What I Don't Like About Glock...

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Sgt127

What other guns are carried half cocked safely?

Both a 1911 and a Colt SAA, it is considered dangerous to carry half cocked.

Only since the striker fired “Glock” era, has this been the norm.

Ruger LCP(Not LCP-2)..

[Nanuk]

Only since the striker fired “Glock” era, has this been the norm.

Because there is a safety to prevent it from inadvertently firing. The steel pin requires the trigger to be pulled to be fired. It does not matter how much you push on the cruciform, it is not going to fire.

Unless someone removes or tampers with the safety features.

You just cannot get over the fact that the Glock, as designed is safe.

[TunnelRat]

A lot of the argument here seems to be around carrying a Glock appendix because doing so results in a tensioned, whether fully or not, striker pointed at your femoral artery. I find it interesting that the majority of the concern here seems to be in the mechanical device itself, which has multiple internal safeties that would have to fail in order for it to fire, rather than the placement of the holster itself. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the probability of all of the internal safeties of the Glock failing in a manner needed for what would be a true accidental discharge (though there might be some question of if there is still negligence in allowing a pistol to get to such a mechanical state) is less than the probability of having a negligent discharge, probably by a noticeable amount. If the concern is damage to the femoral artery, a pretty reasonable concern, then maybe consider changing the location of your holster, regardless of trigger type?

[TxFlyFish]

Have there been cases where a Glock fired a round because the internal safeties failed

[pblanc]

I don't know how extensively the Glock has been drop tested with the trigger tab safety disabled. The trigger tab safety, being polymer, could certainly potentially fail. If so, a drop at the right angle resulting in sufficient inertial trigger travel could render the internal safeties moot.

This was the issue with the SIG P320 which omitted a trigger tab safety.

[Nanuk]

Have there been cases where a Glock fired a round because the internal safeties failed

Not that I know of. They have fired when something interacted with the trigger though.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by pblanc

I don't know how extensively the Glock has been drop tested with the trigger tab safety disabled. The trigger tab safety, being polymer, could certainly potentially fail. If so, a drop at the right angle resulting in sufficient inertial trigger travel could render the internal safeties moot.

This was the issue with the SIG P320 which omitted a trigger tab safety.

I'm curious why the trigger tab being polymer means it could certainly fail. It being polymer keeps it light weight, which is important for the function of that part. Something would also have to strike the trigger tab with significant force to break it (as polymer has some flex) when it is protected by the trigger guard. It being polymer means it won't rust or corrode. I've actually never seen a case of that polymer tab failing. Does someone have an example?

I feel like this thread has a bit of a case of the what ifs, when there don't seem to be anything more than rumor to back up these scenarios as ever having happened. If we're going to go that route that's fine, but then we can what if ways for most systems to fail.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[JohnKSa]

Have there been cases where a Glock fired a round because the internal safeties failed.

It's not impossible although I don't know of any offhand. What's more likely is that modifications or even drop-in parts have disabled safeties resulting in unintentional discharges.

I don't know how extensively the Glock has been drop tested with the trigger tab safety disabled. The trigger tab safety, being polymer, could certainly potentially fail. If so, a drop at the right angle resulting in sufficient inertial trigger travel could render the internal safeties moot.

It is certainly true that without the trigger safety, the Glock is not drop safe at some angles. In fact, in the worst case scenario (dropped directly onto the back of the slide onto a hard surface) the drop height would only need to be about 4 feet to fire the gun without the trigger safety. At least that's what the numbers I ran indicate.

It is also true that the trigger tab safety could break, as could any mechanical device. I've never heard of that happening, but there's no such thing as "break-proof" in the real world. That said, it's going to take a significant amount of force to break a functional trigger safety and it's very easy to check the trigger safety to see if it's functional. It's not a failure I would worry about.

Again, the more likely problem is modifications to the gun. When people try to reduce the trigger travel distance on a Glock, it's very possible that this can result in a situation where the trigger safety, and potentially other safeties, can be disabled.

Here are the things that people should worry about with Glocks.

*Not carrying in a rigid/semi-rigid holster that completely protects the trigger. Trigger motion is designed to disable the internal passive safeties. Not protecting the trigger is like carefully locking up your house and then hanging the key on the outside of the front door.
*Drop-in parts/modifications that result in trigger travel reduction. This can inadvertently disable the internal safeties, resulting in a gun that is not safe to carry.
*Modifications or damage to, or excessive wear of the firing pin safety, connector or trigger guard housing.
*Excessive wear on the firing pin and/or firing pin safety where they interact. This could either cause the gun to fail to fire or disable the firing pin safety.
*Insufficient engagement between the trigger bar and the striker lug.
*Unauthorized disassembly of the firing pin safety from the slide. Improper reassembly can cause the firing pin safety to jam in the fire position or make the gun hard to fire.
*Unauthorized disassembly of the trigger spring. Improper reassembly can cause the trigger to fail to reset.
*Excessive wear to the connector "ear" or the ramp/cam inside the slide that the connector "ear" rides against. This interaction disconnects the trigger bar from the connector, disabling the trigger. It's part of what prevents the gun from firing out of battery. The more wear there is, the farther back the slide can be out of battery and still fire. The ramp should have a tiny dab of light grease on it to prevent wear, and if a groove develops in the slide or the ear flattens significantly compared to a new connector, the gun should be examined by a certified armorer.
*Trigger block gadgets that place the polymer spring of the trigger safety under constant compression. This can actually damage the polymer spring, resulting in a trigger safety that won't go back to the safe position when it is released.

[krimmie]

It’s not the gun I don’t like, it’s the rigid holsters you must wear to keep things out of the trigger guard.


I prefer a soft leather holster, or even something synthetic like Uncle Mikes type holsters, and since I carry appendix or 4 o’clock, a manual safety is a must for me.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by krimmie

It’s not the gun I don’t like, it’s the rigid holsters you must wear to keep things out of the trigger guard.

That's true for just about any gun, yes? Something to protect the trigger?

[krimmie]

Originally Posted by USNRet93

That's true for just about any gun, yes? Something to protect the trigger?

I don’t feel it’s as crucial with a manual safety.

[zeke]

I don't "like" glocks because they do not fit my hand, and the triggers are spongy. However 2 of them are owned, and no plans on selling them. The excellent old man sights, reliability, easily available/affordable mags and aftermarket overide my dislikes. My use of them is an option for defensive pistol. Never owned one until gen 4 came out with varying backstraps. Now have a model 19 and 42. Would be able to shoot them more accurately (50 yds), if didn't own any other handguns.

[Skans]

You just cannot get over the fact that the Glock, as designed is safe.

I think what most people can't get over regarding the Glock's external safety is that they put put it right on the tip of the trigger. I never quite understood this either, to be honest. it's like putting a trigger on a trigger...the trigger won't work until you press the trigger on the trigger first. Glock could have done the same thing with a grip safety and no trigger-trigger.

[TunnelRat]

I think what most people can't get over regarding the Glock's external safety is that they put put it right on the tip of the trigger. I never quite understood this either, to be honest. it's like putting a trigger on a trigger...the trigger won't work until you press the trigger on the trigger first. Glock could have done the same thing with a grip safety and no trigger-trigger.

Because it's not really an external safety in that manner. It's primary purpose really isn't to stop the firearm from discharging were a finger negligently pressed against the trigger. What it is is a method to prevent inertia from firing the pistol were the firearm dropped muzzle up and the trigger driven rearward by inertia. The tab stops this as a result of it's very small mass and spring (if my understanding is slightly off there John can correct me). It can secondarily serve a purpose of stopping some snagging that doesn't directly hit the trigger tab, but that's not really it's main purpose.

I actually like this system better than a grip safety in terms of stopping interial drops. It involves fewer parts and seems to me to be less likely to cause a problem both from fouling or from a less than ideal grip, which may well occur in a defensive situation (a number of the shooters of old used to rubber band down the grip safety on the 1911).

I'd add that with the exception of the HS2000 and then the XD, XDm, almost all other manufacturers have gone with that same type of system. HK, Walther, S&W and FN use a hinge rather than a separate tab but the concept is the same, etc. It's basically become the industry standard. SIG went with a system that in theory shouldn't require the tabbed safety (though their own marketing materials from the release of the P320 did list an option for a tabbed trigger that to my knowledge never materialized). They then had the issues we're all familiar with. Had they just added a tabbed trigger, they likely wouldn't have had the issue.

[Brownstone322]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

I'm curious why the trigger tab being polymer means it could certainly fail. It being polymer keeps it light weight, which is important for the function of that part.

Bingo! I'll assume we all remember the SIG P320 debacle (I'll be so bold as to call it a debacle), and the root cause of the issue was inertial mass that allowed the trigger to keep going when the firearm hit the floor abruptly.

I don't think we want or need a steel trigger tab.

[Ruger45LC]

Everyone is different and I'm cool if a person doesn't like Glocks. To me, they're the gold standard really. I've had many, and still have some around, as a matter of fact all my pistols are Glocks. Over the years I've dropped them and considering I always carry with one in the chamber, they've never went off. I don't mean lightly dropping them, I mean dropping the on concrete and one time I was running with one on, it came out of the junk holster I was carrying and on the way down my leg hit it and I essentially kicked it across about 20ft of gravel. Scuffed up some, but no discharge. So yes, I completely trust Glock handguns.

The trigger, I think, is good ONCE YOU LEARN IT. Quite frankly a lot of people don't know how to shoot a Glock well and then blame the trigger, but once you get the muscle memory down for the trigger reset, do a lot of dry firing then take that to range with you, you might just find that the trigger isn't bad at all and your groups are MUCH smaller than before.

But again, everyone is different. I've had many other kinds of pistols but I always come back to Glocks because they're simple, reliable, rugged and accurate.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Brownstone322

Bingo! I'll assume we all remember the SIG P320 debacle (I'll be so bold as to call it a debacle), and the root cause of the issue was inertial mass that allowed the trigger to keep going when the firearm hit the floor abruptly.



I don't think we want or need a steel trigger tab.

A lot of aftermarket companies use lightweight aluminum. My guess is machining that, given that they already have the CNC equipment, is cheaper than setting up molds. Plus the metal is considered by many to be more premium and have a better feel. I think metal can work fine, but honestly polymer works great for this purpose too.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[lordvader]

What I don't like about them is:
There to boxy and wide, I don't care for plastic guns, they are not as accurate as my 1911's, No external safety, so 9 x out of 10 its carried with an empty chamber. What I do like about it: Very reliable, magazine capacity, 9mm ammunition is cheap, and my G19 fits its leather holster perfect. I do carry it on hunting trips as a sidearm. Although, not a tack driver, it is accurate enough for its intended purpose.

[TailGator]

It's primary purpose really isn't to stop the firearm from discharging were a finger negligently pressed against the trigger. What it is is a method to prevent inertia from firing the pistol were the firearm dropped muzzle up and the trigger driven rearward by inertia.

There is an also the element that an object has to move into the trigger guard from the side and then move almost straight back to activate the trigger. Rigid objects that approach the trigger from a sufficiently oblique angle don't depress the dingus, and objects that approach from a sufficiently acute angle to don't clear the guard. What it doesn't do well is account for soft objects like clothing, floppy holsters, and drawstrings.

It’s not the gun I don’t like, it’s the rigid holsters you must wear to keep things out of the trigger guard.

I prefer a soft leather holster, or even something synthetic like Uncle Mikes type holsters, and since I carry appendix or 4 o’clock, a manual safety is a must for me.

When I carry a single action with a thumb safety, I want both the thumb safety and the trigger to be covered by the holster. (The specific pistol of mine is a Sig P238.) The length of the trigger throw has to be considered in the safety of your setup.

[TunnelRat]

I prefer a soft leather holster, or even something synthetic like Uncle Mikes type holsters, and since I carry appendix or 4 o’clock, a manual safety is a must for me.

I have nothing against leather. A good leather holster should be somewhat rigid around the trigger guard, at least enough to maintain its shape and not collapse. Stiff objects don't have to have sharp objects that poke you. There are any number of negligent discharges from folks using soft nylon holsters that fold in on themselves. Would this have been stopped by a DA/SA trigger? It seems possible it could. To me though these are, in many cases, junk holsters. They don't do what a holster should really do. To me there are options that are still comfortable that don't have these problems. In my experience many people will dish out $500+ on a new pistols and then spend $20 on a holster. I don't think a holster has to be $100+, but some people are asking for trouble. For me when it comes to holsters I use Safariland as the minimum. It's usually well thought out and decently made.

[davidsog]

the Glock is not drop safe at some angles.

Blasphemer

[TxFlyFish]

More people have been injured whining and bickering about smooth vs ridged trigger face than the actual trigger safety failing...trust me

[JohnKSa]

the Glock is not drop safe at some angles.

"It is certainly true that without the trigger safety, the Glock is not drop safe at some angles."

[ritepath]

Mostly my beef is with their owners being arrogant and more often than not insisting only glock makes a reliable gun.

"they shoot themselves"
"cops use them"
"I can buy parts in a vending machine"
"they only have 3 moving parts"
"glock glock glock glock glock"


As for me I'd come closer voting D than owning a glock. (unless it was a g20sf or G40)

[amd6547]

I keep hearing about arrogant Glock owners poluting pistol threads online...
But all I see are absurd threads like this one insulting Glocks and those who happen to like them,