What I Don't Like About Glock...

[tipoc]

Well, yeah...look at the title..Still looking for that 'why I hate Sig' thread...

They were pushed out of the way by the popularity of the "I hate 1911s" threads.

tipoc

[tipoc]

Well I also found this which quotes from the Glock website a few years back, well 12 years now. 2007.

yellowsulphur
10-05-2007, 3:15 AM
I found this on Glocktalk. Hope it helps.

Glock Pistol Upgrades

1990 Upgrade

Glock Model 19, 9mm Luger caliber, requires an upgrade for the following serial numbers:

AN, BP, BR, BV, BW, BX, DL, DM, DN, DP, DR, DS, DT, DV, DW, DX, DY, DZ
These pistols may have the potential of the action to malfunction as follows:
1. The slide locking back on a full magazine.
2. Failure to lock into battery because the barrel lug drags on the slide lock.
3. The magazine follower tips or sticks in the magazine tube.

1992, 6 part Upgrade

GLOCK, INC. Technical Bulletin #920403

April 1, 1992

Glock, Inc. announces a production change of the firing pin safety system. This new firing pin safety system has been installed in all production Glock pistols since November, 1991. A voluntary upgrade is being offered to maintain the Glock tradition of ensuring that all of our pistoils are up to the latest standards in 21st century Glock technology.

Most importantly, the components of the new firing pin safety system are not interchangable with the components of the old systam and Glock will always strive towards maintaining this feature of interchangability while working to ensure future interchangability.

The upgraded firing pin safety system consists of: the firing pin, firing pin safety, the extractor, the spring loaded bearing and the trigger bar. The upgraded system is applicable only to Glock pistols with the following serial number ranges :

Glock 17 - alpha prefix AA - WF
Glock 21 - alpha prefixes through XL
Glock 19 - alpha prefixes through WJ Glock 22 - alpha prefixes through YA
Glock 20 - alpha prefixes thorugh WW Glock 23 - alpha prefixes through SK

The upgraded firing pin safety has a new surface finish making it nearly 100% saltwater corrosion resistant. Also, after rigorous and extensive testing, the new system proves to be more durable and has a longer useful life. Here, as always, Glock is working toward maintaining its standard of perfection.

1993, G19 Upgrade

Glock Model 19, 9mm Luger caliber, requires an upgrade for all pistols.

These pistols have the potential for an UNINTENTIONAL DISCHARGE of a cartridge with the action open.

The Glock model 19 pistol slide has a bottom protrusion, whose function is to push cartridges from the top of the magazine into the chamber. When the pistol is jammed in a double feed situation, the slide protrusion can come in contact with the primer of the jammed cartridge and cause UNINTENTIONAL DISCHARGE while the action is open.

2000, G26/27 Recoil spring upgrade

Glock Model 26, 9mm caliber, serial numbers DGU, DHR DKU.

Glock Model 27, .40S&W caliber, serial numbers DGD, DGV, DHS, DHT, DKV, DKW, DKX.

Mr. Don Bulver, warranty department of Glock, Inc., indicated the recoil springs produced before September 1999 may shear off on some of these pistols due to over hardness of the support tube.

Replacement springs will be distinguished by a vertical mark from the center on the front polymer portion of outer ring of the guide rod assembly, which will appear to be a mold line.

2002 Frame Upgrade – Rear slide rail

The GLOCK Corporation has identified a problem with a very small percentage of GLOCK pistols produced between September of 2001 and May of 2002. The specific problem that has been identified is the potential of breaking a rear frame rail in pistols manufactured during this time period. Within the specific range the breakage rate has been less than 0.0188%. So, while the actual percentage of rails reported broken is within any accepted manufacturing tolerance, it is not an acceptable situation to the GLOCK Corporation. It is also important to note that under most conditions GLOCK pistols will continue to function with three rails. A routine maintenance check after each time the pistol has been taken out and used would immediately indicate if there is a problem.

We are, therefore, concerned that a limited number of customers will not get the product we have promised them and what we have always delivered, the very best pistol on the market, in short, a GLOCK.

For these reasons, we have made the decision that in the interest of customer service, replacement frames will be offered to anyone who has a firearm in this range and decides to take advantage of this offer. The replacement frames will have identical serial numbers to our customer's original firearm except the numeral 1 will be added as a prefix. If you believe your firearm is within this range, please call 1-866-225-4098 to take advantage of the ultimate in customer service.

Nothing less than the best for our customers is acceptable to GLOCK and, as always, we will continue to work towards Perfection.

It appears that only serial numbers starting with "E", "GSSF", or "USA" (American Hero’s Commemoratives) are affected. In general, the chronological serial number set that has the prefix letters of "EKA" through "EVR" inclusive appear to be the affected Glocks, regardless of caliber. Three letters precede three numbers on a plate forward of the trigger guard on the underside of the polymer frame. However, some aberrations to this generalization have been reported by GTers. Reports are that the affected Glocks were manufactured from September 2001 to May 2002. So if you bought (or won a GSSF Glock) an "E" or "USA" series Glock in September of 2001 up until the present day, you might have an affected Glock. Unfortunately, Glock has not published a list. Hope this helps, but again, if you are responsible enough to own a gun and can read this, you are smart enough to check for yourself by calling Glock.

August 8, 2005 - The Glock G36 issue

Glock prides itself in the quality of its pistol and the quality of its manufacturing process. Despite our high standards, however, it has recently come to our attention through our quality testing efforts that a limited number of Glock Model 36 pistols may have an abnormality that could possibly interfere with the operation of the Glock trigger safety. The affected pistols require a simple but necessary modification to ensure the trigger safety operates as intended. IT IS ESSENTIAL FOR THE SAFE OPERATION OF YOUR GLOCK 36 THAT THIS MODIFICATION BE MADE AT GLOCK'S U.S. HEADQUARTERS IN SMYRNA, GA.

If you possess a Glock Model 36 with a serial number in the ranges below PLEASE IMMEDIATELY UNLOAD THE FIREARM AND CLEAR THE CHAMBER. Deliver the pistol to :
1. A UPS Hub (not a store)
2. The place of business where you purchased the firearm of a dealer in your area with a daily UPS pick up.

***Always have the package boxed and labeled with the preprinted return label attached***
If you have any problems with this UPS shipping procedure, please contact Costumer Service toll free at 1-800-701-1558.

Glock will quickly perform the modification and return your pistol to you at no cost. The serial number of your Glock 36 can be found on the silver serial number plate located on the underside of the frame towards the front of the pistol.

The affected serial number ranges are:
GLM 000-999
GRC 500-999

... If you have any questions or concerns please call Glock, Inc. Customer Service toll free at: 1-866-538-3517

Now I have to point out that all gun companies issue recalls and that from time to time batches of guns malfunction or have defective parts. That's normal. It's also true that actual use in the field reveals weaknesses that were not apparent in the factory development or test protocols.

If you've read Paul Barrett's book on Glocks you are aware that Glock, more than any other gun company, it seems, hates to admit that any aspect of it's products are unsafe. Though all gun companies don't like to admit to it due to potential liability suits. So that is not directly mentioned in the 6 part trigger upgrades of 1992 noted above by Glock. They did do a substantial upgrade of the trigger system. It is quite possible that this was linked to issues that effected larger contracts with law enforcement or the military.

tipoc

[Ignition Override]

Ironic. I'm a better shot with my friend's 9mm Glock than with my Sig P228s, Sig P6, CZ 'PCR' (75D) and .380 Russian Makarov.

But I prefer the all-metal (mostly) composition, looks and features of my handguns. That gun club friend states now and then "You will own a Glock".
As rugged/reliable as Glocks are-they are superb-I own three German-proofed Sigs plus these other guns instead.

With the CZ, shooter P228 and for summer carry, the .380 Mak, I don't need a substitute or an additional carry gun.
But If I did (am a lefty), and If **HK USP 9mm Compacts** had a better DA pull, it would be this.

But this isn't what's most critical. It's situational awareness-not so cool to talk about...and this generates far less cash flow for guns and accessories which can resemble those of SEAL Team 6 and GSG-9.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Again, for those that did not care so much for the Glock, especially the lack of a safety. the New Mossberg may be a huge hit. And many will like the Crossbolt safety. A crossbolt, while not my favorite on a shotgun, might just be very easy to use on a Pistol.
I won't buy a Glock, but I really want to try out the Mossberg. And Mossberg is really telling their vendors to focus on the Better Accuracy which they tested against the Glock 43.

I think the Mossberg is going to bust Glock in the.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

Again, for those that did not care so much for the Glock, especially the lack of a safety. the New Mossberg may be a huge hit. And many will like the Crossbolt safety. A crossbolt, while not my favorite on a shotgun, might just be very easy to use on a Pistol.

I won't buy a Glock, but I really want to try out the Mossberg. And Mossberg is really telling their vendors to focus on the Better Accuracy which they tested against the Glock 43.



I think the Mossberg is going to bust Glock in the.

I think it's very early to make any predictions about how the Mossberg will or won't do.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[JohnKSa]

Dean Speirs GunZone did go out of business and the domain name sold. It was the only place that I know of that collected and followed articles on Glock with a critical eye. it was valuable for that if occasionally over the top in some claims.

I'm not saying I fact-checked everything on his website, but in my experience, his information was good. He was obviously concerned with getting the details right. Some people really got bent out of shape over some of his coverage--he never pulled punches and that irritated some people.

His website content can still be found on the web archive.

On the original question: Did Glock have any UD's having to do with it's mechanical safeties and failures of that and the answer is yes. Upgrades were done to the trigger system which corrected this. Glock did not issue a recall and performed the upgrade over a number of years in the 1990s. The Gen 2 guns were introduced before the upgrades.

Gun Tests magazine, and others made the link between Suffolk Co. and the firing pin upgrades. I quoted these above.

Upgrades to the frame were made following the DEA testing.

The first upgrades related to unintentional discharges were announced in 1992.

Based on additional research, it seems extremely unlikely that the Suffolk ADs are what caused Glock to design the upgrade parts although it may have been what prompted them to make the public announcement.

Earlier, I stated that the DEA "Frisbee" testing took place in 1992. That was incorrect, it took place in 1991. By the time the Suffolk ADs took place in January of 1992, Glock already had hundreds of the upgrade parts on hand and had been selling new pistols with upgraded parts since November 1991, as indicated in the upgrade announcement you quoted:

"This new firing pin safety system has been installed in all production Glock pistols since November, 1991."

Here is some information from TheGunZone:

"The DEA "Frisbee Test"
While Suffolk County P.D.'s "AD heard 'round the world" certainly lent impetus to Glock's "going public" with its upgrade, clearly this is something that had been in the works for a considerable period of time, and well before October 1991.

Documents first provided by a source professing to be knowledgeable about the situation, and buttressed by other documents released under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, indicate that failure during the "Frisbee" portion of the 1991 test protocols (DEA-91-R-0023), led to the Austrian pistols being "rated as unacceptable" for broader adoption by the Federal law enforcement agency. (Whereas Glocks had been one of several DEA-approved handguns, subsequent to the tests, the agency selected the SIG P228 as their "official" handgun and removed Glock as an option. No existing Glocks were removed from service, however, and Glock's Walter stated at the time that "Glock is not going to protest the test results, since we feel they were fair and equitable.")"

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

If the tread bothers you then move on. If you want to post a thread titled "why I hate Sigs, then do so." I love the internet, some guy hates the thread and then just keeps posting. Some things never change.

It doesn't bother me, and hate? Hate a really big word..I am very satisfied with my gun choices. Discussion group, discussing..Not angry, more amused than upset. 'Which gun is 'better', with something so subjective, is always amusing. I think a person can only 'hate' a gun if it's really unreliable..

Like I said, I've been in the bicycle business for a long time and I see the same gig with Rapha and Campagnolo(fans of both, along with Glock)..Also, mention 'Iphone or 'Apple'..same thing.

No Sig anything for me, BTW..and I don't 'hate' them, just don't 'fit' me like my Glocks do...Plus the hammer/safety/decocker gig..not a fan.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

Again, for those that did not care so much for the Glock, especially the lack of a safety. the New Mossberg may be a huge hit. And many will like the Crossbolt safety. A crossbolt, while not my favorite on a shotgun, might just be very easy to use on a Pistol.
I won't buy a Glock, but I really want to try out the Mossberg. And Mossberg is really telling their vendors to focus on the Better Accuracy which they tested against the Glock 43.

I think the Mossberg is going to bust Glock in the.

Why? Do you hate them? We'll see if the Mossberg busts anything with regards to Glock..I'm thinking Glock will be just fine('few' more offerings than Mossberg, handgun wise)..Now M&P Shield, particularly with Sig 965 and Glock 43x..I'd be concerned if I was 'Mr M&P'...

PLUS, a well designed striker pistol..it has many safeties if designed well. An external one will make some more comfy..and some won't buy it because of that. Ruger's LC9S 'Pro(no safety), outsells the one with a safety, many times over.

[Tactical Jackalope]

I like HK.
HK is my favorite manufacturer.
I carry a Glock.
It fits my needs and I run them, yes, run. For defensive purposes. Better than I do my HKs.

So I carry a Glock.

I don't look too into it. The people who carry them. The Gucci gang that drops $4,500 into one. Or anyone else.

I don't dismiss and or have an irrational hatred towards them for those reasons or any other reasons either. One of my best friends does. It's sad.

If you don't like it or don't want to try it, don't. People keep recommending them? Ignore it? I'm not speaking like a know it all..But don't give in to anyone and let them trigger you over a piece of plastic and metal that they "love". Which is the other side of it. I get it...It's a bit much at times, but that's how misinformation spreads.

Like "HK hAs ThE wOrSt CuStOmEr SeRvIcE"....No....It doesn't. In fact my other best friend was denied a spare part from Glock because of a $0.25 trigger job. So we all have experiences differing from one another.

Sorry for the ramble.

[tipoc]

John,

Thanks for the clarifications.

I also agree with you on Speirs. He strove to be accurate.

tipoc

[gc70]

Originally Posted by USNRet93

Now M&P Shield, particularly with Sig 965 and Glock 43x..I'd be concerned if I was 'Mr M&P'...

A lot of people have preferences for different brands of guns, but that is not always the deciding factor. I own more Sigs than any other brand, but found the P365 felt too small in my hand.

And many more people are price-conscious. 'Mr M&P' is probably not too concerned with Shields priced at half of a comparable Sig or Glock.

[Laz]

USNRet93 - you said

Ruger's LC9S 'Pro(no safety), outsells the one with a safety, many times over.

Just out of curiosity, why then did Ruger discontinue the safetyless LC9S Pro?

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Laz

USNRet93 - you said
Just out of curiosity, why then did Ruger discontinue the safetyless LC9S Pro?

Did they?..they are on Ruger website..the one at top of page is indeed the 'Pro' model

Safety features include integrated trigger safety, manual safety, magazine disconnect and an inspection port that allows for visual confirmation of a loaded or empty chamber. Pro Models come without manual safety and magazine disconnect.

https://www.ruger.com/products/lc9s/models.html

[gc70]

Originally Posted by USNRet93

Did they?..they are on Ruger website..the one at top of page is indeed the 'Pro' model

Ruger's LC9s page only lists Distributor Exclusive models. If you look on distributor websites (i.e. Davidson's), many of those models are sold out.

The LC9s model is not listed at all in the current Ruger catalog.

[Laz]

I guess a follow up observation and question would be why has Ruger not offered a “pro” version of the EC9S that seems to be replacing the LC9S. I can understand the EC9S. It lowers the price and goes after the more budget-conscious end of a very lucrative market but that is also a very crowded market. I would think a safety-less EC9S would be a big seller IF your hypothesis is correct. You may yet prove right, though, and perhaps an EC9S “Pro” will be coming.

[USNRet93]

Not sure the EC is going to replace the LC but the fact remains, some buy a striker because of an external safety and some won’t buy it because it HAS an external safety. I maintain(and I am no armorer in any way) that a properly designed striker, with internal safeties and not a fully cocked external hammer, doesn’t need an external safety. But some disagree..I carry my glocks with one in the chamber all the time, ymmv and all that. If Glock suddenly offered a G43/19/43x/42 with an external safety, I doubt any present Glock carriers would buy it cuz of that. I wouldn’t.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/...tion.jpg?w=960

I guess this heroic gentleman, up for one of the top UK medals, seems to be ok with carrying a Glock. I wonder if he can't shoot it because of the grip angle.

Also check out https://elitedefenceonline.com/inayat-kassam/

He was heroic at the two attack in Kenya despite the grip angle.

[44 AMP]

I maintain(and I am no armorer in any way) that a properly designed striker, with internal safeties and not a fully cocked external hammer, doesn’t need an external safety.

One can also maintain that no firearm needs an external safety.

Personally, I find a safety to generally be a useful and desirable thing. I require either a manual safety (safety lock) or an external hammer or I'm not interested in the pistol. I don't mind if it has both.

I don't understand people who avoid guns with safeties, I think it like avoiding a certain car because it has an emergency brake. However, beyond firing an adequate cartridge, accurately and dependably, its not about what one needs, its about what one wants. If you want or don't want certain design features on your pistol, there has never been more variety available than there is today.

I don't own a Glock, or similar pistol. I don't have a need for them that I can see, and I don't want them. I have used several, and don't care for the combination of qualities it has, and doesn't have. The package simply doesn't appeal to me. If you think they are God's gift to shooting, by all means, enjoy! I walk a different path.

[dgludwig]

Personally, I find a safety to generally be a useful and desirable thing. I require either a manual safety (safety lock) or an external hammer or I'm not interested in the pistol. I don't mind if it has both.

I'm of the very same opinion. I don't expect others to necessarily share my viewpoint(s) nor am I critical of anyone else's convictions. Lots of different things in life that people have different likes and dislikes about without one opinion being better or worse than another. Who's to say?

[Hawg]

I guess this heroic gentleman, up for one of the top UK medals, seems to be ok with carrying a Glock. I wonder if he can't shoot it because of the grip angle.

What's that got to do with anything? It's about what you're comfortable with. If I had grown up shooting Glocks instead of 1911's I'd probably think everything else felt weird. For me a Glock naturally points about a foot high at 10 feet. Add to that they're fat and have an extremely long trigger pull plus I just like hammers. If you like Glocks then fine, I don't.

[amd6547]

I shot 1911's and HiPowers for decades, and the Glocks point like a finger, for me.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Any competent handgun user unless you have some type of hand problem should be able to shoot a Glock, 1911 or SW 686 effectively. That’s why I am amused by the I can’t shoot a XYZ comments to be silly.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Hardly silly, Yes, I can shoot any gun made, but that in NO WAY means it is the best fit. A Glock DOES NOT FIT MY HAND. IT NATURALLY POINTS LOW. I HAVE TO ACTUALLY MENTALLY RAISE THE GUN WITH EACH SHOT.


No gun is a perfect fit for all, no matter what the Glock CNN crowd tell you. For God sake get out and shoot other guns and make your own decision instead of being lead around like a bunch of mindless Sheep!

[dgludwig]

For God sake get out and shoot other guns and make your own decision instead of being lead around like a bunch of mindless Sheep!

Whoa, Nelly! We're talking about guns here; not where we're going to go after we die. Nothing about this discussion is nearly as important as you seem to think it is. Catch your breath and slow down a bit (just my admittedly unsolicited advice ).

[TunnelRat]

If a Glock points low for you, most pistols should point even lower...usually it's the other way around.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk