I opening a can I guess, but..

[Guest atomemphis]

They have no soul. You won't get attached to one as an heirloom piece. They are very utilitarian.

Completely agree. I have a Sigma now, because it was such a steal price-wise, and its the same thing.

In the motorcycle community, this would be a UJM (Universal Japanese Motorcycle) or GJB (Generic Japanese Bike).

While it may do everything it was designed to do well, its not a lot of fun in the process. It's looks are blah, it feels blah, and it runs like a Honda (or Suzuki or Glock, whatever).

But if you ask yourself if you are a Harley/Triumph/Ducati kind of guy, or are you a Hondayamazuki kind of guy?

On the plus sides, a guy named Gaston invented it. Preeeetty bad ass.

[Guest atomemphis]

Also, you can get sights mounted on the side of the slide for better gangsta shooting of yo fo-tay.

[Ricochet]

I am posting without reading everyone's response and then I will go back and read, that way I can give my thoughts on the Glock I have.

I am new to handgun shooting period, only been shooting a handgun since November and bought my first on Nov. 24th, a S&W 640 revolver. I followed up with a Beretta U-22 Neos shortly after because it fit my hand nicely and was cheap to shoot. I couldn't get enough shooting in, loved it. Not long after that purchase I bought a Kel-tec so it would be easy to carry, but my heart was in a 9mm because I had shot my son in laws 9mm Ruger P89.

I had three handguns within a couple of months time and was still not satisfied and I NEVER entertained getting a Glock because well, I just never gave it any thought. So basically I had shot a .38 special, my Smith .357, my SIL's Ruger, my Beretta, my Kel-tec, a Ruger Black Hawk .44 and I still wanted a .9 mm!!!!

So I told Mark I would look at the Springfield XD subcompact in a 9mm. Someone mentioned to me that I should also look at the Glocks (hahahaha... thanks Packin). So I did my research and found that the Glock loaded weighs the same as the XD empty but I have chosen most of my guns by getting them down to a couple I like and comparing how they feel in my hand. I compared the two and really liked the Glock 26 compared to the XD sub. One day I stopped in at my favorite gun store, Fugates, and she had a nice used Glock 26 that someone had just traded in and I bought it, love how it shoots, carry it a lot and just seriously can't find why anyone hates them so much.

The only handgun I have ever bought without trying it out in my hands is my CZ 75D PCR and I love this gun. It is my favorite.

OK, off my soap box.

[Guest db99wj]

I was going to buy a Glock. Came highly recommended, shot some, held a bunch, just couldn't get comfortable with it. I picked up the XD and it felt great, pointed great, and from my experience and other people I have talked to personally and read on forums they are very reliable. The Glock just doesn't feel right in my hands. That is why I don't have a Glock. I was impressed with Glocks for what I have mentioned but for one other reason. I was up at a range and a guy was shooting a Glock, and some part broke., I know, but they do break! But anyway, one of the guys at the range, tore it down, determined which part it was that broke. Another guy pulled out a "Box O' Glock Parts", i.e. tackle box with the trays labeled with little Glock Parts in them. Pulled the like part out, put it in the gun, reassembled, guy went back shooting. That was really impressive to me. The availability of parts and the ease of breaking it all the way down to fix.

Oh, and in response to warbirds comment

You can dismantle just about any Glock throw a bunch of them in a bucket and put one together out of pieces picked up out of that bucket. Try that with a bucket of 1911's.

I have been told this, that the military wanted a pistol that could be made by multiple manufacturers, that could be disassembled, thrown into a bucket, and rebuilt interchanging the parts and they function. So if you do try that with 1911's, they should work fine. Of course I understand that to be the original intent, and with today's manufactures, this might not be as true and you have to do some work on parts to drop in and work.

Edited May 7, 2008 by db99wj

[Guest atomemphis]

You could do that with not so much trouble if they were all milspec 1911's, same manufacturer. like springfields or colts.

trouble is, you inferred it would be difficult, such as Kimbers, Sigs, S&W's, Wilsons, and Colts would all go in the pot, stirred and then attempt to put them back together.

throw a bunch of plastic guns' parts in a bucket, and they won't go back together either, being different manufacturers.

[The Rabbi]

You could do that with not so much trouble if they were all milspec 1911's, same manufacturer. like springfields or colts.

trouble is, you inferred it would be difficult, such as Kimbers, Sigs, S&W's, Wilsons, and Colts would all go in the pot, stirred and then attempt to put them back together.

throw a bunch of plastic guns' parts in a bucket, and they won't go back together either, being different manufacturers.

I believe the 1911 requires some hand fitting, especially on the internal extractor. That makes total interchangeability a no-go.

To my knowledge the only guns that passed that test in the military's review were the Beretta and the SIG.

[Guest atomemphis]

the majority of the hand fitting comes on initial assembly, and its things like fitting the safety, and extractor tension.

Once those are done, if you had a springfield slide and a springfield slide, you could take the firing pin & stop, extractor, and switch them over without any issue.

That's assuming you have two of the same slides.

You couldn't take a compact glock, and exchange the parts with the full size i would assume.

[Guest atomemphis]

new fangled 1911's like kimbers, which are to tighter tolerances, etc. this would not be possible, i should say. that's the caveat.

[The Rabbi]

the majority of the hand fitting comes on initial assembly, and its things like fitting the safety, and extractor tension.

Once those are done, if you had a springfield slide and a springfield slide, you could take the firing pin & stop, extractor, and switch them over without any issue.

That's assuming you have two of the same slides.

You couldn't take a compact glock, and exchange the parts with the full size i would assume.

Doesnt matter where it comes. If the part is fitted specifically to that gun, that it is not interchangeable with any other gun.

[Guest db99wj]

If you look at my post again notice this part:

I have been told this, that the military wanted a pistol that could be made by multiple manufacturers, that could be disassembled, thrown into a bucket, and rebuilt interchanging the parts and they function. So if you do try that with 1911's, they should work fine. Of course I understand that to be the original intent, and with today's manufactures, this might not be as true and you have to do some work on parts to drop in and work.

My point was that originally the 1911 was suppose to meet that standard, but in today's market, with the multiple manufactures of complete 1911's and parts, that this is no longer true. I probably should have said "...with today's manufacturers, this is no longer true..."

[saintsfanbrian]

Here is a point I know first hand with a 1911.

I had a Para Ordinance Frame and a Springfield slide. These worked great together. The barrel was fitted with a compensator that I didn't like the looks of. I took that out and swapped it with a stock barrel. Looked great. Tried to cycle rounds through it manually (you know, just keep raking the slide back). It jammed every 3rd round. I had several extractors and I tried them all. Finally, I found an extractor that wouldn't jam. The gun worked great.

Now, I have this Beretta 92FS. I can put it together with parts from any other Beretta 92FS and it will work flawlessly. (We did this on the range with several M9's in the Air Force.)

As to Glocks, Well, it fit my hand and pointed nicely. Then again so does the Beretta and the XD.

[The Rabbi]

If you look at my post again notice this part:

My point was that originally the 1911 was suppose to meet that standard, but in today's market, with the multiple manufactures of complete 1911's and parts, that this is no longer true. I probably should have said "...with today's manufacturers, this is no longer true..."

No, the opposite is the case.

When the gun was produced machining was not nearly as precise as today. Ergo it was necessary to hand fit parts. The internal extractor must be fitted by hand precisely otherwise the gun won't work.

Today machining tolerances are much tighter so it is possible to produce one, esp with an external extractor, to be completely interchangeable.

[Guest canynracer]

so wait...I gotta learn something here...if I take 3 of the SAME 1911's, same model and all that, the parts are not interchangeable?

[Guest db99wj]

No, the opposite is the case.

When the gun was produced machining was not nearly as precise as today. Ergo it was necessary to hand fit parts. The internal extractor must be fitted by hand precisely otherwise the gun won't work.

Today machining tolerances are much tighter so it is possible to produce one, esp with an external extractor, to be completely interchangeable.

A little more clarification, what I heard was in regards to the Colt M1911's and the SA M1911's, they are the ones that needed to be interchangeable. The military needed to fill the demand and Colt could not keep up so they gave a second contract to SA, but one of the requirements is that you could interchange parts.

I might be wrong, I might have heard that wrong, and if so I apologize, but that is what I was told by someone.

[deerslayer]

In the motorcycle community, this would be a UJM (Universal Japanese Motorcycle) or GJB (Generic Japanese Bike).

While it may do everything it was designed to do well, its not a lot of fun in the process. It's looks are blah, it feels blah, and it runs like a Honda (or Suzuki or Glock, whatever).

That's the first time I've ever heard it put that way, and it makes sense. I guess it's no coincidence, then, that I also own a UJM (2000 Kawasaki ZR-7).

[Warbird]

so wait...I gotta learn something here...if I take 3 of the SAME 1911's, same model and all that, the parts are not interchangeable?

You know you would think in this day and age they would be, and you'd hope so. But I'd not bet on it.

There are a lot of variables there with the grade of the 1911, are you talking basic factory pistols all or the highest grade all? Again, it would be tough to say. Out of the box pistols maybe if they are basic bottom end 1911's. They have larger tolerances, they are made knowing much of them will be stripped and fitted with better parts. Several of those guns maybe.

When I started buying 1911's you either bought a basic 1911 and spent a lot of money or a little less money and a lot of time to get it reliable, fast, accurate etc for a combat piece. Ironically the pistol famous for being the Service Pistol for so long was not a good combat piece out of the box. The best pistols made were the Gold Cup, which were supremely accurate, but NOT a combat weapon.

So when I use the term out of the box that is what i am referring to. Today a 1911 fan has the chance to buy an out of the box great 1911, but they pay a steep steep price for it. In my experience with 1911's and I've had quite a few of them, they are beautiful if you call a pistol that, but you really have a choice of one of the three options above to have a great and reliable combat piece. They have mechanisms which simply call for fitting. You do all the things needing to be done and you will have a hell of a piece.

[FlyboyLDB]

What makes a Glock "all that"?

Seriously? I don't want to hear the Glock "Perfection" crap.

what makes one so great?

Assuming you can't answer the original question what makes it better than a Sigma? Both are pretty much the same design and the Sigma costs substantially less. I have shot one (Glock), I was not really impressed. I was expecting this revalation about it and, well to be honest I was disappointed. It was okay, but that is it, just okay.

so seriously what makes a Glock so great?

Sell me on it. I am not a Glock hater as such. Just not sure what it is all about.

99.99999999999999999999999% of the time they work! They have an excellent reputation. Glocks are in more LEO's hands than any other brand. And they work - I know I already said that. I can shoot 200 rounds through my glock, take it home and not clean it, come back and put a few hundred more rounds through it with no issues. There is a wide range of options /accessories available for the Glock. I hear the safety issues all the time - non issue for me. Maybe that extra fraction of a second not fumbling with a safety could just save a life. Price is also another attraction to the Glock. And bottom line is Glocks work.

[GhostDog]

You'll have to decide for yourself. I wasn't sold the first time I picked one up (in 1989) but, after shooting them for many years, I can tell you that I shoot them better than anything else

(and, by some miracle, I've never shot myself:D). I used to be a cop and I shoot IDPA style competition (not that it makes me an "expert"). You will have to find an OBJECTIVE way to judge the gun (or compare it against others). Only then will you KNOW what is best for you.

Here is a list of guns I tried but that fell short of the Glocks I swear by.

By "trying" these guns I mean: buying and working w/ the guns for 4-6 months; shooting them in competition; comparing my performance w/ them in an objective forum. As I said, they all fell short.

P7M8, S&W M19, S&W 6906, Colt 1911 (45ACP and 38 Super), SIG 226 (DA/SA and DAO), SIG 225 (DA/SA), Beretta Cougar, S&W M39, and Wilson Professional Model (1911). All of these were fine guns but not for me. I shoot my 9mm Glocks much better. I can't tell you about the 40S&W Glocks. I had a Glock M21 for a short time but the grip was too large for my hands, so I sold it.

Bottom line: don't take my word for it or any internet guru's word for it. Find out for yourself. Who cares what cops carry? Who cares what SEALS use? That doesn't mean a thing for you. But shooting the gun once won't tell you squat. If you really want to know, you have to be willing to do the work to find out OBJECTIVELY. Most people talk about shooting a lot more than they actually shoot. They have lots of opinions, many based on nothing more than BS. Put aside the money, make the commitment to do the work, and find out. Then you will KNOW and it won't matter what some internet ninja thinks.

[Guest Grout]

Glock was the first successful plastic frame pistol so they had a solid start in that area.They are very reliable and their accuracy is good with the .45 ACP models being the most accurate.Sights are crap and at the very least the front sight needs to be replaced as it will break off easily.I think the grips should be reshaped on all the models with the small frame models being reduced in the backstrap area and all big frames being the SF configuration.The M&P and the XD are a lot better in the "feel" catagory.

[Mike.357]

while I enjoyed reading this thread I admit there is not much new here.

Seems you either drink the KoolAde or you don't.

Iam still not sure what makes one better than the S&W Sigma. About all I have heard is the Sigma trigger sucks. And I disagree with that opinion. They smooth out nicely and it is not an issue.

I say you all failed in this task. I do not see it worth the extra expense to buy a Glock. Sounds like a decent but over priced firearm. And I still am clueless about their number code.

All in all the thread has been interesting.

[Guest atomemphis]

The Sigma trigger doesn't suck, I agree. Its heavy, and that's the safety design. The pull is long, its the safety design. It didn't happen by accident, that's for sure.

[nightrunner]

And I still am clueless about their number code.

i believe that he started with 17 because that is how many patents he had on the pistol design. he then just went up in numbers for every new pistol he released. from G17 up to the latest release the G39(not new but still the newest) the only ones not on the website is the G18 (full auto/select fire version of the G17) and the G24 (discontinued competition version of G22)

[Guest Engloid]

Although it may be a good gun, to say it is the best is like saying that a stone wheel made by a caveman is as good as the modern wheel/tire combo.

[Guest Boomhower]

Here is a list of guns I tried but that fell short of the Glocks I swear by.

By "trying" these guns I mean: buying and working w/ the guns for 4-6 months; shooting them in competition; comparing my performance w/ them in an objective forum. As I said, they all fell short.

P7M8, S&W M19, S&W 6906, Colt 1911 (45ACP and 38 Super), SIG 226 (DA/SA and DAO), SIG 225 (DA/SA), Beretta Cougar, S&W M39, and Wilson Professional Model (1911). All of these were fine guns but not for me.

and I am personally glad that the Cougar did not work out for you.

[jay1313g]

I liken Glocks to sledge hammers, maybe not pretty but, they get the job done in the right hands. My G26 has never failed and I can conceal and take it almost anywhere!