a gun down a stairwell? You seem to have missed this point I made awhile ago. Funny.



The problem with your "logic" is that you seem to believe that the majority of these guns are sold for the reasons you're ranting about. They aren't. Some owners site their toughness as a BONUS to buying a lightweight and easy to care for gun that often works better than the the prewar guns that impress you.


BTW, many self defense experts strongly caution against downloading the mag on a carry gun. After an incident you'll have to account for those "missing rounds". But I'm sure it's a great idea in Jack Malloy World.

<<<

[Warbow]

:D

This is silly.

However, Jack, you are very good at what you do (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=troll). 5 pages (and still going) -- not bad. :)

[Desertscout1]

I'll tell you what, Jack. You don't pay any attention to the tests that you despise so bad and we won't pay any attention you when you rant about things you know nothing about. Deal?

[stephen426]

Jack,

Do you bother to read the other posts or are you just adding to your long rant? Please respond to the following if you find the time...

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1533937&postcount=68

The name of the game for businesses is called marketing. You want to sell a product, you've got to make it appeal to people. Sure, some of those people maybe the arm chair ninjas as you suggest, but demonstrations of durability and reliability sell products to almost everyone.

As for dropping a pistol from who knows what heights, again, probably more of an effort to prove the ruggedness of their product as well as the safety. The firing pin block is a very important safety feature as it greatly reduces the chances of an accidental discharge.

More importantly, there were torture tests done that are very applicable to to the durability and reliability of a firearm. The 10,000 round torture test has been conducted by several manufacturers but the one that standso out is Glocks. 10,000 rounds were fired rapidly from a Glock 17 pistol. When the pistol got too hot, it was dunked in a bucked of water, shook dry, and the test was resumed. I hope I'm never in a situation where I would be forced to fir 10,000 rounds, and I certainly hope there is a better way to cool down the gun if I needed to other than dunking it in a bucket of water... but at least I know that I could if I really needed to. More realistically, Glock has demonstrated what level of abuse their products can handle and still function. With better care and better conditions, my Tupper wear should go bang everytime I pull the trigger. That is their claim anyways.

[Handy]

Jack,

Your "logic" now includes that being in a stairwell with a gun is "fantasy".


Good night, Gracie.

[abelew]

Again, I am making a mistake posting to this peverbial black hole of a thread. I am still curious about what you are against here. You rant about the gun's size, yet you claim to own one of their largest framed pistols (maybe not the biggest, but a G17 is a full size frame), yet you complain about it's size. Then you complain about the "torture tests" then cite an incident where you dropped your Glock on the cement, and it scratched the polymer, but did no damage, except cosmetic. I don't see how these "torture tests" have anything to do with what your posting. You stated that people who buy guns shouldn't be concerned about the torture tests, because they do not fit the reality of what most people need in a gun, then you cite corrosion resistance as a problem that we SHOULD be concerned about. Hate to break it to you bub, but the tennifer finish on a glock is pretty darned corrosion resistant, and polymer wont corrode. You balk about concealibility of the GLOCK, however if you have noticed, they have some pretty darned small pistols, and S&W compacts are about the same size, or larger, and have more external pieces that stick out that I would find annoying. Do I care about the "torture tests?" Not really. However I do see them as good marketing. When Glock came out, I imagine they had to proove that their plastic framed pistol was able keep up with steel, so they "torture tested" them so show buyers that their plastic was tough. Do they fit reality, in a strict sense, nope. But if you look at the totality of the circumstances, any sane person would concede that if a pistol could do something outlandishly more difficult, then it could withstand the normal everyday problems it would likely come up against.

[Jack Malloy]

Actually, I sold the g-17 years ago and replaced it with a High Power. Other than corrossion resistance, I find it to be a superior full size service 9 in every way to the g-17. Its more accurate. Just as, if not more reliable. I have fired fifty year old High Powers and we don't yet know how polymer frames will stand up to the decades. What with the thumb safety its safer,and it certainly feels better in the hand. The balance is such, you seldom notice the weight difference.
When I am in a situation where I need super lightweight and corrossion resistance, I pack a G-19, or more often a Chief special in .357. If I think there is a chance that the gun will be lost or stolen, I pack the Gock. Its my version of a Saturday night Special. When carried, its generally in a kydex paddle rig or a coat or vest pocket. I got tired of packing it IWB a long time ago.

I see that you choose to overlook the torture test that was performed in SWAT magazine a few years back where they took a box of Glocks, dissassembeld them and biult a parts gun. It fired about 2,700 rounds or so before a spring broke. That's your idea of durable?
I think that's an applicable test, because it was supposed to show that the parts were realy interchangeable and supposedly needed no handfitting.
Remember, at the factory they are assembling these things the same way.

The same spring linkage is notoriously failure prone in other examples of the Glock line from what I can recall. I would be more impressed if it were improved than I am from seeing one driven over by a truck, which is the point of this thread.
Why are some gullible goofs so impressed by a gun not squishing when a truck runs over it, but they completely overlook things like flimsy linkages prone to breakage or ADs? The pricey USP has had it's own issues, by the way.
Unfortunately some people who are more easily influenced by marketing hype chose to pout, shout and let their feelings out because they feel hurt when the reality of such silliness is questioned, than to use their reasoning and deductive abilties and ask questions like "why are these new generation of guns less flat than the earlier generation of semi autos."

Oh and Stephen, for all the crybabies out there, I can honestly say I would rather be a troll than a mail order ninja or a chairborn ranger any day, because if I remember the other fairy tales right, a troll at least is a fearsome beast that really knows how to fight. As opposed to supposedly big boys who sit and pout because somebody pointed out their prize toy is not as perfect as the sly carney who sold them on it.

[Jack Malloy]

So tell us Handy,
How many guns have you dropped down stairwells over the years?
Do you do that often? Why?
What do the neighbors think?

Pow- to the moon, Alice!




>>>Jack,

Your "logic" now includes that being in a stairwell with a gun is "fantasy".


Good night, Gracie.
<<<

[Handy]

I've dropped a gun just as many times as you've been in a gunfight.

[stephen426]

Jack,

Someone should consider starting a poll about the reliability of the Glocks. This ought to give is real world information about the failure rate of the springs. I have had mine for about 5 years and I have yet to have a single jam, hiccup, misfire, or any malfunction what so ever. As for the torture test where SWAT magazine assembled a Glock from various parts, have you considered that there could be some human error involved in the reassembly process? Even if there wasn't people have fired thousands and thousands of rounds from their Glocks without problems. They have a very good reputation for their reliability.

Like I said, carry what you feel comfortable with but knocking a product based on its marketing campaign or dislike of its aesthetics is not important to most people. The reliability and durability of the Glock is what is important.

As for the accidental discharges, are you going to argue that guns go off themselves or admit that EVERY SINGLE ACCIDENTAL DISCHARGE IS CAUSED BY HUMAN ERROR. Do some guns go bang with fewer steps than others? Yes. Do some guns have lighter triggers than others? Yes. Safety lies first and foremost with the person handling the gun, and then the built in safeties.

[Tamara]

Good night, Gracie.

Indeed.

Jack Malloy, check your PMs.