Glock’s MHS Pistols (With pics)

[psyopspec]

Full article:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/ar...s-mhs-pistols-unveiled/#.WVMWLvOi8K4.facebook

This is interesting. It looks like a G19 slide with an corresponding sized dust cover but with a G17 length magwell. A few other small changes, and an ambi safety. I'll be curious if they choose to bring some aspects of the gun to the civilian market.

 

[gotboostvr]

That's actually a pretty good looking pistol.
I wouldn't mind wringing one out at the range.

 

[Varminterror]

Manual safety = hard pass from me. I understand the addition was in deference to the .mil solicitation, but as much as I might be interested in a modular Glock, or a G19 on a 17rnd grip frame, the manual safety is a turn off.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

I have been on record before as saying that Glock deserved to lose the competition because they just warmed over some old ideas and tossed it at the Army expecting to win... that is, they didn't take the possibility of losing seriously. This just confirms that. No slide cut for a RDS? No real modularity to speak of. Yeah, it's a Glock with a thumb safety, we've seen that before.

Also, someone at American Rifleman should get a firm talking to for calling a lanyard loop clever.

 

[paulsj]

How many times can one make same thing and refer to it as being different or better? The only improvement since introduction has neen frame w/rail for combat light/laser mounting.

 

[1KPerDay]

How many times can one make same thing and refer to it as being different or better? The only improvement since introduction has neen frame w/rail for combat light/laser mounting.

Not accurate. Frame pins, chamber support, and mags have all improved at the very least.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

Not accurate. Frame pins, chamber support, and mags have all improved at the very least.

I don't know if I would give them much credit there. Frame pins had to be done since the 40 was cracking frames, chamber supported since people didn't like the unsupported concept and it being hard on brass. Mags, if you mean drop free now, I don't know if I would call an improvement since there is a good design reason for the ones which were not drop free (keep them from being dropped under stress or lost in combat).

Sort of improvements but not all and keeping frames from cracking is more of a requirement in my mind.

I agree with others. Glock pretty much does one thing alright.

 

[1KPerDay]

I don't know if I would give them much credit there. Frame pins had to be done since the 40 was cracking frames, chamber supported since people didn't like the unsupported concept and it being hard on brass. Mags, if you mean drop free now, I don't know if I would call an improvement since there is a good design reason for the ones which were not drop free (keep them from being dropped under stress or lost in combat).

Sort of improvements but not all and keeping frames from cracking is more of a requirement in my mind.

I agree with others. Glock pretty much does one thing alright.

Are the changes improvements? then they have improved since introduction. Metal reinforced mag lips ARE an improvement. Fixing cracking frames IS an improvement. More chamber support IS an improvment.

sure you can argue that it's not much and far less than the ergonomic nightmare that has never been addressed, but you can't argue that NOTHING has improved since introduction of the G17 except a Pic rail.

 

[herrwalther]

I can see why Sig won the contract. Looks like all Glock did was make a Franken-Glock expecting the Army to just fawn over the design. When your "leap" forward in innovation is adding an ambi thumb safety, you are really grasping at contract straws.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

I'm just glad its over with now. Still think it's silly they didn't go with the Beretta M9A3 and save the taxpayers millions but oh well. Also, happy that Glock didn't win since I find their fan boys to be really annoying. Yes, I own Glocks and they have their place. They are NOT perfection though as their slogan goes. If they were, then why do the fan boys replace as many parts as possible one them?

 

[Zerodefect]

What competition? Spec was written for the sig. It was over before it began.

I don't put any stock into these things, as long as I get to carry my Glock. Ya'll take this stuff way too personally. Shoot what works for you.

 

[herrwalther]

What competition? Spec was written for the sig. It was over before it began.

No. Did you read the requirements? The Army wanted a modular design to allow soldiers with different hand sizes to shoot the handgun. There are a ton of firearms that use interchangeable back straps, including the Gen4 Glocks. Caliber conversion wasn't even on the table. Neither was a serialized FCU. The Army left the competition incredibly wide open to get the best ideas in one room that fit the need. Glock fell short AND over budget. If Sig wanted $1000 for each 320 they gave the Army, I bet we would be having a different discussion. But that isn't what happened. Sig made a better product that met or exceeded all the specifications, BETTER than Glock, and CHEAPER than Glock. Glock could have built something better than the 320. They had plenty of time to come up with something from the ground up to meet the trials. They just didn't. So they lost the contract and then complained about it.

 

[JeffG]

I cut my teeth 40 years ago on the 1911, great fighting gun. I've carried 1911s for duty, off duty and CCW. I continue to choose the Glock as a fighting gun largely because of ease of ergonomic use under stress. No external safety on a Glock for me thanks.

 

[MAKster]

I'm just glad its over with now. Still think it's silly they didn't go with the Beretta M9A3 and save the taxpayers millions but oh well. Also, happy that Glock didn't win since I find their fan boys to be really annoying. Yes, I own Glocks and they have their place. They are NOT perfection though as their slogan goes. If they were, then why do the fan boys replace as many parts as possible one them?

The Army has made it very clear that they did not want to stick with a slide mounted decocker-safety. That design is basically dead. The fact that the Army which is about 10 years behind the commercial market feels that way shows how undesirable that set up is now. The Beretta M9A3 would have been much more expensive than the Sig 320. The Army is only paying $207 per Sig.

 

[[email protected]]

G19 slide with a G17 grip. Would have been much more interesting if it was a G17 slide with a G19 sized grip.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

The Army has made it very clear that they did not want to stick with a slide mounted decocker-safety. That design is basically dead. The fact that the Army which is about 10 years behind the commercial market feels that way shows how undesirable that set up is now. The Beretta M9A3 would have been much more expensive than the Sig 320. The Army is only paying $207 per Sig.

I think the SIG will cost much more than the M9A3 would have in the long run. The M9's (not sure about the A3s) were in the $200's also, but more significantly the DoD has the mags, parts, tools, etc to work on the Berettas and trained people. All of that will have to also be replaced and retrained with the SIG for little to no gain over the Beretta.

 

[JR24]

No. Did you read the requirements? The Army wanted a modular design to allow soldiers with different hand sizes to shoot the handgun. There are a ton of firearms that use interchangeable back straps, including the Gen4 Glocks. Caliber conversion wasn't even on the table. Neither was a serialized FCU. The Army left the competition incredibly wide open to get the best ideas in one room that fit the need. Glock fell short AND over budget. If Sig wanted $1000 for each 320 they gave the Army, I bet we would be having a different discussion. But that isn't what happened. Sig made a better product that met or exceeded all the specifications, BETTER than Glock, and CHEAPER than Glock. Glock could have built something better than the 320. They had plenty of time to come up with something from the ground up to meet the trials. They just didn't. So they lost the contract and then complained about it.

Disagree, I think they wanted the Sig and got it. Good for them, good gun and I hope it works out (I do have reservations about that removable fire controls durability, the one on my P250 seemed a bit flimsy, but Im sure itll be fine).

As for "complaining about it", on major contracts like this in about every industry the second place will always file a complaint. Its just good business as the cost is certainly worth the chance you somehow win the contract. Its pretty much standard operating procedure

 

[rskent]

I don’t think I would buy one.

It seems like a departure from Glocks minimalistic approach to making handguns. A safety catch on a 1911 with a short light trigger seems natural. On a Glock, not so much.

Ambidextrous controls also don’t work for me. They seem like extra unneeded parts. Yes, I generally shoot right handed, but I am left handed. I try to keep some competency with both or ether hand.

I also like the conspicuously missing finger grooves. Even though they don’t fit my fingers, I think they help me hang onto the gun in recoil. Probably not needed in a 9mm, but for me, it helps.

Yea, I think I would pass on this one. What attracts me to Glocks is their simple, elegant design. To me, this is going the wrong way. I understand it’s what the army wants, but I still don’t think it’s for me. I am not an army.

 

[Zerodefect]

I don't get the ambi controls either. A normal Glock is 100% ambi, just flip the mag release if you're a lefty.

I hate the rounded nose, they didn't round the frame to match it, and the safety lever is stupid. If I want a safety lever, it's a CZ or 1911 for me. Glock shouldn't have anything to do with those. You can't un-Glock a Glock.

 

[gotboostvr]

I like this idea in a long slide version.

I might not be so adverse to fitting a nice target trigger in a Glock if it had a thumb safety.

I also like the grooveless front strap.

 

[JR24]

I like this idea in a long slide version.

I might not be so adverse to fitting a nice target trigger in a Glock if it had a thumb safety.

I also like the grooveless front strap.

This. I would accept a safety Glock if it had a 4 pound trigger with minimal movement (IE a good SAO) but in zero other circumstances will I accept a safety on a Glock.

I am capable of paying attention while holstering and require no further safety than my finger and brain.

But an 18 year old who's never handled a gun before and only gets minimal training, I guess I can see the thought process.

 

[tarosean]

Glocks bid was 102m over Sigs. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why they didnt win.

 

[herrwalther]

Disagree, I think they wanted the Sig and got it. Good for them, good gun and I hope it works out (I do have reservations about that removable fire controls durability, the one on my P250 seemed a bit flimsy, but Im sure itll be fine).

True to a degree. I think the Sig is a better pistol. But any government contract makes selections based on budget first. If the purchase cost for the Sig was higher than Glock's offer, we would be having a much different conversation. Sig offered a better model for cheaper. Glock lost in more ways than one on this bid. As far as the complaining comment goes, the Glock fan boys are a large part of that.

 

[Fiv3r]

I don't see the big draw unless you are fully on team Glock.

Honestly, the FNS line has been doing the 4" barrel with 17 round grip for a long while now. The 509 seems to continue on this. Id take one of those well ahead of what Glock brought.

I recently purchased a full size p320, and I can see why the army made the switch. It's light, accurate, modular, robust, and easy to maintain. Good pistol for their needs.

It's a bit much for edc, but I keep it as a night stand gun and a range toy. Not what I would grab to walk the dog or set off into the woods, but a very good, well made sidearm for hell-in-a-handbasket times.

 

[kozak6]

Does it have less of a hump than a regular Gen4, or is it just the camera angle?

I like the idea of a Glock, but the hump makes it point high for me. I don't care about a manual safety, but I might enjoy a minimized hump.