View Full Version : So are there ANY reliable handguns available?
Crow Hunter
04-17-11, 10:48
This is a serious question.
Are there any actual reliable handguns available? If you read this forum, there are potentially serious issues with practically every single model of firearm now available.
-Glock Gen 4
-Now apparently Glock Gen 3.5 (My new term for a Glock Gen 3 with some Gen 4 parts)-Which by default means any Gen 3 Glock since all future spare parts will most likely be the new "updated" design.
-SigArms any non-German produced model (How do you get German spare parts?)
-S&W M&P sears and striker problems (Maybe fixed now?)
-S&W revolvers, unless it is a pre-MIM no lock revolver
-Any 1911 less than $2,000 from the factory (And probably not even that)
These are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. I am sure there are lots more, but you get the idea. (And don't even get me started on ARs or AKs or others....)
So, if someone was going to start fresh and purchase a quality defensive arm that is going to be used to potentially defend himself/herself, what would should they buy?
A Glock 19 Gen 3 pre-2010 and try to scrounge enough spare parts of the "correct" generation to last indefintely?
A HK something? Is ithey truly better, or are there just not enough in the hands of serious shooters to ferret out problems?
Let's discuss...
This is a serious question.
Are there any actual reliable handguns available? If you read this forum, there are potentially serious issues with practically every single model of firearm now available.
-Glock Gen 4
-Now apparently Glock Gen 3.5 (My new term for a Glock Gen 3 with some Gen 4 parts)-Which by default means any Gen 3 Glock since all future spare parts will most likely be the new "updated" design.
-SigArms any non-German produced model (How do you get German spare parts?)
-S&W M&P sears and striker problems (Maybe fixed now?)
-S&W revolvers, unless it is a pre-MIM no lock revolver
-Any 1911 less than $2,000 from the factory (And probably not even that)
These are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. I am sure there are lots more, but you get the idea. (And don't even get me started on ARs or AKs or others....)
So, if someone was going to start fresh and purchase a quality defensive arm that is going to be used to potentially defend himself/herself, what would should they buy?
A Glock 19 Gen 3 pre-2010 and try to scrounge enough spare parts of the "correct" generation to last indefintely?
A HK something? Is ithey truly better, or are there just not enough in the hands of serious shooters to ferret out problems?
Let's discuss...
there is no such thing as a truly reliable weapon.
You can't really go wrong with any of the top tier manufacturers: HK, Sig Sauer, Glock, S&W...however I would give the edge to HK over all of them with my experience.
You want a reliable handgun, get a single shot. :blink:
Seriously though, S&W or Ruger revolvers are pretty reliable. Not much to go wrong. Taurus, YMMV.
For autos, H&K, Glock, Sig, S&W (though no personal experience) all are reliable firearms. Are there a few bad ones out there, sure. The likelyhood of getting a bad one is pretty remote. Also, you have to take into accout who's complaining and how many similar complaints there are.
If several people had issues with Brand X not extracting properly, there may be something there. If someone says they bought Brand X as their first handgun and it's a piece of crap because it's jamming, I wouldn't read too much into it.
BTW, what would you do if you bought a car that broke down?
1. There's no 100% reliable line of handguns on the planet, and if you're holding out for one, you're just wasting your time.
2. If you're doing your due diligence when reading this forum, you should quickly be able to find which handguns people are generally having fewer issues with.
3. Every forum is subject to the statistical pitfall of self-selection bias and hearsay.
EDIT: Nevermind, link was posted below
JarHeadTim
04-17-11, 11:59
http://https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887 (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887)
I agree there's no absolutely reliable weapon in a universe where things run down, rust out, and fall apart.
But there's RELATIVE reliability within a certain frame of time. With pistols--though none is absolutely failsafe--the probability is that, during the years that you'll be using one, certain pistol brands are going to run far longer and better than others before they fail. And I think those patterns of probability are what forums like this help to establish. Yes, Glocks, M&P's, even HK's have problems. But, these guns are also relatively easy to fix, plus they tend to have LESS problems than other competing pistol platforms. In an imperfect world, you gotta run SOMETHING if you don't want to throw rocks, and I think you're still better off researching and going with pistols that have the best reported track records.
And FWIW, I'm not of the tribe that thinks it's impossible to get a duty-reliable 1911 for under $2K. I agree it's not easy and the odds are against you, you're far better off just going with something like a Springfield Pro, which runs $2500. But I still think it's possible. There are some threads in the 1911 forum that discuss some possible options.
Flawed premise. Great pistols available. It could hardly be easier to get equipped with the finest combat pistols. Plenty of options. But you have to do your own work beyond just plunking down the cash.
davebee456
04-17-11, 12:51
whats wrong with my ruger p90?
From what I've read here and seen in my own weapon, I believe S&W has already addressed the sear and striker issues with the M&P.
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-17-11, 13:04
You don't have to be perfect, you just have to be more reliable and lucky than the other guy.
I have an STI..... ....never mind. :sarcastic:
HK USP 45 compact Built like a tank and if I run out of ammo i use it the beat somebodies skull in:sarcastic: it is that tough
But being serious I have never heard of many Problems with the HK But all things Mechanical can and will break down a one point
http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h86/PFC-JB/007.jpg
http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h86/PFC-JB/005-3.jpg
Alpha Sierra
04-17-11, 13:48
As the owner and hard user of three of the "unreliable" handgun models on your list (pair of M&P9s, Gen 4 Glock 17, MIM/lock S&W M637 and M65) I can say with all certainty that all five have been as reliable as any other handgun I have ever had.
Both M&Ps were flawless. The hardest used of them had over 2000 rounds when I sold it to friend.
The G17 has 2200 rounds and has had a grand total of 3 FTEs. None since upgrading the original spring with an 021.
The 637 has been flawless in the just under 1200 rounds I've fired through it.
The 65 had some issues with FTF due to the length tolerance of the firing pin, necessitated by California's stupid safety regulations. Once I shitcanned the part and replaced it with an Apex firing pin, the pistol was flawless. It now has just north of 5400 rounds fired.
However, handguns, like all machines, will not be perfect. I'll just +1 what has been said about buying from reputable makers who will stand behind their products when you need it and taking the time to wring out any infant mortality issues before relying on the weapon for real.
IMO, you can keep wringing your hands or you can live in the real imperfect world.
Crow Hunter
04-17-11, 13:49
I am not looking for a pistol myself. I have owned and shot Glocks for nearly 15 years and a G19 is my daily driver.
I discovered what worked FOR ME after owning nearly one of everything available in the late 1990's and trying to carry concealed and shoot with an acceptable accuracy level.
I was just commenting on the fact that if someone who has no experience who got on a gun board and started reading, how would they ever make a decision?
There is always "something" wrong with every gun out there. Even my favorite G19 Gen 3 is now developing warts. (Of course this was after surviving the NY Phase III fun...)
Just wondering what others thought.
Especially since people ask me all the time what gun to get and I always tell them to get a G19 and if they don't like it, I'll buy it from them.
I was wondering if I was about to get a gun safe full of G19's.:blink:
I have owned a lot of Sigs that ran great with me
I had a glock 30 which i carried for about 9 years,
One day I helped Loss prevention at a store chase down a shoplifter (I use to do that for a Living) running in the parking lot My Glock hit the ground and slid at least 10 feet the only thing that happen was the rear popped off.did not even scratch it
a easy fix but i didn't like the feel of the Glock in my hand and sold it but it never gave me a problem and i had about 3000 rounds through it
As has been mentioned above, no gun is perfect. You can mitigate the problems by sticking with the major manufacturers (Glock, HK, Sigarms and S&W) and learn as much as you can about whatever model fits you best. If available, take an armorers course for your particular brand/model.
I always recommend a used Glock. Initial price is low, parts are plentiful and inexpensive (if needed) and their armorers course is available to practically anyone.
Don't worry about scrounging for parts, Glock will release "updates" as needed.;)
You may consider your car reliable but have you ever had to have it repaired?
First you have to decide what "reliable" means to you or others for frame of reference.
- Do you expect it to work with minimal cleaning required?
- How many rounds through? How many rounds should it fire before breakage or stoppage?
- Are routine inspection and preventive parts replacement accomplshed?
- Do you need it to be able to work in all environmemtal conditions?
Even within well respected brands there can be certain models that are better than others.
IMO, know your stoppage procedures, and have a "what if" plan.
Pistol Shooter
04-17-11, 16:54
I was just commenting on the fact that if someone who has no experience who got on a gun board and started reading, how would they ever make a decision?
That's a great point. It can be confusing when detailed trigger discussions arise, (etc.).
My suggestion is that, if they really care, they will do the research necessary to find the handgun which fits their needs.
I learned by reading everything I could get my hands on in the late 1970's. My family weren't hunters or shooters.
There were no quick Internet answers then; it took some time and research on my part.
I spent a lot of money on Col. Cooper's books and others.
My first purchase was a T Series BHP, followed closely by a Colt MK IV Series 70 Gov Model.
I've never regretted those choices, but if someone really cares and wants valid information, they need to study -- simple as that.
For the 40 years of handgun shooting and study I have observed, the unanimous advice from the SMEs of the time was to choose a quality pistol from a quality manufacturer but frakkin get out and test YOUR specific gun thoroughly because any gun can be an exception to the rule. And if it doesn't run, you fix it or get it fixed. It's not that complicated.
Somewhere along the line, maybe from some SMEs saying that IF they had to pick up a strange pistol and carry it without a test fire, they'd probably pick a Glock 9mm - maybe this started to create this syndrome of seeking absolute certainty before making the purchase.
We can see from threads right here on this board that this isn't even true of HK's costing near double the econ polymer guns. But IMO it's just not that big a deal.
If I prefered the features and function of the M&P, or P30 or Sig, I'd buy one and get to proving it trustworthy or getting it so. I've seen multiple threads on multiple forums with folks reporting problems with all these guns but a large majority of users reporting none.
TonyTacoma
04-17-11, 17:38
I own two HK's and own two glocks, and I've owned more than that but the four is what I have currently. The two hk's have 2k rounds a piece with no failures,the glocks have more rounds and one failure per gun. What's the definition of reliable? Research, buy, practice, maintain, and you will net reliability.
my current daily carries are a glock 19 and an HK p7 psp. the glock has 14,000 or so rounds through it. the only issues i've ever had were related to the crap magazines i train with (a couple old ban era mags with #4 followers. ) I'm kind of on the fence about getting rid of those mags, because they're 95% reliable so they're not annoying to shoot with, they just give me the occasional surprise tap rang bang drill, which really isn't a bad thing.
the p7 i've put 2200 through. that thing has been outright flawless, even worked with some crunched mag feedlips. The old p7's are built like a W123 mercedes benz. Downside is finding parts.
I like to keep new springs in my guns...
I guess the key really is buy one of the guns that tends to have less issues, and shoot a good 500+ rounds through it to work out any bugs. (including as much carry ammo as you can afford)
as a wise man said-people tend to go on the internet when they're angry. a few bad reviews doesn't necessarily mean the product is crap.
Littlelebowski
04-17-11, 18:11
HK P30.
I have 4 Glock 9mm's, 17, 19, 26, and 34. I have never had a single failure with any of them. The 17 is my oldest, purchased in 1991 and it has over 5,000 rounds through it. I trust any of them with my life but realize that any mechanical device can have issues. Train, practice, and maintain any modern pistol and you should get reliable service.
Crow Hunter
04-17-11, 18:43
For the 40 years of handgun shooting and study I have observed, the unanimous advice from the SMEs of the time was to choose a quality pistol from a quality manufacturer but frakkin get out and test YOUR specific gun thoroughly because any gun can be an exception to the rule. And if it doesn't run, you fix it or get it fixed. It's not that complicated.
Somewhere along the line, maybe from some SMEs saying that IF they had to pick up a strange pistol and carry it without a test fire, they'd probably pick a Glock 9mm - maybe this started to create this syndrome of seeking absolute certainty before making the purchase.
We can see from threads right here on this board that this isn't even true of HK's costing near double the econ polymer guns. But IMO it's just not that big a deal.
If I prefered the features and function of the M&P, or P30 or Sig, I'd buy one and get to proving it trustworthy or getting it so. I've seen multiple threads on multiple forums with folks reporting problems with all these guns but a large majority of users reporting none.
One of the most succinct and salient points I have ever read on the subject.
Thank you sir.
MarshallDodge
04-17-11, 18:43
If you think you can purchase a handgun and throw it in your holster then you are kidding yourself. No gun should be carried without extensive testing.
Some guns have a better reputation for being good out of the box but I don't trust any of them out of the box or what people on the internets say.
This is a serious question.
Are there any actual reliable handguns available? If you read this forum, there are potentially serious issues with practically every single model of firearm now available.
Your not asking for reliable, your asking for perfect every time. Even hondas break down now and then ;)
l.
I was just commenting on the fact that if someone who has no experience who got on a gun board and started reading, how would they ever make a decision?
There is always "something" wrong with every gun out there.
The issue here is that none of us has an insight on actual noise-to-signal ratio with these reports, nor do we know actual percentage of malfunctioning guns of a given make and model. There are various biases involved here, and newbie who is about to pick a gun will be in a loss-loss situation if he/she goes by web reports. I can find negative reports on just about any pistol, including HK P30...
If I were a newbie, I'd choose based on desired feature set, overall reliability reports and reputation of company's CS.
Great points here.
If I performed better with 'Brand A' I would take it in a heartbeat over 'Brand B'... even if 'Brand A' had to go back to customer service for correctable issues (on the company's dime) 5% of the time and 'Brand B' was 100% flawless out of the box.
Problems occur when a company has lousy customer service, the problem is epidemic, or the issue is not correctable.
The pistoltraining.com P30 stumbled out of the gate, but it put in a heck of a performance once a couple minor tweaks were made. The Gen4 Glock 17 over there now may very well be following the same trajectory.
I find that I handle an M&P best in the kind of scenarios that I am most likely to encounter, and in over 4,000 rounds I have found it to be every bit as reliable as my West German p226 or my old Glock 17. As such, I don't worry when someone reports a trigger reset bug or an extractor issue. I just keep shooting it, and it keeps working for me.
The majority of M&P's, Glocks, and H&K's work great. Figure out what you shoot well, shoot it enough to know whether it is reliable, and adjust if it is not.
Crowhunter,
When I was reading this I was kind of like WTF to be honest. Have you shot a Glock before? How about any of the other guns you have listed?
There never is nor will there ever be a free lunch. Anything made by man is susceptible to failure. Now let me just say that if the G19 or 17 fits your hand you really can't do much better. It's reliable and it will last a long time. There are plenty of Glocks that have had thousands and thousands of rounds put through them.
You made a mention of sourcing the "correct" parts for xxx generation. Do you actually know what parts wear out? Do you know how to tear apart a Glock completely and replace the parts if you did have them?
There are plenty of companies that have OEM and aftermarket parts on the shelf to rebuild them. I'll be so bold as to say that I highly doubt that you will wear out your Glock and it will probably last longer than you. Point in fact. I have a WW2 Mauser P38 pistol. It survived combat and made it's way back to the U.S. I have it in my safe and it is still fully functional.
I guess my point is that I think you are really overthinking the issue. I'm not telling you to buy a Glock nor am I saying there isn't anything else out there. I am just giving you my POV on this particular choice.
i'm one of those weird jmb 1911 best gun in the world guys...but none of mine are off the shelf and understand the same issues this model 'flavor' carries...just like the various ar's to choose from. All are prone to fail but confidence over rides any real loosing sleep issues.
He has since past but I was lucky to have an old crusty but solid 1911 friend / builder from zapata tx...he was also a crop duster and supposedly worked on some tx rangers rigs?? Anyway, his nick name was Smokey and am fortunate to have some of his better ones. My main lw caspian frankenstein is hideous to look at. Half the annodizing of the frame & grip safety has peeled off and has some speckles on the blueing of the frame from who knows what moisture hit it. I'm also a lefty and butchered my safety so I could use some CT grips.:rolleyes:
One day when i'm back in the chips, I'm gonna send this particular 45 into one of our talented M4 gurus to make her dazzle again.
I was kinda like iraqgunz when i saw the op & would be just as happy with a 4" S&W model 57...u just gotta trust the weapon.
a gazillion people get on jets to fly all over the world daily but when one quits working they are basically rocks fighting gravity. I hate flying but do understand the point you have about 100% records. I think the reliability of primers are insane & would love to know what the real world ppm's are on one not going bang with a correct fireing pin dink.
Crow Hunter
04-17-11, 20:51
Crowhunter,
When I was reading this I was kind of like WTF to be honest. Have you shot a Glock before? How about any of the other guns you have listed?
There never is nor will there ever be a free lunch. Anything made by man is susceptible to failure. Now let me just say that if the G19 or 17 fits your hand you really can't do much better. It's reliable and it will last a long time. There are plenty of Glocks that have had thousands and thousands of rounds put through them.
You made a mention of sourcing the "correct" parts for xxx generation. Do you actually know what parts wear out? Do you know how to tear apart a Glock completely and replace the parts if you did have them?
There are plenty of companies that have OEM and aftermarket parts on the shelf to rebuild them. I'll be so bold as to say that I highly doubt that you will wear out your Glock and it will probably last longer than you. Point in fact. I have a WW2 Mauser P38 pistol. It survived combat and made it's way back to the U.S. I have it in my safe and it is still fully functional.
I guess my point is that I think you are really overthinking the issue. I'm not telling you to buy a Glock nor am I saying there isn't anything else out there. I am just giving you my POV on this particular choice.
I think you misread my post.
I have owned Glocks since 1997. While I do not currently have a Glock armorers certification, I will after August. I have also owned and shot many types of handguns over the years (not the M&P though).
After reading some other comments about the new issues with the GEN 4 and the GEN 3.5 Glocks, I got to thinking about what it would be like as a new shooter coming to the site to do research. I just found it interesting that someone who was reading without actually experiencing, one would truly believe that there aren't ANY reliable handguns out there.
I apologize if I stepped on any toes with my questions.
I just found it interesting that someone who was reading without actually experiencing, one would truly believe that there aren't ANY reliable handguns out there..
I disagree with this statement.
A user would only come to such a conclusion if said user had unrealistic expectations of what it means for a firearm to be "reliable."
Crow Hunter
04-17-11, 21:05
I disagree with this statement.
A user would only come to such a conclusion if said user had unrealistic expectations of what it means for a firearm to be "reliable."
Maybe so.
And I agree with your premise, from my personal standpoint.
But if you had no personal experience with any firearms, and you were researching guns online and you read of problems with Brand X or Brand Y by people who had more experience than you, what would you believe?
Find a 3rd Gen Glock 17 or 19 and don't look back. You can try the handgun de jour or whatever the cool guys are shooting this year but there is little doubt in the experts opinions (not mine, guys that really know what they're doing) that the 3rd Gen 9mm Glocks set the standard for reliability.
Remember, it's a Glock world...plan accordingly.
The problem is this. It all depends on the person. Just take your post and apply it to AR's. How many guys ask for advice and then end up buying DPMS or some other crap? Even after you tell them that there are issues.
Same applies here. A new shooter could be influenced by gun rags, friends, etc... There is just no way to tell. If you read some of the AR posts here one would think that taking an AR out of the box and shooting it isn't possible without half a dozen upgrades.
Maybe so.
And I agree with your premise, from my personal standpoint.
But if you had no personal experience with any firearms, and you were researching guns online and you read of problems with Brand X or Brand Y by people who had more experience than you, what would you believe?
FChen17213
04-17-11, 22:29
First, I'd like to say that I'm not too experienced and that there are tons of very seasoned shooters on this forum. These are just my observations, both personal and online.
I see what the OP is saying actually. Yes, there are no perfect guns. Everything will malfunction and break at some point. We all know this, but I think the OP wants to know what is generally considered most trouble-free out of the box. What gun can you really trust your life to? Several newer designs have turned out to be maybe not as good as previous designs....ie Glock. Yes, I know many of us have not had problems with Gen4 (myself included for the most part) but no doubt some people had.
I have to say go buy a Gen 3 Glock 19 or 17 and don't look back. As previously echoed, thousands and thousands of rounds without any problems and through many classes and lots of carry. Also, I would say an earlier German made Sig P226 would be good too. I got my first Sig P226 when I was 12 years old from my dad, and I still have that gun. Don't think it's ever jammed before either. The HK USP series and HK45/P30s are excellent guns too. I don't have many rounds through mine, but I have never had a malfunction and have heard nothing but the best about them.
If I were to give an overall recommendation, I'd still say get a Gen3 Glock 17 or 19 and don't look back. Expend at least 10,000 rounds through it and report back. I would guess that the only part that would need to be changed would be the recoil spring once or twice. :)
jmlshooter
04-17-11, 22:49
No idea how many rounds through my USP, but it had never malfunctioned in any way in ten years. That's with a dozen types of ammo.
I don't shoot a thousand a month like some of you, though.
Ruger double action SP101 and GP100 revolvers are just about as reliable as a good crowbar.
After reading some other comments about the new issues with the GEN 4 and the GEN 3.5 Glocks,
Snip,
There are issues with Gen 3.5 Glocks?
I have not been tracking closely.
How do you identify a Gen 3.5 Glock? Serial number?
This is disturbing because I was at a party this past Saturday night and someone who has no firearms at the time asked me to recommend something that they could buy that would be reliable. People who don't know much about guns are not in a good position to acquire a gen whatever used Glock. It's nice to be able to send them out to a store and have them buy a new gun that I feel reasonably sure will work.
Been shooting a fair amount since 1959, was firearms officer for my agency 1981-94. We still had and used wheelguns a lot, plus 1st gen. semiautos. All ammo was factory. LOTS of rounds fired.
Revolvers[I]almost[I] infallible, particularly if ejector rods loc-tited and kept clean under the extractor star. Most were issue Ruger Speed Sixes. I ran two of my own Rugers enough to wash out barrels and rebuild them. Had ONE issue gun go down, that one for backed-out screw on cylinder release. It didn't happen often, but we did have G-17/19s choke occasionally. Same with SIG 220s but rarely.
Everything breaks or chokes sooner or later--but with some it's a lot later and a real anomaly. I trust J and K frame S&W revolvers a lot; those old Ruger Sixes even more. My 1911s are very, very good and my BHPs are equally good.
If I could shoot a G-17 well (I can't) I would list that.
An unreliable gun is an abomination.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
04-18-11, 00:15
For every 1 bad post about a product online, there are 1000 happy users out there not saying anything. My Glocks, American Sigs, and old HK are flawless.
I own four H&K's (USP 45 Tactical, USP45, USP45 Compact, USP 40 Compact Stainless,) FN FiveSeven, an older Colt 10mm 1911 that was inherited, Springfield Champion Operator, and a Glock 19. I haven't had any serious problems with any of them although I will probably get a reliability package done on my Springfield for a bit more piece of mind with it. As a general rule - if it's man made it can probably break or fail to operate 100%. If I were buying now, and I will be soon, H&K45 and P30 are what I would buy but that's 100% personal preference in that matter.
There are issues with Gen 3.5 Glocks?
I have not been tracking closely.
How do you identify a Gen 3.5 Glock? Serial number?
I'd like to know too because there isn't any official word from Glock about Gen 3.5 guns. I thinks it's more internet imagination.
DaveInWoodland
04-18-11, 07:37
This is why I love my wheel gun
Littlelebowski
04-18-11, 07:47
This is why I love my wheel gun
Too bad that's a myth. More moving parts and vastly more complicated plus they do break.
I'd take a hard look at several factors, first as stand-alones and than as a total combined package:
1) Gun design
2) Accumulated field experience/reliable/credible reports
3) Aftermarket support reputation of given manufacturer.
4) How you personally index and shoot with a given gun/platform
5) Your intrinsic abilities to adequately understand and maintain a given gun/platform
6) Your accessibility to the dedicated and available resources necessary for the operation, maintenance and repair of a given weapon/platform-preferably on a timely basis
7) Availability of a backup gun (preferably of the same platform) if the primary is down
In my personal experience, in an automatic pistol, I'd recommend Glocks, Ruger P-Series (especially the P89 and P90), Beretta 92, Walther P5 (not the P5C), FN MK III Hi-Powers.
In a revolver, I'd recommend the Ruger -Six series, and the GP100.
Best, Jon
I think you misread my post.
I have owned Glocks since 1997. While I do not currently have a Glock armorers certification, I will after August. I have also owned and shot many types of handguns over the years (not the M&P though).
After reading some other comments about the new issues with the GEN 4 and the GEN 3.5 Glocks, I got to thinking about what it would be like as a new shooter coming to the site to do research. I just found it interesting that someone who was reading without actually experiencing, one would truly believe that there aren't ANY reliable handguns out there.
I apologize if I stepped on any toes with my questions.
Crow,
If you read many of the various consumer-type reports, under your perspective, one could assume that just about nothing out there works, no matter whether one were shopping for guns, cars, cell phones, refridgerators, TVs, lawnmowers or even a simple toaster only because a percentage of buyers claim to have had problems. In these cases rarely, if ever, does one give full details of the failure, their background in diagnosing such problem(s), the environment in which the product is operating, their skill level with the product and any preconceived biases towards the product and/or its manufacturer.
I agree with the majority of answers here in that no manmade machince or piece of equipment can't or won't ever fail or suffer a loss of performance, even if only temporarily. From time to time, everything either breaks, suffers unreliability, or becomes tempermental in operation. That's why we have so many people trained and in-business to service our machines.
Your OP, in my opinion, is exactly the kind of post noobs don't need to see. Your statements have cast doubt over all the equipment out there, whether high quality or junk. And the doubt you've cast is full of flawed thinking. Noobs who come here need clear, concise advice that is not flawed by a weak and/or false premise. If poor judgement and disinformation is what they seek, they need look no further than their local gun shop.
Too bad that's a myth. More moving parts and vastly more complicated plus they do break.
Out of an admittedly small sample set of both autos and revolvers, I've had more problems with revolvers than I've had with autos. In fact, five of the six revolvers I own or have owned had issues.
Ruger Single-Six: won't cock if canted to far away from vertical
Ruger Blackhawk: broken transfer bar
Ruger Speed Six: barrel was over-tightened slightly, but just enough so that the ejector rod did no lock up (the rear of the cylinder locked up fine and the gun functioned 100%, but it bothered me and I sold it)
Smith and Wesson 625 Model of 1989: barrel-cylinder gap was too tight and the gun would lock up after a few rounds either from slight fouling or metal expansion from heat
H&R double action .22LR: timing issues allowing a fired round from one chamber to impact the back of the barrel spewing lead out the barrel-cylinder gap and locking up the gun
My 3" GP100, Springfield Armory 1911A1 and my new M&P9 have, so far, met my expectations. Although the GP100 does blister the piss out of my thumb with magnum ammo.
Anyone who thinks wheelguns are invincible needs to buy some ocean front property in Arizona. They are machines too and suffer the same potential pitfalls of any machine.
I'd like to know too because there isn't any official word from Glock about Gen 3.5 guns. I thinks it's more internet imagination.
I believe that he is referencing a post I made. It seems that Glock has started to use the extractors from the 4th gen in the 3rd gens. You can see the difference with the naked eye. The "new" style has a dip in the top of the extractor.
Too bad that's a myth. More moving parts and vastly more complicated plus they do break.
a lot of the working parts on a wheelgun are indeed exposed to impact dirt and abuse. drop it hard on the cylinder :eek:
automatics tend to hide all their vulnerable bits inside the slide or frame.
i think that whole wheelgun vs auto thing is basically because wheelguns use a trigger powered mechanism that you can easily understand to reload.... and automatics use "magic" :D
-Now apparently Glock Gen 3.5 (My new term for a Glock Gen 3 with some Gen 4 parts)-Which by default means any Gen 3 Glock since all future spare parts will most likely be the new "updated" design.
I think he's saying all Gen3 guns are now Gen3.5 cause Glock's small parts QC may have gone down a bit recently?
I think Iraqgunz is right. I think you are overthinking this. You want a pistol that seems to be beyond reproach. Something everyone on this forum seems to unanimously say, this gun is the "safest best" choice. Perhaps Glock's QC with their small parts has gone down but all companies go through up and down periods. Buy a HK now, but who knows where H&K QC and customer service will be 5 years from now? Or any other company including Glock? At least with Glock most people will more likely be able to get parts and be able to fix it themselves. And should that be the only criteria? How about a pistol you prefer to shoot? Pick the "best" for you and take your chances. Or if you can afford it get a bunch of different brands and spread the risk.
I think he's saying all Gen3 guns are now Gen3.5 cause Glock's small parts QC may have gone down a bit recently?
This whole thing is VERY troublesome to be. I used to be able to point a new shooter to a Glock and be able to call it good, knowing that they would have a gun that worked reliably from the factory. I am talking about a casual acquaintance who you might meet socially who you could direct to pick up a Glock without when or where they are going to buy it. In other words someone who you are not going to be actively involved in helping find the gun.
I can find sources for an older Gen 2 Glock or a Gen 3, but it is not something that I would expect someone not familiar with guns to be able to do.
I want to recommend this person a handgun with a single consistent trigger and one that is easy to shoot well without a lot of work for someone with weaker hands--no DA first shot.
I've seen issues with Smith M&Ps as well that required them to go back to the factory. New shooters are less likley to be able to analyze problems and decide what was them, what was the ammo, and what needs to go back to the factory.
What do I do at this point, recommend the XD?:confused:
Crow Hunter
04-18-11, 17:27
This whole thing is VERY troublesome to be. I used to be able to point a new shooter to a Glock and be able to call it good, knowing that they would have a gun that worked reliably from the factory. I am talking about a casual acquaintance who you might meet socially who you could direct to pick up a Glock without when or where they are going to buy it. In other words someone who you are not going to be actively involved in helping find the gun.
I can find sources for an older Gen 2 Glock or a Gen 3, but it is not something that I would expect someone not familiar with guns to be able to do.
I want to recommend this person a handgun with a single consistent trigger and one that is easy to shoot well without a lot of work for someone with weaker hands--no DA first shot.
I've seen issues with Smith M&Ps as well that required them to go back to the factory. New shooters are less likley to be able to analyze problems and decide what was them, what was the ammo, and what needs to go back to the factory.
What do I do at this point, recommend the XD?:confused:
Thank you Ed.
This was the gist of my original post. That and voicing my growing frustration with reading information on gun forums. Seems like every time I log on there is something else bad to read about.:(
I am not a very good wordsmith and I apologize again, if I have given anyone pause or caused them to doubt their chosen tool.
I also don't mean to spread doubt and disinformation but having read comments from several members that I respect referencing the new Gen 3.5 and potential issues, I was trying to put my frustration into words.
FWIW I have had way more problems with a particular Gen 3 G19 (That I no longer own) than I have had with my 2 Gen 3.5 G19s.
I'll go back into my hole now.:sarcastic:
I get pinged by a non gunnut friend from time to time about choosing a defensive pistol out of general principle. And if they will not bite on my suggestion we pick one of many magnificent older K frame .38's still available used in local stores - cause they have to have a semiauto, I steer them to Glock's or M&Ps. They ask what I got. "Ohhh, not quite a dozen Glocks." And it's typical they say, something to the effect, "Glocks never jam right". And I tell them, most don't but you have to get out and shoot them and insure your gun is GTG.
Of the last 3 like this, one bought a Ruger and the other two, Sigs. LOL I've never worked in sales.
But we've been shooting and all three of them seem to have good specimens and they seem to run fine.
Its not so bad.
sniperfrog
04-18-11, 20:05
Too bad that's a myth. More moving parts and vastly more complicated plus they do break.
+1
I've seen wheel guns have much worse problems than any semi-auto.
Oddly enough I go to allot of training classes and weapons malfunctions of any kind are rare. I personally think the Internet “The Sky Is Falling” on damn near every handgun known to man is getting completely out of hand. I just watched a Gen4 G19 run like a raped ape, multiple Sig’s w/o issues, etc. I see 1911’s of all price ranges run just fine in classes. Like I said, malfunctions of any kind are rare and when they do happen a quick lube usually fixes it. If you trust the internet these guns should have all exploded into pieces. It’s getting completely out of hand. Personally I blame allot of it on certain individuals wanting to be seen as experts.
IMO: Buy a service quality Glock, Beretta, Sig, Smith & Wesson, HK, etc and go shoot it.
For every 1 bad post about a product online, there are 1000 happy users out there not saying anything.
I agree. That's why I take everything I read on the net with a grain of salt, and go by what personal experience I have with my weapons, and with weapons at work or training.
If I believed everything that I have read on the net, then all Glocks blow up, all new SIGs suck, H&K's never fail and the company hates me. :confused:
davebee456
04-18-11, 21:59
Still think
9mm Glock 19 3rd Gen or 17.
Test any handgun out at least 300 rounds..
Maybe a 357 Magnum Ruger GP-100 Revolver could work if you are still cautious on an autoloader.
Oddly enough I go to allot of training classes and weapons malfunctions of any kind are rare. I personally think the Internet “The Sky Is Falling” on damn near every handgun known to man is getting completely out of hand. I just watched a Gen4 G19 run like a raped ape, multiple Sig’s w/o issues, etc. I see 1911’s of all price ranges run just fine in classes. Like I said, malfunctions of any kind are rare and when they do happen a quick lube usually fixes it. If you trust the internet these guns should have all exploded into pieces. It’s getting completely out of hand. Personally I blame allot of it on certain individuals wanting to be seen as experts.
IMO: Buy a service quality Glock, Beretta, Sig, Smith & Wesson, HK, etc and go shoot it.
Bingo!
John_Wayne777
04-19-11, 08:48
Are there any actual reliable handguns available? If you read this forum, there are potentially serious issues with practically every single model of firearm now available.
Correct...and this is why you're urged to thoroughly test anything you buy and intend to use in a defensive role. There are identifiable problems with practically every mass-produced option on the market today.
That being said, there are still a lot of 9mm Gen 3 Glocks out there that work just fine, a lot of M&P's that run just fine, and there are relatively few P30's out there with problems from the box.
So while it's true that overall the tide is pretty low right now in regards to handgun manufacturing, it's not true that the market is just all bad options.
Radioflyer
04-19-11, 15:29
My HK P30 has run flawlessly ever since i bought it a couple years ago. This includes my lack of cleaning when I first got into the gun world. That is why it is now my daily carry weapon.
Oddly enough I go to allot of training classes and weapons malfunctions of any kind are rare. I personally think the Internet “The Sky Is Falling” on damn near every handgun known to man is getting completely out of hand. I just watched a Gen4 G19 run like a raped ape, multiple Sig’s w/o issues, etc. I see 1911’s of all price ranges run just fine in classes. Like I said, malfunctions of any kind are rare and when they do happen a quick lube usually fixes it. If you trust the internet these guns should have all exploded into pieces. It’s getting completely out of hand. Personally I blame allot of it on certain individuals wanting to be seen as experts.
IMO: Buy a service quality Glock, Beretta, Sig, Smith & Wesson, HK, etc and go shoot it.
Good points, VA Dinger!
Perhaps most of the Glocks and Sigs you have seen in classes are the older ones that don't have the issues of the newer ones. Ken Hackathorn reported problems with Gen 4 Glocks in his classes. Issues with the Gen4 Glocks are well documented from a number of sources. On the other hand I have a freind with a new Gen4 Glock 19 that has been flawless going on a thousand rounds.
Didn't Sig loose the ATF contract due to reliability issues? The Air Marshals are documented to have had problems with newer Sigs as well.
As for personal experience, I had one M&P9 break the right side of its ambi slide release during a class; I had an M&P45 go down with trigger issues that it became unfireable and witnessed an M&P40 do the same in another class. My M&P45 was one of those afflicted with the occasional failure to reset problems. I've experienced issues with my M&P9 where the rounds lodged together in the magazine. This only happened in one out of about 1200-1500 rounds, but it did occur nevertheless.
And do't get me started on HK P-7 breakages and issues. I had to send my P-7M8 back to the factory 3 times due to either function issues or an outright breakage that rendered it unfireable. The gun might have had 3k rounds through it. And I am not going to mention the problem Kimber that I had.
On the other hand I was talking to a friend who is with the LAPD. He has had the same Beretta 92 for like 25 years and has never had a breakage or a single malfunction. He pretty much only shoots it in quarterly qualifications and I believe used it in the academy. At some point he had a new slide switched in by a dept armorer friend who had an extra slide with night sights. But other than that, the gun is the same as when he bought it.
I don't know how common these issues that we are hearing about certain guns are--or maybe we are now hearing about relatively uncommon issues because of the vastness of the internet or because some people tend to put a lot more rounds through their guns than most people did in the past. But clearly problems do exist out there.
You said it yourself in your first post. S&W revolver. Simple. Reliable.
I don't know about the ATF, but the FAMS did have problems with the POS P250 that was forced on them. They went back to carrying their Classic series P229's and P239's in .357 SIG.
I believe that he is referencing a post I made. It seems that Glock has started to use the extractors from the 4th gen in the 3rd gens. You can see the difference with the naked eye. The "new" style has a dip in the top of the extractor.
Okay but that doesn't mean it's a half of a generation. The older G21s with finger grooves and no rails are 2.5 gens. An updated extractor is just a part.
Do the new extractors have different part numbers?
I just don't want to see some internet feeding frenzy bleed over here without some official word from a reliable source. Let's leave the crazy talk where it belongs.
Okay but that doesn't mean it's a half of a generation. The older G21s with finger grooves and no rails are 2.5 gens. An updated extractor is just a part.
Do the new extractors have different part numbers?
I just don't want to see some internet feeding frenzy bleed over here without some official word from a reliable source. Let's leave the crazy talk where it belongs.
I didnt come up with the 3.5 gen term. I just was curious about the change and made a post about it. As far as part numbers go, I have no idea. I do know that the "new" ones have a number stamped on them, and the "old" ones do not. Will it change the function and performance? No clue, but I doubt it. I'm going to just shoot the damn thing, if it doesnt work, I'll worry about it then.
Does anyone have pics of the new extractor design compared to the previous type?
AFAIK any issues with the Gen 4 Glocks had to do with recoil spring issues and heavier trigger pulls. I had not heard there were issue with the extractors as well. Is that the case?
I will admit that my sample size is small, me. I also have only around 2,500 rounds through it. That being said, my Smith and Wesson 4" 686+ has run flawlessly and it shoots tight groups. It also is what I consider perfectly balanced and the stock grip fits my medium sized hand well.
Just my 2 cents.
OP, I enjoyed the thread.
I didnt come up with the 3.5 gen term. I just was curious about the change and made a post about it. As far as part numbers go, I have no idea. I do know that the "new" ones have a number stamped on them, and the "old" ones do not. Will it change the function and performance? No clue, but I doubt it. I'm going to just shoot the damn thing, if it doesnt work, I'll worry about it then.
Understood but let's not be the forum that stirs the internet into a frenzy though. You're approach is the right one. Instead of worrying about it go out and shoot it. If there's a problem (again, according to the internet your gun should literally crumble to dust the first time you fire it) you can worry about it then.
John_Wayne777
04-20-11, 06:39
Does anyone have pics of the new extractor design compared to the previous type?
AFAIK any issues with the Gen 4 Glocks had to do with recoil spring issues and heavier trigger pulls. I had not heard there were issue with the extractors as well. Is that the case?
http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u339/kcimb/100_2394.jpg
...courtesy of Tusk212. The newest extractor is visible in the rear.
The Gen4 Glocks have had all sorts of issues. Springs, unfortunately, haven't fixed all of them.
Whether or not the inclusion of that extractor on Gen3 Glocks has caused problems is unknown at this point.
The Gen4 Glocks have had all sorts of issues. Springs, unfortunately, haven't fixed all of them.
Whether or not the inclusion of that extractor on Gen3 Glocks has caused problems is unknown at this point.
My biggest concern with the use of the Gen 4 parts in Gen 3 guns (which I will stick with for now) is the trigger bar that jacks up the trigger.
Overall I don't get the reason for some of the changes, particularly in the Gen 4 9mm guns. Take a Gen 3 9mm and give it the backstrap options and the texturing of the Gen 4 and it would be near ideal for me. The reports of some of the issues popping up with the Gen 4s make it seem like they went to market with it a little soon. For the G22 and other .40 models that had issues with lights mounted the changes make sense. For the 9mm guns not so much. Don't fix it if it aint broke sort of thing.
FWIW I don't see a big difference in that extractor... looks like it sits in the channel at a slightly different angle to me is all.
I am in the same boat as Ed L. though. I used to be like one of those dolls with the string you pull if somebody asked me what gun to buy, "Glock 19." Now I don't really know what to say.
My M&P Pro has run pretty much flawlessly for the last 25,000+/- rounds... It had early issues, like a few FTEs in the first 1000 rounds! The ONLY issues since have been my poorly checked reloads.
NO gun is perfect, they are mechanical devices.
Is a few dozen failures in 25,000 cycles acceptable? One failure in 1000? I call that pretty f-ing good. Mine has about that many, and all can be linked to ammo.
Jeff
Something that grabbed my attention is the fact that Glock seems to be putting more parts from the GEN 4 into the GEN 3 (3.5)? I have been told that Glock (Austria) wants to do away with the GEN 3's and Glock (US) wants to keep them. In order to make manufacturing parts cheaper and easier, I wonder if some decisions have been made to stop producing SOME GEN 3 parts and just use GEN 4 parts?
This is all PURE speculation and thinking out loud, but if I was a GEN 3 Glock owner, I might try and pick up the older style extractor (for a spare).
C4
Alpha Sierra
04-20-11, 16:35
Is there an extraction issue now with Gen 4s?
Mine, at 2200 rounds, has never had an extraction failure. FWIW.
These are my novice assumptions and amateur observations regarding reliability and the state of handguns today and should be treated as such.
One problem is that Glock's reliability and durability has led many shooters to believe that things such as cleaning, lubrication and maintenance are no longer necessary with handguns today. We now expect handguns to go thousands and thousands of rounds with no lube and God forbid we have a malfunction in the process. I believe that shooters were more conscience of lubrication and cleaning before this obsession with "proving" a handguns worth by shooting it thousands of rounds without cleaning when this situation would never occur in police, military of civilian life.
Along those lines it seems that we place tremendous value on "torture tests" as if it directly applies to any real situations that you yourself would actually put your gun through. And the apologists say "Well its necessary to know my gun could go 10,000 rounds without cleaning" or "What if my gun gets dirty in the field". Well your dealing with many different variables since no gun gets dirty exactly the same way each time and again exactly where are you going where your gun is going into a mud pit. Answer that realistically.
Another problem seems to be that we've come to absolutely believe in brand quality over everything else.
HK=Good, M&P=Good, Glock=Good(but not 4th Gen), SIG=Only if its German, Kimber=Bad, 1911=OK, DA/SA=bad, Striker fired=good etc.
Instead of using these as general guidelines its instead become absolute truth. And even if a Kimber 1911 for example would prove itself to be reliable we would assume that its "only a matter of time" before something happens. Now you now have shooters that have encountered no problems with a carry pistol selling them and going and buying a Glock because they want absolute reliability that only the Glock brand can provide despite the fact the gun they are replacing what was a proven performer.
Or you have shooters who have always ran with DA/SA guns are now switching to striker fired because that's what the experts say is best. DA/SA or cocked and locked is for the Dinosaurs they heard regardless of how good they are at running handguns with this set-up.
Another issue seems to be the confusion between duty use and CCW and whats acceptable for these roles. It seems many shooters are confusing "gun games" with actual duty use pistols. Running a pistol in a training course isn't "duty use" Sorry. Shooting 10,000 rounds a year and rubbing elbows with serious dudes at a training class isn't "duty use" Sorry again. At the end of the day your still a plumber who has a CCW. Carrying a pistol as part of your profession into potential harms way is "duty use".
I don't believe that handguns today are in a poor state. I really don't. While the quality of materials used have declined over the years(especially on small parts) and QC has declined we still have improvements in sights, ergonomics, finishes, reliability with different types of ammo and CNC technology has certainly have helped improve consistency in certain areas. We also have a wider selection of handgun choices today than at any point in history when you consider various sizes of guns, calibers available and materials used in construction.
Pretty strong 33rd post AJD. Nice. Thanks.
Is there an extraction issue now with Gen 4s?
Mine, at 2200 rounds, has never had an extraction failure. FWIW.
Oh there's been some. TLG had them and resolved them in his test gun for the last several thou rounds by changing extractors. But he's put in a replacement of current design for the successful 2K test and beyond.
Ours (4) extract strongly. Nice arc out to the right.
My biggest concern with the use of the Gen 4 parts in Gen 3 guns (which I will stick with for now) is the trigger bar that jacks up the trigger.
.
Generally fair enough points but FWIW the Gen 4 trigger bar with a "-" connector gives what IMO is nearly the ideal carry trigger. I've done the best speed and precision shooting of my Glock life with them. This combo is not that far off a Gen 3 with the "-". A little heavier.
So the jacked up part is not a total loss. ;)
These are my novice assumptions and amateur observations regarding reliability and the state of handguns today and should be treated as such.
One problem is that Glock's reliability and durability has led many shooters to believe that things such as cleaning, lubrication and maintenance are no longer necessary with handguns today. We now expect handguns to go thousands and thousands of rounds with no lube and God forbid we have a malfunction in the process. I believe that shooters were more conscience of lubrication and cleaning before this obsession with "proving" a handguns worth by shooting it thousands of rounds without cleaning when this situation would never occur in police, military of civilian life.
Along those lines it seems that we place tremendous value on "torture tests" as if it directly applies to any real situations that you yourself would actually put your gun through. And the apologists say "Well its necessary to know my gun could go 10,000 rounds without cleaning" or "What if my gun gets dirty in the field". Well your dealing with many different variables since no gun gets dirty exactly the same way each time and again exactly where are you going where your gun is going into a mud pit. Answer that realistically.
Another problem seems to be that we've come to absolutely believe in brand quality over everything else.
HK=Good, M&P=Good, Glock=Good(but not 4th Gen), SIG=Only if its German, Kimber=Bad, 1911=OK, DA/SA=bad, Striker fired=good etc.
Instead of using these as general guidelines its instead become absolute truth. And even if a Kimber 1911 for example would prove itself to be reliable we would assume that its "only a matter of time" before something happens. Now you now have shooters that have encountered no problems with a carry pistol selling them and going and buying a Glock because they want absolute reliability that only the Glock brand can provide despite the fact the gun they are replacing what was a proven performer.
Or you have shooters who have always ran with DA/SA guns are now switching to striker fired because that's what the experts say is best. DA/SA or cocked and locked is for the Dinosaurs they heard regardless of how good they are at running handguns with this set-up.
Another issue seems to be the confusion between duty use and CCW and whats acceptable for these roles. It seems many shooters are confusing "gun games" with actual duty use pistols. Running a pistol in a training course isn't "duty use" Sorry. Shooting 10,000 rounds a year and rubbing elbows with serious dudes at a training class isn't "duty use" Sorry again. At the end of the day your still a plumber who has a CCW. Carrying a pistol as part of your profession into potential harms way is "duty use".
I don't believe that handguns today are in a poor state. I really don't. While the quality of materials used have declined over the years(especially on small parts) and QC has declined we still have improvements in sights, ergonomics, finishes, reliability with different types of ammo and CNC technology has certainly have helped improve consistency in certain areas. We also have a wider selection of handgun choices today than at any point in history when you consider various sizes of guns, calibers available and materials used in construction.
Great post.
Magic_Salad0892
04-21-11, 01:22
IMHO, I still equate Glocks (Gen3 and newer Gen4 guns) along with HKs as a pretty much guaranteed reliability out of the box.
And if a Glock starts having problems, then they aren't hard to fix, and they've been known to run correctly (mostly) even with parts not installed in the gun correctly, or with parts removed from the gun entirely. That says something to me.
One problem is that Glock's reliability and durability has led many shooters to believe that things such as cleaning, lubrication and maintenance are no longer necessary with handguns today. We now expect handguns to go thousands and thousands of rounds with no lube and God forbid we have a malfunction in the process. I believe that shooters were more conscience of lubrication and cleaning before this obsession with "proving" a handguns worth by shooting it thousands of rounds without cleaning when this situation would never occur in police, military of civilian life.
This is right on the money. People are retarded and think that they don't have to clean and lube their guns (especially polymer guns).
Can guns go for long periods of time without cleaning them? Sure. Should you do this with your carry gun? Of course not.
C4
John_Wayne777
04-21-11, 09:13
These are my novice assumptions and amateur observations regarding reliability and the state of handguns today and should be treated as such.
You expressed your opinion well, but I'm going to have to take issue with some of it.
One problem is that Glock's reliability and durability has led many shooters to believe that things such as cleaning, lubrication and maintenance are no longer necessary with handguns today. We now expect handguns to go thousands and thousands of rounds with no lube and God forbid we have a malfunction in the process. I believe that shooters were more conscience of lubrication and cleaning before this obsession with "proving" a handguns worth by shooting it thousands of rounds without cleaning when this situation would never occur in police, military of civilian life.
I would say yes and no to this...it's true that the Glock has led to some goofy ideas out there in the shooting public, including the idea that every handgun on the market can run with no lube and cleaning. Many do not run well that way...and even Glocks do better with proper cleaning and lubrication.
It's also true, however, that the 9mm Glock raised the bar in terms of people's expectations out of handguns, (and all weapons, really) which is what makes it the most influential weapon in the market after the introduction of the AR15.
Along those lines it seems that we place tremendous value on "torture tests" as if it directly applies to any real situations that you yourself would actually put your gun through. And the apologists say "Well its necessary to know my gun could go 10,000 rounds without cleaning" or "What if my gun gets dirty in the field". Well your dealing with many different variables since no gun gets dirty exactly the same way each time and again exactly where are you going where your gun is going into a mud pit. Answer that realistically.
While you're hitting on some truth there, you're also overlooking something: Every law enforcement and military agency that adopts a weapon system does so after some form of torture testing. They don't put weapons through those tests because they expect that the life of every weapon will involve being fired until destruction or left to soak in salt water for extended periods of time. They put the weapons through all of that because they want to ensure that even under the worst of conditions when someone's life is on the line that they can reach for the weapon and have the best shot possible that it will function.
Now you now have shooters that have encountered no problems with a carry pistol selling them and going and buying a Glock because they want absolute reliability that only the Glock brand can provide despite the fact the gun they are replacing what was a proven performer.
That's individual error, and something we advise against frequently around here. In fact, there's a thread in this forum where someone asked about switching from a Sig to a Glock for a duty gun. My exact response was that if the Sig was working and doing what it needed to do one shouldn't be in a hurry to drop it and go to an unfamiliar weapon just because the word "Glock" is stamped on the slide.
Another issue seems to be the confusion between duty use and CCW and whats acceptable for these roles. It seems many shooters are confusing "gun games" with actual duty use pistols. Running a pistol in a training course isn't "duty use" Sorry. Shooting 10,000 rounds a year and rubbing elbows with serious dudes at a training class isn't "duty use" Sorry again. At the end of the day your still a plumber who has a CCW. Carrying a pistol as part of your profession into potential harms way is "duty use".
There's a giant flaw with that line of thinking.
Take it to absolute basics: Why does a police officer grab a handgun? Generally because they perceive a potentially lethal threat. Why does the plumber grab a handgun? Generally because they perceive a potentially lethal threat.
Now in that moment which one needs a reliable weapon?
Both. Both individuals need a weapon that will function as expected when they are attempting to use it to preserve their life. Once it reaches the point where you have to pull a trigger to put down a threat it no longer matters whether or not you have a badge. It doesn't matter whether you are dealing with a gangbanger or an insurgent. It doesn't matter whether you are using the weapon at the ATM or in a cruise ship full of hostages and terrorists.
When the moment comes to put bullets in a threat it no longer matters what you do for a living or how high-speed/low-speed you are...you need the equipment to work.
Now this next bit is unpleasant and may piss some people off, but I'm going to say it anyway:
Joe the plumber may actually have more need for a duty grade weapon than Officer Bob does.
Let's face facts: There are a lot of cops on patrol right now whose only interaction with firearms is mandatory training and quals. They only touch a weapon when they are forced to by departmental regs and policies. Contrast that with Joe who may be a plumber, but is also an enthusiast. He may put more rounds downrange in a year than an entire patrol squad at a reasonably small PD.
If we establish that Joe needs his gun to work every bit as much as Officer Bob and that Joe may invest more of his time and money into practice with firearms than Officer Bob and that because he's an enthusiast he probably is more skilled than Officer Bob in the use of a handgun for serious social purposes...can you really argue that Joe's somehow on the lower end of the "needs a gun that runs" spectrum?
The term "duty use" is used frequently because some guns on the market are designed for the percentage of the market that doesn't ****ing shoot. An example from my personal life: I have an uncle who bought a .380 Beretta pistol during the Nixon administration. Last year he managed to finish the 50 round box of ammunition he purchased with the handgun.
The sort of guy who shows up in training courses regularly ain't like my uncle. They're putting a lot more rounds downrange and as such are much more likely to run into the limitations of equipment than the person (whether they wear a badge or not) for whom the firearm could be sealed behind a pane of glass labeled "Break in case of emergency". Their need for a reliable weapon that can take a reasonable round count without needing constant attention is no different than what a PD looks at when it comes to fielding weapons for their officers.
mike boufford
04-21-11, 10:51
These are my novice assumptions and amateur observations regarding reliability and the state of handguns today and should be treated as such.
One problem is that Glock's reliability and durability has led many shooters to believe that things such as cleaning, lubrication and maintenance are no longer necessary with handguns today. We now expect handguns to go thousands and thousands of rounds with no lube and God forbid we have a malfunction in the process. I believe that shooters were more conscience of lubrication and cleaning before this obsession with "proving" a handguns worth by shooting it thousands of rounds without cleaning when this situation would never occur in police, military of civilian life.
Along those lines it seems that we place tremendous value on "torture tests" as if it directly applies to any real situations that you yourself would actually put your gun through. And the apologists say "Well its necessary to know my gun could go 10,000 rounds without cleaning" or "What if my gun gets dirty in the field". Well your dealing with many different variables since no gun gets dirty exactly the same way each time and again exactly where are you going where your gun is going into a mud pit. Answer that realistically.
Another problem seems to be that we've come to absolutely believe in brand quality over everything else.
HK=Good, M&P=Good, Glock=Good(but not 4th Gen), SIG=Only if its German, Kimber=Bad, 1911=OK, DA/SA=bad, Striker fired=good etc.
Sorry to truncate, but this is by far the best post in the 5 pages I've read on this thread. It's amazing what a dose of common sense will provide in a discussion of this nature.
There are a lot of gun ranges out there which allow a newbie to go out and try various platforms before making a purchase. People should take advantage of these options and get familiar with what they want to buy.
From my viewpoint, and experience, I would never own a Glock. They do not feel good in my hands, they are too bulky in the slide, and I don't like the 4 point frame to slide rail mount. I had to "fix" a mismatch my son had when he somehow managed to mount his Glock 9mm slide onto his frame with the two front slide points engaged and the back two sitting UNDER the slide. It took a ton of work to get the two pieces apart, and that incident completely ended any thoughts of my buying one. Since that was my son's carry piece for his work at the time, I asked him to trade it in on a 40 cal minimum because he was doing security work at a federal housing project known for a lot of drug activity. He went back to Glock; his choice not mine, he likes the platform and that is what is important.
I personally prefer the 1911 platform and have a couple of Kimbers. My daily carry weapon is a Kimber Pro Carry HD II which after an extended break in, runs flawlessly. The other went back to Kimber for rework and should be back today - hopefully.
I have an M&P Pro as well. I immediately took it to a guy who was recommended to me to have the so-called pro sear replaced with one that didn't feel like it was being dragged across 60 grit sandpaper. It's a good shooter in my hands, but right now it's a safe queen.
No matter what, a clean and lubricated weapon is a happy weapon. Why anyone would want to shoot thousands of rounds through any platform and brag about it is beyond my level of comprehension. I shoot a weapon and I bring home for a cleaning and relube. I have never been big on letting crud build up a on a weapon and HOPE it will be reliable when I need it whether it's a clays tournament, out hunting, or anything else. A weapon jammed or broken due to lack of maintenance isn't reliable. Parts are going to break, but much of that can be eliminated through proper maintenance.
Is there an extraction issue now with Gen 4s?
Mine, at 2200 rounds, has never had an extraction failure. FWIW.
Yes, but nothing across the board. No question some very respected people have had and seen issues, that is certainly a fact. Other individuals (entirely Internet based) have sensationalized the issues to National Enquirer hype levels all across the internet. It seems if you’re not screaming that the sky is falling everyday nobody listens and their “Internet Expert” or “Internet Coolness” factor drops, hence the continuing trend towards this behavior. It’s something people need to realize before they log into blogs or certain websites. Not everyone has good motivations for the things they post and this taints their information.
I've personally seen several Gen4's run like a champ, and information from friends I trust says complete departments have guns running fine.
If you have purchased a Gen4 Glock and it has proven itself reliable - rock on and ignore the internet. If you purchased one and are one of the guys who has continuing issues contact Glock and get it fixed. Just like you would with any firearm. Glock has a world class reputation for reliability, but the Gen4 is a completely new design. I’m not shocked they are not as stone reliable as a 9mm Gen3 yet, but I am sure Glock will get a handle on it shortly.
John_Wayne777
04-21-11, 11:58
Is there an extraction issue now with Gen 4s?
Mine, at 2200 rounds, has never had an extraction failure. FWIW.
It seems to depend on the individual specimen. I know a couple of people who have used Gen4 guns with no trouble for a few thousand rounds and suddenly they began to experience malfunctions. I know others who had trouble early on and then the gun settled down and it went smoothly from then on. I even know a few that never had any problems.
In your situation I'd just keep shooting the pistol and see how she does.
Beat Trash
04-21-11, 12:45
While you're hitting on some truth there, you're also overlooking something: Every law enforcement and military agency that adopts a weapon system does so after some form of torture testing. They don't put weapons through those tests because they expect that the life of every weapon will involve being fired until destruction or left to soak in salt water for extended periods of time. They put the weapons through all of that because they want to ensure that even under the worst of conditions when someone's life is on the line that they can reach for the weapon and have the best shot possible that it will function.
Take it to absolute basics: Why does a police officer grab a handgun? Generally because they perceive a potentially lethal threat. Why does the plumber grab a handgun? Generally because they perceive a potentially lethal threat.
Now in that moment which one needs a reliable weapon?
Both. Both individuals need a weapon that will function as expected when they are attempting to use it to preserve their life.
When the moment comes to put bullets in a threat it no longer matters what you do for a living or how high-speed/low-speed you are...you need the equipment to work.
Let's face facts: There are a lot of cops on patrol right now whose only interaction with firearms is mandatory training and quals. They only touch a weapon when they are forced to by departmental regs and policies. Contrast that with Joe who may be a plumber, but is also an enthusiast. He may put more rounds downrange in a year than an entire patrol squad at a reasonably small PD.
If we establish that Joe needs his gun to work every bit as much as Officer Bob and that Joe may invest more of his time and money into practice with firearms than Officer Bob and that because he's an enthusiast he probably is more skilled than Officer Bob in the use of a handgun for serious social purposes...can you really argue that Joe's somehow on the lower end of the "needs a gun that runs" spectrum?
The sort of guy who shows up in training courses regularly ain't like my uncle. They're putting a lot more rounds downrange and as such are much more likely to run into the limitations of equipment than the person (whether they wear a badge or not) for whom the firearm could be sealed behind a pane of glass labeled "Break in case of emergency". Their need for a reliable weapon that can take a reasonable round count without needing constant attention is no different than what a PD looks at when it comes to fielding weapons for their officers.
John Wayne,
I agree with several points you made in your post.
Any agency worth existing will test new guns before adopting them. I participated in my agencies T&E process which led to our being one of the first agencies to issue the 9mm M&P. I got to shoot a lot of rounds through four different types of guns.
When talking about a "duty gun", I disagree with your post, as I interpret what you were trying to say. It's not about who "needs" their gun more to protect their life when threatened, a LEO or Joe the Plumber. The issue is who's gun can take the most abuse and function when needed.
Guns assigned to Uniform Patrol officers are exposed to some unbelievable conditions. When I was assigned to our Mounted Patrol unit years ago, I'd find horse hair inside of my S&W 5946. This is from a gun that had not left the holster while mounted, and was never field stripped and cleaned while in uniform. No clue how that happened!
Many LEO's are not gun people. They clean their guns after they shoot them at their agencies mandated training sessions. For my agency, that's twice a year. These guns are exposed to the elements, rain, road dust, lint, M&M's, who knows. A "duty gun", in my opinion is about being able to take abuse and neglect and still function, if possible.
They must survive being dropped, thrown, and banged into. I had a Safariland holster break during a foot chase and noticed my 5906 sliding down the roadway alongside of me. I was wrestling with a suspect and we bounced off the corner of a wall hard enough to cut the removable backstrap of my M&P almost in half. I think selecting a duty gun is about finding a shooter friendly platform that can take abuse and neglect.
I think Joe the Plumber's needs when involved in a life threatening incident are the same as a LEO when faced with a life threatening incident. But I also think that Joe the Plumber's gun will not be as likely to be exposed to as harsh as an environment day in and day out as a LEO's duty weapon, and still be expected to function.
You mentioned the individual attending training classes and his need for a durable gun that can take a high round count. I agree this person's needs are parallel to the needs of an agency. I notice at training classes that many of the guns being used are the same types as being issued by many agencies. This is where it's up to the individual consumer to accept the responsibility to make a wise choice, and to accept responsibility for their choice. World of difference from being tasked to make the same type of choice for others, then forcing them to bet their lives on the choices that you made. This is exactly what you are doing when involved in transitioning issued Duty weapons for an agency.
Is there any "perfect" gun out there? Hell no. This is why one should test their guns and equipment before trusting their lives that their equipment will work. Any manufacture can produce a gun with issues.
But my personal opinion is that there are several very good guns being made today. Both new designs, and older designs that are still being produced.
Generally fair enough points but FWIW the Gen 4 trigger bar with a "-" connector gives what IMO is nearly the ideal carry trigger. I've done the best speed and precision shooting of my Glock life with them. This combo is not that far off a Gen 3 with the "-". A little heavier.
So the jacked up part is not a total loss. ;)
I have not actually shot a Gen 4, but what I had heard is that many of them have a sharp stacking feeling where you need a big increase in pressure right before the trigger breaks. This is supposedly because of the new bump on the trigger bar that prevents the bar from flexing sideways right before and during the break. That and the increased angle on the connector is said to give a slightly heavier pull throughout the trigger. Is that accurate or not? Certainly conflicts with what you are saying. The slightly heavier throughout part wouldn't really matter, but a big stacking feeling right before break I wouldn't like.
As others have said there are many sky is falling type reports out there on the Gen 4s (and M&Ps, etc., etc.). Which is mostly what I have read while I have taken my wait and see attitude on them (let other people work out the bugs for a few years before buying one) and drove on with the Gen 3s, but if they are going to stop making Gen 3 parts and putting Gen 4 parts in Gen 3s that is going to interfere with my strategy.
There's a giant flaw with that line of thinking.
Take it to absolute basics: Why does a police officer grab a handgun? Generally because they perceive a potentially lethal threat. Why does the plumber grab a handgun? Generally because they perceive a potentially lethal threat.
Now in that moment which one needs a reliable weapon?
Both. Both individuals need a weapon that will function as expected when they are attempting to use it to preserve their life. Once it reaches the point where you have to pull a trigger to put down a threat it no longer matters whether or not you have a badge. It doesn't matter whether you are dealing with a gangbanger or an insurgent. It doesn't matter whether you are using the weapon at the ATM or in a cruise ship full of hostages and terrorists.
When the moment comes to put bullets in a threat it no longer matters what you do for a living or how high-speed/low-speed you are...you need the equipment to work.
Now this next bit is unpleasant and may piss some people off, but I'm going to say it anyway:
Joe the plumber may actually have more need for a duty grade weapon than Officer Bob does.
Let's face facts: There are a lot of cops on patrol right now whose only interaction with firearms is mandatory training and quals. They only touch a weapon when they are forced to by departmental regs and policies. Contrast that with Joe who may be a plumber, but is also an enthusiast. He may put more rounds downrange in a year than an entire patrol squad at a reasonably small PD.
If we establish that Joe needs his gun to work every bit as much as Officer Bob and that Joe may invest more of his time and money into practice with firearms than Officer Bob and that because he's an enthusiast he probably is more skilled than Officer Bob in the use of a handgun for serious social purposes...can you really argue that Joe's somehow on the lower end of the "needs a gun that runs" spectrum?
The term "duty use" is used frequently because some guns on the market are designed for the percentage of the market that doesn't ****ing shoot. An example from my personal life: I have an uncle who bought a .380 Beretta pistol during the Nixon administration. Last year he managed to finish the 50 round box of ammunition he purchased with the handgun.
The sort of guy who shows up in training courses regularly ain't like my uncle. They're putting a lot more rounds downrange and as such are much more likely to run into the limitations of equipment than the person (whether they wear a badge or not) for whom the firearm could be sealed behind a pane of glass labeled "Break in case of emergency". Their need for a reliable weapon that can take a reasonable round count without needing constant attention is no different than what a PD looks at when it comes to fielding weapons for their officers.
I agree with what your saying and at an absolute basic level your right about the gun needing to fire at that critical moment. As a counterpoint between CCW and duty use I would say that having a reliable weapon is essential to either but an excellent CCW choice might not make an excellent choice as a duty weapon(J-Frame S&W for example). And that disconnect seems to be lost on some. It seems that many CCW holders expect their handguns to withstand harsh military conditions before they will carry it in their fanny pack to Wal-mart.
Their is nothing wrong with wanting the best auto pistol you can buy to carry every day but I'd say that rubbing a sweaty T-shirt with a ketchup stain all over your pistol or dropping it in the toilet at a gas station is more likely torture test scenario with what you might encounter in "the real world" then running your pistol 6000 rounds without cleaning or lube it in the desert to "prove" some illusion of what is "needed" in a CCW. And again if shooters want to fire that many rounds its only going to make them a better shot and sometimes a shooter just wants to know but I don't think stuff like that is honestly required when choosing a CCW versus choosing a duty weapon. And when I say duty I'm implying more along the lines of military service as opposed to Sheriff Joe in Podunk NE town of 200 people who fires 6 rounds every two years through is Model 10.
I have not actually shot a Gen 4, but what I had heard is that many of them have a sharp stacking feeling where you need a big increase in pressure right before the trigger breaks. This is supposedly because of the new bump on the trigger bar that prevents the bar from flexing sideways right before and during the break. That and the increased angle on the connector is said to give a slightly heavier pull throughout the trigger. Is that accurate or not? Certainly conflicts with what you are saying. The slightly heavier throughout part wouldn't really matter, but a big stacking feeling right before break I wouldn't like.
As others have said there are many sky is falling type reports out there on the Gen 4s (and M&Ps, etc., etc.). Which is mostly what I have read while I have taken my wait and see attitude on them (let other people work out the bugs for a few years before buying one) and drove on with the Gen 3s, but if they are going to stop making Gen 3 parts and putting Gen 4 parts in Gen 3s that is going to interfere with my strategy.
Well, I'd put it like this. There is a more firm and consistent take up, (but not "heavy"), then a sharp stack, to a sharper break. So your description could work for some's experience and it might come down to a matter of degree in one's preferences.
Quality wise - I'd take the stock Gen 4 trigger over all prior's every day. There's just one little catch and it's important. The price for that feel is about pound or TWO heavier pull. So the real world 5.5 Gen 3 becomes a 6.5 (still ok?) to 7+ (borderline). For a few thousand rounds I was sure I would stay with stock. But I was persuaded by the strong message from TigerSwan trainers and AARs from their courses and the a few others arguing that the single greatest factor in your pistol shooting accuracy was the ratio of trigger pull weight and the gun's weight.
So personally, I followed the pattern of the TigerSwan edition G17 (and it was a Gen 3) and many others of course and dropped "-" connectors in to the Gen 4's. I think the reports from those who've weighed them saying they weight out around 5-5.5 lbs vs Gen 3's with a "-" scoring 4.8 - 5.1 lbs etc to be what I perceive.
I have read "rumors" that Glock has tweaked something in newer production and newer Gen 4's are not pulling as heavy as the first year's production but I've not handled a newer one yet nor seen this documented in any way.
Alpha Sierra
04-21-11, 16:53
If you have purchased a Gen4 Glock and it has proven itself reliable - rock on and ignore the internet. If you purchased one and are one of the guys who has continuing issues contact Glock and get it fixed. Just like you would with any firearm. Glock has a world class reputation for reliability, but the Gen4 is a completely new design. I’m not shocked they are not as stone reliable as a 9mm Gen3 yet, but I am sure Glock will get a handle on it shortly.
Concur.
Mine has been upgraded with an 021 spring to completely eliminate the very, very few FTEs I had when new and has a 3.5 lb connector which brought the final trigger to a very reasonable 5 - 5.5 lbs.
With zero issues after the 021 spring install, mine is GTG.
Shadow1198
04-21-11, 17:58
I'm sure it's been said before, but in case it hasn't I'll say it. With the number of good quality handguns on the market these days, I'd be more concerned with the shooter being "reliable" at operating the gun (I'm speaking generally here). Clearing malfunctions is pretty easy, and it's not that big a deal to train it to be subconscious. Nothing is perfect, and I doubt anything ever will be, so why worry about it? Choose something reputable, train properly, and put that negative mental energy on something more positive and productive.
WARNING: I'm known to be HK biased, but contrary to popular believe I know that there are other good firearm makers. I swear!! :D
My experience might be not so huge as most of people here but leads to some conclusion on this matter:
HK - modern models are extremelly reliable (P7 is not modern model in my book). My personal experience is (I do not clean my HK's just shoot them, sometime I wipe excess dirt and add some lube):
P2000 9mm - zero malfunctions in 15000+ rounds,
Expert .40SW - 2 FTE due to split case and one FTF user induced (weak hand, odd position) in 10000+ rounds
P30 9mm - zero in like 3000 rounds
P30L 9mm - 10 FTE in first 50 rounds with steel cased Russian Barnaul and alu cased CCI Blaser - since then nor failures in 5000 rounds
P2000SK - 2 FTE on steel cased ammo in 2000 rounds
I also use STI a lot - don't make me start here. If gun need pile of parts and personal gunsmith, it is not "reliable" in my book.
From observation of my friends shooting with me:
HK - same as mine, boringly reliable.
Glock until Gen4 - almost as reliable as HK. Maybe not as durable, but it really does not matter if gun breaks after 50.000 rounds or 100.000 rounds - it is still past it's intended service life.
Walther P99 - feels good in company of HK and Glock. With big "mileage", barrel problems can arise with worn out rifling or feed ramp split from barrel (does not apply to FB Radom made one-piece CHF barrels).
S&W M&P - maybe those that were sent to Poland just were QC rejects?
CZ 75 / SP-01 - to often break parts to be considered reliable in my book.
SIG - don't get me started here, maybe they have some models working fine. Maybe. I have yet to see one.
This basically sum up what we see in use here, with Glock be most popular.
My personal carry selection is HK, then I would use Glock, then I would use Walther but I do not see any more alternatives for carry for me.
I'm pretty much going to agree with everything Montrala said here. On the CZ 75's I've seen here I've not seen actual parts breakage as opposed to extractor issues. Failures to extract are common on the examples in my area.
On the Walther P99 I have zero experience. But given the deplorable examples of four PPK/PPKs/and full size PP's I've seen I'm left wondering how the CZ's and Walther's ever got the reputations for reliability I used to read about as a kid.
Then again the answer probably comes from where I read those things.
WARNING: I'm known to be HK biased, but contrary to popular believe I know that there are other good firearm makers. I swear!! :D
My experience might be not so huge as most of people here but leads to some conclusion on this matter:
HK - modern models are extremelly reliable (P7 is not modern model in my book). My personal experience is (I do not clean my HK's just shoot them, sometime I wipe excess dirt and add some lube):
P2000 9mm - zero malfunctions in 15000+ rounds,
Expert .40SW - 2 FTE due to split case and one FTF user induced (weak hand, odd position) in 10000+ rounds
P30 9mm - zero in like 3000 rounds
P30L 9mm - 10 FTE in first 50 rounds with steel cased Russian Barnaul and alu cased CCI Blaser - since then nor failures in 5000 rounds
P2000SK - 2 FTE on steel cased ammo in 2000 rounds
I also use STI a lot - don't make me start here. If gun need pile of parts and personal gunsmith, it is not "reliable" in my book.
From observation of my friends shooting with me:
HK - same as mine, boringly reliable.
Glock until Gen4 - almost as reliable as HK. Maybe not as durable, but it really does not matter if gun breaks after 50.000 rounds or 100.000 rounds - it is still past it's intended service life.
Walther P99 - feels good in company of HK and Glock. With big "mileage", barrel problems can arise with worn out rifling or feed ramp split from barrel (does not apply to FB Radom made one-piece CHF barrels).
S&W M&P - maybe those that were sent to Poland just were QC rejects?
CZ 75 / SP-01 - to often break parts to be considered reliable in my book.
SIG - don't get me started here, maybe they have some models working fine. Maybe. I have yet to see one.
This basically sum up what we see in use here, with Glock be most popular.
My personal carry selection is HK, then I would use Glock, then I would use Walther but I do not see any more alternatives for carry for me.
:suicide:
:suicide:
So bad? Do not do it! Everything will be fine, tomorow will be beautifull day! :D:D:D
Something that grabbed my attention is the fact that Glock seems to be putting more parts from the GEN 4 into the GEN 3 (3.5)? I have been told that Glock (Austria) wants to do away with the GEN 3's and Glock (US) wants to keep them. In order to make manufacturing parts cheaper and easier, I wonder if some decisions have been made to stop producing SOME GEN 3 parts and just use GEN 4 parts?
This is all PURE speculation and thinking out loud, but if I was a GEN 3 Glock owner, I might try and pick up the older style extractor (for a spare).
C4
FYI, I ordered some spare parts from Lone Wolf and received them yesterday. The extractor I got was the "new" style.
Something that grabbed my attention is the fact that Glock seems to be putting more parts from the GEN 4 into the GEN 3 (3.5)? I have been told that Glock (Austria) wants to do away with the GEN 3's and Glock (US) wants to keep them. In order to make manufacturing parts cheaper and easier, I wonder if some decisions have been made to stop producing SOME GEN 3 parts and just use GEN 4 parts?
Is it even fair to call these "gen 4" parts?
Isn't the "gen 4" trigger bar the same as what Glock started shipping in the model 37 some years ago?
The extractor may be different, but it's hardly unheard of for Glock to upgrade a part to reduce cos^H^H^Hbetter serve their customers. It doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that the part was never intended to be unique to the corresponding gen 4 9/40 models. That's just where it ended up first.
I have personally shot and been around 100's of thousands of rounds run through Sig 226's and have never seen a malfunction that wasn't magazine related or operator induced.
I hear of issues with QC but have never personally experienced it.
WARNING: I'm known to be HK biased, but contrary to popular believe I know that there are other good firearm makers. I swear!! :D
My experience might be not so huge as most of people here but leads to some conclusion on this matter:
HK - modern models are extremelly reliable (P7 is not modern model in my book). My personal experience is (I do not clean my HK's just shoot them, sometime I wipe excess dirt and add some lube):
so what's wrong with the p7?
massad ayoob ran 2200 rounds with no cleaning through one before gas cylinder fouling lead to malfunctions. my beat up PSP has 2500+ rounds through it in my hands. i've gone 400 without cleaning. (which is as far as i care to take a gun full of hard to replace parts) It's been totally flawless with factory mags.
i can't really think of an HK with a bad track record for reliability actually. which is probably why they cost nearly double the competition's guns. of course they're a great deal compared to a custom 1911 :o
so what's wrong with the p7?
massad ayoob ran 2200 rounds with no cleaning through one before gas cylinder fouling lead to malfunctions. my beat up PSP has 2500+ rounds through it in my hands. i've gone 400 without cleaning.
2200 rounds?
2500 rounds?
400 without cleaning?
These numbers are not at all impressive by modern handgun standards.
I had a P-7 that had to be sent back to the factory twice for breakages within about 4000 rounds.
Magic_Salad0892
04-24-11, 04:18
Glock until Gen4 - almost as reliable as HK. Maybe not as durable, but it really does not matter if gun breaks after 50.000 rounds or 100.000 rounds - it is still past it's intended service life.
I consider myself a mild HK fanboy, but I have issues with this statement.
May I politely ask what you base this on?
I've heard of several Glock pistols that have reached 200,000 rounds with the only major parts replacement being the barrel. Chuck Taylors (Gen2), and Kyle Defoor (Gen3) undoubtedly the most popular, and I've seen HKs choke much more than I've seen Glocks choke.
Nothing against HK, as I love them. But from what I've seen, I must politely disagree with that.
I do hate that HK factory springs last like 4 times as long as Glock factory springs. (not that it really matters if you replace them at intended intervals)
Feedback would be appreciated.
I was in a class taught by Larry Vickers a few years ago and brought an HK45. The other student's guns included Glocks, Sigs, 1911s, S&W M&P, a browning high power, an HK P-7M8. Vickers commented to the class that if you were to back up trucks full of ammo to the range and keep shooting all of the pistols, the HK45 would outlast all of them.
This isn't to say that Glocks have not proven themselves to be extremely durrable.
Without any sort of scientific testing (with proper respect given to appropriate sample sizes of N), this is all just speculation.
Speculation from informed observers, perhaps, but speculation nonetheless.
Nephrology
04-24-11, 17:17
I was in a class taught by Larry Vickers a few years ago and brought an HK45. The other student's guns included Glocks, Sigs, 1911s, S&W M&P, a browning high power, an HK P-7M8. Vickers commented to the class that if you were to back up trucks full of ammo to the range and keep shooting all of the pistols, the HK45 would outlast all of them.
This isn't to say that Glocks have not proven themselves to be extremely durrable.
Vickers /did/ help design the HK45 so I would be surprised if he said anything otherwise.
I have personally shot and been around 100's of thousands of rounds run through Sig 226's and have never seen a malfunction that wasn't magazine related or operator induced.
I hear of issues with QC but have never personally experienced it.
:D
That cannot be correct.
The Internet says Sig's virtually explode after five hundred rounds.
Something tells me we should be listening to guys like you instead.
Nephrology
04-24-11, 19:46
:D
That cannot be correct.
The Internet says Sig's virtually explode after five hundred rounds.
Something tells me we should be listening to guys like you instead.
The internet has told me a lot of things! I assume of course that everything I read is true, so I have decided to throw my rounds on target to avoid FTFs and kBs! The ultimate weapons system - only source of error is the user!
I have personally shot and been around 100's of thousands of rounds run through Sig 226's and have never seen a malfunction that wasn't magazine related or operator induced.
I hear of issues with QC but have never personally experienced it.
:D
That cannot be correct.
The Internet says Sig's virtually explode after five hundred rounds.
Something tells me we should be listening to guys like you instead.
Holy shit! The interperts are going to explode because someone is weighting in with "real" real world experience :D
Alpha Sierra
04-24-11, 20:51
I was in a class taught by Larry Vickers a few years ago and brought an HK45. The other student's guns included Glocks, Sigs, 1911s, S&W M&P, a browning high power, an HK P-7M8. Vickers commented to the class that if you were to back up trucks full of ammo to the range and keep shooting all of the pistols, the HK45 would outlast all of them.
I read stuff like that all the time and I come to the same conclusion over and over.
How is that relevant to me? I'm never going to have a truckload of ammo to shoot until my pistol disintegrates. So the point is lost on me.
2200 rounds?
2500 rounds?
400 without cleaning?
These numbers are not at all impressive by modern handgun standards.
I had a P-7 that had to be sent back to the factory twice for breakages within about 4000 rounds.
2200 without cleaning isn't good enough? Seriously? I'm not talking about it breaking it just needed the gas tube cleaned.
what year was your p7 produced?
How is that relevant to me? I'm never going to have a truckload of ammo to shoot until my pistol disintegrates. So the point is lost on me.
People ask questions about comparative durability.
This is an answer from Larry Vickers, an expert.
2200 without cleaning isn't good enough? Seriously? I'm not talking about it breaking it just needed the gas tube cleaned.
A lot of modern guns have gone well beyond that.
what year was your p7 produced?
I don't have it any more so I don't remember the marks. I bought it new in 1986.
Can we just agree that all pistols choke and that there is a certain threshold of quality that once reached, discussions like this become mostly moot?
People ask questions about comparative durability.
This is an answer from Larry Vickers, an expert.
I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Vickers, and he has superb credentials, however such a claim would have to be substantiated. Being an expert doesn't make his word, or any other SME's word, stand without some kind of proof. I do not believe that I, or anyone else, asking for something substantive is stepping too far out of bounds in light of Vickers' experience. This is not the same as saying that "he doesn't know what he's talking about."
I understand that you're simply relaying what you heard him say, so this is not an attack on the messenger.
I have personally shot and been around 100's of thousands of rounds run through Sig 226's and have never seen a malfunction that wasn't magazine related or operator induced.
I hear of issues with QC but have never personally experienced it.
Originally Posted by VA_Dinger
That cannot be correct.
The Internet says Sig's virtually explode after five hundred rounds.
Something tells me we should be listening to guys like you instead.
Originally Posted by M4arc
Holy shit! The interperts are going to explode because someone is weighting in with "real" real world experience.
LOL! Are you telling me that taking training classes and running shoots at you're local "gun club" doesn't classify as "real world experience", and isn't equal to an active duty SEAL? Say it ain't so! :eek:
While I have nowhere near the experience that WillC has on SIGs, my personal experience sounds the same. I hear a lot of doom and gloom from the errornet experts, but I personally have not experienced it with my SIGs, or seen any issues with my co-workers either. I have purchased 3 new SIGs in the last 6 months and they run just as well as my other US and German models do.
I shoot around 10k rounds a year through my SIGs and not once have I had a parts breakage on any of them. I do maintain them by cleaning/re-lubing after ever time they are used, and I replace all of the springs every 5k rounds or so. I don't follow the latest fads of not having to clean your firearm. I guess I am old-school and believe in the saying of "take care of your gear, and it will take care of you." It hasn't let me down yet.
I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Vickers, and he has superb credentials, however such a claim would have to be substantiated. Being an expert doesn't make his word, or any other SME's word, stand without some kind of proof. I do not believe that I, or anyone else, asking for something substantive is stepping too far out of bounds in light of Vickers' experience. This is not the same as saying that "he doesn't know what he's talking about."
I understand that you're simply relaying what you heard him say, so this is not an attack on the messenger.
Since LAV was involved in the design and development of the HK45 and saw first hand how the HK45 (and other H&Ks including the P30) are over-engineered AND tested not to mention that he's personally fired a truck load of ammo through the HK45 I think his claim has been substantiated.
There are just certain people that when they say something you can bet money that it comes from real, first-hand experience. LAV is one of them. If his experience can help you then that's great. If it doesn't apply to you then no problem but bet money that's it's been "substantiated" with first-hand experience.
Now, if I said it you'd have a valid point :p
A lot of modern guns have gone well beyond that.
I don't have it any more so I don't remember the marks. I bought it new in 1986.
fair enough, so what broke on yours?
the design of the p7 does necessitate more cleaning than a recoil operated gun but that hardly means it's "unreliable". I can't really imagine a situation in which a carry gun would actually have to go 2000+ rounds with no cleaning. HK specifies cleaning the gas tube every 1000 rounds.
:D
That cannot be correct.
The Internet says Sig's virtually explode after five hundred rounds.
Something tells me we should be listening to guys like you instead.
The P226's supplied to the Teams are not comparable to the Sig products on the commercial market between 2003-2008. Not to mention that the Teams have competent armorors that provide excellent preventive maintenance. While most Sigs are fine, the chances of issues took a small but noticeable jump up in even the more reliable Sig products - not to mention the GSR, P250, mosquito, and 556.
The P226's supplied to the Teams are not comparable to the Sig products on the commercial market between 2003-2008. Not to mention that the Teams have competent armorors that provide excellent preventive maintenance. While most Sigs are fine, the chances of issues took a small but noticeable jump up in even the more reliable Sig products - not to mention the GSR, P250, mosquito, and 556.
How are they not comparable? Do you work for SIG to know this as fact, or have you had some trigger time behind the SIGs from a SEAL Teams armory and one from a dealer to make comparisons? I'm not trying to bust your balls here, but unless you have done any of the above, then it's hearsay.
I have no doubt that NSW's SIGs get a little more TLC. Things such as closer hands on inspections and more rounds test fired to make sure everything (sights, trigger pull etc) is within contract specs, but that doesn't make them a completely different animal than a gun offered at the dealer.
You can't single out SIG though, because all of the major manufactures (HK, SW, Glock, SIG) do it. A member of this board who is a SEAL, said when NSW tested the HK45c, that H&K was told that the DA/SA trigger sucked and to "fix it." H&K won the contract so I would guess that they "fixed it" and do give the NSW guns a little more attention than guns going to the dealers shelves. I have been told that Glock has done some things that aren't available to civi's for a unit that uses them. It's been said several times here that S&W's LE guns get more TLC than the "standard" ones.
I'm only talking about the standard classic series handguns. Not the fluff crap (556, GSR, P250) that you mentioned, that are only made to add to their bottom line and aren't fit for duty use.
A member of this board who is a SEAL, said when NSW tested the HK45c, that H&K was told that the DA/SA trigger sucked and to "fix it." H&K won the contract so I would guess that they "fixed it"
I've thought about this a lot since the official contract was announced. I remembered as you have this very situation regarding the DA pull.
The Gen4 Glock 19 has a main spring assembly problem, do not buy till they fix it.
Generation 3 Glock 19? as near perfect as any pistol made, anywhere.
However, for whatever reason, the Gen4 Glock 17, with the latest spring assembly works fine, the improvements on the receiver, great.
My RTF Glock 19, carry every day, to me, best carry pistol in the world.
When, if ever Glock gets their head out of the sand, and fix the Gen4 Glock 19, I will switch to it.
I have personally shot and been around 100's of thousands of rounds run through Sig 226's and have never seen a malfunction that wasn't magazine related or operator induced.
I hear of issues with QC but have never personally experienced it.
Hey Will, the SIG's that the teams get (and other units) get a lot of QC and in some instances better parts (IMHO).
The commercial SIG's right now are not up to the same standards as what you see.
C4
The Gen4 Glock 19 has a main spring assembly problem, do not buy till they fix it.
When, if ever Glock gets their head out of the sand, and fix the Gen4 Glock 19, I will switch to it.
Except for all the ones that run great out of the box. You haven't heard of those? Want to shoot a couple to see what's in store? ;)
They have some issues to sort out to get their production FAR more consistently reliable. Best new work on the subject is looking closer at a)bad lot of extractors which also affected some Gen 3's 9mms last year and b) the length and angle of the ejector. Bill Rogers has been filing on some of his school guns ejectors and has reported getting all his troubled Gen 4's running this way - according to a pal of his.
Stay tuned. The Mothership is very likely close to some solutions I think.
Alaskapopo
04-27-11, 08:59
This is a serious question.
Are there any actual reliable handguns available? If you read this forum, there are potentially serious issues with practically every single model of firearm now available.
-Glock Gen 4
-Now apparently Glock Gen 3.5 (My new term for a Glock Gen 3 with some Gen 4 parts)-Which by default means any Gen 3 Glock since all future spare parts will most likely be the new "updated" design.
-SigArms any non-German produced model (How do you get German spare parts?)
-S&W M&P sears and striker problems (Maybe fixed now?)
-S&W revolvers, unless it is a pre-MIM no lock revolver
-Any 1911 less than $2,000 from the factory (And probably not even that)
These are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. I am sure there are lots more, but you get the idea. (And don't even get me started on ARs or AKs or others....)
So, if someone was going to start fresh and purchase a quality defensive arm that is going to be used to potentially defend himself/herself, what would should they buy?
A Glock 19 Gen 3 pre-2010 and try to scrounge enough spare parts of the "correct" generation to last indefintely?
A HK something? Is ithey truly better, or are there just not enough in the hands of serious shooters to ferret out problems?
Let's discuss...
According to the Glock reps I spoke with the Gen 4 issues with the 9mm are fixed by creating a 9mm specific recoil spring. I have had great luck with all the Glock 17's I have owned over the years.
Pat
The Gen 4 new ones, Glock 17s work fine, spring problem, fixed, the Gen 4 Glock 19, not yet, they are working on it.
Now this is white box 115g and such, with my carry ammo, 127g +P+ Ranger, perfect, and significant reduction in recoil control.
My buddy is a top shot on the Glock circuit, he will not use Gen 4 Glock 19s!
I talked him into using a G19 for IDPA a couple of years ago, lateral movement, and then two shots on target, a little faster.
With stove pipes, failure to feed, no more G19 Gen 4s for him.
The G4 G19 I use in IDPA, I use the G3 spring. The only other mod. The bigger surface magazine release, the bottom corner dug into my finger, used my knife to trim it off.
Let me clarify one major problem with all Sig 226 9mm pistols, are double action first shot, then revert to single action there after.
A little theater, you have just exited your movie house in your local shopping center. It is 11PM, the bulb above your parked vehicle is out! Two men approach, one is holding a knife.
"Wallet now" out of your holster comes your Sig 226! The most important shot of your life is a 10lb at least, double action one, followed by a 4lb single action one? This is good?
Compared with (for instance) a Glock 19, lighter loaded weight, quicker draw (physics, weighs less) 5.5lb trigger, approx, same trigger weight for all shots.
And that is my opinion.
Nephrology
04-27-11, 11:14
Let me clarify one major problem with all Sig 226 9mm pistols, are double action first shot, then revert to single action there after.
A little theater, you have just exited your movie house in your local shopping center. It is 11PM, the bulb above your parked vehicle is out! Two men approach, one is holding a knife.
"Wallet now" out of your holster comes your Sig 226! The most important shot of your life is a 10lb at least, double action one, followed by a 4lb single action one? This is good?
Compared with (for instance) a Glock 19, lighter loaded weight, quicker draw (physics, weighs less) 5.5lb trigger, approx, same trigger weight for all shots.
And that is my opinion.
I don't like SA/DA anymore than you but with all due respect there are plenty of individuals in law enforcement and military service who have successfully managed to use SA/DA pistols in the line of duty. Perhaps you could solicit WillC for his opinion on the 226 manual of arms. I am willing to wager that after round # 60,000 or so he probably got over it.
I don't like SA/DA anymore than you but with all due respect there are plenty of individuals in law enforcement and military service who have successfully managed to use SA/DA pistols in the line of duty. Perhaps you could solicit WillC for his opinion on the 226 manual of arms. I am willing to wager that after round # 60,000 or so he probably got over it.
I am talking Joe film goer, fires 100 rounds a year, for instance, the misses with first shots, common, second is a problem even.
Jeff Cooper, who I met a couple of times, said "Double action first shot, is a perfect solution, to a none existent problem"
sniperfrog
04-27-11, 11:25
Let me clarify one major problem with all Sig 226 9mm pistols, are double action first shot, then revert to single action there after.
A little theater, you have just exited your movie house in your local shopping center. It is 11PM, the bulb above your parked vehicle is out! Two men approach, one is holding a knife.
"Wallet now" out of your holster comes your Sig 226! The most important shot of your life is a 10lb at least, double action one, followed by a 4lb single action one? This is good?
Compared with (for instance) a Glock 19, lighter loaded weight, quicker draw (physics, weighs less) 5.5lb trigger, approx, same trigger weight for all shots.
And that is my opinion.
Then get a DAK Sig 226. Same trigger pull every time, about 6 pounds.
I used a DA/SA Sig 226 for about 12 years and now use the DAK 226 for the last 5 years. I never had a problem with the DA/SA but I shot it quite a bit.
I do like the DAK better.
Then get a DAK Sig 226. Same trigger pull every time, about 6 pounds.
I used a DA/SA Sig 226 for about 12 years and now use the DAK 226 for the last 5 years. I never had a problem with the DA/SA but I shot it quite a bit.
I do like the DAK better.
Never shot a DAK, my buddy said the reset is much longer than his G19, I have no horse in this race really, just voicing an opinion, I did one time drop a Sig 226 half loaded magazine, two bullet noses facing up!!
Duty calls, later.
Let me clarify one major problem with all Sig 226 9mm pistols, are double action first shot, then revert to single action there after.
That's not a problem with the 226. That's a training issue with the shooter. But that's a completely different topic....
I am talking Joe film goer, fires 100 rounds a year, for instance, the misses with first shots, common, second is a problem even.
Jeff Cooper, who I met a couple of times, said "Double action first shot, is a perfect solution, to a none existent problem"
Jeff Cooper's dictum has been disproven for many many years. DA/SA is no biggie for the legion to worked it. I didn't even have to work on it long with a Sig P220 and 92FS to be good at it. Maybe 50 rounds?! Albeit I've got a lot of DA revolver time under me belt. But for the life of me I have never been able figure out how Chairman Jeff concluded that it couldn't be done.
But Joe film goer? 100 rds a year? He's a sack that has thrown his fortune to the wind and is hoping for the best. You might as well presume he'll use his Glock to shoot himself in the ass pulling it or crank all his DA only shots wide left. Or then he could have a 1911 and not turn off his safety.
The state of the craft has moved way beyond the original Modern Technique. With all due respect to the Guru.
Does that mean that CZ75 isn't the "world's best service nine" as the Col thought? Uh Oh.
I don't think ranking pistols based on the users ability to adapt to them is a real valid approach.(as if anything I post on the Internet is really "valid" on the other hand)
I guess I could turn it around and say for example that the Beretta 92FS doesn't have too large of a grip there is just a design flaw in the size of your hand because nothing is wrong with grip size when I pick it up.
there is just a design flaw in the size of your hand .
ROFLMAO
Beat Trash
04-27-11, 18:44
I am talking Joe film goer, fires 100 rounds a year, for instance, the misses with first shots, common, second is a problem even.
Jeff Cooper, who I met a couple of times, said "Double action first shot, is a perfect solution, to a none existent problem"
I would offer that this Joe who fires 100 rds a year is the problem not the gun.
Anyone who carries a gun in public without the necessary skills is a walking liability.
I carried an issued DA/SA pistol for about 8 years before we went to a DAO gun. Granted there are only about 1,100 officers in my agency, but it all boils down to training. I didn't feel handicapped when carrying one.
While I prefer the M&P and Glock to the DA/SA guns, I've seen people who can make a DA/SA gun work for them. If you want an example, the Navy's Special Warfare folks, AKA SEALS, don't seem handicapped with their Sig 226's.
Jeff Cooper had a lot of opinions. Rather strong ones. Very strong ones. He rarely ever changed his stance once his opinion was given.
Anyone who carries a gun in public without the necessary skills is a walking liability.
Jeff Cooper had a lot of opinions. Rather strong ones. Very strong ones. He rarely ever changed his stance once his opinion was given.
The two understatements of the year!
If you anticipate shooting, cock the DA/SA and keep your finger off the trigger. You have two hands, and not all self defense shooting requires that you shoot the instant you clear the holster. IMHO there is not much difference between a cocked SIG or Beretta and a Glock if both have about 5-6# trigger pulls. All three have firing pin safeties.
ive heard that keltec autoloaders are pretty bomb proof.
MarshallDodge
04-27-11, 23:16
ive heard that keltec autoloaders are pretty bomb proof.
:sarcastic:
NikokurausuX9
04-27-11, 23:18
ive heard that keltec autoloaders are pretty bomb proof.
Quoted for troof!:blink:
Magic_Salad0892
04-28-11, 03:02
How are Kahr Arms pistols? I've heard good things on this board.
The Dumb Gun Collector
04-28-11, 07:13
I have had very good luck with almost every brand. HK, Glock, SIG, Walther and Kahr. I wouldn't sweat it.
Nytcrawler93
04-28-11, 15:53
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS. I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
Littlelebowski
04-28-11, 16:58
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS. I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
Excellent troll post.
Magic_Salad0892
04-28-11, 18:50
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS.I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
Lol. I think it's funny that those two quotes come right after another.
Anyway. How many rounds have you put through your XDM 3.8, and how many malfunctions have you had?
I had a Glock 17 that had over 30k rounds on it between me, my family members and friends shooting it. It passed the 2k round test suppressed. It hasn't had any issues. My sister owns it now, and from what I'm hearing it's still running strong. It's only had the frame changed out (RTF frame, the old one had no issues), barrel changed to a threaded barrel (Glock 34 barrel I had threaded, I still have that barrel, and the pistol mentioned has it's old barrel which the first 30k or so were shot through), and springs replaced.
How well does your XDM with crappy magazines, no armorer support, awkward ergonomics, and no after-market support compare?
Alaskapopo
04-28-11, 18:56
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS. I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
Umm sorry but no.
XD's compared to Glocks.
1. XD's have a higher bore axis which magnifies muzzle flip.
2. XD's have an inferror finish that rusts easily.
3. XD's trigger has a long reset and sucks compared to a Glock.
4. tend to break parts at a greater rate and Springfield won't send you those parts you have to send the gun in.
Glocks win this battle easily.
Pat
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS. I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
Hooray for unsubstantiated claims!
Littlelebowski
04-29-11, 05:52
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS. I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
If this guy (http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=95638#Post95638) had ONLY bought a Springer Precision roll pin!
Nytcrawler93
04-29-11, 09:06
If this guy (http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=95638#Post95638) had ONLY bought a Springer Precision roll pin!
If you read my post I said XDM not XD. Your pic is of an XD. Also, I have had several of the famed GEN 3 Glock 19's as well. Out of approximately 3-4000 rounds through 5 of them I have had around 10 failures. Out of 1000 rounds or so through an XDM 3.8 compact in stainless, I have had zero fails. I find it comical that people can not comprehend these are all machines and will fail regardless of brand. I love Glock, but I am open minded enough to recognize when advances are made. Yes, I like the bore axis better on the Glock but the XDM for me is more ergonomic and I like the grip safety. Customer support has been fine. It was not meant to be a troll post, the roll pin is a known issue that SA should fix pronto. I was calling out an obvious flaw. The rest of the pistol has been tested and has endured anything that any other brand has been put through. There are other links and tests out there for those who care to actually investigate. Regardless, I will not crusade for SA or any other brand, all have drawbacks. For the record, I like the trigger in the XDM BETTER than the Glocks I have sold. Just because somebody posts something that is counter to your biased opinion does not necessarily make them a troll. I will also not make BS claims about internet rounds fired. A side note: some of these messed up xd pics are from idiots who don't know how to clear a jam and get out a hammer. Also, when an XDM fails, the product is crap, when a Glock fails then God caused it and it is normal. Whatever.
How are Kahr Arms pistols? I've heard good things on this board.
The two Kahrs I have owned were dead reliable, amazingly accurate, good trigger (though a tad long) and a joy to shoot. Personally, I prefer the all metal versions as the added weight greatly improved shooting stability and recoil. They are not cheap, but you get what you pay for when it comes to guns in my view. If one wants super small, reliable, accurate, and well built, it's gonna cost...
If you buy an XDM 3.8 compact and replace the top roll pin with a Springer Precision one, it will arguably be one of the most reliable pistols on the market. Don't believe the Glock fanboy BS. I love Glock too but there are more up to date designs available.
Umm, Ok... :rolleyes:
Although no machine is perfect, HKs have been statistically more reliable than any other brand I've owned, borrowed or rented.
Alaskapopo
04-29-11, 09:47
If you read my post I said XDM not XD. Your pic is of an XD. Also, I have had several of the famed GEN 3 Glock 19's as well. Out of approximately 3-4000 rounds through 5 of them I have had around 10 failures. Out of 1000 rounds or so through an XDM 3.8 compact in stainless, I have had zero fails. I find it comical that people can not comprehend these are all machines and will fail regardless of brand. I love Glock, but I am open minded enough to recognize when advances are made. Yes, I like the bore axis better on the Glock but the XDM for me is more ergonomic and I like the grip safety. Customer support has been fine. It was not meant to be a troll post, the roll pin is a known issue that SA should fix pronto. I was calling out an obvious flaw. The rest of the pistol has been tested and has endured anything that any other brand has been put through. There are other links and tests out there for those who care to actually investigate. Regardless, I will not crusade for SA or any other brand, all have drawbacks. For the record, I like the trigger in the XDM BETTER than the Glocks I have sold. Just because somebody posts something that is counter to your biased opinion does not necessarily make them a troll. I will also not make BS claims about internet rounds fired. A side note: some of these messed up xd pics are from idiots who don't know how to clear a jam and get out a hammer. Also, when an XDM fails, the product is crap, when a Glock fails then God caused it and it is normal. Whatever.
Basically you like the XD and think Glocks are crap. You say different but your tone tells it all. I have no real issue with the XD and its a serviceable firearm but compared to Glock it has more issues and problems. Its the new kid on the block and it will take a while to work them all out. XD's were very popular at the club I shoot IDPA at and I have seen broken extractors, broken mag bottons, rust etc. Glocks on the other hand just run especially the 9mm models. There have been issues from time to time with certain models like the 19 and the 22 with a weapon light installed. But if you compare the track record of both designs Glock comes out on top. By the way your opinion is biased as well. That is what opinions generally are. They are biased based on our own experience and personal beliefs.
By the way please list what you feel are advances with the XDM line compared to Glock?
Pat
Alaskapopo
04-29-11, 09:48
Although no machine is perfect, HKs have been statistically more reliable than any other brand I've owned, borrowed or rented.
I carried an HK USP in 45 acp at the begining of my career. Not a bad gun but it would fail to go fully into battery from time to time unless you have the most rock solid hold possible. Trigger sucked in DA mode and it had a long rest in SA mode. Also very top heavy gun that magnified recoil.
Pat
Nytcrawler93
04-29-11, 10:00
Basically you like the XD and think Glocks are crap. You say different but your tone tells it all. I have no real issue with the XD and its a serviceable firearm but compared to Glock it has more issues and problems. Its the new kid on the block and it will take a while to work them all out. XD's were very popular at the club I shoot IDPA at and I have seen broken extractors, broken mag bottons, rust etc. Glocks on the other hand just run especially the 9mm models. There have been issues from time to time with certain models like the 19 and the 22 with a weapon light installed. But if you compare the track record of both designs Glock comes out on top. By the way your opinion is biased as well. That is what opinions generally are. They are biased based on our own experience and personal beliefs.
By the way please list what you feel are advances with the XDM line compared to Glock?
Pat
I love Glock. I will own more. No tone intended. Anyway, some of the advances IMO made by SA are the way the compact converts to fullsize with the grips, the handle is more ergonomic, the sights are more robust from the factory, the grip safety, the serrations on the slide, and the look (even though that is least on my list). I feel like SA stole the Glock general idea and made some improvements. The trigger is a straight up ripoff but for some reason the grip safety gives me peace of mind while carrying one in the chamber. I was all about going after a Gen 4 until I heard the mags didn't interchange and all of the issues. I have researched every thread and review I can find and the only thing that comes up over and over is that stupid roll pin. If you look at Gen 4 Glocks, it seems like there is that ejection issue. In my own thinking, I figured it was easier to replace a roll pin that the recoil spring in a Glock. I am really trying not to be biased. I have a friend with an XDM 3.8 40 and it had nothing but problems so who the hell knows? I would not mind owning an exo-coated G19 again. That is a nice piece. I just happen to prefer the XDM due to personal preference.
Nytcrawler93
04-29-11, 10:05
I have owned a PPS as well. It was fine after 250 rounds. HK USP was great too. I had failures in all of them as well. The XDM is the only one I haven't made puke yet. I'll keep trying.
Doc Safari
04-29-11, 10:12
[SNIP] when an XDM fails, the product is crap, when a Glock fails then God caused it and it is normal. Whatever.
Chuck Taylor has put how many hundreds of thousands of rounds through his Glock 17 now? Has a single XD or XDM even been shot to 100,000 rounds?
I watched those guys on Guns & Ammo TV torture test an XD or XDM and they made it fail. That's enough for me not to own one.
Nephrology
04-29-11, 10:49
Chuck Taylor has put how many hundreds of thousands of rounds through his Glock 17 now? Has a single XD or XDM even been shot to 100,000 rounds?
I watched those guys on Guns & Ammo TV torture test an XD or XDM and they made it fail. That's enough for me not to own one.
As a Glock owner and kool aid drinker, I will be the first to say that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
This discussion of reliability is stochastic in nature. That is to say, when we refer to Gen 3 9mm Glocks as being the pinnacle of reliability, that just means that if you buy and shoot a 9mm Gen 3 Glock it is only less likely to have a malfunction that if you buy and shoot, say, a Rock Island Armory 1911. As with all statistics, this statement is only descriptive, not prescriptive.
I bring that up because I own both an RIA 1911 as well as 2 glocks. While one is relatively new, my G19 has somewhere around 7000 rounds through it. it has hiccuped occasionally. I've had at least one or two stovepipe jams (probably user error) and one failure to feed. It also failed during an IPSC course in which a dropped magazine picked up an Airsoft BB that was on the range floor and, when inserted into the gun later, blocked the rearward motion of the trigger bar completely, giving me a 100% dead gun.
The RIA? 1 jam in the first magazine (the shitty one that came with it, too) and then flawless reliability since. At least 1000 rounds with not a hitch.
Now, statistically, the RIA should probably fail more often then my G19. Has that been the case? Nope. Pretty much every piece of internet gun wisdom, no matter who it is from or how well founded in reality it is, is pure probability. The only way for you to know for sure about any given handgun in front of you is to shoot the piss out of it to make sure that probability worked out in your favor.
Nytcrawler93
04-29-11, 11:32
As a Glock owner and kool aid drinker, I will be the first to say that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
This discussion of reliability is stochastic in nature. That is to say, when we refer to Gen 3 9mm Glocks as being the pinnacle of reliability, that just means that if you buy and shoot a 9mm Gen 3 Glock it is only less likely to have a malfunction that if you buy and shoot, say, a Rock Island Armory 1911. As with all statistics, this statement is only descriptive, not prescriptive.
I bring that up because I own both an RIA 1911 as well as 2 glocks. While one is relatively new, my G19 has somewhere around 7000 rounds through it. it has hiccuped occasionally. I've had at least one or two stovepipe jams (probably user error) and one failure to feed. It also failed during an IPSC course in which a dropped magazine picked up an Airsoft BB that was on the range floor and, when inserted into the gun later, blocked the rearward motion of the trigger bar completely, giving me a 100% dead gun.
The RIA? 1 jam in the first magazine (the shitty one that came with it, too) and then flawless reliability since. At least 1000 rounds with not a hitch.
Now, statistically, the RIA should probably fail more often then my G19. Has that been the case? Nope. Pretty much every piece of internet gun wisdom, no matter who it is from or how well founded in reality it is, is pure probability. The only way for you to know for sure about any given handgun in front of you is to shoot the piss out of it to make sure that probability worked out in your favor.
AMEN!
The one day Armorers Course, recently taken, what an eye opener, three years since my last one, the changes/advances, information from the Instructor, really well done.
The Gen 4 Glock 19 problems? Was not spoke about a lot.
I have two of them, the actual changes in the receiver, perfect! (well the new wider Magazine release dug into my left hand ring finger, knife out, cut it off cured) but in trying two of the up grade main spring assembly's! not fixed yet, bought the wee metal ring from Clockwork's?
Then you can use the gen 3 spring, fixed!
My Grandson uses the one he has, with the spring marked 04, with his Security job, G licensed here in Orlando, Ranger 127g +P+, flawless performance. I have just purchased 150 rounds of Ranger 147g +P+, I will try that with 04 spring I was sent last, should be fine.
The jury is still out I think on the 127/147 +P+ choice, the Glock Instructor said he has dropped the use of +P+ for carry.
The big difference, to me, in shooting people, if you had too, the closer your grip is to the bore access, the sooner you get on the trigger for repeat shots (More is better, always!) and Glock has that advantage.
TruGlow fiber optics sights? Incredable. I carry a RTF Glock 19, 3rd Gen. Trust my life to it, every day.
Alaskapopo
04-29-11, 17:53
I love Glock. I will own more. No tone intended. Anyway, some of the advances IMO made by SA are the way the compact converts to fullsize with the grips, the handle is more ergonomic, the sights are more robust from the factory, the grip safety, the serrations on the slide, and the look (even though that is least on my list). I feel like SA stole the Glock general idea and made some improvements. The trigger is a straight up ripoff but for some reason the grip safety gives me peace of mind while carrying one in the chamber. I was all about going after a Gen 4 until I heard the mags didn't interchange and all of the issues. I have researched every thread and review I can find and the only thing that comes up over and over is that stupid roll pin. If you look at Gen 4 Glocks, it seems like there is that ejection issue. In my own thinking, I figured it was easier to replace a roll pin that the recoil spring in a Glock. I am really trying not to be biased. I have a friend with an XDM 3.8 40 and it had nothing but problems so who the hell knows? I would not mind owning an exo-coated G19 again. That is a nice piece. I just happen to prefer the XDM due to personal preference.
The grip safety is not really an improvement. It may make you feel better but it does not make the gun any safer. Most ND's occure with the gun in your hand which would de activate the grip safety. Same goes for ND's while re holstering the weapon. All the grip safety does is add a dropped gun safety but the Glock has that covered. As too sights Glocks Night Sights are very robust. The plastic stock sights are not as much but frankly who leaves those on the gun. I would not use stock sights on an XD either.
The Gen 4 Glock 17's are working the 19 still seem to have some issues according to some on here. When ever you change a design there is always some teathing problems. It sounds like you like your XDM and it has performed for you but calling it an improvement over a Glock is not correct. In several areas it falls behind.
Pat
Nytcrawler93
04-29-11, 18:52
The grip safety is not really an improvement. It may make you feel better but it does not make the gun any safer. Most ND's occure with the gun in your hand which would de activate the grip safety. Same goes for ND's while re holstering the weapon. All the grip safety does is add a dropped gun safety but the Glock has that covered. As too sights Glocks Night Sights are very robust. The plastic stock sights are not as much but frankly who leaves those on the gun. I would not use stock sights on an XD either.
The Gen 4 Glock 17's are working the 19 still seem to have some issues according to some on here. When ever you change a design there is always some teathing problems. It sounds like you like your XDM and it has performed for you but calling it an improvement over a Glock is not correct. In several areas it falls behind.
Pat
I agree with most of what you say.I should add that not having to pull the trigger before field stripping is an improvement. I don't see the negative there. So, you are saying that it is OK to have growing pains as long as it is Glock but not OK if XDM has growing pains...I understand....:rolleyes:Anyway, I still think the gen 3 glock (out of the box) is the most robust but the OP asked if any were reliable. I simply stated that if you fix the number one issue with XDM, the stupid roll pin, that it would be ARGUABLY the most reliable. I can make that argument without being an idiot. There is a reason I didn't say an XDM, unmodified was the best. I qualified my statement. Regardless, Glock, M&P, and XDM are REALLY close no matter what measures you use. I get what you are saying about the grip safety but I still see value when pocket carrying, which I do in a Superfly holster in cargo shorts if my shirt is not a good CCW choice that day. For holster carry, the grip safety is not all that. I think Springfield did a decent job improving the capacity of that size weapon as well and the argument against the mags is kinda silly. The only weird thing with the mags is that if you load to full capacity they rattle. I don't think the stainless top will rust but you just never know....Still, this was never intended to be a troll type post.
I agree with most of what you say.I should add that not having to pull the trigger before field stripping is an improvement. I don't see the negative there. So, you are saying that it is OK to have growing pains as long as it is Glock but not OK if XDM has growing pains...I understand....:rolleyes:Anyway, I still think the gen 3 glock (out of the box) is the most robust but the OP asked if any were reliable. I simply stated that if you fix the number one issue with XDM, the stupid roll pin, that it would be ARGUABLY the most reliable. I can make that argument without being an idiot. There is a reason I didn't say an XDM, unmodified was the best. I qualified my statement. Regardless, Glock, M&P, and XDM are REALLY close no matter what measures you use. I get what you are saying about the grip safety but I still see value when pocket carrying, which I do in a Superfly holster in cargo shorts if my shirt is not a good CCW choice that day. For holster carry, the grip safety is not all that. I think Springfield did a decent job improving the capacity of that size weapon as well and the argument against the mags is kinda silly. The only weird thing with the mags is that if you load to full capacity they rattle. I don't think the stainless top will rust but you just never know....Still, this was never intended to be a troll type post.
Glock Magazines are the best pistol magazines in the Word, Steyr AUG the best Rifle magazines ever, see one cartridge, you have 15 left!
The Steel insert inside Glock Magazines, tenifer! As hard as a Diamond! Stainless Steel will rust sooner.
Alaskapopo
04-29-11, 20:52
I agree with most of what you say.I should add that not having to pull the trigger before field stripping is an improvement. I don't see the negative there. So, you are saying that it is OK to have growing pains as long as it is Glock but not OK if XDM has growing pains...I understand....:rolleyes:Anyway, I still think the gen 3 glock (out of the box) is the most robust but the OP asked if any were reliable. I simply stated that if you fix the number one issue with XDM, the stupid roll pin, that it would be ARGUABLY the most reliable. I can make that argument without being an idiot. There is a reason I didn't say an XDM, unmodified was the best. I qualified my statement. Regardless, Glock, M&P, and XDM are REALLY close no matter what measures you use. I get what you are saying about the grip safety but I still see value when pocket carrying, which I do in a Superfly holster in cargo shorts if my shirt is not a good CCW choice that day. For holster carry, the grip safety is not all that. I think Springfield did a decent job improving the capacity of that size weapon as well and the argument against the mags is kinda silly. The only weird thing with the mags is that if you load to full capacity they rattle. I don't think the stainless top will rust but you just never know....Still, this was never intended to be a troll type post.
Growing pains happen with any pistol and I am not saying XD's are junk but they are not nearly as developed and field tested as Glocks are. I have noted the areas of concern. If it works for you then stick with it. But to call it an improved Glock is not correct. As for the XD mags the base pads break regularly when dropped on the concreet floor at our indoor range IDPA and USPSA matches.
Pat
Crow Hunter
04-30-11, 10:02
As to the XD/XDM series.
I have limited experience with them and what I have had, I was not impressed.
My brother had a XD40 compact that he had on an ATV ride in a OWB holster. Mud landed on the grip safety. It would no longer compress and the gun was useless. It was rather funny since the only mud that actually got on the gun was right at the grip safety. You could hear a "crunchy" noise when you gripped it, but it was locked up tight. We swirled it around in a bucket of water for a while and finally got the grit out. He promptly sold it and got a G19.
Another guy I know, who is very easily swayed by advertising went to a local store to get a G19 and was talked into getting a full sized XDM in 9mm because it had a "match grade barrel" and came with a holster and magazine carrier in the box. And since it was more expensive than the Glock, it must be better.... So far he has had to buy a Maxpedition manpurse to carry it in and a tungsten guide rod to reduce the muzzle flip.
If someone likes the XD/M series better and it works for them, drive on. But I don't believe that are an improvement on anything, at best they are an amalgamation of features from several designs that produce a usable firearm.
lloydkristmas
04-30-11, 10:13
I've owned six different variations of the USP series, 9mm's and 45's, full size and compact, tactical and match, NEVER had a problem with any of them. Never a single jam over the course of several thousand rounds.
I hate to sound like a "fan boy" but me and HK have been around the block, and I dont trust anything else. Glock ranks a close second, but I've had them malfunction on me before.
Regardless, Glock, M&P, and XDM are REALLY close no matter what measures you use.
"Close" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. :cool:
They are not close enough in design, etc, that those knowledgeable in such things would see them as interchangeable.
So far he has had to buy a Maxpedition manpurse to carry it in
Hey now, say what you will about the XDM, but don't diss the Maxpedition manpurse!!!!! :sarcastic:
I have two, and I wub those things.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b374/willbrink/swatchallengpic-1.jpg
Nytcrawler93
04-30-11, 13:15
My USP failed more than all of my Glock 19's combined. My Glock 19's failed more than my XDM compact. Yeah, I am probably in the minority but we live in a golden age of firearms and the difference is a LOT closer than any fan boy of any make or model will admit. My Walther failed more than any of these and my Springfield Loaded, A1, and GI, failed more than my Taurus 1911s and way more than any of my polymer guns. Today's manufacturing techniques are FAR superior than 20 years ago, regardless of platform. I work in an engineering field and I can tell you that things are only getting better. ;) Find one that you can shoot, put a few hundred rounds through it to ensure your mags/gun are good to go and rock on.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.