View Full Version : Universal Self-Loading Pistol
I just traded my Glock 19 with tfo nights, 6 mags, and a tlr-1 for a USP compact .45 acp. with two mags(just plane factory). The usp was shot minimally and there isnt any wear on the gun at all. Did i make the right decision? My main use will be cc and I wanted something with a lot more knockdown power.
I don't own a USPc 45. But I do have a USPc SS 40. I put 4275 rounds through it without cleaning it. It is one solid and fine shooting pistol. Enjoy.
I just traded my Glock 19 with tfo nights, 6 mags, and a tlr-1 for a USP compact .45 acp. with two mags(just plane factory). The usp was shot minimally and there isnt any wear on the gun at all. Did i make the right decision? My main use will be cc and I wanted something with a lot more knockdown power.
I believe the term you are looking for is better terminal ballistic performance instead of "knockdown power". ;)
To each their own for that trade....I personally would of gotten an HK45.
Another reason for me doing the trade is, because it is very applicable to my needs. For instance, I am a left handed shooter and I like the fact that it is ambidextrous. With a few modifications, I am good to go. Carrying it with one in the chamber, safety off, in double action mode Is similar to the glock concept, which I am familiar with. I will post pics when I get it. I also placed an order for a RCS phantom, and customer service said I will be recieving it early December:laugh:
Kyrin,
The manual of arms associated with the USP is actually quite the opposite of the glock.
Please do yourself a favor and train accordingly.
No one can tell you whether or not you "got a good deal" or if you "made the right decision" as firearm choice is largely personal.
If you're happy then you're happy. Ultimately, you walked away with a pistol that has a higher secondhand value than your G19 so you won in that regard.
Otherwise, you traded what is arguably Glocks finest offering and one of the best CCW pistols on the market. I wouldnt have done it but thats just me.
Best of luck with your new firearm!
I have owned several Hks over the years - great guns. I had a USPc45 that was my carry gun until I switched to my Beretta 92FS.
I liked the USPc45 better than the HK45c
Good guN!
Welcome to the HK family. You too will drink the cool aid lol
If you have questions regarding your New HK, a good source for info is hkpro.com
Spurholder
10-07-10, 09:47
Too funny - I went the opposite direction and went back to Glock.
FYI - CDNN sometimes has great deals on HK magazines. I bought extra 8 rounders from them at one point for $20/each.
The G19 is one of the worlds finest combat guns. I also like HK (just not the USP's). So I think you have made a poor choice.
C4
Having owned various USPs (including compacts), there is no way I would trade a Glock 19 for one.
I hope you are satisfied with your trade, though.
GermanSynergy
10-07-10, 10:31
My experience is opposite of the OP. I'm in the process of selling my HK handguns (except my custom P7 PSP and HK 45).
No way I'd part with a Glock 19 for USP anything.
Magic_Salad0892
10-07-10, 12:14
I wouldn't trade 9x19mm for a .45 ACP anything.
However, I like the USP-C models better than the Glock compact models.
(P2000 being the best.)
Glock makes amazing full size models though.
I am not a fan of non grip reduced Glocks, I sold off my last HK USP9 and now only carry SIGs.
I think you definitely traded up.
P.S. Just let the bums keep the briefcase regardless of what your HK wants to do.
I should have stated before that I have another glock 19 in the safe:laugh: i just want to expand my collection and add a new caliber to the group. I have no experience with the HK style of pistol, so a lot of training will be done before i make this my everyday carry. I know i made a good trade and that people that are partial to glocks will disagree. I am just tired of glocks to be quit honest; out of all the guns i have owned i grew tired of the glock first. Not that it is relevant to my carrying philosophy, I just think the glock is boring( don't get me wrong, the glock is my favorite weapon in terms of reliability, combat accuracy, and adaptability)
Having owned various USPs (including compacts), there is no way I would trade a Glock 19 for one.
Thats great, but explain yourself next time. A lot of people who are replying are just saying that I will never trade usp for glock, but why. Please be a little more elaborate. Thank you
You're comparing two pistols developed for completely different purposes. Both are equally reliable, but they were developed with different mindsets and different solutions to existing handgun problems.
Start with the Glock. The Glock was developed to simply go "bang" every time you pulled the trigger and only when you pull the trigger. It's design was focused on simplicity and reliability, therefore it sacrificed many of the traditional "combat" pistol elements, such as a trading a hammer for a striker and removing all external safeties. It's a perfect carry weapon because it goes bang every time you pull the trigger. It doesn't have a safety that can be left on by accident or tripped during a gunfight. In a nutshell, it was designed to always go bang.
Now the H&K. The H&K is a combat pistol, designed primarily for combat. Therefore it too is designed to always go bang, but it incorporates many of the traditional elements of American military pistols, including no less than four (or more, depending on the model) safeties, a frame-mounted safety/decocker, an exposed hammer, a lock-out function, etc. It also has a captive-spring recoil assembly that reduces the recoil to much less than that of similar guns and extends the life past 20,000 rounds of +P ammunition. All of these elements add much more complexity to the H&K compared to the Glock. It's just as reliable, but when something goes wrong (as inevitably happens with all pistols), it's much more complex to fix compared to a Glock. The USPs are also relatively bigger than Glocks.
The Glock is a reliable carry pistol that can (and is) used for combat. The USP is primarily a combat pistol that's reliable enough to be used for carry. They're equal in reliability, but the antithesis of each other in terms of function and design. This is why you tend to find those that love Glocks hate USPs and vice-versa.
Just my .02 anyways.
Magic_Salad0892
10-07-10, 18:20
^
Then there are us rare birds, that love both.
varoadking
10-07-10, 18:52
The G19 is one of the worlds finest combat guns.
Always wondered - what constitutes a "combat gun" and who is the authority that coined the phrase?
Is it relative to caliber, configuration, popular use, all of the above?
Great response Skyyr. In pure economic terms, you traded up. You can probably sell your USPc for more. That said, I am a fan of the USP's SA trigger, and the frame mounted safety/decocker. Going from a Glock to a USP takes a little bit of getting used to, so make sure you get your muscle memory set (grip angle, decocker, ensuring your thumb isn't pressing down the decock, etc.)
I'm not so sure how I feel about 8rds of .45ACP though. And HK mags are extremely expensive. Be sure to purchase some 10rd USPc mags to carry as a spare.
In sum: only you can say if you did the 'right' thing. I like both platforms, and both are great guns.
Always wondered - what constitutes a "combat gun" and who is the authority that coined the phrase?
Is it relative to caliber, configuration, popular use, all of the above?
Many things. Guns that are actually issued to a Military unit. Guns that are used by LE agencies.
Who coined the phrase? No idea.
C4
I want an HK45c someday, but honestly i'm pretty much sold on 9mm. and in 9mm i'm pretty much sold on glock and P7's.
45 cal USP's are sweet though. sometimes you do have to mix it up a little with guns. It's fun to train with new stuff. Just make sure you are trained with it, as many here have already said.
So you traded "up" to more "stopping power" by giving up just about double the capacity, a simpler and more intuitive manual-of-arms, a more compact footprint, and greater reliability...
On the bright side, training with it only got twice as expensive and no lights work on it's rail unless you use an adapter.
Well, it is an H&K, so I guess technically now you're a real "Operator". :)
MarshallDodge
10-08-10, 10:06
Most of what you are going to get is opinions. There are Glock fans and there are HK fans, add in the 9mm vs. 45 and you will get even more opinions. Both are good guns and good calibers so in my opinion you cannot go wrong either way.
Now get out there and train with your new acquisition. :cool:
In terms of trading up in "stopping power", I don't think it really matters. As the guys I trust say 'More of enough is still not enough'. Handguns just are not effective killing tools relative to rifles. I attended a tactical first aid class recently, taught by Mike Shertz (a former SF Medic) and he estimated in his experience of treating gunshot wounds, about 80% of the people survive.
The real criteria should be is the weapon reliable? Does it go bang every time? And are you effective/accurate with it? If you meet those criteria I think you're fine with a Glock OR an HK, in 45 ACP or 9mm. To be fair, though, as has been noted the manual of arms with most HKs (unless you've got the LEM trigger) is a bit more complex and most people are less accurate with a 45.
I personally have a HK45 which I love. I've never much cared for Glocks though I'd still like to pick up a G17 when I have a chance as after the apocalypse there will be two things left: cockroaches and Glocks.
after the apocalypse there will be two things left: cockroaches and Glocks.
Don't forget Toyota engines.:D
So you traded "up" to more "stopping power" by giving up just about double the capacity, a simpler and more intuitive manual-of-arms, a more compact footprint, and greater reliability...
On the bright side, training with it only got twice as expensive and no lights work on it's rail unless you use an adapter.
Well, it is an H&K, so I guess technically now you're a real "Operator". :)
That's right, i'm certified bad ass now:sarcastic:
I have the best of the best of the best.:neo:
So you traded "up" to more "stopping power" by giving up just about double the capacity, a simpler and more intuitive manual-of-arms, a more compact footprint, and greater reliability...
It's not greater reliability - the two models in question roughly the same (some could argue the H&K is more reliable due to the hammer over the striker). The only difference is the complexity of the design, which makes the H&K harder to repair. However, a broken gun is a broken gun, and a broken G19 is just as out of commission as a USP.
On the bright side, training with it only got twice as expensive and no lights work on it's rail unless you use an adapter.
Ummm... Insight makes the UTL, which mounts DIRECTLY to the USP rail. Where do you get this misinformation?
It's not greater reliability - the two models in question roughly the same (some could argue the H&K is more reliable due to the hammer over the striker). The only difference is the complexity of the design, which makes the H&K harder to repair. However, a broken gun is a broken gun, and a broken G19 is just as out of commission as a USP.
Ummm... Insight makes the UTL, which mounts DIRECTLY to the USP rail. Where do you get this misinformation?
Sank u sur...
R3V3LATIONS
10-08-10, 12:00
confirmation bias aside:
I would have made the same descision and here is why:
- the usp is made to tighter tolerances, and is more accurate "out of the box
- bobbed hammer vs. striker system (already mentioned, but redundancy never hurts)
- ambi mag release (a feature not stock on the glock)
- lock out device
and it is comprable in reliability.
Others may disagree, and I respect differing opinions, however I think that if you carry concealed with the intent of ever having to deploy your weapon (rather than just having a CCW and piece to make conversation with) that the HK will serve you better.
my .02
gtmtnbiker98
10-08-10, 12:11
So you traded "up" to more "stopping power" by giving up just about double the capacity, a simpler and more intuitive manual-of-arms, a more compact footprint, and greater reliability...
On the bright side, training with it only got twice as expensive and no lights work on it's rail unless you use an adapter.
Well, it is an H&K, so I guess technically now you're a real "Operator". :)Pass me some of that Kool Aid!:rolleyes:
That's right, i'm certified bad ass now:sarcastic:
I have the best of the best of the best.:neo:
Hope you know I'm half-kidding, plenty of guys find hammer-fired guns easier to shoot well over a Glock and would rather have 8+1 hit POA over 15+1 missing to the left... There are always intangibles that make one prefer one design over another (like being a lefty as you mentioned).
It's not greater reliability - the two models in question roughly the same (some could argue the H&K is more reliable due to the hammer over the striker). The only difference is the complexity of the design, which makes the H&K harder to repair. However, a broken gun is a broken gun, and a broken G19 is just as out of commission as a USP.
Ummm... Insight makes the UTL, which mounts DIRECTLY to the USP rail. Where do you get this misinformation?
Take it easy tiger, just kidding around... On the light thing, I stand corrected, there is one that'll work after all, my apologies. As a former owner of a couple USPs, I won't agree with you on reliability being a toss up though, just isn't so.
Hunter Rose
10-08-10, 14:14
As a former owner of a couple USPs, I won't agree with you on reliability being a toss up though, just isn't so.
Be careful making broad generalizations off your small sample size/individual experience. You may have had a bad experience with a USP that malfunctioned and your Glock did not, so you think the Glock is more reliable.
I have had a different experience, at an EAG carbine class, my USP performed flawlessly. My buddies Glock 19 choked with a broken recoil spring guide and was out of commission until fixed. So Icould state HKs are more reliable.
But will I? Heck no, based off all the firearms out there in service averaged out, the USP platform and Glock 9mm platform can be said to be equal in terms of reliability. A part will break on a pistol here or there, but for the most part that is just dumb luck.
As for the other stuff, striker vs hammer, .45ACP vs 9mm, Glock vs HK, it's all personal preference and what fits/works best for you. 9-rounds of .45ACP in a reliable and accurate USP Compact is an excellent choice for CCW....as is 15 rounds of 9mm in a Glock 19. There is no ultimate right answer, just what makes the individual comfortable and effective with their chosen platform.
All that being said, chicks dig guys with HKs and Glocks are just for those that cannot afford HKs! Ha!:sarcastic:
Be careful making broad generalizations off your small sample size/individual experience. You may have had a bad experience with a USP that malfunctioned and your Glock did not, so you think the Glock is more reliable.
I have had a different experience, at an EAG carbine class, my USP performed flawlessly. My buddies Glock 19 choked with a broken recoil spring guide and was out of commission until fixed. So Icould state HKs are more reliable.
But will I? Heck no, based off all the firearms out there in service averaged out, the USP platform and Glock 9mm platform can be said to be equal in terms of reliability. A part will break on a pistol here or there, but for the most part that is just dumb luck.
As for the other stuff, striker vs hammer, .45ACP vs 9mm, Glock vs HK, it's all personal preference and what fits/works best for you. 9-rounds of .45ACP in a reliable and accurate USP Compact is an excellent choice for CCW....as is 15 rounds of 9mm in a Glock 19. There is no ultimate right answer, just what makes the individual comfortable and effective with their chosen platform.
All that being said, chicks dig guys with HKs and Glocks are just for those that cannot afford HKs! Ha!:sarcastic:
I'd be careful making broad generalizations off your small sample size/individual experience yourself, no need to worry about me thanks.
My opinion isn't just based solely off my personally owned ones either.
If you don't agree with my assessment, that's quite all right, everyone's got their own opinion and that's fine, the OP asked for an opinion and I gave one, but please keep your advice to yourself on whether or not you think I've considered things correctly enough or not in your eyes as you have no idea what I'm considering in my scope other than the few words I've shared and are just making an assumption.
I'd be careful making broad generalizations off your small sample size/individual experience yourself, no need to worry about me thanks.
My opinion isn't just based solely off my personally owned ones either.
If you don't agree with my assessment, that's quite all right, everyone's got their own opinion and that's fine, the OP asked for an opinion and I gave one, but please keep your advice to yourself on whether or not you think I've considered things correctly enough or not in your eyes as you have no idea what I'm considering in my scope other than the few words I've shared and are just making an assumption.
You stated your opinion as fact. You didn't say "I believe" or "I think." You simply said it as if it was a given, just like you stated there were zero lights that could fit the USP's rail without an adapter. :rolleyes: That alone shows you have little experience whatsoever with the USP and therefore any opinions you have on the subject of Glocks vs H&K's are rather irrelevant.
Hunter Rose
10-08-10, 15:06
I'd be careful making broad generalizations off your small sample size/individual experience yourself, no need to worry about me thanks.
My opinion isn't just based solely off my personally owned ones either.
If you don't agree with my assessment, that's quite all right, everyone's got their own opinion and that's fine, the OP asked for an opinion and I gave one, but please keep your advice to yourself on whether or not you think I've considered things correctly enough or not in your eyes as you have no idea what I'm considering in my scope other than the few words I've shared and are just making an assumption.
Just stated my opinion as well and wasn't meaning to be preachy. I'll agree I made an assumption based off the few words of your post, but that's all I have to go on.
USPs lacking in reliability as compared to Glocks is news to me. Most reviews I've seen by SMEs praise HK's pistols for reliability/accuracy and criticise them for price, parts availability, and customer service. I'd be genuinely interested in the reasons/cases that led you to your view that Glocks are superior in the reliability dept.
Just to break the tension in here. Here she is, sorry for the bad pic(phone).
http://i642.photobucket.com/albums/uu149/kyrin88/photo-4.jpg
Which one do you think will kill you quicker......:big_boss:
Magic_Salad0892
10-08-10, 15:39
As a fan of both H&K AND Glock pistols. I will say the Glock is more INHERENTLY reliable. (Just as an AK is more inherently reliable than an M4/16)
Tenifer/Gas Nitrated Slide and Barrel - Metal is hardened to 64 RC. According to Glock's Advanced Armorers course.
Less parts.
Striker Fired Design - In theory, due to the hammer and sear not being exposed this leads to better reliability in horrible environments.
Oh... and there's this...
http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90
I'd love to see a USP do that.
I'm not joking. I really want to see H&K produce a USP with a Gas Nitrated finish, and higher magazine capacity. Then I would choose H&K over Glock every day of the week. But the facts make me carry a 17 instead.
I'd love to see the responses. :)
As a fan of both H&K AND Glock pistols. I will say the Glock is more INHERENTLY reliable. (Just as an AK is more inherently reliable than an M4/16)
Tenifer/Gas Nitrated Slide and Barrel - Metal is hardened to 64 RC. According to Glock's Advanced Armorers course.
Less parts.
Striker Fired Design - In theory, due to the hammer and sear not being exposed this leads to better reliability in horrible environments.
Oh... and there's this...
http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90
I'd love to see a USP do that.
I'm not joking. I really want to see H&K produce a USP with a Gas Nitrated finish, and higher magazine capacity. Then I would choose H&K over Glock every day of the week. But the facts make me carry a 17 instead.
I'd love to see the responses. :)
Haha that's nice!! This is why I have both. Why settle for one, get the best of both worlds:laugh:
Haha that's nice!! This is why I have both. Why settle for one, get the best of both worlds:laugh:
+1 to this. Both are very proven and have their own following. Seems like a personal preference thing. I have an HK45 and a G19 myself. Love them both.
I really want to see H&K produce a USP with a Gas Nitrated finish, and higher magazine capacity. Then I would choose H&K over Glock every day of the week. But the facts make me carry a 17 instead.
I'd love to see the responses. :)
i was under the impression the USP series had a finish similar to tenifer. Corrosion isn't really an issue with the USP or glocks, as far as i know.
i was under the impression the USP series had a finish similar to tenifer. Corrosion isn't really an issue with the USP or glocks, as far as i know.
Virtually the same finish, just different names, although the cosmetic "blacking" (which does not affect corrosion resistance) in better on the Glocks than on USPs.
Well i just got the gun and i am trying to get used to it . I have owned two sigs for some time so i would say that i am use to carry a DA/SA semi. The only thing that i have a problem with is the target acquisition on the factory sights. I am having a little problem lining the front and rear factory sights quickly( i can do this faster with glock factory sight). Does anyone know of some sights that have helped them with a similar problem on this platform? Night sights, Big dots ETC. I know this is a personal thing, but input greatly appreciated.
Magic_Salad0892
10-08-10, 21:46
Honestly though, I trust the Glock 17 more. But I like the USP better. ;)
Magic_Salad0892
10-08-10, 21:47
i was under the impression the USP series had a finish similar to tenifer. Corrosion isn't really an issue with the USP or glocks, as far as i know.
The metal isn't hardened by that amount, as far as I know.
To be honest. I'm not a certified armorer on either platform, so I really can't comment as much as I'd like to.
The metal isn't hardened by that amount, as far as I know.
To be honest. I'm not a certified armorer on either platform, so I really can't comment as much as I'd like to.
understood..
i hate to see people armchair quarterback the hardening process and materials used in guns though without knowing all the engineering behind it.
clearly the USP isn't suffering undue wear and tear due to a slightly softer surface. all the 20K+ round tests and stuff.. i wouldn't say it has any issues.
only downsides i see to USP's personally are expensive mags/parts, expensive guns, and SA/DA action (personal preference)
The metal isn't hardened by that amount, as far as I know.
To be honest. I'm not a certified armorer on either platform, so I really can't comment as much as I'd like to.
Hardening isn't part of the corrosion resistance / Hostile Environment finish (nitriding), rather that's simply part of hardening of the steel itself to the manufacturer's specs. I don't know the exact specs, but I do know I've never seen data showing Glocks or H&K's as having superior hardening compared to the other... and there certainly aren't any widespread issues with soft Glocks or H&K's melting in their operators' hands. For all intents and purposes, I'd say they were equal.
Magic_Salad0892
10-08-10, 22:18
I'd like to get Iraqguns or Gotm4 in here. IIRC one of them took the Glock Advanced Armorers course.
Glock pistols have better out of the box trigger IMHO.
H&K polymer triggers have too much flex before the trigger pull starts.
However, with work the H&K trigger is better.
I'd like to get Iraqguns or Gotm4 in here. IIRC one of them took the Glock Advanced Armorers course.
Glock pistols have better out of the box trigger IMHO.
H&K polymer triggers have too much flex before the trigger pull starts.
However, with work the H&K trigger is better.
interesting, i've only fired factory HK's...
i LOVE the glock trigger though. consistent, staple-gun like, with a kick in the pants reset.
Magic_Salad0892
10-08-10, 23:27
Yeah, I like Glock triggers a lot.
But I ever so slightly prefer a worked on H&K trigger. It feels somewhat like a 1911 trigger. Which I kind of have a thing for.
But in a self defence gun, the Glock has a better trigger, even compared to a worked on H&K. IMHO.
You traded a good gun for a good gun, no real issues there. Now, which one do you like better? Which one do you shoot best?
ThirdWatcher
10-09-10, 06:07
You traded a good gun for a good gun, no real issues there. Now, which one do you like better? Which one do you shoot best?
Exactly... it's just a matter of individual preferences.
I've got H&K USP's in 9mmP, .40S&W, & .45ACP and Glocks in 9mm and .45ACP. I prefer HK's but there is nothing wrong with a Glock (especially since there are a lot of readily available and inexpensive parts and magazines available for Glocks; not so for HK's).
Here are my thoughts on the subject. My first carry gun was a CZ-75 (original) and then later a S&W 586 .357 magnum. I kept it loaded with 158gr. hollowpoints.
When I was in the military I used the Beretta 92F and later purchased a real deal Italian made one that was balls on accurate. Later I ended up getting a Glock 19. It was a great gun but I wasn't really into it and sold it.
I ended up going back to the Glock (I currently have a Gen 3 G22 and G19). When I was in Iraq we also used Glocks.
Our Glocks were used and abused and yet they continued to function. I know for a fact that they were purchased in 2004 and when I took over the armory in 2007 they still had the original guide rods, mags and probably the original parts as there were no spare parts when I arrived. Not only was it a harsh environment but alot of personnel were terrible about doing maintenance on them.
Having been to the Beretta armorer course, Glock, and Sig and self trained on the USP I have to say that the Glock is probably the best all around gun. The parts are easy and cheap to get. I can do a complete rebuild on a G19 for about 50.00 or so. Magazines are easy to get and run around 24.00 a piece.
The biggest advantage is that anyone can easily learn how to completely tear down and work on or repair a Glock. for the most part all you need is the Glock tool and you are GTG. They are that easy. I was doing it even before I went to the armorer course. I just hijacked a manual and figured it out.
They are exceptionally easy to manipulate and training someone to operate it is by all accounts easy.
My thoughts on the USP .45.
1. .45 ammo isn't cheap even though prices are coming down. I can get a case of decent 9mm ball for around 209.00 at the moment.
2. H&K parts aren't cheap and sometimes getting them can be like going on a search for the Holy Grail.
3. H&K magazines aren't cheap.
4. The USP has more parts and IMHO there is more shit to go wrong. And they are a more of a PITA to work on.
In the end would I have made that trade? No. I would have had 2 good Glocks and made the little tweaks on them like I have with my other ones.
"Knockdown power" :rolleyes:
Please do yourself favor and read some of the stickies in the ballistics section.
And good luck getting service/parts/help from HK when something breaks. All guns break parts, if you shoot them enough.
IMO, you went from a more capable gun to a less capable gun.
But that is merely an opinion.
Magic_Salad0892
10-09-10, 08:45
Iraqguns got it perfectly.
See picture below.
"Knockdown power" :rolleyes:
Please do yourself favor and read some of the stickies in the ballistics section.
And good luck getting service/parts/help from HK when something breaks. All guns break parts, if you shoot them enough.
IMO, you went from a more capable gun to a less capable gun.
But that is merely an opinion.
Yes, it really is your opinion. Why don't you do me a favor, and read all of the posts before commenting. Wait a second, you're a glock guy aren't you? it almost seems like you are upset because of my trade, which illustrates you bias opinion, which doesn't do me any good. Thanks for the .002 cents
I had a USP(full size) which I recently sold, and still have a P-2000 (both of these were/are 9mm) Both had light LEM triggers, so that pretty much negates the DS/SA trigger pull argument.. The USP has a high bore axis which I did'nt like, For a 9mm it's kinda large, The P-2000 addresses all of these complaints, and is a smaller much more CC friendly package, I shoot it about as well as I do my FS M&P 9.
About the parts/service issues..My P-2000 (bought NIB) came from the factory with a broken spring,(this happened in 2009) which I did'nt catch at the shop, I called HK and got someone at the third try (it was just after 9am), I talked to two people, they called me back with a RA# and I sent it in, They fixed it, and while there went though the whole pistol looking for anything else wrong..they found that the firing pin spring was also out of spec,and it was also replaced,It was returned to me with in 10 business days,I've had no other problems with it. I DID have to pay to ship to them and they repaired and shipped back to me at no cost, not quite as good as S&W, But, HK's service was'nt THAT bad.My understanding is, HK is trying to improve their CS, and have Americans in charge of CS who understand the concept of service.The only problem they have to address is parts shortages, And this is'nt always their fault, figure,customs, and the fact HK has to operate within German laws, which are difficult concerning the exportation of "gun" parts, and you get exports delayed for months a time.
To the OP; I don't think you did bad, Yes, .45 is going to be more expensive,And the pistol you chose has a different manual of arms, So you'll have to practice with it. I reload all of my.45 for my Midsize M&P45,(and it's a friggin laser) so going that route brings the cost down considably, And I'll also add that even though the HK has polygonal rifling, you CAN shoot hard cast lead bullets through it without problems...I do it with my P-2000,(usually 2-300rnds at a time) and have never had a problem.The key here is keeping the velocitys reasonable, which with a .45, is very easy to do.Anyway the bottom line here is, YOU are the one who is going to use/carry this thing,if you're happy with it, get out and start practicing with it, and quit worrying about if you got a good deal or not, and other peoples opinions, At least you traded quality for quality, and did'nt do something simple like trade a Glock for a XD..
I've had great reliability with both Glocks and the USP series. As a whole, I'd give the Glock 19 a slight edge in all areas. Regarding the finish though, I carried a USP40 IWB for the summer and it did develop rust on the slide right above the decocker in the serrations and around the rear sight. My Glock 19 carried in the same manner developed no rust at all. So in my experience, the Glock has a more corrosion resistant surface treatment.
The Dumb Gun Collector
10-09-10, 17:14
In my experience (and that is all it is) the H&K's are a more reliable over the long haul. The question is, is it worth it? I think they are--but it is admittedly a close call.
As a fan of both H&K AND Glock pistols. I will say the Glock is more INHERENTLY reliable. (Just as an AK is more inherently reliable than an M4/16)
Tenifer/Gas Nitrated Slide and Barrel - Metal is hardened to 64 RC. According to Glock's Advanced Armorers course.
Less parts.
Striker Fired Design - In theory, due to the hammer and sear not being exposed this leads to better reliability in horrible environments.
Oh... and there's this...
http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90
I'd love to see a USP do that.
I'm not joking. I really want to see H&K produce a USP with a Gas Nitrated finish, and higher magazine capacity. Then I would choose H&K over Glock every day of the week. But the facts make me carry a 17 instead.
I'd love to see the responses. :)
You chummed the water and I'll hit your bait.
H&K pistols are also salt-bath nitrocarburized. Always have been with the USP series. Same with the P2000, P30 and HK45. I know because I took an extractor and had it analyzed and it's stated in the User Manual of the P30.
I don't buy the less parts automatically = more reliability. That's just not so. You can state it's less complex and for a given task having a less complex solution is generally regarded as "better" as long as it performs the job as well as the more complex system. Just saying.
I'd like to get Iraqguns or Gotm4 in here. IIRC one of them took the Glock Advanced Armorers course.
Glock pistols have better out of the box trigger IMHO.
H&K polymer triggers have too much flex before the trigger pull starts.
However, with work the H&K trigger is better.
Three words: Law Enforcement Module.
Magic_Salad0892
10-09-10, 19:59
In my experience (and that is all it is) the H&K's are a more reliable over the long haul. The question is, is it worth it? I think they are--but it is admittedly a close call.
Can I ask what formed this observation?
I'd also like to clarify ''long haul'' and the conditions involved.
Thanks for the response in advance. :)
In my experience (and that is all it is) the H&K's are a more reliable over the long haul. The question is, is it worth it? I think they are--but it is admittedly a close call.
i would agree that they are perhaps of slightly heavier duty construction. if you took an HK and a glock and ran 30k through each i think the HK would break less parts. that said, if you inspect a glock and replace worn springs and stuff every 5k or so it'll outlast anything. Considering that glock parts are like 4 dollars each and available everywhere it's a very easy gun to keep running.
Magic_Salad0892
10-10-10, 03:49
i would agree that they are perhaps of slightly heavier duty construction. if you took an HK and a glock and ran 30k through each i think the HK would break less parts. that said, if you inspect a glock and replace worn springs and stuff every 5k or so it'll outlast anything. Considering that glock parts are like 4 dollars each and available everywhere it's a very easy gun to keep running.
Chuck Taylor would like to have a word with you.
He ran a Glock 100k or more rounds without replacing anything. (But springs I think. He might not have replaced those either.)
Mjolnir: I'm not going to argue or debate over what you said, because I don't think it's wrong. And the LEM thing is subjective. I hate true DAO triggers. :(
And the gun has to be well built for the ''simpler is better'' thing. We all know full well that a gun with more parts can be just as reliable if not more reliable than a gun with less. (IE: AR vs. AK argument.) But a gun with less parts and a good design will be more inherently reliable than a more complicated firearm.
Chuck Taylor would like to have a word with you.
He ran a Glock 100k or more rounds without replacing anything. (But springs I think. He might not have replaced those either.)
Mjolnir: I'm not going to argue or debate over what you said, because I don't think it's wrong. And the LEM thing is subjective. I hate true DAO triggers. :(
And the gun has to be well built for the ''simpler is better'' thing. We all know full well that a gun with more parts can be just as reliable if not more reliable than a gun with less. (IE: AR vs. AK argument.) But a gun with less parts and a good design will be more inherently reliable than a more complicated firearm.
hmm that's a good point. he must have at least replaced the recoil spring though rihgt? of course HK's need those too, and they're like 65 bucks for an HK.
Captain_America
10-10-10, 17:49
Lots of great combat worthy handguns out there. FWIW I've tried more than a few out and have always seemed to come back to the 19. I have a deep appreciation for it's utilitarian nature. Not perfect, nothing is. Alot of folks wear them everyday and go into harms way, and I've never heard anything glaringly bad about them.
Chuck Taylor would like to have a word with you.
He ran a Glock 100k or more rounds without replacing anything. (But springs I think. He might not have replaced those either.)
Mjolnir: I'm not going to argue or debate over what you said, because I don't think it's wrong. And the LEM thing is subjective. I hate true DAO triggers. :(
And the gun has to be well built for the ''simpler is better'' thing. We all know full well that a gun with more parts can be just as reliable if not more reliable than a gun with less. (IE: AR vs. AK argument.) But a gun with less parts and a good design will be more inherently reliable than a more complicated firearm.
The LEM trigger isn't really a true DAO.
And the gun has to be well built for the ''simpler is better'' thing. We all know full well that a gun with more parts can be just as reliable if not more reliable than a gun with less. (IE: AR vs. AK argument.) But a gun with less parts and a good design will be more inherently reliable than a more complicated firearm.
That's a false premise; it assumes that all parts are equal, when in fact they may or may not be.
If you have gun A with 25 parts built to withstand 75% stress load, and gun B with 100 parts, all built to withstand a 99.9% stress load, which gun is more reliable? The same applies here, which is why you don't see many examples of a USP failing more often than a Glock even though a USP has double or so the parts (I think the official parts numbering for a 9mm USP is 54).
USPs tend to have extremely over-built parts, especially in the 9mm models. This is what lends to their reliability. The Glock's parts, while sturdy, are more streamlined in the name of simplicity and ease of maintenance.
Think I'm wrong? Compare the .45 USPs to the .45 Glocks (oh snap! I went there!). Of course, if H&K made 10mm handguns, then I could really rub it in by comparing them to the 10mm Glocks, but alas they do not. ;) Honestly though, I'm not trying to create drama, I'm simply pointing out that USPs across the board are known for rather boringly predictable reliability, while comparatively (note that key word) fewer Glocks actually live up to their "unfailing reliability" reputation. If you want to open up an even bigger can of worms, let's compare the Gen 4 Glocks to the USPs. And then there's the Larry Vicker's sand test that the Glock 21 failed but the USP passed... ;)
I'm not biased, I'm simply pointing out that relatively few of the Glocks are actually known for the near-100% reliability that the 9mm models have; the rest have issues, ranging from a few, very minor ones to many "don't trust your life to them" type of issues.
The USPs quality of design, construction, and reliability is shown across the board, across every model. Glocks may or may not be, depending on the model, caliber, and generation. This reinforces my first point. USPs tend to be massively overbuilt (especially compared to Glocks), making the "more parts = more chances to fail" virtually inconsequential in this setting. It isn't so obvious when comparing Gen 3 9mm Glocks with the USP series, but compared lineup vs lineup, the USP really takes the lead in reliability.
I'm not in ANY way bashing Glock, and I truly don't think there's a handgun that can beat a Gen 3 9mm Glock's reliability. USPs rival it, but don't surpass it. However, to say that because a USP has more parts means that it's inherently more unreliable is false, at least with the USP vs Glock argument.
In my opinion, you definitely traded up. The only handgun I have owned for the past 9 years is a USP45f. It is a KF datecode, meaning it was born in 95. The only upgrades I have performed is installing Meprolights, a Bill Springfield trigger job, and his accuracy upgrade.
I have put well over 10,000 rounds through the weapon without so much as a hiccup and Im not even the original owner. Granted I do my part with regular cleaning and maintenance. Customer service is actually not bad in my experience. just practice, practice, practice then watch Collateral and practice some more.
Magic_Salad0892
10-11-10, 01:06
That's a false premise; it assumes that all parts are equal, when in fact they may or may not be.
If you have gun A with 25 parts built to withstand 75% stress load, and gun B with 100 parts, all built to withstand a 99.9% stress load, which gun is more reliable? The same applies here, which is why you don't see many examples of a USP failing more often than a Glock even though a USP has double or so the parts (I think the official parts numbering for a 9mm USP is 54).
USPs tend to have extremely over-built parts, especially in the 9mm models. This is what lends to their reliability. The Glock's parts, while sturdy, are more streamlined in the name of simplicity and ease of maintenance.
Think I'm wrong? Compare the .45 USPs to the .45 Glocks (oh snap! I went there!). Of course, if H&K made 10mm handguns, then I could really rub it in by comparing them to the 10mm Glocks, but alas they do not. ;) Honestly though, I'm not trying to create drama, I'm simply pointing out that USPs across the board are known for rather boringly predictable reliability, while comparatively (note that key word) fewer Glocks actually live up to their "unfailing reliability" reputation. If you want to open up an even bigger can of worms, let's compare the Gen 4 Glocks to the USPs. And then there's the Larry Vicker's sand test that the Glock 21 failed but the USP passed... ;)
I'm not biased, I'm simply pointing out that relatively few of the Glocks are actually known for the near-100% reliability that the 9mm models have; the rest have issues, ranging from a few, very minor ones to many "don't trust your life to them" type of issues.
The USPs quality of design, construction, and reliability is shown across the board, across every model. Glocks may or may not be, depending on the model, caliber, and generation. This reinforces my first point. USPs tend to be massively overbuilt (especially compared to Glocks), making the "more parts = more chances to fail" virtually inconsequential in this setting. It isn't so obvious when comparing Gen 3 9mm Glocks with the USP series, but compared lineup vs lineup, the USP really takes the lead in reliability.
I'm not in ANY way bashing Glock, and I truly don't think there's a handgun that can beat a Gen 3 9mm Glock's reliability. USPs rival it, but don't surpass it. However, to say that because a USP has more parts means that it's inherently more unreliable is false, at least with the USP vs Glock argument.
Skyyr: I don't think your wrong, but please re-examine my wording. I said ''design'' not construction. A DDM4 will be just as reliable as a factory build Russian AK-47, but more reliable than some lesser models. Same design, different process and QC. Get my point? On the flip side. A Russian AK-47 will be more reliable and an RRA M4.
In overall handgun lines. I believe that the USP is only more reliable in the .40 offering. I've seen way too many G21s take a beating, (See Steve of ADCO's reliability test) and survive where a USP choked up. Overall though, excluding the full-size 9x19, and .45 ACP variants, I think H&K makes better pistols. I'd still like to see what exactly happened during the LAV test. As it may very well change my mind about the USP series. (Well.... maybe not the USP, but an HK45C, which is my favorite H&K .45 variant.)
And regarding the Gen4 guns:
Let's wait until they've been out a few years before comparing them to other designs. Otherwise the M&P sucks.
Magic_Salad0892
10-11-10, 01:09
hmm that's a good point. he must have at least replaced the recoil spring though rihgt? of course HK's need those too, and they're like 65 bucks for an HK.
In that report, all I can recall reading is that he replaced magazines.
He might have replaced the action spring though, you can find the article online, if you're curious.
I said HK's service sucks, not that HKs suck. I also said you went from a more capable gun to a less capable gun. So, I'll explain my reasoning.
As to capability having more rounds in the gun when the fight starts is a very good thing. We've had a few local incidents where magazine capacity, or the lack of it, played a major role in the outcome. IMO, starting with 9 in the pistol when you could start with 16 or 18 is akin to taking off in an airplane with a tank that is 1/2 full. This is not saying you should spray and pray. You are accountable for every round fired, and the only thing worse than a miss is a slow miss. But I want to start the fight with every advantage I can.
As to HK service/support after the sale - in the last year, after using USPs for less than 10 yrs, Washington State Patrol dumped their USP40 full size and compacts, primarily due to lack of support from HK. The guns certainly weren't even close to wearing out. But they did need parts replacement due to inevitable parts breakage and wear items like springs. When an agency with well over 1,000 guns can't get HK to provide service and parts after the sale, that's a big problem. I know this because I know one of the Troopers who was on the selection committee and we talked about how the process was going as it progressed (they went with M&Ps, by the way).
All guns break and need service, eventually. As well engineered as their guns are (of that there is no doubt), HK's service has consistently been very lacking, especially for agency and individual customers. If it is improving, then good. I'd wait to see numerous more accounts that it has actually improved before I believed it.
Having said this, I think highly of some HK pistols, like the P30 and the HK45. I've shot a P30 and it shoots well and the ergos on it are very good. Wouldn't buy one due to the lack of support from HK, though. About 15 yrs ago, I owned SP89, but didn't shoot it much, and sold it to fund another project.
Back to Glock - my experience with Glock's service has been very good. One of my guys had a 1st gen G17. The pins were drifting out of the frame. Glock replaced the frame, and most of the parts in the rest of the gun for FREE.
I can buy Glock parts from anywhere and install any part on the gun except for sights within minutes, using no more than a ballpoint pen or a cuff key. So easy a caveman could do it.
If you want to attend the armorer course, it's widely hosted, is very affordable, and lasts only 8 hrs.
Glock has certainly not done everything right. I would not own a Glock in .40, since I put X300s on my pistols. One of my guys experienced firsthand the problem of stoppages when he added an X300 to a G22. I fixed that with a LWD guide rod and 20lb spring solved that problem.
A few guys with high round count Glocks in 9mm -
Kelly McCann (over 750,000 as of a few years ago)
Kyle Defoor (over 100,000 before changing the recoil spring)
Chuck Taylor (previous poster said over 100k)
As to me, I prefer 1911s, but I well understand and appreciate the advantages of a more modern design (more reliable, easier to maintain, simpler to operate) that holds more ammo, and I would rather have 16 or 18 rounds of 9mm in the gun when the fight starts, rather than 8 or 9 rounds of .45.
Yes, it really is your opinion. Why don't you do me a favor, and read all of the posts before commenting. Wait a second, you're a glock guy aren't you? it almost seems like you are upset because of my trade, which illustrates you bias opinion, which doesn't do me any good. Thanks for the .002 cents
I like the fact that I can lock the slide back with my trigger finger, because the slide stop is so large. I am left handed, so this allows me to keep my TF along the side of the weapon and keep the weapon pointed downrange toward my target/enemy while reloading. I cannot do this with my glock 19, but i can activate the slide stop easily after a reload with my TF. The thing dislike about the gun so far is the round capacity, compared to my glock I can carry 32 rnds of ammunition(1 spare 15), usp I can only carry 17(1 spare 8). Shot placement!!!:suicide2:
I do my research before I buy or trade guns, and i know that the usp and glocks are both reliable. We can talk about reliability issues all day, because one person had this problem and another had this etc. blah blah. But, I am not concerned about that, because I keep my weapon clean and I learn how to use efficiently so that I can trust my life with it. I could care less about the customer service, i don't shoot thousands and thousands of rounds so it is probably very unlikely that I will have replace parts unless i upgrade. i have shot 200 flawless rnds and i am very pleased with accuracy and recoil, but not so much the trigger( I still need to get used to).
Magic_Salad0892
10-11-10, 10:47
Honestly. I don't think the OP chose a less capable pistol over a more capable pistol. I believe he chose a different pistol, over a different pistol.
I would have made the same choice had it been a 9x19mm USP variant.
A P2000 would have been cooler though. :cool:
BTW: Really eager to try my USP with the slide stop on the right side, and practice all manipulations with my trigger finger. I've been wanting a pistol that could do that for a long time. Completely forgot about the USP's ability to do that.
Will try, thanks for the idea.
Captain_America
10-11-10, 10:48
With respect regarding the above, 200 rounds is nothing. Glocks and H&Ks should be able to digest thousands of rounds. Spare parts and customer service factor in quite a bit if you depend on your sidearm when going in harms way. No offense, but I don't think a casual shooter/concealed carrier is a good measure of reliability and performance.
I need to know my firearms will function under adverse conditions. I take care but use hard. Easy repair is a necessary, and agreeable customer service should be the norm. I don't buy a gun to get a snooty attitude if an issue arises.
Magic_Salad0892
10-11-10, 10:51
In my opinion, H&K customer service is improving, and the ''You suck, and we hate you.'' attitude is kind of a thing in the past.
The only thing I've had a problem with is parts availability due to export laws. (That was me trying to get an H&K Factory threaded barrel.)
However, it's becoming a non-issue.
R3V3LATIONS
10-11-10, 10:53
With respect regarding the above, 200 rounds is nothing. Glocks and H&Ks should be able to digest thousands of rounds. Spare parts and customer service factor in quite a bit if you depend on your sidearm when going in harms way. No offense, but I don't think a casual shooter/concealed carrier is a good measure of reliability and performance.
I need to know my firearms will function under adverse conditions. I take care but use hard. Easy repair is a necessary, and agreeable customer service should be the norm. I don't buy a gun to get a snooty attitude if an issue arises.
+1, HK makes a great gun at a decent price, however unfortunatley it seems their mentality is "If you dont have a uniform, you cant." translating into a part aquisition issue.
BTW: Really eager to try my USP with the slide stop on the right side, and practice all manipulations with my trigger finger. I've been wanting a pistol that could do that for a long time. Completely forgot about the USP's ability to do that.
Will try, thanks for the idea.
I dont think you read the part where i said i was left handed.
With respect regarding the above, 200 rounds is nothing. Glocks and H&Ks should be able to digest thousands of rounds. Spare parts and customer service factor in quite a bit if you depend on your sidearm when going in harms way. No offense, but I don't think a casual shooter/concealed carrier is a good measure of reliability and performance.
I need to know my firearms will function under adverse conditions. I take care but use hard. Easy repair is a necessary, and agreeable customer service should be the norm. I don't buy a gun to get a snooty attitude if an issue arises.
You obviously didnt get what I was trying to say. Im not measuring the guns reliability based on "my" rnd count, I know that 200 rnds is not a lot. As I said we all know they are reliable and that we can debate it's track record all day. You say you need to know that the gun can handle adverse conditions.Dude, are you going to shoot thousands of rnds up and down in the mud to proove that with your particular weapon?I dont know your line of work, but I highly doubt that. You wouldnt buy a weapon because of customer service? Let me ask you this. Have you ever had experience with hk customer service? As far as glock, I didnt even know they had customer service:laugh:
Magic_Salad0892
10-11-10, 11:25
Goddamnit. I forgot about that. :o
Can you flip where the slide stop is?
I've seen a lefty configured USP I'm sure...
Captain_America
10-11-10, 14:02
You obviously didnt get what I was trying to say. Im not measuring the guns reliability based on "my" rnd count, I know that 200 rnds is not a lot. As I said we all know they are reliable and that we can debate it's track record all day. You say you need to know that the gun can handle adverse conditions.Dude, are you going to shoot thousands of rnds up and down in the mud to proove that with your particular weapon?I dont know your line of work, but I highly doubt that. You wouldnt buy a weapon because of customer service? Let me ask you this. Have you ever had experience with hk customer service? As far as glock, I didnt even know they had customer service:laugh:
I guess my point was that the reliability aspect of it should be a given. I mean most people whether they're mil, leo, or just avg citizen would like a reliable durable gun. And then you gotta find the one that fits you best. So then all else being equal to me the deciding factor is CS and parts availability. The more you shoot, the more the possibility you might need service or parts. It's like a lot of things, you take it for granted till you need it. But I will say, if two gun makers are putting out a comparable gun, I'd go with the better CS company. The money I spend on guns is very small compared to most others, but I would rather take my business to someone who appreciates it. It's a wiser investment on my part too. I can't afford the time and money to fiddle around with half ass warranty/repair/parts service.
I was just trying to point out that there are some who do shoot thousands of rounds up and down in the mud, and their life depends on it. In their case, service and support may be a very important factor.
Just got my first M4 and one of the reasons I wanted to go with BCM or DD over Colt was the great customer service reports I've heard of.
I wasn't disagreeing with you. Just pointing out that a lot of folks do care about CS. You don't feel a need to purchase based on CS, but quite a few do. I think people feel that if they're paying a lot of money for something as well made and engineered as an H&K, it would be nice if H&K was backing them up no matter who they are. I think good support service should come along with the pride of making something good. Not saying they need to warrant for the lifetime of the gun without charge, just be willing to help out in a timely/orderly/respectful fashion when it's needed.
ThirdWatcher
10-11-10, 15:56
Just pointing out that a lot of folks do care about CS. You don't feel a need to purchase based on CS, but quite a few do. I think people feel that if they're paying a lot of money for something as well made and engineered as an H&K, it would be nice if H&K was backing them up no matter who they are. I think good support service should come along with the pride of making something good. Not saying they need to warrant for the lifetime of the gun without charge, just be willing to help out in a timely/orderly/respectful fashion when it's needed.
This is one of the reasons Smith & Wesson is so popular. My former agency switched from H&K to S&W for this very reason.
USP's are excellent pistols. But I can't tell you if you made the right choice or not. That's up to you to decide, how the gun fits you.
Good luck.
lloydkristmas
10-12-10, 16:14
I've owned 7 different variations of the USP in varying conditions, and ALL of them have performed flawlessly. NEVER had a jam in thousands and thousands of rounds. Call it "kool aid" if you'd like, but I trust HK above all the rest.
Here is a review I wrote up for people who are new to the USP line of pistols. May be some helpful info inside for you
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=784087#post784087
In my opinion, the Glock is probably the better choice if youre looking for a 9mm, but on the other hand, I believe HK makes the best .45 pistol on the market. The USP line is just a little too bulky for a 9mm.
If you told me to name the best 9mm pistol in the world, I'd say "Glock 17 or 19"
If you told me to name the best .45ACP pistol in the world, I'd say "HK USP or HK45"
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.