What I Don't Like About Glock...

[Cirdan]

If you're that concerned about the lack of a safety, there's a product call Saf-T-Block that slips in behind the trigger to prevent ND's. There's an adjustable tension post. When you need to fire the gun, a tap with the finger will push it out from behind the trigger.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Skans

If that's what the Mods decide - it is up to them. I did check the rules and do not see where I have violated any of them. In any event, I just wanted to express what I personally do not like about Glocks. I would hope you understand that I am not trashing the gun - there is nothing wrong with the gun. It's just not the end-all be-all gun for everyone. I pointed out several reasons why it just doesn't work well for me.

I have no experience wit this model. An easy to conceal 10-shot 9mm is appealing. I feel more comfortable with small DAO, DA/SA, and even 1911 style SAO guns, admittedly, none of the ones I own have 10 round capacities.

Glock 43x or Glock 48..

These threads are interesting...I am fairly new to handguns, only had my CCW for a year..have tried/owned a fair number of models, types, etc. Handguns, among the YUGE number and types out there..are a YUGE YMMV..like bicycles(I am a long term bike industry lizard..owned a shop for 13 years). Ones I really don't care for? Ruger, Sig..sorry, not a fan of either.

Put 3 people in a room and ask about handguns, get 5 or more opinions..

BTW-I am a BIG fan of Glock..they work, everyday. 42, 43, 19, 17..my sons are part of the Glock universe also. All 3 of us carry everyday, always one in the chamber..sorry, well made striker/plastic Glocks don't just 'go off'...

BUT these threads are kinda like discussing hammers..'my gosh, that hammer is a BEAUTY!!'..Not sure why anybody that carries or shoots a HG cares how it looks, but if you do, groovy!!..
BUT, I think how it works is more important..And gotta pick/choose/test ammo types cuz some don't work? Yikes..don't get that either. A modern HG 'ought' to be able to use successfully any proper caliber round..IMHO.

'Failures out of the box'..any single instance of any anything, is anecdotal and may make up somebody's mind for them but...all the Glocks I have owned or tested..maybe 3000-3500 rounds between all of them, I can count on 4/5 of one hand any FTF type stuff..I just got a really dirty -17 and about 1300 rounds of 'remanufacturered' 9mm ball ammo...I have 250(5 boxes) left and have zero failures of any kind..Cleaned it once.

BUT YMMV, subjective, 100%. What works for a gent that carries a full sized, 3 pound 1911 with all sorts of decockers/external safeties..won't 'work' for me.

"Tools not Trophies"

[tallball]

I didn't like Glocks; I didn't want to like Glocks.

As a teenager I had a Single Six that I shot all the time. When I was in my early 20's I got my first "real" handgun, a medium framed 4" 357. The next was probably my small-framed 2" 38 special. Within a couple of years I added a Beretta 92 and Hi-Power (both clones) and a Makarov. Those were my main handguns for a very long time... something like 20 years.

To me a "real" handgun was made of metal and had a hammer. I kind of preferred revolvers (still do), but the metal military type semiautos were perfectly okay.

I had handled Glocks at gun shows and the LGS, but never cared for the way they felt. Then my FiL picked up a G22 police trade-in for cheap and I shot it whenever he brought it to the range. I shot it well. The sights and trigger worked well for me. It felt a little funny in my hand at first, and the trigger felt a little odd at first, but I got used to them quickly.

When I got the chance to get my own sub-$300 G22 trade-in, I jumped right on it. Since then I've also picked up a G43 and a G26. I still shoot the G22 just fine, though there are many service pistols I shoot just as well, and a few I shoot better. I don't shoot any of my "CC sized" semiautos better than the G43/G26.

I don't dislike Glocks. I am still more of a revolver guy, and there are service pistols I prefer to my G22. But I've gotten used to the way that Glocks feel, mine go bang every time, and I shoot them fairly well. From my more experienced present-day point of view, there's really nothing to dislike.

[dontcatchmany]

I pretty much agree with the OP.

I have a G27 and also have a 9mm and a 357 Sig barrel for it.

I probably have 3,000+ rounds through it in all calibers.

Recently I had several failures and eventually replaced the RSA, Extractor and the Striker Safety Plunger. Has been flawless in all calibers through about 150 rounds since the changes and I am going to put another 100-200 rds through it today.


The reason I have shot it as much as I have is that I am stubborn and am going to learn how to shoot it better, even though other guns are much more accurate and comfortable in my hands.

As the OP said the trigger thingy ain't (my southern expression of emphasis) for me. Hurts my trigger finger for whatever reason and my index knuckle....the grip does not "feel" right.

However, dang it, I like the gun...lol. Why, mainly that it is a challenge in my hands when my Shields and FNH weapons are great for me.

I look at this type of thread to maybe get some "secret" to shooting the G27, some clue, some something. After all, Glocks are one of if not the most liked weapons by others.

I have learned a lot from the G27. I completely took it apart and put it back together a couple of times...and surprisingly did not have any parts left on the bench....lol! Never have taken any of my other weapons completely apart.

Bottom line is that I like the Glock in a way quite different from folks who swear by them. Mine will never be a trusted first option carry and it will reside in one of my vehicles as a backup or secondary back up and be a range toy.

I am determined to like it.

[pblanc]

I have a Glock 19 Gen 4.

I have adapted myself pretty much to the mediocre trigger.

I have become somewhat immune to its ugliness, so long as I don't stare at it for too long.

I can't abide the crappy stock sights, but at least those were easy to remove and replace with something decent.

I have even come to terms to some extent with the grip angle and palm swell on the back strap that cause it to not point naturally for me.

I absolutely could not tolerate the finger grooves, but at least the bumps were not that difficult to grind off the front strap.

But what I still have difficulty dealing with is that block, flat-sided grip. I just seem to have difficulty getting my support hand firmly applied to the side of it. I don't know if it is due to the size and shape of my hands and fingers, but it always feels as it there is an air space between my support hand and the grip, no matter how I adjust my grip.

[OhioGuy]

I respect everyone's opinions, but I'm continually lost as to why these things are even discussed. One person likes Glock, another likes something else. I shoot a CZ P-07 that I picked up for under $400 new. It fits my hand, I shoot it well, I got it milled for an RMR that I love, and it's never hiccuped over 3000+ rounds. Other people have exactly that experience with a dozen other brands of firearm. There will always be that one Glock, Ruger, CZ, Sig, etc. that has something break and someone will run off and think Brand X sucks.

If it fits your hand, you shoot it well and it runs reliably, a hammer is a hammer. Just about any "Plastic Nine" made today will run almost flawlessly and be entirely boring, which is what you want in a tool made for home and self defense. If pressed to pick a gun I love the most, it would probably be a .22 target pistol because it's fun and you can customize it to look like something out of Star Wars.

Glocks are great. CZ fits my hand better, as does S&W. They all poke holes in things.

[osbornk]

To me, the Glock is the generic handgun like the Toyota Camry is the generic mid-sized car. They are very reliable, available almost everywhere at a fairly reasonable price and uninspiring. The are both ordinary and many people like ordinary because they don't want the risk of disappointment.

[FireForged]

There may certainly be some merit to the things you have outlined but in order for [me]to accept the conditions you describe as being merited, I would have to regard the Glock from a hobbiest/enthusiast point of view and I tend to regard weapons as weapons and judge them based on reliability and capabilities. In my personal assessment, Glock does everything pretty darn well and although I may not enjoy the grip angle or its blocky ergonomics, those things are not really all that important [to me ] when considering a gun for what it is.

I do not have an affinity for any weapon, they are tools and they either work well in my hands or they don't. I have trained extensively with Glock and they have always worked very well in a variety of conditions. I consider them good guns.

Considering glock from a purely hobbiest point of view, sure.. I could submit some gripes but that's not really my gig.

[2wheelwander]

^^^ Great post. Nails it for me. Uninspiring, well said.

[44 AMP]

Glowing testimonials of 3,000, 30,000, or even 300,000 rounds without a failure of any kind are great, but when the gun in my hands malfunctions (and I have had GLocks do that) how reliable someone else's gun has been for them means very little to me.

There are a number of things about the GLock design I don't like. But those are personal matters. What I really detest is the combination of some people's slavish fanboy devotion and Glock corporate attitudes, over the years.

I don't care if you think Glocks are the best thing since sliced bread, canned beer, and friendly girls who smell nice, if your answer to every handgun question is "get a Glock!", you aren't convincing me. Likewise, when their answer to every problem is "its your fault, our product is perfection", that doesn't win points in my book, either.

[JDBerg]

Question: How many folks who don’t like Glocks have actually tried the newer 19x or the Model 45? Both are real winners, my 19x is my best 9mm Glock.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

My first wave Glock 42 was a horror. It jammed dead solid on the first shot. It later jammed all the time and once fired out of battery with smoke and flame coming out of the ejector port.

It had to go back for the mods they made to the first wave. Been OK since.

[Boarhunter]

Glocks are decent tools, but they have no souls.

BOARHUNTER

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I closed the other Glock thread when it became content less. That's a hint.

[amd6547]

Can’t believe the OP felt it necessary to start this thread about why he dislikes Glocks. It’s ridiculous. Who cares?
I happen to like my Glock 17 and 26 a lot. The G26 is in my belt right now. Neither has ever failed me. The trigger is good enough to allow me to repeatedly hit a 8” steel plate at 50yds offhand with my 26.
I’m 61. I started shooting young, and have owned most brands of the better service autos. I carried various Browning HiPowers for years. It took a long time to get into Glock’s, but once I spent some quality time with the G17, there was no doubt I would get the G26.
There are guns I don’t care for, but I sure don’t see a reason to start a thread like this, nor would I judge anybody else’s choice in pistols...it’s juvenile.

[5whiskey]

Could you provide details here? How many Glocks? Which ones? Were any modified in anyway from OEM? etc.

Question wasn’t directed at me, but I can attest that I’ve seen a couple of Glock failures. I’m in law enforcement at a 50 man agency. I have shot with everyone there for years. While we carry sig P227s right now, almost everyone qualifies with an off duty pistol or two. I’ve seen a G23 and a G30 of friends have failures. The G30 was brand new, first day out. I didn’t really hold it against the pistol as compact 45s shouldn’t be judged until a 200 or so round break in, IMO at least. Can’t remember if the owner worked it out or not. The G23 started stove piping at least once a mag. An extractor spring solved that iirc.

FWIW, I’ve seen countless other glocks run without a hiccup. The point is they don’t have mythical power. They can and do fail.

[JohnKSa]

I could make good money betting that the handgun in any ND is a Glock or another clone with a Glock-style trigger against all other gun models.

Probably not the way you mean.

Based on this poll, the single biggest cause of unintentional discharges is from a person INTENTIONALLY pulling the trigger (dryfiring) a gun they believe to be unloaded. This is a cause (and a problem) that is totally independent of gun model, and solely user related--and it will remain that way until someone comes up with a gun that can tell when a user wants to dryfire an unloaded gun and when they want to fire a loaded gun and prevents one while allowing the other.

Now, on the other hand, it is true that the Glock style trigger is on a lot of popular guns, and that means, that all else being equal, a lot of unintentional discharges will happen with that type of guns simply because there are a lot of them out there.

[TunnelRat]

the single biggest cause of unintentional discharges is from a person INTENTIONALLY pulling the trigger (dryfiring) a gun they believe to be unloaded

This has been the truth of stories in my area locally.

[Spats McGee]

I don't think anything in the world inspires as much awe or loathing as a Glock . . . unless it's a 1911. I'll start by echoing what somebody else said: I didn't like Glocks. I didn't want to like Glocks. And I spent about 30 years in that camp.

Originally Posted by Skans

Since the last thread about Glocks got closed before I could respond, I just wanted to explain three reasons why I personally find my Glock 17 to be one of my least favorite guns. Still, however, a gun that I keep and use.

1. I am not comfortable carrying a handgun with a relatively light trigger pull, with one in the pipe without an external safety that I can manually manipulate. I've been a gun-owner for many years and have owned, shot and carried many guns. I've heard all of the "safety" retorts, such as "the only safety you need is your finger, etc." Sure, some people train relentlessly with their Glock and they fee comfortable carrying it. No problem there, it's just not for me.

All I can say is, "fair enough." If you want a manual safety for carry, there are plenty of good options that have them. I carried a 1911 when I first started carrying and it took me a while to get used to the idea of carrying a pistol without a thumb safety.

Originally Posted by Skans

2. I am not nearly as accurate with my full-sized Glock 17 as I am with a number of other 9mm's which are mostly steel. I am a much better shot with my CZ 75B, S&W 659, old Steyr GB, Hi-Power and a number of other older 9mm's than I am with my Glock.

I'm a better shot with my 1911 than I am with my G19, too. When I want to make little groups, I take it out. When I suit up for the day, I . . . . grab my S&W Shield, quite frankly. But I used to grab my G19 every day.

Originally Posted by Skans

3. The Glock's trigger out of the box is not what I consider to be a good trigger. I completely understand the mechanics of the Glock, have tried systems to improve the trigger, but I just never liked the pull or feel of the trigger. I especially do not like the trigger-dingus safety.

Having said that, I do acknowledge that my Glock 17 has been a very durable and completely reliable gun. I've owned it for decades now and have put many rounds through it. While I wouldn't get rid of it, I have never felt the urge to purchase another one.

I'm something of a heathen when it comes to triggers. Honestly, my G19's trigger was decent* right out of the box, so I haven't even tried to improve it. I "get it" that there are better triggers than a Glock trigger, and I certainly shoot my 1911 better. BUT . . . . . My G19 trigger is acceptable for SD work and I shoot it with reasonable accuracy.

Off-the-shelf Glocks are neither target guns nor race guns. They're ugly, but they're workhorses, by and large. Can they fail? Sure. Anything mechanical can. My G19 has had a few hiccups, but nothing major. One slide lock spring broken at ~400 rounds. A few failures to feed or eject probably <10, mostly ammo or mag related. Admitting this on a certain other forum (which shall remain nameless) made the 'residents' of that forum absolutely apoplectic, whereupon they shrieked that I was either a liar or had gotten one of the extremely rare lemons that Perfection ever produced, and virtually demanded that I sent it back to the factory. I've got ~2K rounds through her, and by and large, she runs like a top. I consider 10 failures, with identifiable, avoidable causes to be acceptable in 2K rounds.

Skans doesn't like Glocks. Sounds to me like there are better choices out there for him.

* = By "decent," I mean that I've had a few other shooters ask me if the trigger on my G19 was an aftermarket trigger.

[pblanc]

It may not be a malfunction in the more common usage of the term, but my Gen 4 Glock 19 has sent more than a few spent cases back into my head and face in its time.

It seems to be smoothing out a bit now with age, but the BTF issue is certainly something that various generations of various models of Glocks have been known for, and it is definitely not a characteristic of "perfection".

Glocks obviously work very well for many people. But one of the things I like least about them is the umbrage taken by Glock aficionados at the suggestion that they might not be the ideal pistol for everyone, and their insistence that anyone for whom they are less than ideal simply does not know how to shoot, that any type of malfunction whatsoever is clearly a result of "limp wristing" or some other shooter error, and that they have always been perfect and that any modification or revision that has been made by Glock has simply made them more perfecter. Or is it most perfectest?

[Skans]

So it's a thread about his preferences in handguns. It's not about Glocks being poor guns, it's about why he doesn't like them. Others have added to that.

That's exactly right. In fact, I've never sold the one Glock (Glock 17, 2nd Gen) I do own, because it is so darn reliable, rugged and virtually maintenance free. I did install a Ghost trigger system; made sure every part was well polished and it did make the trigger a bit slicker - but it did nothing to eliminate the take-up which I never much liked. In fact, my Glock's trigger actually feels slicker than my old da/sa S&W 659 which really does have a "gritty" trigger, but I shoot better with that heavy 659, despite all of its faults. Will I carry the 659? Heck no! I rotate between a Boberg XR9-S, a Diamondback DB9 (oh, don't worry, I'm not going to even try to convince anyone that a DB9 is better than a Glock, it's just easy as heck to carry) and I sometimes carry an STI LS40.

All I can say is, "fair enough." If you want a manual safety for carry, there are plenty of good options that have them. I carried a 1911 when I first started carrying and it took me a while to get used to the idea of carrying a pistol without a thumb safety.

My problem is that I'm just not as accurate as I would expect to be with the Glock (as I am with other guns) given the amount I have shot it in the past; and I'm not personally comfortable with the Glock safety system with one in the pipe. That's just me, I know. I'm just resolved myself to knowing I prefer DAO or SA with a safety for carry.

To all the horror of Glock owners I'm sure, I sort of wish some of the smaller Glocks came with a thumb safety.

[tipoc]

I actually like Glocks but not that much. I like the idea of them. I've owned 4 G19s and one G17. I've owned a G22 and two G23s. This over about 20 years. I shot them all extensively. I like the idea of them. I'll get another G19 (I currently have none as I traded my last one away 4 months ago) and I will get a G26, the subcompact and maybe try that against my excellent S&W Shield in 9mm.

The thing is I like the idea of the G19 more than the reality of it. I figure this is because I don't shoot them as well as other guns. This is due to the grip shape. Not the grip angle, I overcame that soon enough by adapting. The blockish shape does me no good. The guns also slip and flex too much in my hands, especially if my hands are sweaty. My middle finger rubs too much against the bottom rear of the trigger guard.

These issues can be addressed. Skateboard tape, stippling, Robarizing, etc. "Magna-Port" the barrel and slide to reduce recoil, etc. This and more adds to the cost of the gun.

The stock trigger is not great but I can work it. If it really bugs an Apex trigger is available, as are others.

I can work with the stock plastic sights.

One day I may do this G19 and the G26 and form them to my needs.

I found the guns in 40 S&W not so useful and I avoided that caliber for a number of years as a result. A friend advised me to try the Sig P229. I ran across a used one from the 1990's with a spare barrel in .357 Sig and I haven't looked back.

In Calif. where I live we do not get the Gen 4 or 5 guns. I've seen them but have not worked with them. Neither do we get the S&W M&P series other than the Shield.

tipoc

[adamBomb]

1. I am not comfortable carrying a handgun with a relatively light trigger pull, with one in the pipe without an external safety that I can manually manipulate. I've been a gun-owner for many years and have owned, shot and carried many guns. I've heard all of the "safety" retorts, such as "the only safety you need is your finger, etc." Sure, some people train relentlessly with their Glock and they fee comfortable carrying it. No problem there, it's just not for me.

This is why I won't carry a glock. Add an option for a safety, which they do for the military, and you have a gun I would buy.

[Targa]

I have only owned one Glock and their really wasn’t a thing I disliked about that gun, it just did everything well. I did get rid of it due to it being a double stack and just a bit to wide for me to IWB carry, this was before the G43. I am toying with the idea of replacing my S&W 642 with the 43.

[Catfishman]

A $600 gun shouldn’t have delicate plastic sights. Everything else is just about perfect