View Full Version : Glock Gen 5, What would you recommend to Glock?
FlyingHunter
07-13-15, 20:12
My recommendations:
1. Modular, customizable Grip (think HK VP9)
2. Undercut trigger guard
3. Decent sights not made of plastic, hey Gaston...go look at these: Vickers Battlesights
4. Front slide serrations
5. Trigger more like a SIG 320
I thought glocks were perfect? :suicide:
Sorry Flyinghunter, I couldn't resist.
Anyway, I would like to see grip options. Like ones with no finger grooves and loosing the plastic POS sites.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-13-15, 20:34
1. Incorporate M&P style rear grip insert that allows for CT laser grip integration.
2. Abandon superfluous trigger within a trigger "safety." It serves practically no purpose other than tricking police administrators into thinking it is a safety.
3. Abandon screw-on front sights. I know Glock likes saving money, but this is subpar. Needs dovetail or CZ style cross-wise roll pin.
4. Put thicker shelf around the slide-release lever to reduce accidental slide lock-back and/or failure to lock back.
5. Return to G3 specs for recoil system, etc for 9mm models.
Go back to the Gen 3 specs and leave it alone. I can modify the grip to my likings.
I've seen a lot of people gripe about the screw on sights. What's the big deal? Little bit of thread locker and I've never had one come loose before.
Good topic. I've been Glock monogamous for almost 12 years now.
Here's what I want:
Every Gen 5 should come with the factory extended slide stop lever (or slide release as they say back on the block)
Slightly revised takedown. My fingernails hurt when stripping the pistol. A little longer and a little fatter, please
Don't care about interchangeable grips.
Slanted front and rear serrations
MIAD style front grip, giving the option to NOT have finger grooves.
I agree...while I don't mind the trigger safety; I don't like it either. At least an option to change it. Wide and fat. Possibly flat bow.
Yeah I'd buy that
Change angle of extractor from (15 degrees?) back to 90..also redesign the slide, extractor entirely. Shitcan the spring, depressor rod, bearing, etc, and change to a simple lever&spring set up like found in HK's M&P's etc, You know, something that works.. Lower the ejection port, and bevel the inside bottom of the port. Make the extractor wider to get a better grip on the case. And while we're at it, on the sides of the breech face where the case slides up, cut a small notch to catch the rim of the case, and stop it from sliding off the breach face in case of poor extractor tension..
Get rid of the finger grooves. and the "safety" lever on the trigger, as was mentioned above it doesn't do anything meaningful.
Possibly offer a model with a Gadget installed..
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-13-15, 21:35
What Ralph said.
FlyingHunter
07-13-15, 21:39
and also...whatever unobtanium unicorn parts needed to prevent the almighty BTF. The BTF is getting old!
brushy bill
07-13-15, 21:40
Most already covered. Only two things I'd add are:
Drop MIM and go back to previous materials.
Make metal slide inserts so that if one breaks you can replace without needing a new frame.
and also...whatever unobtanium unicorn parts needed to prevent the almighty BTF. The BTF is getting old!
Doing what I suggested would make BTF a thing of the past..
FlyingHunter
07-13-15, 22:05
Doing what I suggested would make BTF a thing of the past..
Well that's great news! Now to implement your plan...I went to Glocks website, jobs, and found this position: CNC - FERTIGUNGSTECHNIKER/IN ZERSPANUNG.
Please apply for whatever this CNC job is and solve the eternal/infernal BTF problem. I'll pitch in for the airfare to Austria.
My recommendations:
1. Modular, customizable Grip (think HK VP9)
2. Undercut trigger guard
3. Decent sights not made of plastic, hey Gaston...go look at these: Vickers Battlesights
4. Front slide serrations
5. Trigger more like a SIG 320
Too many sight options to do that. I'd only want Trijicon HD orange. So any other crap just wastes my money. I consider the plastic sights place holders or dovetail protectors.
I used to think front slide serrations were necessary for press checks. Then I was issued a Glock and I quickly learned they aren't. They serve no functional purpose in my mind and are purely cosmetic. And I wouldn't want them on a Gen 5.
I'd like to see interchangeable front and side straps (finger grooves and no finger grooves). I'd like grey as a frame color and that's about it.
A lot of things previously mentioned Id like to see but my only real complaints are the undercut and the shape of the trigger. I don't like how round it is from side to side. Id like a flater trigger.
Well that's great news! Now to implement your plan...I went to Glocks website, jobs, and found this position: CNC - FERTIGUNGSTECHNIKER/IN ZERSPANUNG.
Please apply for whatever this CNC job is and solve the eternal/infernal BTF problem. I'll pitch in for the airfare to Austria.
Doing what I suggested is well known, Glock went to the 15 degree extractor in a effort to get the case to clear the ejection port, when all that was needed was to lower the port. If you ever read the BTF thread that was over 200pgs long, (I think)at least one of these ideas have already been tried. for example, Randy Lee of Apex tactical has been lowering ejection ports on Glocks for years, it's nothing new, and it works. Glock knows full well what they could do if they wanted,But apparently they don't want to bad enough. People buy everything they make as it is so, why should they change?? Glock will do nothing to address any known problems until somebody comes along and gives them some serious competition for LE contracts/civilian sales, and starts making inroads into their bread and butter..
Besides, I don't speak German, and I'm not inclined to learn.
FlyingHunter
07-13-15, 22:19
I'd like grey as a frame color and that's about it.
Lipsey's has your factory Grey frame:
http://www.lipseys.com/itemdetail.aspx?itemno=GLPG1950203GF
MOLON AABE
07-13-15, 23:20
Glock Gen 5.
1. Serialized removable frame rails to which the frame, trigger, sear, ejector etc. Attach.
2. Removable duty, compact, and sub compact grips. (Non serialized) buy the compact, then you can buy a second frame in whatever size you want. To go from a 19 sized, to a 17 or a 26 sized gun.
3. From the factory steel Glock sights with the front sight being mounted on a dovetail as has been previously mentioned.
4. Revised takedown similar to the captured takedown pin of the Arsenal Strike One.
5. Ideally be able to take Gen 4 slides as well as Gen 5 slides. That way aethstetic or functional changes on Gen 5 guns can be swapped to a more traditional Glock look/feel. As well as affording those with extensive updates to Gen 4 slides such as RMR cuts, serrations jobs etc. can utilize their personal improvements.
Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
Hemoglobin
07-13-15, 23:35
A closed top glock 34 and go back to the gen 3 9mm recoil spring assembly. My list of changes wouldn't be realistic. I'm better off just sending my gun to have the frame worked over and the slide worked over. I'll have my RMR's one day lol
I want a Glock 34 MOS with tall sights and a threaded barrel. Nothing follows.
Lipsey's has your factory Grey frame:
http://www.lipseys.com/itemdetail.aspx?itemno=GLPG1950203GF
Holy sweetness! You just cost me more money! Lol! Truth be told it isn't your fault. I'd have seen them eventually. But thanks! :)
WickedWillis
07-14-15, 11:36
There is quite a bit of flack here on the Gen 4 springs, what exactly did I miss regarding those? My Gen 4 19 I have not had a spring issue. Simply asking, not trying to start an argument or call anyone out.
what I would want on a Gen 5;
Remove the finger grooves. I was amazed how much I liked them not being there on a Gen 3 that my friend removed them from. I felt like I had better control.
Good factory sights on all guns. Add a little bit of cost and ship with usable 3-dot steel sights. The dot notch is a joke, and being plastic makes it worse.
Friendlier controls. Extend the mag release similar to the tango down add ons, extended slide release like TD, and easier take down levers. I have dealt with some very, very stiff take down levers.
Stock RDS options and packages. The MOS was the correct direction, but make a factory model with suppressor height night sights, with maybe an RMR shipped from factory. This could also translate to more tactical packages from the factory (I am looking at the FN45 tactical)
More factory customization options. Allow me to order a G21 with RMR setup, suppressor height sights, threaded barrels directly from Glock or Lipsey's or whomever. Give us more factory options.
Interchangeable grip panels. The P30 and the VP9 are great examples of how to make a gun feel in your hand just right.
Fix the extractor issue the first time. No excuses that guys are still getting BTF.
Just my humble additions and subtractions on what I would personally want. I shoot Glocks more than any of my other guns.
Thinner/ slimmer and tapered slide.
Gen 2 grip (no finger grooves)
Under cut trigger guard
Minus connector
Smooth trigger
Early Gen3 reliability
Light rail
Trijicon night sights
WickedWillis
07-14-15, 12:07
And to add to mine, go back to the tenifer finish, the Gen 4 finish is so sub-par.
Slightly less steep grip angle
Slightly thinner grip and slide
Slightly smaller grip front to back
Steel sights in dovetails front and back
Steel insert in frame at dust cover to prevent deformation by clamp on lights
Return to parts that did not cause BTF issues
Code3Patriot
07-14-15, 17:52
Like everyone else here:
Undercut trigger guard
Get rid of finger grooves
Front slide serrations
Gen3 RTF2 frame without finger grooves and an undercut trigger guard.
Add a standard picatinny rail, undercut front strap, and while I'm wishing add 10-8 sights or battlecomp sights standard.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
Redesign the trigger guard and make it more glove friendly, lose the hook up front and undercut and radius the underside.
Offer more sight options or no sights at all for less $.
9mms never needed dual recoil springs so ditch 'em. You can blame it on the 9 being a pusswad round :laugh:
Do not carve "Grip Zone" anywhere on the pistol.
Failure2Stop
07-14-15, 20:57
Truly ambi slide stop/release. Not extended, just a bit more ledge to catch.
Truly ambi magazine release.
Better bevel of magwell.
Stock striker/trigger bar block (see "the gadget").
Undercut trigger guard for both the firing hand middle finger and support hand index finger.
True Mil-STD-1913 front rail.
Improved trigger characteristics (clean break, overtravel stop) without losing the reset or initial stack of a good Glock trigger.
Provided that function and precision are not worse than current Gen 4, I can deal with or readily modify the little other things.
From Tapatalk:
Jack Leuba
Knight's Armament Company: Military/Govt Product Liaison
F2S Consulting: Director of Shooting Stuff
NCPatrolAR
07-14-15, 21:00
No finger grooves
Make it an M&P.
That certainly sounds like what everyone in this thread wants. Or a Lone Wolf Tmberwolf Glock.
Dionysusigma
07-14-15, 21:47
Make it an M&P.
God no. I want to be able to hit what I'm aiming at, and not need to unleash a volley that goes somewhere in the general vicinity of POA.
My list:
No finger grooves
Add Picatinny rail
Gen 3 internal mechanism and recoil assembly
Lowered ejection port
Fully ambi magazine release
Slightly larger takedown release
Go back to Tenifer finish on all metal parts
Lose the hump on the backstrap and the hook/grip area on the front of the trigger guard
Undercut the rear of the trigger guard slightly
Add a slightly more pronounced beavertail
Vickers slide release as standard (but also ambidextrous)
That certainly sounds like what everyone in this thread wants. Or a Lone Wolf Tmberwolf Glock.
Quick side track. Why are said timberwolf frames not more popular?
Gen 4 build and texture, same back straps, replaceable front straps. I understand the original Tenifer finish isn't usable anymore, so I'd like something closer to the flat color of an M&P versus a shiny finish.
Ambi mag release and slide stop would be a nice touch. Stock sights don't bother me as long as night sights are available.
Quick side track. Why are said timberwolf frames not more popular?
Good question. Seems like they have most of the features everyone has posted that they want.
Good factory sights on all guns. Add a little bit of cost and ship with usable 3-dot steel sights. The dot notch is a joke, and being plastic makes it worse.
I don't get the demand for different factory sights, it does't matter what factory sights they add, like every single handgun brand, I'm going to rip off the factory sights day one. I definitely don't want to pay more for something else I don't want. If they offered a no-sight option I'd opt for it every time.
Guinnessman
07-15-15, 08:03
I will take a Gen 4 size grip, no finger grooves, with the RTF 2 texture, and old school Gen 3 reliability. Glock can keep the plastic sights to save me some money on my purchase since I will buy aftermarket sights.
You can see why designing a product for the masses is difficult. I read 80% of these suggestions and think "f*** no!"
I don't give a rat's a** about ambi anything and I hate 3 dot sights as another example.
We're a pain to deal with :cool:
Maybe echoing many here: Gen4 frame w/o finger grooves, Gen3 internals, steel factory sights that do not need to be replaced if you are happy without night sights.
I am probably going to get rocks thrown at me….
but I would like to see a Trigger Over-travel stop.
It would clean up trigger break and keep your front end from excessive movement.
S&W M&P have it….why cant Glock.
take a small piece of paper and keep folding it to add thickness and slip it between the back of the trigger and frame and adjust to see how much it cleans up trigger break.
OK….stone away!
Quick side track. Why are said timberwolf frames not more popular?
So just for shits and giggles (shiggles) I priced out what a complete Lone Wolf pistol would cost:
$826.63 for the assembled frame($328.28) assembled Lone Wolf G35 slide($388.40) and their barrel ($109.95)
$130.00 for Dawson Precision adjustable sights
$250.00 for a ZEV Tech Ultimate Fulcrum trigger kit
So, $1206.63 + Shipping, and FFL fees and applicable taxes...
For that much I think I would end up going with something like a CZ-75 Shadow Target II.
Straight Shooter
07-15-15, 21:21
1. Gen 3 internals
2. Gen 1-2 reliability/durability.
3.Undercut/beveled triggerguard.
4. Now STOP ****ing with the damn things and just MAKE THEM.
God no. I want to be able to hit what I'm aiming at, and not need to unleash a volley that goes somewhere in the general vicinity of POA.
My list:
No finger grooves
Add Picatinny rail
Gen 3 internal mechanism and recoil assembly
Lowered ejection port
Fully ambi magazine release
Slightly larger takedown release
Go back to Tenifer finish on all metal parts
Lose the hump on the backstrap and the hook/grip area on the front of the trigger guard
Undercut the rear of the trigger guard slightly
Add a slightly more pronounced beavertail
Vickers slide release as standard (but also ambidextrous)
Pretty much with you except for the slide release - I use it as a catch not a release.
I'm a lefty and I get the weapon reloaded just as fast as anyone I run with using the standard, not extended, non-ambi, mag release. Having said all of that, activating the Glock mag release for quick reloads is problematic for many beginning police shooters. Unfortunately, the truth is that many police shooters never get much beyond the beginner stage in terms of weapon manipulation. I'd rethink the whole mag release for those folks.
I'd also add small scallop cuts on the bottom sides of the grips to aid in stripping mags.
I like Glocks, but then again, I don't expect them to be as accurate as my bullseye pistols.
I have a G17 & a G23. There's nothing else from Glock that I need.....or want.
-Bring back the RTF2 frame. Offer some ‘tacticool’ colors* right out of the box (none Lipsey’s special editions).
-Cutout on the base of the trigger guard.
-Offer better sights. Most guns I own the sights are good enough out of the box that I can use them just fine. My M&P Pro came with ledged night sights. My Sigs have good sights. My HKs are…well, not horrible. The Glock’s are crap. In fact, one of my G17s came with Warren Tact fiber optic sights installed from the factory. It was only $10 more than a regular G17. I don’t see why they couldn’t do this more often. For the most part, a Glock doesn't cost $500, but closer to $600 because of how bad the OE sights are.
-Some front slide serrations would be nice.
-Gen3 everything except gen4 mag release.
-Dovetail front sight. The front sight on my G27 can be easily rotated ~ 10 degrees
-Make the mag release and slide stop/release ambi.
*Yea, yea, yea, I know. I like FDE and the gray is pretty cool looking too; sometimes something that minor is enough to push me over the edge to buy a second or third one of something.
This would be a huge switchup for Glock, but how about losing the polymer magazines? There are plenty of pistols with reliable and inexpensive metal mags, why does Glock need to stick with the plastic? Metal mags would be thinner than the current metal-lined plastic, and that translates to thinner and less blocky grips. Yes, you lose a lot of compatibility with older generation Glocks, but if I'm going to wish, I'm wishing big.
You can see why designing a product for the masses is difficult. I read 80% of these suggestions and think "f*** no!"
I don't give a rat's a** about ambi anything and I hate 3 dot sights as another example.
We're a pain to deal with :cool:
I couldn't agree more. I had no interest in Glocks Gen 1-3 (I tried to like a Gen 3 specifically). I finally agreed to try a Gen 4 from a friend and those minor changes to the grip and accuracy improvements (and me learning the trigger) transformed the entire experience for me. I am now a monogamous Gen 4 Glock guy. The only thing I would change is a lowered ejection port and no more finger grooves. Other then that, please leave it alone.
insertgenericid
07-16-15, 12:50
Kinda looks like you're describing an M&P :p...
God no. I want to be able to hit what I'm aiming at, and not need to unleash a volley that goes somewhere in the general vicinity of POA.
My list:
No finger grooves
Add Picatinny rail
Gen 3 internal mechanism and recoil assembly
Lowered ejection port
Fully ambi magazine release
Slightly larger takedown release
Go back to Tenifer finish on all metal parts
Lose the hump on the backstrap and the hook/grip area on the front of the trigger guard
Undercut the rear of the trigger guard slightly
Add a slightly more pronounced beavertail
Vickers slide release as standard (but also ambidextrous)
insertgenericid
07-16-15, 12:52
I agree on removing the backstraps, undercut the trigger guard. Get rid of the thumb ledges too. Make a dedicated optic gun, where the milling is down for one particular optic, so the fit is tight. The "trigger" safety might not do anything, but does it really get in that much in the way? And unless everyone here who wants better sights can agree on what sight they want, I'd rather they save the money.
I'm suprised no one mentioned a 17 slide with a 19 frame.
Undercut the trigger guard, Front cocking serrations, and a quality finish.
The new ones scratch/scrape easy and look awful for that.
Sights; I would maybe put metal sights on the gun. But there are so many after market sights; I wouldn't drive up production cost for something that will be replaced.
I consider Glock sights to be on par with an A2 grip on an AR; it's basically a place holder.
No weak ejection issues, no BTF issues, and no BTH issues:rolleyes:
I'm suprised no one mentioned a 17 slide with a 19 frame.
I'd be happy with a 19 slide on a 17 frame, but that's just preference since for various reasons the compact frames just don't fit my hands.
I can almost conceal a 17 frame IWB with a loose shirt but not quite. However, a gen 4 m19 frame with no finger grooves, more agressive texturing front and back and 17 upper would be for me. Plastic sights are just a place holder that reads: "Place real sights here."
and the "safety" lever on the trigger, as was mentioned above it doesn't do anything meaningful.
2. Abandon superfluous trigger within a trigger "safety." It serves practically no purpose other than tricking police administrators into thinking it is a safety.
Fellas, this is bad information to our readers. That is an inertia safety. If that thing wouldn't exist and you dropped your pistol on it's backstrap, the gun would go off. Although it's not the most comfortable thing, it's a necessity. If anyone wants to dispute it, buy a $15 trigger and trigger bar and file that inertia safety off and drop the gun a few times. .....I suggest you use an unloaded weapon.....
Back to the main topic of this thread....
An RTF2 without finger grooves and front sight dovetails would do it for me.
G17 slide, G19 grip length, no grip bumps, Gen4 features, "-" connector.
I chopped my G17 and the more I shoot it, the more I'm convinced this configuration is ideal.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-16-15, 19:48
"Fellas, this is bad information to our readers. That is an inertia safety. If that thing wouldn't exist and you dropped your pistol on it's backstrap, the gun would go off. Although it's not the most comfortable thing, it's a necessity. If anyone wants to dispute it, buy a $15 trigger and trigger bar and file that inertia safety off and drop the gun a few times. .....I suggest you use an unloaded weapon..... "
Isn't that the role of the drop safety? I could see this if you had a 1 lb trigger. Interesting. How does the dig 320 address. This?
Kinda looks like you're describing an M&P :p...
That's exactly the gun everybody in this thread is describing. If S&W came out with a G19 sized M&P, Glock would go out of business within a year of it's release.
I'm surprised none of y'all asked for a paddle mag release...
FlyingHunter
07-16-15, 21:13
These responses are interesting. They appear consistent with the most common custom shop mods offered on Glocks such as sights, grip/frame work, Cerakote finishes, slide work such as RMR cuts or front serrations, trigger work etc...An entire cottage business has been created to meet the needs of Glock owners desiring the changes mentioned in this thread.
Isn't that the role of the drop safety? I could see this if you had a 1 lb trigger. Interesting. How does the dig 320 address. This?
The drop safety prevents the firing pin from hitting the primer UNLESS THE TRIGGER IS PULLED to the rear. The inertia safety prevents gravity and G force from allowing the trigger to move to the rear and disable the drop safety. Obviously the further you drop the gun, the weight of the gun and trigger pull weight all play a role in this but the inertia safety is definitely needed.
I have only fondled a Sig 320 at a gun shop so I don't know how Sig addressed the issue but I also would like to know. I will say that Sig's would be the first striker fired pistol that didn't catch flack from Glock Inc. because of patent infringement on the triggers and safeties. Glock just about sued everyone, starting with S&W, when striker fired pistols broke loose.
Maiden3.16
07-16-15, 21:26
I don't think a gen 5 is necessary, but if they do:
MOS for all popular models (except 42 &43 of coarse.) with how popular RDS have been on pistols this would really put glock ahead of the curve. Surprised other companies haven't jumped in this.
And... That's pretty much it. Maybe small changes like texture but I wouldn't want them to do anything drastic as to make them incompatible with the older models.
I don't think a gen 5 is necessary, but if they do:
MOS for all popular models (except 42 &43 of coarse.) with how popular RDS have been on pistols this would really put glock ahead of the curve. Surprised other companies haven't jumped in this.
And... That's pretty much it. Maybe small changes like texture but I wouldn't want them to do anything drastic as to make them incompatible with the older models.
Why not? I'd add an RMR to a 43 if I had one. Either by milling and/or adapter plate if necessary.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-17-15, 15:11
The drop safety prevents the firing pin from hitting the primer UNLESS THE TRIGGER IS PULLED to the rear. The inertia safety prevents gravity and G force from allowing the trigger to move to the rear and disable the drop safety. Obviously the further you drop the gun, the weight of the gun and trigger pull weight all play a role in this but the inertia safety is definitely needed.
Fascinating. I wonder what is going on with the Glock trigger mechanism? For example, DA/SA (SIG, HK, FN, Berretta) have even lighter trigger pulls in SA mode, often with heavy metal triggers) that never required a second trigger safety.
Thanks for pointing this out, for years I only saw reference to "might help with snagging or dropping gun in some bushes, etc) which always seemed pretty meh. Neat!
The drop safety prevents the firing pin from hitting the primer UNLESS THE TRIGGER IS PULLED to the rear. The inertia safety prevents gravity and G force from allowing the trigger to move to the rear and disable the drop safety. Obviously the further you drop the gun, the weight of the gun and trigger pull weight all play a role in this but the inertia safety is definitely needed.
I thought this was common knowledge. There is nothing wrong with leaving the feature on future generation pistols.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-17-15, 15:36
Apparently I slept through that part of class. I still wonder why it needs a second drop safety vs. other designs.
Apparently I slept through that part of class. I still wonder why it needs a second drop safety vs. other designs.
Because, perfection!?
Apparently I slept through that part of class. I still wonder why it needs a second drop safety vs. other designs.
Wasn't this a requirement in order to secure the Austrian Army contract?
Maiden3.16
07-17-15, 17:39
Why not? I'd add an RMR to a 43 if I had one. Either by milling and/or adapter plate if necessary.
Hey why not. Imagine buying your first 9mm handgun and your torn between a vp9, 320, m&p, and glock. Having an Optics ready glock 17/19 for around 600 would definitely sway many over the other models IMO. Especially considering how expensive it is to get your slide milled for an optic.
Nytcrawler93
07-17-15, 22:51
I could see it going more modular, ala the Sig 320.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BOOSTjunkie
07-18-15, 07:22
1. For the love of god get ride of the finger groves
2. Front slide serrations
3. Keep the cheap plastic sights as this will keep the cost down. Sights are so personal most change it out anyways.
4. RMR cutout for every model
5. Gen 3 recoil spring
I like the concept (whether intentional or coincidental) that most glock parts are usable but cheap to keep the initial price down as many people modify those parts to suit their own needs anyways ie mag release, slide lock, sights etc.
Why do I keep seeing a desire for front slide serrations? Unless running an open class gun, what do they do that rear serrations don't? They will drive up the cost of the pistol due to extra machining involved.
Ok here's my .02 on the whole gen5 thing (is there rumor this is coming soon or something?). As far as I'm concerned any evolution in the design in order to be considered as should be, for the most part, a simplification of what already exists. That said I'd like to see the following:
1. Gen 2 style frame with no finger grooves, no SF, no need for retarded pin on gen4 back straps (who comes up with this hokey crap?
2. Fix the damn pig nose nonsense. It's 2015 a rigid rail is possible.
3. Ditch the goofy euro grip angle along with the hump on the back strap and go with a true 1911 angle.
4. Gen 4 mag release
5. Gen 3 grip texture is fine for 95% of shooters. If you want it more aggressive or under cut do it on your end.
6. dovetail front sight (would novak cuts be cool on glocks? idk, atleast match the rear glock cut).
7. Angled rear serrations. No need for front serrations unless their on top of the slide.
8. No need for extended controls, if you want to them buy them aftermarket.
9. Updated trigger geometry of the trigger itself (flatter trigger).
In the end what I find most appealing about the glock platform is it's stupid simple utilitarian design and essence. For a stock production gun I want a simple, clean, design that lends itself well to user end modifications if needed. Most importantly I needs to go bang every time above all else. Any departure from a generic use oriented performance envelope is superfluous imo so this includes factory stippling, extended controls, undercuts, .
Lastly, I'd want to see less parts. The fact that I can break the gun down to its most fundamental parts with a pointy object is huge plus in my book. A glock has what 35 parts? I want 30 if possible. An internal design chassis like the Sig p320 could maybe go a long way here in allowing this to happen assuming there was a way to integrate already existing components (ie trigger bar, connector, ejector, etc into it). Maybe that is or isn't possible idk, but the notion 40$ glock frames that are essentially consumables that I can stipple, sand, hack up etc, makes me warm and fuzzy.
1. Return to Bar stock / original materials extractor
2. Get rid of the finger grooves !
3. Again get rid of the finger grooves !
4. A flatter face trigger
Why do I keep seeing a desire for front slide serrations? Unless running an open class gun, what do they do that rear serrations don't? They will drive up the cost of the pistol due to extra machining involved.
Wait until you are in your 7th decade and have arthritic hands. Makes press checks MUCH easier:)
john
Larry Vickers
07-18-15, 19:14
Understand that Lipseys is the Number One Glock Distributor in the USA which means in the world - the ONLY reason those special edition colors like FDE and Grey and my RTF2 limited edition guns happened is because Lipseys has the horsepower and the checkbook to get them done- period.
Just keep that in mind as you formulate your opinion on anything special and non standard in regards to Glock
Eurodriver
07-18-15, 20:09
Gen 5 should be Gen 2 with RTF2 and a light rail.
Done.
Wait until you are in your 7th decade and have arthritic hands. Makes press checks MUCH easier:)
john
Not trying to be smart. How is it easier than using the rear serrations?
I like all of mine, Gen3 and Gen4. I would change nothing.
Not trying to be smart. How is it easier than using the rear serrations?
My habit is to grasp the slide over the front, clamp down and put my thumb into the triggerguard and lever back - I only do that on pistols w/o LCI's. I find it to be a more precise way of doing it than on the rear of the slide. There is also more to grab hold of in front of the ejection port than behind the ejection port. Additionally, in the case of DA/SA pistols with slide mounted safeties there is the chance of inadvertently engaging the safety.
I could see how hands weakened by the pain and stiffness or arthritis would benefit from front striations.
Larry Vickers
07-19-15, 07:15
Glock should have added front grasping grooves long ago - form follows function and forward grasping grooves are very functional. Well worth the price of admission and is standard on virtually every other modern fighting pistol except Glock - everybody else aint wrong on this one and Glock is right
Fascinating. I wonder what is going on with the Glock trigger mechanism? For example, DA/SA (SIG, HK, FN, Berretta) have even lighter trigger pulls in SA mode, often with heavy metal triggers) that never required a second trigger safety.
I have always compared the Glock firing sequence to a bow and arrow (bare with me...).
As you pull the trigger...
The pressure on the trigger first disconnects the inertia safety on the face of the trigger.
As the trigger is pulled to the rear, about half way (stage one of a two stage trigger) the trigger bar pushes up on the drop safety which is located on the slide. This plunger opens up the firing pin channel to allow the firing pin to strike the primer.
As the trigger is pulled further to the rear, the back of the trigger bar engages the little hook on the rear of the firing pin and draws it to the rear (like a bow) and because of the angle on the back of the trigger bar, it then drops off and releases the firing pin sending it forward under the tension of the firing pin spring.
BANG
Other weapons that are DA/SA or DAO or SA have sear engagements. This is why the SA action is much lighter and usually more crisp. Berettas and Sigs and CZs, etc all have safety mechanisms that won't allow the pin to hit the hammer unless the trigger is to the rear. 1911s have the beaver tail.
All of the striker fired pistols that I own (Glock, PPQ, VP9, M&P) all have some form of inertia safety on the trigger. I like the M&P version the best because it's more of a hinge and you don't really feel it. My P7M8 doesn't have it but you have to cock it with the squeeze cocker.
Fascinating. I wonder what is going on with the Glock trigger mechanism? For example, DA/SA (SIG, HK, FN, Berretta) have even lighter trigger pulls in SA mode, often with heavy metal triggers) that never required a second trigger safety.
Thanks for pointing this out, for years I only saw reference to "might help with snagging or dropping gun in some bushes, etc) which always seemed pretty meh. Neat!
SA/DA system start with the hammer in the full down, rebound position. There is no spring pressure to move the hammer if a sear should fail. SA mode is only used once the shooting has started. Most DA/SA handguns are meant to be de-cocked before returned to the holster. No trigger safety is required.
You will also notice pistols with SA mode have a half cock notch. This notch was originally used to catch the hammer if it should fall without the trigger being engaged, such as the shooter's thumb slipping off the spur during cocking or a sear breaking and letting the hammer fall.
The drop safety of a striker fired weapon fills the same role as the half cock does for hammer. The striker of the Glock is held in an almost completely cocked position. If the part hold the striker should fail, or the striker break in two, the drop safety will block the striker from hitting the primer. It also blocks the striker in case the pistol is hit hard enough to cause "sear bounce", releasing the striker without the trigger being pulled.
The half cock will catch a hammer if an pistol in SA mode is dropped hard enough to cause sear bounce or if the sear shears from the impact. It's not as positive as a drop safety as a blow to the hammer hard enough to cause sear bounce or to break the sear might be hard enough to cause the half cock sear to fail as well.
Now, too add to the topic in a typical MistWolf smart-alecky fashion- I fixed all the annoying problems with Glocks by buying a PPQ. Now, all I have to do is upgrade the sights and fix the problem I have riding the long slide release with my thumb
Not trying to be smart. How is it easier than using the rear serrations?
Easier to press check from below (up front) than any other way.
Just wait, grasshopper - your time will come:)
john - aka "geezer":)
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-19-15, 18:04
Does anyone know how SIG does it without having the extra lever in the trigger? Sig offers the trigger tab for agencies that insist but say that it passes all tests without it. Apparently the Glock will not according to an earlier poster who indicates the Glock is not drop safe without the tab.
Psalms144.1
07-20-15, 12:00
Most of this has been said before, but I'll throw my two cents in:
1. Redesign slide/extractor per Ralph's description for increased reliability
2. Overtravel stop on trigger to minimize front sight "bounce"
3. Dual RSAs only on 40, 357, 45 and subcompacts - back to single spring RSA on 9mm
4. Gen4 lower WITHOUT finger grooves - OR re-do spacing on "Compact" finger grooves to match spacing on full size pistols (anyone else notice that the FGs that cramp your fingers on a G19 are fine on the G17?)
5. Radius bottom of trigger guard and deepen the "bow" at the back of the trigger guard for a higher hand position
6. TD Gen4 magazine release
Otherwise, I think the current design is pretty darned good, for what it is. Interchangeable side panels or FCU ala the VP9 and P320 would be nice, but do we really want to push the Glock into that price range?
Eurodriver
07-20-15, 19:28
How did this thread become about the firing pin/trigger function on Glocks.
Really curious? Is there a fault there?
How did this thread become about the firing pin/trigger function on Glocks.
Really curious? Is there a fault there?
Personally, I like it for what it is. Simple. The apex flat trigger should be a nice improvement.
Psalms144.1
07-21-15, 08:27
How did this thread become about the firing pin/trigger function on Glocks.
Really curious? Is there a fault there?I don't find the trigger safety tab to be an issue. I do have a couple of Glocks where the overtravel makes it hard to achieve long-range accuracy due to resulting front sight "jump" after the FP releases. Not an issue on every Glock I own, but on some it's fairly epic. The Ghost connector with "Trigger Control Tab" (limits overtravel) cures this. I'd like to see a factory fix...
Does anyone know how SIG does it without having the extra lever in the trigger? Sig offers the trigger tab for agencies that insist but say that it passes all tests without it. Apparently the Glock will not according to an earlier poster who indicates the Glock is not drop safe without the tab.
In issue #19 of RECOIL Russell Phagan wrote a review of the gun and said this about the trigger:
"It's offered as both a standard trigger and with a trigger safety, though the latter is not necessary for it to be drop safe. There's an internal safety that prevents the striker from dropping unless the trigger is pulled, teamed with a disconnector safety that prevents the striker from falling with the slide out of battery"
With out physically seeing it I don't know how it works either but I thought this might give you some insight into it.
Hammer fired with a decocker.
It has already been stated, but my biggest gripe is the ejection. I'm tired of taking brass to the face.
Go back to the "Improved" Gen 2 with no finger groves. Add a external thumb safety and you might have one of the best pistols ever. Then have Glock change it's attitude. No, they are not perfect and have made some mistakes like everyone else.
No finger grooves.
Add front serrations.
Gen 3 everything else.
And make a Glock 1911 in 9mm and .45ACP!!!
Maiden3.16
07-23-15, 21:41
Not sure if has been mentioned yet, but I would also like a 1913 rail to the full size guns instead of the proprietary glock rail. Military arms YouTube channel had a 21 with a 1913rail. Looked sweet.
Edit: here is the link with the 21 1911 pic rail http://youtu.be/Eynv1q_Ttb0
I would like to see the .40/.357 Sig/9mm frame/slide built from the ground up to handle .40/.357 Sig..
Quality steel sights and a 1913 rail
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Go back to the "Improved" Gen 2 with no finger groves. Add a external thumb safety and you might have one of the best pistols ever. Then have Glock change it's attitude. No, they are not perfect and have made some mistakes like everyone else.
Nobody wants a thumb safety on a Glock. That's ridiculous.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
click boom
07-25-15, 20:24
Change angle of extractor from (15 degrees?) back to 90..also redesign the slide, extractor entirely. Shitcan the spring, depressor rod, bearing, etc, and change to a simple lever&spring set up like found in HK's M&P's etc, You know, something that works.. Lower the ejection port, and bevel the inside bottom of the port. Make the extractor wider to get a better grip on the case. And while we're at it, on the sides of the breech face where the case slides up, cut a small notch to catch the rim of the case, and stop it from sliding off the breach face in case of poor extractor tension..
Get rid of the finger grooves. and the "safety" lever on the trigger, as was mentioned above it doesn't do anything meaningful.
Possibly offer a model with a Gadget installed..
lol yeah, glocks don't work at all.:jester:
click boom
07-25-15, 20:41
a lot of people are complaining about the sights... everyone likes different sights so it makes sense to save the end user money by including the cheapest possible. I wouldnt want them to add 100 bucks and put in trijicon sights when i might want FO front and serrated plain black rear for that particular pistol.
I do like the suggestion I saw of MIAD style front strap with choice for with/without finger grooves. If possible without adding bulk (idk, theres still a mag to fit in there and the material isn;t that thick...) that would be sweet. I can't stand the finger grooves on compact clocks. subcompact and full size fit my hands fine.
My gen4's have been flawless, no BTF, no probs, so can't really ask for much more. There is plenty of aftermarket for the doodads. you want extended slide release, take down lever, lighter/different trigger, etc.. stuff is all cheap and available. Gen 4 mag release is pretty much perfect size. Gen4 grip dimensions are pretty much perfect except finger grooves on some models.
I'm really disappointed at the quality of this thread and some of the misinformation being repeated. M4C isn't what it used to be.
Were I to have any input on the next gen of Glock here's what I'd do:
Under-cut the trigger guard.
Make the front and rear of the grip modular; allowing for removal of the finger grooves for those that want it.
Increase the quality of the small parts like the extractors, etc.
Add front cocking serrations.
Improve barrel quality. Other factory guns are leaving Glock in front dust in out of the box accuracy.
Add cocking "wings" ala VP9, well maybe. I do like them.
Scallop the grip just being the magazine release to some degree.
Add a crescent-shaped cut to the bottom of the grip allow easier magazine stripping.
Perhaps use Vickers style mag release and slide release.
Sights get changed anyway.
It's important to maintain compatibility with existing parts and accessories like holsters.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Improve barrel quality. Other factory guns are leaving Glock in front dust in out of the box accuracy.
I can't speak to your experience but the 3 Gen 4 Glocks that I have are consistent 2" at 25 yard guns. Now while that's certainly not Les Baer accuracy, for $400, I'm not sure what more you can reasonably expect.
RotaryRevn
07-27-15, 11:42
To me, Glocks have never been comfortable (I only have gen 4's). They give me glock knuckle and the grip with the finger grooves feels horrible. I use glocks because they are reliable, and I can trust them. I put reliability over comfort every day of the week as the only reason I own firearms is with the intent that they might someday be needed for self defense or the defense of others and they need to go bang every time.
That said, what I would like to see done with the gen 5 is:
1) undercut the trigger guard.
2) a complete re-do of the frame/grip. Give them some kind of "spiderman grip" ala HK VP9 or something very similar. Put some type of removable grip panels on the the sides and back of the grip.
Thats it! The internals of the slide seem fine to me and work reliably. Just make the darn things more comfortable to hold/shoot and we will have a winner.
Nobody wants a thumb safety on a Glock. That's ridiculous.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well I do, that makes one. I also think you would be very surprised how many Comminalli thumb safeties are installed on Glocks each year.
That's asinine. It's striker-fired, if that floats your boat to screw up the function of the best selling pistols that's one thing, but don't think for a second that it's going to make the Glock a better pistol or help their sales for them to implement it into their line.
What in the hell do you think you gain from a thumb safety?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Flankenstein
07-27-15, 14:04
Market research- nobody will every be happy.
That's asinine. It's striker-fired, if that floats your boat to screw up the function of the best selling pistols that's one thing, but don't think for a second that it's going to make the Glock a better pistol or help their sales for them to implement it into their line.
What in the hell do you think you gain from a thumb safety?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Agreed.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-27-15, 16:05
Probably for safety reasons. Some people are not convinced that a short take-up, short over-travel single action only(practically speaking, if not technically) safety-less trigger is the best way to go. I imagine people can disagree on this without resorting to insults.
And those would be what?
Keep in mind, it's a striker-fired pistol.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd like to see a change in barrel rifling while we're at it.
beschatten
07-27-15, 17:19
An ambi-slide release would be nice (for us lefties). Before I get flamed - when running a pistol against a timer, this is much faster.
Some decent sights so I don't have to drop an additional $100.
Better ergos. Then I will start buying them again.
El Pistolero
07-27-15, 17:54
I'd like to see them keep the rail but lose the finger grooves, and make a gun the size of the G19 but in .45 ACP. Something like the G38 but in ACP instead of .45 GAP.
That's asinine. It's striker-fired, if that floats your boat to screw up the function of the best selling pistols that's one thing, but don't think for a second that it's going to make the Glock a better pistol or help their sales for them to implement it into their line.
What in the hell do you think you gain from a thumb safety?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is just amazing how so many of the "Glock Fan Boys" have to be rude, call folks asinine, and be so brain washed about their Holy Grail of pistols. I will say it again, "You would be amazed at how many folks have comminalli thumb safties installed on their Glocks". Like S&W, Glock could offer their pistols with or without a safety. That way all the brain washed could still stay happy. We both know that their are those on both sides of the Glock Thumb safety issue / argument. Why rehash it here. I answer what the OP ask's and you immediately go off. Chill out.
All I did is ask you a question, one which you won't (can't answer).
I didn't once call you a name. Now you've put words in my mouth, called me a "Fan Boy", "brain washed", then try to act like this is an actual hot debate. Grow up.
How many thumb-safeties are installed on Glocks? I guarantee much much less than 10% of their sales. Probably less than 5%.
Better yet, how many credible firearms instructors advocate adding safeties to a pistol, Glock in particular? None.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't once cal you a name. Now you've put words in my mouth, called me a "Fan Boy", then try to act like this is an actual hot debate. Grow up.
How many thumb-safeties are installed on Glocks? I guarantee much much less than 10% of their sales. Probably less than 5%.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Now we are both sounding like 7 year olds. I would rather be called a "Fan Boy" then called "Asinine". Bottom line, Why does it offend you to the point of saying my remark is asinine because I would like a thumb safety on my Glock? Why do even care? What business is it of yours? Like I said, they could offer their pistols both ways. Can we please end this stupid bickering.
I didn't call you asinine. Do you know what the word means? I said "that's asinine" as in the statement you made. Reading comprehension...
It doesn't offend me. It's just a retarded idea. Again, how many? How does it improve the pistol?
By the way, Glock made them in the 80s and the customer decided the thumb safety was unnecessary. I believe a few contracts were filled requiring them and some sold commercially (I could be wrong on that part) but in the end an non-demanded unnecessary feature.
http://www.forgottenweapons.com/thumb-safety-glock/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-27-15, 20:35
Guys. Chill out. If you can't talk about this subject like gentleman don't talk about it.
As to the question about how it improves safety. Many folks believe that the addition of manual safeties increase the overall safety of a gun with a relatively light trigger. Many manufacturers like FN, S&W, etc offer this feature for that reason. Reasonable minds can disagree on this.
beschatten
07-27-15, 21:35
I didn't call you asinine. Do you know what the word means? I said "that's asinine" as in the statement you made. Reading comprehension...
It doesn't offend me. It's just a retarded idea. Again, how many? How does it improve the pistol?
By the way, Glock made them in the 80s and the customer decided the thumb safety was unnecessary. I believe a few contracts were filled requiring them and some sold commercially (I could be wrong on that part) but in the end an non-demanded unnecessary feature.
http://www.forgottenweapons.com/thumb-safety-glock/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lots of stories of NDs going around... little bits of clothing getting in holster, improper finger placement. Whatever the case is. I admire you for thinking the majority of people have wits or are somewhat responsible.
I think thumb safeties are a good option to have on striker-fired pistols. Not because it makes it a better pistol but because I think it will benefit the some users. It can instill additional confidence in beginners to carry, and act as an additional safeguard when people act retarded. There are also situations that are more ND prone, like when you are wearing lots of clothing in winter and are out of breath from running, and you have to re-holster. If you are sitting all day--sure no problem.
If it was such a bad idea I am pretty sure S&W and FNS would not have done it.
As for trainers -- who cares what they do or endorse? Learning to use a thumb safety isn't hard and doesn't slow anyone down... unless you fall into a special category. It's just practice. Not sure why you have to be so against it.
Why would I be against it? Because they are unnecessary. Why add more parts and a potential failure point to a gun for no reason? The gun only fires when the trigger is pulled. It's drop safe. If you're having a problem with your lipstick tube getting into the trigger guard while it floats around in your purse, buy a quality holster.
Proper gun-handling negates the need for a forth safety on the Glock. This is 2015, such notions need set aside. If you're shooting yourself, you have no business handling a firearm. You've mishandled it. Furthermore, it's like sights. Glock went to all plastic sights. Why? It's a waste of money to try to meet the tastes of a minority of people. It's better for the consumer to have $5.00 sights they will throw away than $100 sights they will throw away.
Why advocate for changing the most popular handgun design off all time for a minority of people? Don't like it, buy a Smith.
Question, why did S&W and FN do so? Could it be going after specific contracts that require a thumb safety?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't call you asinine. Do you know what the word means? I said "that's asinine" as in the statement you made. Reading comprehension...
It doesn't offend me. It's just a retarded idea. Again, how many? How does it improve the pistol?
By the way, Glock made them in the 80s and the customer decided the thumb safety was unnecessary. I believe a few contracts were filled requiring them and some sold commercially (I could be wrong on that part) but in the end an non-demanded unnecessary feature.
http://www.forgottenweapons.com/thumb-safety-glock/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"OK, you win" (said sarcastically). I am happy that you don't know anyone who has an intellectual disability. If you did you would not throw the word "retarded" around in such a callous way. An "Intellectually Disabled" person has a lot more class then you will ever have. I am done with you.
So you call me names and I'm classless? Call out the PC-Police, somebody's got thin skin.
If you care to open a dictionary, retarded and "mental retardation" are not one in the same.
Guess you've never purchased flame retarded pants? It would be all to offensive!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
beschatten
07-27-15, 22:05
Why would I be against it? Because they are unnecessary. Why add more parts and a potential failure point to a gun for no reason? The gun only fires when the trigger is pulled. It's drop safe. If you're having a problem with your lipstick tube getting into the trigger guard while it floats around in your purse, buy a quality holster.
Proper gun-handling negates the need for a forth safety on the Glock. This is 2015, such notions need set aside. If you're shooting yourself, you have no business handling a firearm. You've mishandled it. Furthermore, it's like sights. Glock went to all plastic sights. Why? It's a waste of money to try to meet the tastes of a minority of people. It's better for the consumer to have $5.00 sights they will throw away than $100 sights they will throw away.
Why advocate for changing the most popular handgun design off all time for a minority of people? Don't like it, buy a Smith.
Question, why did S&W and FN do so? Could it be going after specific contracts that require a thumb safety?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So you want to limit who can and cannot have a firearm based on proficiency? Sure sounds like some politicians in power at the moment. Not everybody has the resources or care enough to reach what you deem as proficient. Some people want a thumb safety on a Glock - so what. It isn't your business how they want to train or what they want to carry. Freedom - damn that's a nice word. The word "choices" comes into mind as well.
Everything you've said just sounds like regurgitated thoughts found on those tactical dvd's sold on those javascript heavy websites. Except angrier.
Unless you can show that a broken thumb safety on a Glock renders a firearm useless - it is moot. All my handguns and rifles have thumb safeties - man I must be incompetent and 90 years old huh :p. Sadly, none have broken yet.
Just go ahead and file down the thumb safety on your AR so it stays on "FIRE" and cannot be deactivated. Same thing.
I wonder how many ND's occurred before people realized a safety is probably a good idea for these contracts geared toward the "general masses" where maintaining proficiency with a handgun is not something expected? Hmm...
You put words in my mouth; anybody can buy a firearm that has the legal right; I haven't advocated otherwise. However I do want anybody handling one around me to know what they are doing.
But, Let's get this straight, you want to change the design of the most popular handgun in the world so that people that handle them unsafely won't shoot themselves?
Why don't we just make them all into nerf guns? Or just all use laser trainers instead? It's not that hard not to point the gun at yourself or others and to keep your finger off the trigger until you press out...
Yes there are lots of failures from firearms because of safety malfunctions. Furthermore, I couldn't tell you the number of times I've seen new shooters try to fire their pistol to realize their safety is on; what happens in a self-defense life or death situation? You say train to use the thumb safety. Why not train to be safe with the firearm?
Or the "untrained general masses" who are to stubborn or poor to seek training can just buy one of the many existing firearms that come with a manual thumb safety.
Glock has safeties. So I don't know where you're getting the idea that NDs are occurring all the time and somebody got the bright idea to add them. Where have I advocated that a firearm shouldn't have a safety?
If it were such a flaw in the design, I wonder how Glock became the biggest selling pistol in the country and the world?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
beschatten
07-27-15, 22:31
You put words in my mouth; anybody can buy a firearm that has the legal right; I haven't advocated otherwise. However I do want anybody handling one around me to know what they are doing.
But, Let's get this straight, you want to change the design of the most popular handgun in the world so that people that handle them I safely won't shoot themselves?
Why don't we just make them all into nerf guns? Or just all use laser trainers instead?
Yes there are lots of failures from firearms because of safety malfunctions. Furthermore, I couldn't tell you the number of times I've seen new shooters try to fire their pistol to realize their safety is on; what happens in a self-defense life or death situation? You say train to use the thumb safety. Why not train to be safe with the firearm?
Or the "untrained general masses" who are to stubborn or poor to seek training can just buy one of the many existing firearms that come with a manual thumb safety.
Glock has safeties. So I don't know where you're getting the idea that NDs are occurring all the time and somebody got the bright idea to add them. Where have I advocated that a firearm shouldn't have a safety?
If it were such a flaw in the design, I wonder how Glock became the biggest selling pistol in the country and the world?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Like I said in my first post Tyler - not everyone is responsible or the brightest crayon in the box. My point was humans are flawed and error-prone, which is a viable reason to consider a thumb safety.
Nobody here insinuated Glocks design was flawed or all Glocks should have a thumb safety (nothing is perfect though). Merely pointing out an OEM option would be a nice choice to have. You know, like some Glocks are FDE and some are black? Just a choice. I know as a 1911 guy, I would appreciate it, since my thumb is always looking for a safety at this point.
I am also pretty sure this was just a fun thread on people exchanging ideas on what they would like to see.
FYI - change is not always a bad thing. e.g., everything eventually changes.
Why don't we just ban guns because not everyone is responsible?
I suspected you were a 1911 guy. Remember how I said its 2015 ;)
Have a good evening.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
beschatten
07-27-15, 22:39
I suspected you were a 1911 guy. Remember how I said its 2015 ;)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Finally :)
sr71plane and tylerw02, check your PMs. Your participation in this thread has ended.
We now return this thread to a higher level of discourse.
FlyingHunter
07-29-15, 18:53
sr71plane and tylerw02, check your PMs. Your participation in this thread has ended.
We now return this thread to a higher level of discourse.
ST911 - Thanks for redirecting this thread which I opened. It was an embarrassing lack of civility.
Back on track: If I could add one single thing to the Gen 5 it would be to resolve the BTF once and for all.
My vote goes to fully supported chambers to end the stupid Glock bulge once and for all. If I'm laying out money for a G20/22 or G35/40 I shouldn't have to replace the barrel right off the bat to shoot my reloads in it without having to bulge bust them.
brickboy240
08-03-15, 10:21
Fully supported chambers and no more brass to face issues.
...that would about do it.
lol yeah, glocks don't work at all.:jester:
I never said Glocks don't work..It's the extractors that seem to have problems. I have a Grey framed Gen 4 G19 bought about two weeks ago, and guess what? Yup, BTF the first rounds out of it, and for the next 750 or so, until I replaced the extractor with a Apex unit, and replaced the mag springs with Wolfe +10% springs..OTH, I also have a Gen4 G17 made in 2010 that I bought, it was a police trade-in, price was right and I bought it..It runs like a swiss watch. No BTF, nothing. It's box-stock, I've only changed the sights, and as a precaution,(and I'm not entirely sure they needed it) recoil spring assembly, trigger spring, and striker spring. It runs fine. Tell me again that Glock has the extractor issues fixed...If you truly believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale...:suicide:
BoringGuy45
09-01-15, 15:53
I'd like the Gen5 to have a straighter grip angle. I love my Gen4 19 that I carry every day, but I still point my M&P45 more naturally. I tried the Gripforce and it just didn't feel comfortable to me. If they came out with a G19 that had a grip closer to the angle of my M&P, that would be pretty close to my perfect handgun.
My recommendations:
1. Modular, customizable Grip (think HK VP9)
2. Undercut trigger guard
3. Decent sights not made of plastic, hey Gaston...go look at these: Vickers Battlesights
4. Front slide serrations
5. Trigger more like a SIG 320
Why not just buy a 320? After shooting the 320, I highly doubt I'll ever own another Glock
I see a lot of people saying they want Gen 3 internals. Sorry for my ignorance, but what is it about the Gen 3 internals that's better than the Gen 4?
brickboy240
09-04-15, 09:47
Gen 5 Glock:
Lose the annoying "hump" on the backstrap of the full size frames. No other pistols have such a pronounced hump and it does tend to make you shoot low with this hump. The G19 sized Glocks have less of a hump but it is still there.
Fix the weak ejection/extractor issue. If you have to charge us 5 bucks more for the pistol to have a machined extractor...so be it. No more brass to face or "dribbling out" ejection, please.
Take a hard look at Larry Vicker's mag release. Maybe this should be OEM on the Gen 5 Glocks?
Ditch the plastic sights and offer base sights that are metal and better. Again...if you have to charge us 5 bucks more for the gun..many will pay it to get decent starter sights. There is NO excuse for crappy plastic sights...period. Kyle DeFoor's excellent black machined sights would be a great thing to emulate.
That is about it for me. Bring on the Gen 5s! LOL
Lose the annoying "hump" on the backstrap of the full size frames. No other pistols have such a pronounced hump and it does tend to make you shoot low with this hump. The G19 sized Glocks have less of a hump but it is still there.
There's a lot of derp in this thread that I have restrained myself from commenting on, however: bullets only go where your sights are pointed at. Quit playing musical guns and learn where your sights point.
Also, why pay for sights you're going to throw away? Plastic is perfect. Keeps the dovetail safe until you put in whatever you want. Bubbas keep them in, but who cares?
There's a lot of derp in this thread that I have restrained myself from commenting on, however: bullets only go where your sights are pointed at. Quit playing musical guns and learn where your sights point.
Also, why pay for sights you're going to throw away? Plastic is perfect. Keeps the dovetail safe until you put in whatever you want. Bubbas keep them in, but who cares?
You win the internet for the day.
Want to pay $50-$100 more for the gun with Glock steel or night sights that you may or may not like anyway. I'd rather have that money in my pocket to put toward sights of my preference.
WickedWillis
09-04-15, 11:29
There's a lot of derp in this thread that I have restrained myself from commenting on, however: bullets only go where your sights are pointed at. Quit playing musical guns and learn where your sights point.
Also, why pay for sights you're going to throw away? Plastic is perfect. Keeps the dovetail safe until you put in whatever you want. Bubbas keep them in, but who cares?
Plus it's not like they don't give you the option to buy them new with 3-dot trijicon night sights.
Nytcrawler93
09-04-15, 18:53
Plus it's not like they don't give you the option to buy them new with 3-dot trijicon night sights.
All of this^^^^
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's a lot of derp in this thread that I have restrained myself from commenting on, however: bullets only go where your sights are pointed at. Quit playing musical guns and learn where your sights point.
Also, why pay for sights you're going to throw away? Plastic is perfect. Keeps the dovetail safe until you put in whatever you want. Bubbas keep them in, but who cares?
This, AGAIN. I don't want to pay ANYTHING for sights that aren't what I want. The one thing Glock does Perfect is not waste my money on sights I don't' want.
Gen 5 Glock:
Lose the annoying "hump" on the backstrap of the full size frames. No other pistols have such a pronounced hump and it does tend to make you shoot low with this hump. The G19 sized Glocks have less of a hump but it is still there.
Take a hard look at Larry Vicker's mag release. Maybe this should be OEM on the Gen 5 Glocks?
Glocks tend to shoot high because if the hump and the grip angle. Never seen them shoot low - especially when a shooter is used to HK/Sig/Colt/Beretta/etc.
The Vickers mag catches on the Gen 4's is nice but on the larger frame pistols (20/21) they are unreliable in my experience on 2 different guns. Read about others having the same issue.
I like the plastic sights.
They're easier to rip out (literally) so I can install the ones I actually want. I'd happily buy a "bare" Glock with no sights at all installed.
All I want out of Glock is for them to either just rip off HK or places like Boresight when it comes to ergonomics on the lower, and to return the upper to the reliability that they've been known for.
RTF2 texture.
Front cocking serrations.
All models be MRDS compatible.
BangBang77
09-05-15, 13:16
Gen 4 grip dimensions.
RTF2 texture.
Gen 3 upper and internals.
I'll handle the sights......
Regarding RTF2, I'd prefer it as an option. For a match gun or one that only rides in a duty type holster it's awesome. But for concealed carry I don't want it tearing up my skin and clothing. Hell the regular gen 4 finish eats up my concealing garments as it is.
All I want added from the factory are front cocking serrations. Otherwise all my Gen 4 Glocks are perfectly fine as-is and I am capable of making the only other changes I need (sights, oem extended slide release, and Taran Tactical striker and plunger springs).
I agree with the poster above me...my favorite glock ever is a RTF2 G17 but carrying that thing chews through my shirts like crazy. My Gen 4s also wear on my clothes as well, but I can carry my RTF2 17 IWB and literally wear a small hole in a brand new shirt in one day. So it remains relegated to OWB range day duties.
Go back to the Tenfier finish of the Gen 3
Gen 4 grip dimensions
Could care less about panels/backstraps and texture as I prefer my own stippling job
Undercut trigger
Lose the thumb rest on the side of the grip
Sights are fine I throw them away anyway so many aftermarket options
MOS option on G19/G17
He biggest request would be a dehorned G19. Think the front of a g26 on the g19. That would be perfection of a carry gun
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
OK I'll play, and I am basing my opinions on the hundreds of guns that have come through the shop.
1. First and foremost, flatten the back strap. Most everyone here could live with the actual grip angle if the back straps were running parallel like just about every other gun out there.
2. Radius the underside of the trigger guard a bit. Most people don't have the fingers of a 5 year old and need a bit more room under the trigger guard.
3. Delete the finger humps. They simply don't fit as many people as well as a flat front strap.
4. Texture the grip like H&K has on the side panels of the USP series pistols. It is aggressive enough to get a solid grip, but not so much as to tear things up. Use it on the side panels, front strap and back strap.
5. Re design barrel to take down lever lock up. This is IMO the weakest part of the glock design. The tolerances are extremely loose in this area, and this is why most other designs are more mechanically accurate than a Glock.
With the exception of the lock up design, every other thing I listed is what 97% of my customers have me do to their existing pistols.
If they built them like that from the factory, they would still use current magazines, holsters, sight options and just about everything else that fits current Glock models.
TXPO
OK I'll play, and I am basing my opinions on the hundreds of guns that have come through the shop.
1. First and foremost, flatten the back strap. Most everyone here could live with the actual grip angle if the back straps were running parallel like just about every other gun out there.
2. Radius the underside of the trigger guard a bit. Most people don't have the fingers of a 5 year old and need a bit more room under the trigger guard.
3. Delete the finger humps. They simply don't fit as many people as well as a flat front strap.
4. Texture the grip like H&K has on the side panels of the USP series pistols. It is aggressive enough to get a solid grip, but not so much as to tear things up. Use it on the side panels, front strap and back strap.
5. Re design barrel to take down lever lock up. This is IMO the weakest part of the glock design. The tolerances are extremely loose in this area, and this is why most other designs are more mechanically accurate than a Glock.
With the exception of the lock up design, every other thing I listed is what 97% of my customers have me do to their existing pistols.
If they built them like that from the factory, they would still use current magazines, holsters, sight options and just about everything else that fits current Glock models.
TXPO
Couldn't agree more, loved the work you did on my 17! I had the grooves removed and re textured, added a grip force adapter to get rid of the hump and undercut the trigger guard. Just about perfect for me as far as Glocks go.
A grip angle like a 1911. I rented a Glock when they first came out, and shoot them with a smile on my face when ever some one at the range offers to let me shoot theirs. I don't mind the grip angle but the change of grip angle takes about 4 mags of ammo to get me dialed in with out having to think about it.
MOS all the slides.
Flat side to side triggers without the trigger safety
4" barrels on sub compact frames. Screw the single stack 9 hype, the 26L is way better.
Better steel treatment than the g4s so they don't rust up so fast from sweat.
Less over travel on the factory trigger
Undercut trigger guard
Ability to add a beavertail without increasing grip size.
Vickers tactical slide stop OEM
Short Frame for 17, 19, and 26. A 17 with a 19 slide, call it a 17S. A 19 with a 26 slide. Call it a 19S. A little bit easier to conceal. Yeah, yeah, yeah, barrel length gives up nothing on concealability, except that it does, comfort.
ramairthree
10-21-15, 11:49
Gen two grips/frames except the front dust cover , which has picc standard slots.
Put a 17 length slide on a g19 frame from the factory.
Lots of good ideas in this thread.
I'd really like to see an ambi slide release. When operating the weapon left hand only, it is very difficult to lock the slide back when clearing a malfunction. It is also much faster to release the slide when only using the left hand.
This is the main reason why I use a VP9 as my primary carry gun after 15 years with Glocks. Clearing a double feed or even doing a speed reload left hand only is much faster and more positive with the VP9 because of it's ambi slide release.
brickboy240
10-21-15, 11:55
No finger grooves and no brass to face and most of us would be totally happy with the gen 5 Glocks...right?
Short Frame for 17, 19, and 26. A 17 with a 19 slide, call it a 17S. A 19 with a 26 slide. Call it a 19S. A little bit easier to conceal. Yeah, yeah, yeah, barrel length gives up nothing on concealability, except that it does, comfort.
A G17 slide on a G19 frame is really the perfect Glock. I've been carrying it for months now. Shaved finger grooves, undercut trigger guard, slight epoxy magwell funnel at bottom of backstrap. Best balanced pistol I own. I didn't think it was worth the effort at first, but then I shot it for a few weeks, and then compared it to the G19, and was amazed how much more I liked the chopped gun.
I'm ok with ththat finger grooves, but I recognize that I might be in the minority there. I'd do just fine without them.
-Reduce the hump on the G19 backstrap, or alter the geometry. I know another member mentioned cutouts for ripping the mag. Not bad, if they can do it without affecting those who want to install magwells.
-Keep the stock plastic sights and a small selection of factory installed metal/tritium options. I'll replace them with sights of my choice. Or, maybe the buyer could save $10 and get one shipped with no sights. Not a big deal.
-My number one request, and I think I've mentioned this before, is for a factory 20-25 round magazine for the 9mm, like what they did for the .40. I'd prefer to not use extended bases for more capacity.
A glock gen3 with the gen4 mag release. Also, replaceable back straps and non-crap sights.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Psalms144.1
10-22-15, 12:40
I'd recommend they make a model that meets the specifications for the FBI's new Request for Proposal!
-Finger grooves would have to go
-Some method of attaching the backstraps without a pin
-ambi slide release is a "should have" not a "must have" - something to think about
Not sure any of that would keep the GLOCK in the FBI's holsters, but it would at least get them in the door to compete.
With the FBI and MHS bids going on, I'm thinking we will see a Gen 5 Glock by SHOT16.
I'd like to see:
Grip with replaceable front and backstraps, possibly side panels like the VP9
Undercut trigger guard
MOS standard
G34 SCL standard
Overtravel stop
Optional thumbsafety (D&L/Cominolli)
Pic standard rail
Slide compatibility between 17/22 and 19/23 frames
Fix the BTF issues
On the subject of finger grooves, they could make removable front strap inserts that either have them or lack them. The grooves don't bother me, but I don't particularly like them either. Regardless, that bit of interchangeability would make the platform more versatile.
Psalms144.1
10-25-15, 14:48
The problem with the concept of changeable front/back straps and palm swells, ala the VP9, is they would necessitate a significant cost increase. That's a lot more work than just having a plain mold they squirt polymer into and let it cool.
I really doubt GLOCK can make a grip as modular as the VP9s without getting into/above the VP9 price range.
Of course, I've been wrong, a lot...
AnthonyCumia
10-25-15, 20:31
The problem with the concept of changeable front/back straps and palm swells, ala the VP9, is they would necessitate a significant cost increase. That's a lot more work than just having a plain mold they squirt polymer into and let it cool.
I really doubt GLOCK can make a grip as modular as the VP9s without getting into/above the VP9 price range.
Of course, I've been wrong, a lot...
Wont the price go up anyways due to inflation?
Psalms144.1
10-25-15, 20:49
Wont the price go up anyways due to inflation?They haven't in the last 5 years, at least Blue Label guns. Still the same price now I paid in 2008 when I got back CONUS.
I'm talking about a MAJOR price increase due to the cost of redesign and the significantly increased amount of effort to produce the grip/inserts. Probably on the order of $150-200/pistol, if I had to guess.
Remove the finger grooves
Lessen or remove the rear hump
Standardize to 1913 rail instead of proprietary
Better grip inserts than current
RAM Engineer
10-26-15, 08:54
Remove finger grooves.
Standardize to 1913 rail.
Improved feeding/extracting/ejecting.
Return 9mm guns to Gen-3 recoil spring configuration in order to strengthen the front-lower slide face.
Make all models standard with optic cut slides, optimized with consultation from Mark Housel or some other expert in that area.
AnthonyCumia
10-26-15, 11:05
They haven't in the last 5 years, at least Blue Label guns. Still the same price now I paid in 2008 when I got back CONUS.
I'm talking about a MAJOR price increase due to the cost of redesign and the significantly increased amount of effort to produce the grip/inserts. Probably on the order of $150-200/pistol, if I had to guess.
Oh.
Well if they are going for that level of price increase, then why not go even further?
I think a 5.7 model would be very cool, maybe conversion kits for other calibers, maybe 7.62×25mm
I mean if they are going to have to raise costs, why not make it worth the risk/increase in price?
Any idea on what they will be doing for the recoil spring system? Are they going back to 3rd gen or staying with 4th gen layout?
I'd be happy if they would just fix the damn grip angle and ditch finger grooves. Simple practical changes.
I'd be happy if they would just fix the damn grip angle and ditch finger grooves. Simple practical changes.
If Glock wants to keep the FBI contract, you may get your wish. The only thing DQing them from the new pistol RFP is the finger grooves. Kinda reads like the FBI is saying "We really like you Glock but hate these grooves and the P320 is looking mighty purdy..."
https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=b572bfc31492380c0534465de4c674dc
Psalms144.1
10-26-15, 21:00
Oh.
Well if they are going for that level of price increase, then why not go even further?
I think a 5.7 model would be very cool, maybe conversion kits for other calibers, maybe 7.62×25mm
I mean if they are going to have to raise costs, why not make it worth the risk/increase in price?
Any idea on what they will be doing for the recoil spring system? Are they going back to 3rd gen or staying with 4th gen layout?Well, I'd guess that the 5.7 wouldn't fit in any of their current magazines, and, seriously, how many 7.62x25's do you think they'd sell every year?
I have NO idea what, if anything they're planning. I have NO inside knowledge. Seriously. Just speculating based on things we've seen and heard over the years.
IMHO, we'll see a finger-grooveless Gen4 frame, with some sort of "tweaked" system for attaching the back straps to avoid the prohibition on inserts retained with pins. Beyond that, I don't expect to see a huge change. But, I could be WAY wrong - I have been plenty in my lifetime.
Return 9mm guns to Gen-3 recoil spring configuration in order to strengthen the front-lower slide face.
.
RAM Engineer
Is that occurring?
We have been with G21s since 1992 and upgraded in 2011 to SF and have a few Gen 4 G21s.
We are starting the very slow process of going Gen 4 G17s which will take the next few years.
Are there reports of breakage on gen 4 G17 slides due to the larger opening for the recoil spring assembly?
Thanks in advance
prestonoconnor
10-27-15, 10:39
I just want want them to make gen 3 9mm just like they used to; with tennifer finish. You know, back when they worked. I can add my own sights as needed. Too many "non dedicated" people ask me which handgun for self defense. 9mm works and it needs to be inexpensive within reason.
RAM Engineer
10-27-15, 14:45
RAM Engineer
Is that occurring?
We have been with G21s since 1992 and upgraded in 2011 to SF and have a few Gen 4 G21s.
We are starting the very slow process of going Gen 4 G17s which will take the next few years.
Are there reports of breakage on gen 4 G17 slides due to the larger opening for the recoil spring assembly?
Thanks in advance
I've seen exactly ONE picture of a Gen 4 that had the lower 120 degrees broken off of the slide flange for the recoil spring. I have no back story on it as to whether it was dropped or broke from fatigue. BUT just looking at it, that is a VERY thin cross-sectional area right there and I wouldn't expect it to survive even a mild drop onto the nose of the gun. Compare and contrast this area with some other guns, such as the VP9 and P320. I believe they definitely need some more meat in this area for durability purposes.
AnthonyCumia
10-27-15, 20:31
I've seen exactly ONE picture of a Gen 4 that had the lower 120 degrees broken off of the slide flange for the recoil spring. I have no back story on it as to whether it was dropped or broke from fatigue. BUT just looking at it, that is a VERY thin cross-sectional area right there and I wouldn't expect it to survive even a mild drop onto the nose of the gun. Compare and contrast this area with some other guns, such as the VP9 and P320. I believe they definitely need some more meat in this area for durability purposes.
I hate to ask but do you have a link to said photo?
I just feel like the change in the recoil was pointless, caused more problems with no reward, and created a whole new segment for parts for the sake of future sells of said parts.
RAM Engineer
10-28-15, 15:16
I hate to ask but do you have a link to said photo?
I just feel like the change in the recoil was pointless, caused more problems with no reward, and created a whole new segment for parts for the sake of future sells of said parts.
I'll have to look. It was in a magazine. I was thinking Recoil but I'm not sure.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.