I may actually buy a Glock

[BreechFace]

The lack of a manual trigger safety and a trigger dongle that can get caught on gloves and susceptible to contamination in general. "Glock Leg" would be impossible if a manual trigger safety was engaged. Just sayin'.

Pretty sure these are non issues based on the sheer number of Glocks out there.

Contamination, there’s been plenty of torture testing military testing, FBI testing and somehow this is the first I heard of the trigger being susceptible to contamination more so than any other trigger.

Glock leg? More like serpa holsters, and poor training leg.

I certainly haven’t had those issues. So next straw man argument, batter up!

 

[.38 Special]

Oh! And for those that complain about the trigger, try a double action revolver trigger for a few thousand rounds and you’ll think you died and gone to trigger heaven next time you pull on any glock.

I have a few hundred thousand DA trigger pulls under my belt and despise the Glock trigger. A smooth, repeatable DA trigger can be an asset in fast strings, helping to bring the sights back onto target. The Glock trigger is anything but smooth and repeatable, stacking unpredictably and finishing with a "sproing" that pulls the gun off target.

In my opinion, folks who claim that people complaining about the Glock trigger don't know how to manage a trigger are coming at it from a particular point of view: that keeping them all in the nine ring at seven yards is perfectly adequate. That's a valid requirement, but ignores those of us who are looking for more precision - and who can get it from better guns.

 

[CNobbe]

The lack of a manual trigger safety and a trigger dongle that can get caught on gloves and susceptible to contamination in general. "Glock Leg" would be impossible if a manual trigger safety was engaged. Just sayin'.

Years ago the Saf-T-Blok was invented for the small percentage of people who think a Glock should have an external safety. Actually, Glock did produce models w/ external safeties for a short time (and probably a specific contract).

$20 for peace of mind, and much more intuitive than an external safety. https://www.clipdraw.com/product/4rl-saf-t-blok/

 

[BreechFace]

Years ago the Saf-T-Blok was invented for the small percentage of people who think a Glock should have an external safety. Actually, Glock did produce models w/ external safeties for a short time (and probably a specific contract).

$20 for peace of mind, and much more intuitive than an external safety. https://www.clipdraw.com/product/4rl-saf-t-blok/

Really?!? That is ridiculous, no wonder people are shooting themselves when they buy crap like that.

Just keep one’s finger out of the trigger guard until one is ready to fire.

If one wants a manual safety buy a firearm with a manual safety.

 

[CNobbe]

Glock leg? More like serpa holsters, and poor training leg.

P320 leg seems more common.

Really?!? That is ridiculous, no wonder people are shooting themselves when they buy crap like that.

Just keep one’s finger out of the trigger guard until one is ready to fire.

If one wants a manual safety buy a firearm with a manual safety.

Agreed, the G22 was the first pistol I ever had to train with and master. I never once thought it needed a safety or had its dingus not function wearing gloves, nor any other Glock I competed with indoors/outdoors in all seasons/temps.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Pretty sure these are non issues based on the sheer number of Glocks out there.

A manual trigger safety when engaged prevents nearly all negligent discharges. It's difficult to argue your way around that issue.

Contamination, there’s been plenty of torture testing military testing, FBI testing and somehow this is the first I heard of the trigger being susceptible to contamination more so than any other trigger.

Garrand Thumb proved the contamination issue beyond a shadow of a doubt when all of the triggers with dongles would NOT fire during the splash and freeze tests and the Sigs with the one piece trigger hinged at the top FIRED even when splashed and frozen. There is no way to argue around that. The Sig with it's one piece trigger hinged at the top is LESS susceptible to contamination.

Glock leg? More like serpa holsters, and poor training leg.

Again, an engaged manual trigger safety prevents the problem from occurring.

Not to mention that it is beneficial to engage a manual trigger safety before clearing malfunctions.

 

[army_eod]

The endless Glock arguments. Give it a rest.

 

[JDeere]

The endless Glock arguments. Give it a rest.

Yep been down this road so many times on forums. You either like them or you don't...

 

[P89DCSS]

....In my opinion, folks who claim that people complaining about the Glock trigger don't know how to manage a trigger are coming at it from a particular point of view: that keeping them all in the nine ring at seven yards is perfectly adequate. That's a valid requirement, but ignores those of us who are looking for more precision - and who can get it from better guns.

If someone buys a $550 double stack pistol for accuracy then there's your issue. Like the guy that bought a $200 pot-metal revolver and complained it wasn't accurate and the factory won't fix it.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

You either like them or you don't...

I don't have a particular dislike of Glocks per se. I just don't like the lack of a manual trigger safety or the trigger dongle. I have that same issue with other brands.

 

[BreechFace]

If someone buys a $550 double stack pistol for accuracy then there's your issue. Like the guy that bought a $200 pot-metal revolver and complained it wasn't accurate and the factory won't fix it.

Agreed. Who buys a Glock with a 5.5# trigger and tolerances that lend themselves to high reliability and think precision?

Use the right tool for the job. It's no surprise that Glocks are my choice for self defense, but precision? No. I've got a cajunized CZ 97 or my Ruger MKIV with a competition barrel and light trigger. And none of this is to say that the Glocks aren't accurate, but precision is not what I would call a poly framed, lightweight, wide sight posts, etc firearm.

 

[.38 Special]

It's not that Glocks are inaccurate, but rather that the trigger makes accuracy so hard to prove. The Glock is a good pistol let down by a poor trigger, and it doesn't have to be that way - even on a $500 gun.

 

[BreechFace]

It's not that Glocks are inaccurate, but rather that the trigger makes accuracy so hard to prove. The Glock is a good pistol let down by a poor trigger, and it doesn't have to be that way - even on a $500 gun.

How would you change the Glock trigger?

Glock is not for everyone, and it doesn't have to be. It's just interesting that there are quite a few people who want them to be something they aren't. And there are those that try and configure a Glock into something it isn't. Never quite understood these reasoning's as there are lots of good firearms out there. Want a manual safety, S&W and Sig got you covered, want a grip safety Springfield XD, want hammer fired there are countless choices there and DA/SA, SA, DA, decocker, manual safety, etc.

To me what I like about the Glock trigger for self defense is the following:

1. The striker is not fully charged, and held at a stored energy amount (~60% cocked) not enough to ignite a primer

-90-100% fully cocked strikers: Springfield XD, Sig P320, Walther, S&W M&P, HK VP9​

2. The trigger dongle is an easy and effective inertial and foreign object mitigation safety
3. The 5.5# trigger allows for more than sufficient accuracy and ease of shooting at self defense scenarios, and one can get other disconnector weights if one so chooses to, me I'll just practice and get proficient at a 5.5#, it hasn't prevented me from being proficient.
4. Any "grit" in the glock trigger mechanism either smooths out over time or takes 20 minutes of minor polishing of the cruciform, trigger bar, and firing pin block area to smooth it out.
5. The sponginess of squeezing through the last bit of charge on the striker is something that one gets used to.
6. Nothing is between my trigger finger pressing the trigger and the gun firing.
7. It's design reduces to a minimal amount of parts, and that is the peak of a design's evolution. As this makes maintenance, understanding and reliability better (in most cases)

 

[GEM]

What a yawn of virtue signaling from the Glock Haters. Yes, you can like other guns better. However, saying they cannot be shot very well is just BS. That's on the user. I've watch excellent competitive shooters at matches, excellent results in classes over the years. If you like another gun, fine. But the trigger and grip angle blather preventing decent or excellent results is just that, blather.

The NDs - that's on you. Look in the mirror. I've seen NDs over the years, it's folks with fingers on the trigger. If you need a manual safety to prevent that, that's on you. Put one on your revolvers, that can be done.

 

[Targa]

I had a Glock 26 for a while. I thought it was a really good gun, I loved how simple it was without all of the unnecessary fish scales, serrations, whatever you want to call them. I enjoyed the reliability, easy take down and grip angle of the gun. I only got rid of it for a slimmer, single stack offering (Kahr CM9, another outstanding pistol by the way) for IWB carry. The G43 hadn’t been manufactured yet but if it had I could have very well had it instead of the Kahr. As for a safety, rifles and single action autos are the only guns I will own with a safety, they certainly will not be on a gun I am carrying for self defense.

 

[Overkill870]

What a yawn of virtue signaling from the Glock Haters. Yes, you can like other guns better. However, saying they cannot be shot very well is just BS. That's on the user. I've watch excellent competitive shooters at matches, excellent results in classes over the years. If you like another gun, fine. But the trigger and grip angle blather preventing decent or excellent results is just that, blather.

The NDs - that's on you. Look in the mirror. I've seen NDs over the years, it's folks with fingers on the trigger. If you need a manual safety to prevent that, that's on you. Put one on your revolvers, that can be done.

Exactly. If you can't shoot a Glock well it's not the Glock, it's the shooter. They are the perfect combat triggers in my opinion. Anything lighter is a liability.

And the safe action system is bomb proof. It will not fire unless you pull the trigger.

 

[tomrkba]

Get it two months from now. Pay everything off since you have guns for defense.

 

[LiveLife]

It's not that Glocks are inaccurate, but rather that the trigger makes accuracy so hard to prove. The Glock is a good pistol let down by a poor trigger, and it doesn't have to be that way - even on a $500 gun.

During the past 30 years, I have shot over 700,000 rounds of reloaded handgun rounds mostly in Glocks (G17/19/26 and G22/23/27 along with G20/30) while also using 40-9mm conversion barrels made by KKM/Lone Wolf/Tactical Kinetics/BCA, including 40S&W aftermarket barrels.

And starting with Glocks that do not move/jerk the front sight when dry fired/striker is released, as 4.5 lb factory trigger smooths out after break-in, sub 2" groups are attainable at 25 yards using decent ammunition. (If you want accurate Glocks out of the box, keep dry firing different samples until you find one that doesn't move the front sight) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...opment-and-observations.899455/#post-12157707

And Lipsey's Vickers Tactical Glock 17 with factory trigger produced following best/worst/average 25 yard groups - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...s-and-discussions.778197/page-9#post-10940688

• CCI 115-gr. Blazer FMJ - 1.65" - 2.82" - 2.22"
• Black Hills 124-gr. +P JHP - 1.80" - 2.23" - 2.06"
• Hornady LE 90-gr. Frangible - 1.00" - 3.01" - 2.34"

And from my Gen3 Glock 22 (factory trigger) load development with Alliant BE-86 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/40-s-w-powder.851647/page-3#post-11150251

And for those in disbelief that Glocks can be accurate, I met a fellow THR member FTF at the range to witness following group - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/40-s-w-powder.851647/page-3#post-11150251

 

[JohnKSa]

Yeah, they shoot ok and can be shot ok even with the stock trigger. Took a class some years back where the instructor, at one point, had everyone take a shot at a bowling pin set at 50 yards. Two of the folks made first round hits using Glocks.

 

[army_eod]

Of course my other issue is I already have a Taurus G2C which I love and it also has a manual safety which I also love. Granted the trigger is less than stellar and the grip is similar to the G43 but it's just as reliable and is nicer looking than the Glock.

Trade the Taurus for a G43X or G19.

 

[Spats McGee]

I had a Glock 26 for a while. I thought it was a really good gun, I loved how simple it was without all of the unnecessary [stuff]...

There is certainly something to be said for a Glock's simplicity.

 

[kje54]

Trade the Taurus for a G43X or G19.

No.

 

[camsdaddy]

If you want a 43 and need a small very shootable gun suited for pocket or other discreet carry I say jump on it. I had one and found it uber reliable and easy to shoot. I shot it a lot better that some of the other sub compact offering such as the P365.
The thing that would give me hesitancy is I would not finance a gun nor allow a gun to get me into debt. If you cant afford to pay cash for the gun you probably cant afford to buy the gun and pay interest.

 

[Godsgunman]

While I prefer other guns like HK and CZ, the CZ ergos for me are just a thing of beauty, there is one Glock that I really like. The Glock 30 SF. It just feels good to me. Whether it's the finger grooves or the shortened trigger reach, it feels better than any other Glock I've shot. That's why it's the one I own.

 

[kje54]

I've been re-thinking this but with a couple of caveats........ A Glock22, fully functional with extra mags and a trigger upgrade for under $150............ That's about all it would be worth to me.