To Glock or Not to Glock

[wanderson]

Nowadays $50 a pop for magazines isn't what I consider expensive, I probably paid $40 a pop for all the Sig & HK USP mags I've bought over the years.
I've bought & sold a half dozen Glocks over the years and still have a g32 & g44. Love the modularity, my g32 (.357 sig) also has .40 s&w and 9mm conversion barrels.
But never been a big fan of the ergonomics compared to more current designs like the M&P series, Caniks or the last gen Walthers. And Glock could easily offer a better trigger, yea there's inexpensive aftermarket fixes but nowadays Glock is at the bottom of the pile in regards to factory triggers. At their price point others have em beat.
I like a Glock right out of the box. Simple, reliable, rugged. Like my old HK USP, it's kinda clunky but I won't ever have any surprises if I don't go nuts with mods.
Personally if I were going to go crazy with mods, I'd start with a CZ.

[yoni]

I've bought & sold a half dozen Glocks over the years and still have a g32 & g44. Love the modularity, my g32 (.357 sig) also has .40 s&w and 9mm conversion barrels. .

Believe me I get it, back in the day it was the 125 grain ammo that gave 357mag performance that drew me to .357 sig. I bought a Glock 35 and a 32, then had issues with quality control with the small ammo companies that were loading .357sig like it should be. Went back to 9mm, then started seeing reports on Underwood Leighi Defense that got me looking back at 357 sig. I tested the stuff and really liked what I saw in term of performance on flesh.

Then I jumped on my 357sig PCC, journey which was a total failure. So I am back to 357sig pistol and depending on where I might be, the truck gun is either a Zasatava "Krink" in 7.62 or an AR.

Lastly I am having MK3 firearms build be qa 3 caliber Hi Power, it will be my answer to the whole 2011 thing.

[Ron3]

Believe me I get it, back in the day it was the 125 grain ammo that gave 357mag performance that drew me to .357 sig. I bought a Glock 35 and a 32, then had issues with quality control with the small ammo companies that were loading .357sig like it should be. Went back to 9mm, then started seeing reports on Underwood Leighi Defense that got me looking back at 357 sig. I tested the stuff and really liked what I saw in term of performance on flesh.

Then I jumped on my 357sig PCC, journey which was a total failure. So I am back to 357sig pistol and depending on where I might be, the truck gun is either a Zasatava "Krink" in 7.62 or an AR.

Lastly I am having MK3 firearms build be qa 3 caliber Hi Power, it will be my answer to the whole 2011 thing.

Did you consider 135 gr and lighter bullets from 10mm and .40 cartridge guns?

There are far more choices of .40 and 10mm guns and ammo than .357 Sig.

[yoni]

Did you consider 135 gr and lighter bullets from 10mm and .40 cartridge guns?

There are far more choices of .40 and 10mm guns and ammo than .357 Sig.

No the round that brought me back to the 357 sig is the 68 grain Leighi Defense in my 6 inch Glock 35 it is 2270fps. I really like the way it performs, when I shot hogs with it.

[Ron3]

No the round that brought me back to the 357 sig is the 68 grain Leighi Defense in my 6 inch Glock 35 it is 2270fps. I really like the way it performs, when I shot hogs with it.

I read people using full size pistols getting 1800-1900 fps from Underwood 10mm 100 gr Lehigh bullet loads.

[MegademiC]

I do understand the internals and the firing pin disconnect that nearly all auto's have.

Much of the concern is my head. Distrust. That striker, held by the sear 60--95% gun depending, like the fingers on the knob of a pinball-machine. Should it slip, the striker slams forward. Did the disconnector spring do it's job? Does it keep the firing pin held back? If not, you may be shot. Or someone near you be shot or maybe catch a ricochet. It's decided by these mass-produced parts thrown together in haste and chance.

Or carry a gun with a hammer at rest and not worry about it.

Actually, I just started carrying my new M&P Compact .40. It has a manual safety. I've been using that when holstering, then clicking it off.

I ran drills (draw to first shot on timer) and I didn't like the extra motion of clicking off the safety. It's not automatic for me after carrying for decades not having to do it. I'm hard-wired not to now & I'm not sure how many thousands of draws it would take for a safety sweep to be automatic.

It's really all about the first shot & how the pistol fits an optic. (Striker vs DA / SA)

I dont think you do understand.
The glock trigger is not cocked. Its at like 30% or so. Its basically a double action, unlike other stiker designs.

It also has a striker block, blocking the striker unless the trigger is pulled.

The disconnect doesnt really affect safety, it resets the mechanism. Without it youd slam fire and either go full out on really soft primers (maybe?), or just have a dead trigger every shot (likely)

[Ron3]

I dont think you do understand.
The glock trigger is not cocked. Its at like 30% or so. Its basically a double action, unlike other stiker designs.

It also has a striker block, blocking the striker unless the trigger is pulled.

The disconnect doesnt really affect safety, it resets the mechanism. Without it youd slam fire and either go full out on really soft primers (maybe?), or just have a dead trigger every shot (likely)

Perhaps I'm using the wrong terms.

I'm calling the plunger that gets pushed up by the trigger bar that allows the firing pin to go forward the disconnector. Is it called something else?

Edit:

I watched some videos. What I'm referring to is probably best called a firing pin safety plunger or block.

I didn't seeing anything called a "disconnector". The sear holds the striker in place until the trigger bar, aka connector, acts upon the sear.

The striker spring in the S&W is definitely more compressed when "cocked" than the Glock. I don't know if that has any effect on safety except in my head.

It also makes me wonder why 1911 / 2011 guys bother with a manual safety if the gun already has a sear, firing pin safety, and a grip safety. (Which prevents the trigger from tripping the sear, AFAIK)

[kirkland]

I do understand the internals and the firing pin disconnect that nearly all auto's have.

Much of the concern is my head. Distrust. That striker, held by the sear 60--95% gun depending, like the fingers on the knob of a pinball-machine. Should it slip, the striker slams forward. Did the disconnector spring do it's job? Does it keep the firing pin held back? If not, you may be shot. Or someone near you be shot or maybe catch a ricochet. It's decided by these mass-produced parts thrown together in haste and chance.

Or carry a gun with a hammer at rest and not worry about it.

Actually, I just started carrying my new M&P Compact .40. It has a manual safety. I've been using that when holstering, then clicking it off.

I ran drills (draw to first shot on timer) and I didn't like the extra motion of clicking off the safety. It's not automatic for me after carrying for decades not having to do it. I'm hard-wired not to now & I'm not sure how many thousands of draws it would take for a safety sweep to be automatic.

It's really all about the first shot & how the pistol fits an optic. (Striker vs DA / SA)

On a Glock the firing pin/striker is mechanically blocked from coming forward on it's own, not only by the firing pin plunger safety, but also by the trigger bar itself. The trigger bar (which also acts as the sear) is mechanically blocked from getting out of the way of the striker by a slot that it rides in, it only has a path to move out of the way and release the striker if the trigger is pulled. The trigger is mechanically blocked from being pulled unless the trigger safety is disengaged. Even if all of those safeties could fail, the striker itself is not even cocked. So there are multiple safety redundancies built into the gun that keep the firing pin from hitting the primer unless the trigger is deliberately pulled. it can't just slip and set off the gun.

Here's a nice animation of the internal workings of a Glock for anybody who's interested.