I just dont see what people see in Glocks

[gmh1013]

Ive tried shooting my friends G22 .40 and could not hit the side of barn it....its way to light and his 17 is not that much better.
The angle if the handle is strange compaired to SIG/Taurus/Browning etc.
I just cant see paying 540 bucks for some plastic when I read it cost 75-80 a copy to make.
I hope this light weight gun craze blows over and Smith/Taurus/Springfield start making revolvers and auto's out of steel again.....lucky for me SIG never followed the plastic gun craze and still makes great steel autos...but at cost.
If they dont Im stuck looking for vintage revolvers and auto's
You get what you pay for. Rant over.

 

[jmr40]

Most SIG's are made of aluminum, not steel. The steel guns as a rule hold up the longest, followed by the plastic with aluminum wearing out the fastest.

I'm not going to tell you Glocks are the greatest guns made, but I've owned just about everything out there and they are a good gun.

 

[ny32182]

Being now 30 years into the "lightweight gun craze"... I don't think light weight guns are going away any time soon.

What do people see in Glocks, well:

-Lighter than comparable models
-Plastic and Tennifer make it virtually impervious to sweat, rust, or other elements
-Higher capacity than comparable models
-Most simple method of operation possible

Essentially, it is the perfect carry gun. Lots of searchable threads out there.

There are still plenty of steel/aluminum guns out there. They just don't get the market share they used to for the above reasons.

I used to carry Sigs, but switched to Glocks after I tried them, due to every reason above: They beat Sigs when it comes to weight, finish durability, cost, trigger pull consistency (subjective I suppose)... pretty much any objective performance metric by which I measure a pistol. Ergonomics are important too, and are subjective... they are definitely different between the Sig and Glock, but what I find is that whatever I've been shooting is what starts feeling "natural" to me... i.e. "its a training issue" that requires muscle memory either way.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I just cant see paying 540 bucks for some plastic when I read it cost 75-80 a copy to make.

So don't. And this figure (cited from apocryphal sources, no less) is undoubtedly from some "creative" accounting.

 

[Dr_2_B]

Some random thoughts.

If you just love the feel of the steel guns, then I can see where Glocks would not do it for you. It reminds me of some of the early resistance to the newfangled AR15 by the generals who preferred the wood & weight of the M14. They weren't wrong (except in that they insisted the AR15 was garbage), they just really preferred their M14s.

Also, with over 6 billion people in this world, I can't imagine that everyone's hand is shaped the same or that their preference for weigh and balance is the same. The Glocks' grip angle & balance works well for me. But it sounds like it doesn't for you. I can certainly understand that. If that were the case for me, I'd be asking why everyone else liked it too.

As far as accuracy, I find my Glocks plenty accurate. Maybe you got some bad copies or maybe the poor hand fit sunk you. With practice you might get to where you could shoot bullseye with it, but why bother... stick with something you enjoy. Life's too short to dance with a handgun you don't love.

 

[LiveLife]

I just don't see what people see in Glocks

I used to think the same - why would anyone make a gun out of plastic?. I was shooting 1911 as my match gun at the time. But when I shot my Sig226, CZ75, Beretta 92, RugerP89/P95 and other shooters' guns in comparison test shoots (we had many comparison test shoots so we could test out different guns using same load), I always got the fastest time with tightest double tap groups (typical USPSA match setup) with Glock 17/22.

Mind you, I did not like the grip angle, small mag release, funky trigger, slide lock, plastic sights, etc., but my target shot groups and timer did not lie. I eventually bought two new G22 to use as my match guns. Many in our shooting group did the same and some bought G24/G34.

The Gen3 G27 is very accurate and I am currently practicing with G27 to shoot my matches with also.

Check out hickok45's various Glock videos - he also has many comparison videos:
http://www.youtube.com/user/hickok45#p/u/33/2ulrNh_OiD8

 

[JAguirre]

In reference to the OP, Sig does make polymer framed pistols, the SP2022.

 

[XavierBreath]

I don't understand why so many people, many of them knowledgeable shooters, are crazy about Glocks. Probably because its a gun that works for them.

All too often, we think that what is best for us is best for everyone. That's fallacious thinking. Proof of a correct decision is timed shots reliably on target. If Glock gives you that, then Glock is right for you.

It's really a Ford Chevy Dodge thing. The end result is what counts, not the tool used to achieve it.

 

[AL3X]

Maybe you could shoot a little better if you used your walker as a make-shift tripod!

I get the same comments from my co-worker, a 63 year old who thinks guns shouldn't evolve and should only be 1911s. It's always the same argument with anything that has had a standard building material for such a long time and people are resistant to drastic change.

 

[XavierBreath]

I had hoped that this thread could be kept away from personal attacks.

That did not last long. This one is closed.