If Glocks are so good...

[MilitaryArms]

Actually, from what I've read, the glock was not to be considered for army duty for other reasons. One, no external safety or hammer. The military wanted a gun that had "2nd shot" capability just in case the hard military primer didn't go on the first shot. Striker-fired guns require a rerack of the slide to recock it to fire.

...and ironically when I was in the Marines and stationed at a Naval nuclear weapons facility (where I was tasked with weapons security) we were trained to immediately rack the slide to chamber a new round should the first round not fire in our M9's. I don't imagine the training has changed over the years... which begs the question: If you're training your troops the proper course of action on how to deal with a misfire, why would you have a requirement that contradicts your training policy?

I don't know of any instructor worth their salt who teaches to pull the trigger a second time on a double action pistol vs. racking the slide and chambering a new round if you encounter a misfire. Chance are if the round didn't fire the first time, it's not going to fire the second time and you've wasted too much time screwing around, just kick the bad round out and get back into the fight.

The beretta is a much more "GI proof" gun than a glock with the DA first pull and external safety and it.

The Glock, IMHO, is not a safe pistol for the average GI. So I agree, from a safety standpoint it's less "GI proof" than the M9.

I won't get into this here, but plenty of people like the Beretta just fine. It's been discussed a billion times on various forums. I'd go with either. I carry a Gen4 G17 b/c it's fairly cheap and still reliable.

The M9 is an ok pistol, it's nothing special. There are better designs and there are worse designs. I like the pistol and have several in my private collection.

 

[Airborne33]

Glock makes a reliable handgun. I know a lot of people use them downrange and rely on them when their primary goes down. A lot of US Spec Ops guys use them with few gripes.

I would say however, it seems to be a love 'em or hate 'em deal with glocks. I have shot a few times, and for me, it just doesn't fit in my hand right. I like a nice crisp trigger pull like what a 1911 offers, but other people like the smoother trigger pull a glock offers.

As to why they are always selling? Couldn't say. My buddy once loved glocks so much at one point he had three seperate pistols in .40 s&w. Eventually he got rid of two. I guess common sense prevailed. They are highly reliable handguns, but I think a lot of people buy them, before they bother to shoot them. The only way to get money back on their investment is to privately sell.. Also remember, times are tough, and some people sell, just so they can make their way for a few more weeks.. can't blame them for that.

-Wu

 

[wally05]

...and ironically when I was in the Marines and stationed at a Naval nuclear weapons facility (where I was tasked with weapons security) we were trained to immediately rack the slide to chamber a new round should the first round not fire in our M9's. I don't imagine the training has changed over the years... which begs the question: If you're training your troops the proper course of action on how to deal with a misfire, why would you have a requirement that contradicts your training policy?

I don't know of any instructor worth their salt who teaches to pull the trigger a second time on a double action pistol vs. racking the slide and chambering a new round if you encounter a misfire. Chance are if the round didn't fire the first time, it's not going to fire the second time and you've wasted too much time screwing around, just kick the bad round out and get back into the fight.


The Glock, IMHO, is not a safe pistol for the average GI. So I agree, from a safety standpoint it's less "GI proof" than the M9.


The M9 is an ok pistol, it's nothing special. There are better designs and there are worse designs. I like the pistol and have several in my private collection.

I'm just placing out there what the guys at the beretta forum have found in research. Original guidelines called for a DA pistol. Part of that was second strike IIRC. That's part of the reason why the stock 92/m9 hammer spring makes the pull long and hard... contract requirements for military primers.

Some guys claiming to be instructors on AR15.com and other forums have stated the whole second strike idea and say it's better than "oh sh*t, it didn't fire!" and there are BGs 20 feet from you and you have to rack to recharge. Just click again... Who knows if it's true, but it's just what I've found.


I like glocks, but as I've seen a glocktalk.com forum member say... the list of users is the who's who of noncombatants. An excellent LE gun... I'd say yes for the most part, but the m9 has had a h*ll of a lot more combat experience than the G17.

To the OP, it's a great pistol and would serve you well.

 

[HICKMAN]

I like glocks, but as I've seen a glocktalk.com forum member say... the list of users is the who's who of noncombatants. An excellent LE gun... I'd say yes for the most part, but the m9 has had a h*ll of a lot more combat experience than the G17.

Being carried in combat is not the same as combat experience. Bad guys are being killed by rifles, not sidearms in most cases. Now if you of stats to show otherwise, I'd love to see them.

From those I've talked to, the only time they used their M9's when deployed was at the range.... their rifles do the work.

I'm not knocking the Beretta, I'm knocking the notion that sidearms are used that often. I think someone else recently said "1911's killed a helluva lot more Nazi's than Glocks...".... I'm thinking duh...

I guess the Iraqi Army was issued Glocks, and several contractors over their also carry Glocks. I'm thinking in the 130 degree weather over there, if I had to draw a sidearm, it'd be polymer instead of some hot metal.

IMHO, the M&P 45 would be a perfect sidearm for our military.

I'm sure there is a whole generation of military peeps that swear by the M9, because that's all they've known since they've been in, nothing wrong with that. But NOBODY I knew back when I was in preferred it to the 1911.

But times change, I'm sure the M4 is much better than the M16 A1/A2's that I was issued.

 

[HICKMAN]

The Glock, IMHO, is not a safe pistol for the average GI. So I agree, from a safety standpoint it's less "GI proof" than the M9.

I agree with you there, striker fired sidearms with no extra safety's would probably be detrimental to the military...

We wouldn't have any LT's left to make Captain

 

[sig1473]

I think why people claim Glocks are so good is because that is all they can afford

 

[HICKMAN]

I think why people claim Glocks are so good is because that is all they can afford

yup, we can't all be rich

 

[sig1473]

I know for a fact that the M9 was/and used to kill insurgents "over there". You can talk to my roommate about that if you would like confirmation. Still, the most common issued military sidearm in the world is the CZ-75. That is a fact.

 

[HICKMAN]

I know for a fact that the M9 was/and used to kill insurgents "over there". You can talk to my roommate about that if you would like confirmation. Still, the most common issued military sidearm in the world is the CZ-75. That is a fact.

I'm sure they are used on occasion, just like Glocks kill bad guys for LEO's around the globe. Point being that the pistol is not the first thing you grab if you have a choice.

 

[traderdan]

If your Glock jams assume there is a problem with the ammo! They usually work and feed everything.

 

[sig1473]

I'm sure they are used on occasion, just like Glocks kill bad guys for LEO's around the globe. Point being that the pistol is not the first thing you grab if you have a choice.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. Man, I think I'm going to grab my pistol instead of my rifle..... That is not the point of my post. Glocks are the AK of the pistol world. They are simplistic to those who don't know much about or have a background familiar with sidearms. You don't see Navy SEALs or British SAS toting around Glocks. They are using SIGs, USPs, 1911s and Browning HPs.

 

[HICKMAN]

Glocks are the AK of the pistol world. They are simplistic to those who don't know much about or have a background familiar with sidearms.

You are right about Glock being like the AK, because they run in ANY condition. Neither need to shoot inch groups to be combat deadly.

As far as simplicity goes, I don't need a decocker, grip or thumb safety to keep me from f'n up.... apparently Uncle Sam thinks otherwise.

You don't see Navy SEALs or British SAS toting around Glocks. They are using SIGs, USPs, 1911s and Browning HPs.

They don't carry AK's either... pretty sure that doesn't mean our troops don't respect their capabilities ....

I'd also bet anyone proficient with a 1911, SIG, USP could hit the same target with a Glock, XD or M&P with little effort. Bad guys don't care about the gun that shot the bullet, they care about the bullet.

 

[sig1473]

You are right about Glock being like the AK, because they run in ANY condition. Neither need to shoot inch groups to be combat deadly.

As far as simplicity goes, I don't need a decocker, grip or thumb safety to keep me from f'n up.... apparently Uncle Sam thinks otherwise.




They don't carry AK's either... pretty sure that doesn't mean our troops don't respect their capabilities ....

I'd also bet anyone proficient with a 1911, SIG, USP could hit the same target with a Glock, XD or M&P with little effort. Bad guys don't care about the gun that shot the bullet, they care about the bullet.

Uh, the SEALs and SAS both carry AKs, so that statement is false. And USPs are polymer just like Glocks, but only better. I like XDs considerably better then Glocks also.

 

[Rich.Carpenter]

It's a shame, really. Because a whole generation of punk thug wannabes glorify Glocks - likely because they aren't bright enough to handle anything more than point and squeeze, and to some extent they probably think "Glock" and "Glock-9" just sound cool - an otherwise fine firearm has to overcome such a negative stigma.

Aside from the kaboom issue, I've really heard nothing but good about Glocks. I think it really all boils down to whether or not one prefers an external safety and how well it fits their hand.

To each their own.

 

[HICKMAN]

Uh, the SEALs and SAS both carry AKs, so that statement is false.

am I supposed to take your word on that? I wasn't aware of the U.S. military issuing AK's.

And USPs are polymer just like Glocks, but only better.

In your opinion.

I like XDs considerably better then Glocks also.

Good for you!

You keep arguing as if the military is the be-all-end-all when it comes to hand guns. I'd wager they used rifles more, whereas LEO's use pistols more.

I'm fully aware the spec-ops guys have the ability to purchase whatever weapon they think best suites their mission. None of the arguments above disprove the Glock's ability as a combat firearm and I haven't heard many complaints from the Iraqi Security Forces.

 

[HICKMAN]

Aside from the kaboom issue, I've really heard nothing but good about Glocks. I think it really all boils down to whether or not one prefers an external safety and how well it fits their hand.

To each their own.

among competitive shooters, Glock has done VERY well in the Production Division.

I don't need anything more than a $450 Glock 23 to defend myself. Perfectly happy with the number of rounds and light-weight carry.

 

[Gpfury86]

I haven't been shooting for very long but my first handgun was glock 27 cause I got a good deal on it and I love it for the reliabilty and good to carry. I shot a buddys kimbers both .45's and they definitely feel nice. Better than my glock 21...Trigger pull is awesome and feels good in hand. Also twice the price...U can still beat the glock around and never fail to unload mags through it lol....

 

[IndyMonkey]

I haven't been shooting for very long but my first handgun was glock 27 cause I got a good deal on it and I love it for the reliabilty and good to carry. I shot a buddys kimbers both .45's and they definitely feel nice. Better than my glock 21...Trigger pull is awesome and feels good in hand. Also twice the price...U can still beat the glock around and never fail to unload mags through it lol....

At least you have a nice shot gun.

 

[Cemetery-man]

Handgun owners are a lot like car owners. There are those that are perfectly happy to drive around all day in a $100 "beater" that runs well and starts every day. Then there are those owners that demand a vehicle that performs properly and looks good at the same time.

 

[Gpfury86]

At least you have a nice shot gun.

Lol, kinda nice to have a grandpa that owns 20 of them and says here take this $2000 shotgun....