Glock G41 confirmed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Glock,

Build a service-sized G36 and I'll buy one. So will a lot of other folks. While you're at it, a single stack 9mm pocket gun would be nice. 5X4 inches would be about right. Oh, and if you could see yourself clear to lose the plastic covered magazines you could make your guns a little slimmer.

Thanks,

VA27
 
Build a service-sized G36 and I'll buy one.
Click to expand...
In the .45 Auto "centric" forums I frequent, a single stack version of the G21 is what I often see requests for, though I suppose a big G36 would also be OK.

I don't ever see guys asking for a bigger G21. Of course I'm not on the competition forums where the Glock guys may be enviously looking at their buddies with those long barreled XDM Competition guns. Gotta keep up with the Jones's I guess.
 
Not looking for another larger Glock. Waiting on something a bit more compact and better suited to my smaller hand size.
 
Almost the best news from the new Glock models, since the rumor about the G42 being a 9mm single-stack subcompact has not yet been confirmed, is that they're skipping the Glock 40 model number.

!!!:D!!!

... too confusing to a certain demographic.
 
Hate to be the party pooper, but...
Quotes from previous posters:

Build a service-sized G36 and I'll buy one. So will a lot of other folks. While you're at it, a single stack 9mm pocket gun would be nice. 5X4 inches would be about right. Oh, and if you could see yourself clear to lose the plastic covered magazines you could make your guns a little slimmer.

In the .45 Auto "centric" forums I frequent, a single stack version of the G21 is what I often see requests for,

Waiting on something a bit more compact and better suited to my smaller hand size.

As much as I admit that Mr. Gaston figured out how to market a marginal pistol extremely well, his limitation is that of a one-trick pony. When, in the entire history of Glock, have you seen a single stack? And you never will. When was the last time you saw one that wasn't needlessly over thick in the grip frame? Never. They all are by nature of following the current design model with zero appreciable deviation.

If Glock pistols fit your hands, go for it. If they don't, stop making happy thoughts and wishes, just move on to something that is better for your needs.

Just my thoughts.
 
Oh, and if you could see yourself clear to lose the plastic covered magazines you could make your guns a little slimmer.
Click to expand...

I've never understood the point of the plastic-coated Glock mags. Plenty of uber-reliable pistols use all-steel mag bodies just fine.
 
The original G17 mags were poly with steel reinforcing on 3 sides. You have to remember that Glock was primarially a plastics company so the mags had to be plastic. When fully loaded they would swell slightly and not drop free. This was to prevent accidental loss of a magazine in the field. Since the gun was designed to fill a military contract this sort of makes sense.

It was only after the American market complained about the mags not dropping free that the full metal-lined mags were constructed.

Glock could design a slimmer frame to take all metal mags. The question is, will they? I think not, since they had their chance to do that with the 36 and chose not to. Still, a guy can dream.
 
Is it because 'metal magaine vs. plastic gripframe' could lead to ugly wear?


Larry
 
So a Glock 21 with a 1" longer barrel? Yawn.
Click to expand...

As you get older an extra inch of sight radius can make a disproportionate difference!

Unfortunately I'm past the point where it makes enough difference :(


Is it because 'metal magaine vs. plastic gripframe' could lead to ugly wear?
Click to expand...
Doubt it, even Taurus can get this right.
 
VA27 wrote,
The original G17 mags were poly with steel reinforcing on 3 sides. You have to remember that Glock was primarially a plastics company so the mags had to be plastic. When fully loaded they would swell slightly and not drop free. This was to prevent accidental loss of a magazine in the field. Since the gun was designed to fill a military contract this sort of makes sense.
Click to expand...
That's pretty funny.

The CZ75B was designed to retain magazines. A part is in the magwell to keep the mags from falling free.

The Glock on the other hand, had a poor magazine design, that would allow the mags to swell when loaded. In typical Glock fashion, the problem became a feature. "Ya, that's the ticket, it's a feature we designed into our guns to make them better. We changed the design to make them even more better, ya, that's the ticket."
 
Why was it a "problem"???

They achieved the same thing as the CZ without adding more parts and increasing the complexity of their design.

Same results less parts.
 
Because there were times when you needed to drop a partially filled magazine for another one. And if the mag was too swelled, it would not "drop free" even when empty. So it slowed down the mag change and required two hands.

A lot of us shooting matches back then developed the Glock wrist flick. When dropping empty mags, we flicked our shootng hand/wrist HARD to toss the empty mag out as the other hand reached for another mag.

We were happy when fully lined true "drop free" mags came out.

With any magazine fed pistol, when the mag is empty I prefer that mag come out of the pistol like yesterday.

As to metal mags marring/scratching frame, my M&Ps don't have any issue and mag always drop free even when full.
 
Not a terrible thing to have the mag stay in the gun if you're doing a tactical reload. Less chance of losing it.
 
Weevil wrote,
Why was it a "problem"???

They achieved the same thing as the CZ without adding more parts and increasing the complexity of their design.

Same results less parts.
Click to expand...
CZ's was done by design. The basic CZ75B still has that feature, I believe. Other models in the CZ line-up delete that feature if you don't want it.

On the other hand Glock was simply a bad magazine design, that gave their gun that "feature" by accident. Rather than saying, oops our mags don't work as intended, we'll call it a feature of our guns. Once they figured out how to properly make a magazine, they apparently determined that mags not dropping free was not such a good feature. They all work as intended now.
 
bds said:
Because there were times when you needed to drop a partially filled magazine for another one. And if the mag was too swelled, it would not "drop free" even when empty. So it slowed down the mag change and required two hands.
Click to expand...

You're forgetting that just like the CZ-75 the mag was not supposed to drop free. Because of the mag-brake the CZ's mag won't drop free "even when empty" and also requires two hands to remove.

A lot of us shooting matches back then developed the Glock wrist flick. When dropping empty mags, we flicked our shootng hand/wrist HARD to toss the empty mag out as the other hand reached for another mag.
Click to expand...

The Glock was not designed to be a target pistol for competition shooting. It was designed to win Austria's military contract and the Austrians like most Euro militaries did not want drop-free mags.

This is also why CZ went through all the trouble of adding a flat spring to prevent the mags from dropping free.

We were happy when fully lined true "drop free" mags came out.

With any magazine fed pistol, when the mag is empty I prefer that mag come out of the pistol like yesterday.
Click to expand...


Just because you prefer drop-free mags doesn't mean there was a "problem" with the original non drop-free mags. The worked just as they were designed to work for the Euro military contracts Glock was going after, even if this wasn't what competition shooters in America wanted.
 
JTQ said:
CZ's was done by design. The basic CZ75B still has that feature, I believe. Other models in the CZ line-up delete that feature if you don't want it.

On the other hand Glock was simply a bad magazine design, that gave their gun that "feature" by accident. Rather than saying, oops our mags don't work as intended, we'll call it a feature of our guns. Once they figured out how to properly make a magazine, they apparently determined that mags not dropping free was not such a good feature. They all work as intended now.
Click to expand...


No it wasn't an "accident".

Glock was going after the same market that CZ was going after and that market did not want drop-free mags.


Do you really think that Glocks do the same thing by "accident" as CZs that have a spring added to on purpose to keep the mag from dropping free???
 
Weevil said:
Just because you prefer drop-free mags doesn't mean there was a "problem" with the original non drop-free mags. The worked just as they were designed to work for the Euro military contracts Glock was going after, even if this wasn't what competition shooters in America wanted.
Click to expand...
Well, appeasing match shooters in America certainly turned out great for Glock ... financially.

Win, win.

I for one certainly appreciate the fully lined drop free mags. :D

So, anybody now want "non-drop free" Glock mags?
 
Yes the American market did indeed prove a lucrative one...but when they first designed the pistol and it's mags they had no way of predicting the future. I'm sure no one even imagined how popular they would become in America, they were just trying to grab a military or police contract or two in Europe.


I wouldn't swear to it but I'm pretty sure that CZ has dropped the mag-brake feature on most if not all of their pistols for the American market as well.



Americans think there's a problem if the mags don't drop free.

:D
 
Last edited:
1992 I told someone highly placed with Glock at a convention that if they made a single stack with 1911 grip angle that took 1911 magazines and so a thinner grip that they would sell like hotcakes at that time. He said I was going to like what would soon be available......so far he has been wrong. Don't know my Glock numbers but the only one I have thought worth while was a mid sized .40 I borrowed when I had issues with a Star PD at a match.

-kBob
 
wally said:
As you get older an extra inch of sight radius can make a disproportionate difference!
Click to expand...

For a very small part of Glock's market: competition shooters. The most common barrel length for a concealed carry pistol is around 4 inches. There aren't many firearms with 5 inch unless you are carrying a full size 1911 or one of the 5" XD/XDM models. It just keeps looking like to me that Glock is chasing after small niches of customers compared to the customers they could be going after by keeping with popular firearm trends.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
The new ".45 Glock" round
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
M58
M
M
  • Locked
I love my old Gen3 Glock 30
Replies
17
Views
721
Zeabed
Zeabed
P
  • Locked
Thinking about trading a 1911 for a Glock 19
2
Replies
44
Views
1K
AndyC
A
K
  • Locked
[A Tribute To] The **GLOCK 27**
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
Spats McGee
Spats McGee
J
  • Locked
Did I get a good deal? (Glock 23 + light)
Replies
2
Views
362
10-Ring
1
Back
Top