- Thread starter Hattrick
- Start date
Also, the high bore axis on the SIG, relative to Glock, really did feel outdated to me... maybe it's the way I've been trained to grip a pistol, but it did feel top heavy. When I look at other brands of pistols (CZs being the exception), I see this high bore axis and it puts me off... but I'm just one guy on the internet with a bunch of opinions.
This high bore axis thing is BS. It matters a whole lot less than people think once you grip a pistol hard and learn how to manage (not eliminate) recoil.
BTW, the bore axis on any CZ (except the P-10 series) is quite a bit higher than glocks. CZs just hide it behind an illusion.
I'll hit you with a PM later on. I have a significant amount of seat time on that platform and the CZ P-09. I've also take Shadows for a spin before.
Depending on what you mean by competition, high dollars does not equate to high performance in your hands and outstanding work can be done with polymer pistols.
I personally don't fear anyone at a match because they have a pistol that costs twice as much and weighs 50% more than mine.
That info is not tin hat, it comes DIRECTLY from the Glock instructors at at armours acadamy
I mentioned in a post above that I did have malfunctions on Glocks and that more than 90% had to do with magazine springs.
Well, I found an old picture of the springs. Below are two springs both from a Gen 3 Model 27. The top spring was in one of two magazines that were shot regularly, and kept loaded, 24/7/365 for over 3 years. The bottom spring is a new replacement.
The malfunction was without exception a failure to feed on any of the last 3 or 4 rounds in the magazines. So, cycle your mags often, and inspect the springs often as well.
Well, I found an old picture of the springs. Below are two springs both from a Gen 3 Model 27. The top spring was in one of two magazines that were shot regularly, and kept loaded, 24/7/365 for over 3 years. The bottom spring is a new replacement.
The malfunction was without exception a failure to feed on any of the last 3 or 4 rounds in the magazines. So, cycle your mags often, and inspect the springs often as well.
Polygonal rifling makes it much more difficult. But not impossible.
But rifling marks are not the only evidence left behind by your pistol.
The rest of your post, with all the legal liability bullshit, is just that.
I mentioned in a post above that I did have malfunctions on Glocks and that more than 90% had to do with magazine springs.
Well, I found an old picture of the springs. Below are two springs both from a Gen 3 Model 27. The top spring was in one of two magazines that were shot regularly, and kept loaded, 24/7/365 for over 3 years. The bottom spring is a new replacement.
The malfunction was without exception a failure to feed on any of the last 3 or 4 rounds in the magazines. So, cycle your mags often, and inspect the springs often as well.
I consider magazine springs to be wear items. I replace them yearly in modified magazines with extended baseplates and once every five years or so on other magazines that are in normal use.
The 320 does look like it should filp and flop more than other guns, but recoil management on it, as far as getting back on target quickly, is phenomenally easy. That said, these are 9mm pistols, not 454 Casull revolvers, so they don't have much recoil of note, and the average man should be strong enough to deal with what they throw at you.Wow, I'm late to this party, but gonna chime in in response to the OP anyway...
I have a Gen 3 and a Gen 5. My issued duty gun is a Gen 2, and the gun I usually qualify with is a Gen 4.
The grip texture on the Gens 4 and 5 is WAY better than the previous versions.
As for triggers, some say there is no difference, but I do notice a difference between the Gen 4 and Gen 5 trigger feel. I prefer the Gen 5. It's still "mushy" like a Glock, but somehow it's also more tactile/crisp/positive/whatever... at least in my experience--especially on reset.
Using the same sights (Trijicon Bright n' Tough) on my 19 (Gen 5) as on my 17 (Gen 3) I can shoot tighter groups with the stubbier Gen 5... take that for whatever its worth. I did get to compare my Gen 5 19 against one of the Gen 4 17s at work (standard Glock steel sights). Still shot better with the Gen 5 19 (knocked down 8" plates faster and with fewer misses--could have been the due to the sights). Again, anecdotal, so take it with a grain of salt.
In my opinion, if you're buying a model you don't already have, get the Gen 5, if available. If you already have a Gen 3 or 4 of a particular model, only update if you have cash burning holes in your pockets.
I don't have a lot of experience with various brands of pistols, but I can say this. Shot my FIL's SIG 229 (or whatever the SEALs used to carry... 226?), and the trigger was a huge disappointment. Now, to be fair, his pistol is California'd, so it may be some kind of compliance thing, but there was literally NO reset on the trigger. When you let off looking for a reset, you just get a limp trigger (no spring force "assisting" your trigger finger back). Once you let ALL the way off the trigger, it kinda "falls" into place and you can shoot again... I really didn't know what to think... I was really disappointed. Also, the high bore axis on the SIG, relative to Glock, really did feel outdated to me... maybe it's the way I've been trained to grip a pistol, but it did feel top heavy. When I look at other brands of pistols (CZs being the exception), I see this high bore axis and it puts me off... but I'm just one guy on the internet with a bunch of opinions.
I once had to function test 4500 rounds of 115 gr FMJ through something like 25 different handguns. I got it done in a day plus the next morning, but by the end of it my hand was wore out enough that I could feel everything "wrong" with each of the handguns (mold seams, safeties that hit my thumb, anything that rubbed/moved under recoil, etc..).
What I noticed was the P226 and P228 put noticeably more strain on the tendons in my ring and pinky finger than everything else. Obviously people aren't often shooting 3000 rounds in a day so it's not like it's a huge deal but the higher bore axis does have an effect. That all said, I think MOST people are probably spending dramatically more time finding sight picture than what little benefits you'll get from lower bore axis on the pistol's recoil.
What I noticed was the P226 and P228 put noticeably more strain on the tendons in my ring and pinky finger than everything else. Obviously people aren't often shooting 3000 rounds in a day so it's not like it's a huge deal but the higher bore axis does have an effect. That all said, I think MOST people are probably spending dramatically more time finding sight picture than what little benefits you'll get from lower bore axis on the pistol's recoil.
Interesting.
This is just my assumption, but I'd actually think that the higher stress would come from pistols that had more of a tendency to twist in recoil, like the VP9 or Wilson x9, and less from something like the 320 which has less twist than any other pistol I've shot, other than a 1911. I actually think the lack of need to torque the hands in is what makes it so shootable. But again, it is a minor difference given the total recoil in a 9mm.
Most of my grief was from features that abraded or poked, not really from twist, and those Sigs were the only ones I noticed the extra strain from for 'flip'. Off hand the ones I remember being very nice were VP9, Walther PPQ, P320, S&W 39, (don't laugh) Luger P08, and Shadow 2. The Walther P99 felt like absolute trash, S&W M&P had bad mold seams that started getting annoying, Hi-power safety dug into my thumb but was otherwise nice. A lot of the single-stack CCW guns get really old really quick but I did like the G43X a lot (Only Glock I'd spend my money on). Most everything else was kind of in the mix. Didn't have a P-09 or P-10 for that test.
Oh yeah... the S&W Sigma is a complete piece of trash. Probably old news to most.
Oh yeah... the S&W Sigma is a complete piece of trash. Probably old news to most.
I mentioned in a post above that I did have malfunctions on Glocks and that more than 90% had to do with magazine springs.
Well, I found an old picture of the springs. Below are two springs both from a Gen 3 Model 27. The top spring was in one of two magazines that were shot regularly, and kept loaded, 24/7/365 for over 3 years. The bottom spring is a new replacement.
The malfunction was without exception a failure to feed on any of the last 3 or 4 rounds in the magazines. So, cycle your mags often, and inspect the springs often as well.
Steel magazine springs don't "take a set" from static loading. They instead lose preload from repeating cycling; i.e. loading and unloading.
Regardless of the cause, it's something that needs to be monitored for wear and replaced as necessary.
This
In case anyone wants to argue with this guy on springs..............just know he's an automotive suspension expert. You will lose that argument.
This
In case anyone wants to argue with this guy on springs..............just know he's an automotive suspension expert. You will lose that argument.
"Expert" is going too far, but I've been in the vicinity with men deserving of that term long enough to know what I'm talking about in this narrowly-defined instance.
E Bryant, Is it the same with a bow (like bow and arrow)? I'd always heard it takes a set after you cut it, and leave it stringed. Is it actually going through some number of shooting cycles that gets it to take initial set? V springs the same? It seems like once I've heated and tempered them, then put them in the vise for full compression 1x to verify temper, that they take a set. Or am I confusing 2 events: first compression "set" with a later "loss of pre-load"?
Oh, and I like Glocks, S&W M&P, SIG X5's, and all sort of CZ's. Gen5 over Gen4.
Oh, and I like Glocks, S&W M&P, SIG X5's, and all sort of CZ's. Gen5 over Gen4.
Last edited:
The first full compression of a spring will indeed cause it to take a "set". It's common to specify some number of compression cycles before measuring the free length of a spring. This is distinct from the changes that occur over subsequent cycles; the number of cycles between that first one and the loss of mechanical characteristics is the effective cycle life. Mankind has gotten pretty good at designing and manufacturing springs so we can get billions of cycles if a lot of things come together correctly. When they don't come together, then your pen fails to retract or your engine makes expensive noises.
Magazine springs suffer from what we would normally consider to be excessive strain (at least in the context of, say, automobiles or retractable ball-point pens); the ratio of free length to fully-compressed length is substantially greater than a suspension or valve spring. We're talking about taking a spring from about 10-12" free length (typical full-capacity pistol mag) down to coil bind at <1"; that's far more abusive than the front springs in whatever you're driving (recoil springs, in my experience, aren't designed much more kindly). Everyone here would gladly give up infinite cycle life to gain another round of capacity, so that's exactly the trade-off made by gun manufacturers.
The only time that plastic deformation/creep/“set" should be a concern with steel is if the temperature goes too high (roughly 0.4x the melting temperature in absolute units). This is around 400°C for steel; if you see that in a gun spring, this usually means it has been exposed to a fire. You'll know this temperature has occurred when the plastic bits of the magazine have turned into a puddle.
Springs made of polymers are different; some of those materials will indeed take a set at room temperature. I'm skeptical that this would be a problem with the materials used in modern bows, but would not be surprised at all if it was an issue within the lifetime of the grey-haired guy behind the counter of the local archery shop (especially if we are taking wooden primitive bows).
Yep - lots of academic and practical research in this area. Lead-free solder and tin plating are amusing ones at room temperature (and by "amusing, I mean "the unpredictable formation of dendrites creates random short circuit conditions"). Some stainless steel will creep at relatively low temperature, and environmental effects like radiation can also effect this behavior, so don't make springs from 304 and install them in a nuclear reactor.
We know that "typical" steels do not exhibit this behavior because we've been bolting and riveting together buildings and bridges from steel for over a hundred years without loss of fastener preload.
I've heard this dozens of times over the years, but have some experience that makes me question it:
Many of us used to have a problem at work when turning in our handguns and magazines to the armory. When clearing the pistol, some rounds would just fall out of the magazine because the spring failed to push the follower/next round up against the feed lip. It instead just sat there until we shook it loose and it then moved the follower.
After making the armorers aware, we have not had that issue in a few years now, so I think they may have started some kind of rotation or something. But I have seen several times in life magazines whose spring is perpetually compressed just spill out rounds.
My original post is obviously anecdotal. But there is more to the story. First, I said I shot the gun regularly with the offending magazines. That meant like once a month, sometimes every two months. At that time I was shooting my 1911's a lot. In the meantime they were always loaded, and with the Plus one bases. I'm by no means a spring scientist. But here's the rest of the story:
When the failures to feed started getting really bad I took the gun to the gunsmith at the range and explained the problem. The first thing he did was to take the magazines apart. He looked at the springs, no measurements or nothing, went back in his office and came back with two new springs put the magazines back together and said "that will be 20 bucks". I asked him? "How do you know that's the problem"? I'm always skeptical of quick fixes....
He answered "I see this all the time in carry Glocks. Cycle your loaded magazines often and the springs will last a lot longer".
I've never had another problem with springs since, and that was over 15 years ago. Then again I cycle through at least three magazines for the loaded rotation monthly.
Last edited:
Bought a Gen 5, first Glock, to see what all the hoopla was about. I don't like not having a thumb safety, too dangerous for me personally without one, and full disclosure, never shot the pistol yet, actually have about 7 guns Ive bought this year I haven't shot yet, and the Glock doesn't impress me when I just hold it and dry fire in my apartment. Feels Clunky to me. 
I always felt the same way about Glocks coming off of 1911s... even the M9.Bought a Gen 5, first Glock, to see what all the hoopla was about. I don't like not having a thumb safety, too dangerous for me personally without one, and full disclosure, never shot the pistol yet, actually have about 7 guns Ive bought this year I haven't shot yet, and the Glock doesn't impress me when I just hold it and dry fire in my apartment. Feels Clunky to me.
When I think about what a hand gun is meant to do, and what I want it to do, for the price, I can't really justify anything more expensive than a Glock.
One thing I find somewhat comical is seeing pics of guys' KAC rifles with CompM5s and $1000+ dollar suppressors with a humble Glock in stock trim right next to it. But there's definitely a reason why all the .mil guys switched to Glocks in recent years.
I have most of the guns discussed in this thread. The P10/320/VP9/etc etc etc.
I carry a G34. It does a lot of things that float my boat. AT some point a P10 may creep in there, I'm not sure yet. The G34 replaced a CZ P01 Omega that I still like a lot.
I carry a G34. It does a lot of things that float my boat. AT some point a P10 may creep in there, I'm not sure yet. The G34 replaced a CZ P01 Omega that I still like a lot.
I’ve used a Gen 4 22, Gen 5 17, and Gen 5 34 all on duty. All Gen 5 34s are MOS. Gen 5 doesn’t have finger grooves and have the newer Glock marksman barrel. Aside from those differences I haven’t noticed anything that really stands out. Some of the newer Gen 5 also have front serrations on the slide.
Absolute 100% falsehood.. The magic of ‘metallurgical science’ is commonplace in the world of forensics these days, dude. It’s called ‘striation’. Not only will they zero a bullet right down to the exact barrel/rifling on any/every single gen 5 barrel on the planet, they’ll prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt. Lord have mercy
See I'm the opposite. I will never own, let alone carry, a pistol that needs to have a safety manipulated to make it fire.
Handguns without manual safeties are not dangerous. They don't go off by themselves. Incompetent users are the danger.
Who told you that?
The standard issue handguns are the M17 and/or M18. Neither of which is a Glock.
100% agree
For a carry gun (for me) a straight up factory Glock 26 or 19
No thumb safety
Aaannnnddddd
Definitely no fucking magazine safety disconnect (or whatever they call it)
A strong opinion for or against a thumb safety is almost always a lack of practice. None of my carry guns have safeties but I'm certain with a little practice I can master anything. My Open and Limited guns have thumb safeties and I have no issues moving between them and a G19/34 or M&P. An evening of dryfire is pretty much all it takes anymore.
Or it could be a personal opinion based on someone’s experience.
"I don't like XYZ because some stuff someone said on the internet that I don't know and I have never met."
Practice and training; it's nearly universal.
What if Glock made a bolt-action rifle, an AR15, or a shotgun, all with no thumb safety, hmmmmmm…
Not sure I’d want to hunt with you!
(Half in jest, stirring the pot, sorry)
I own guns like Glocks, as well as 1911’s and DA/SA’s like CZ’s.
I do get that Glocks and similar pistols are pretty safe, especially when used with a holster that covers the trigger guard completely. And yeah, pistols tend to be used/carried a little differently than long guns and in different scenarios by citizens vs the military.
But it’s worth thinking about.
The best safety may be one’s brain, but my brain sometimes throws an error, especially when a beautiful lady walks by. Luckily, hot babes in bikinis are seldom seen in the areas I hunt, so I don’t ND. lolol
Edit: Full disclosure - I ND only while hunting AND perusing the Maggie’s Motivational thread in the Bear Pit. BLAMMO
Oh yeah, by ND I mean ejaculate
Not sure I’d want to hunt with you!
(Half in jest, stirring the pot, sorry)
I own guns like Glocks, as well as 1911’s and DA/SA’s like CZ’s.
I do get that Glocks and similar pistols are pretty safe, especially when used with a holster that covers the trigger guard completely. And yeah, pistols tend to be used/carried a little differently than long guns and in different scenarios by citizens vs the military.
But it’s worth thinking about.
The best safety may be one’s brain, but my brain sometimes throws an error, especially when a beautiful lady walks by. Luckily, hot babes in bikinis are seldom seen in the areas I hunt, so I don’t ND. lolol
Edit: Full disclosure - I ND only while hunting AND perusing the Maggie’s Motivational thread in the Bear Pit. BLAMMO
Oh yeah, by ND I mean ejaculate
Last edited:
Possibly, but it’s far more likely to be based on someone’s lack of experience.
I have had several people over the years express similar concerns.
Nearly always, a little training is all it takes to get them over that fear.
The fact that Glocks (and nearly every other poly framed, striker fired pistol) are the predominant issue handgun for police and military the World over is pretty solid evidence that the lack of a manual safety is a non issue.
Yes and no.
Can I get used to one? You bet. I've made harder transitions happen on my own (irons to optics).
Do I want to waste the time mastering something that is still adding one more link that needs to work right in the sequence of events to fire a handgun?
Absolutely not.
Anyone who requires a manual safely to be safe with a firearm, needs to meet up “oh don’t worry, it’s unloaded” crew and take their guns to the local Sheriff’s dept and turn them in, for everyone’s safety.
Christ there are a good amount of people who can’t remember the fan/light switch in the freakin bathroom….
Ah, but the safety is the high trigger pull my friend (but you knew that).I agree, all I use on a regular basis is glocks, and sometimes a super Blackhawk 44 mag, also without a manual safety.
Sorry... I shouldn't have said "all the .mil guys."
I've read a bunch of articles on it: SOF guys, in particular, are running Glocks. Even when the "standard issue" pistol for the army was the M9, the Rangers were running Glocks at least since 2009, according to the guys I went to WLC with.
I think the M17/18 was adopted in 2017... some of the below articles predate that change by a few months to a year, so take the usual grain of salt. One is from 2018, and one from 2019.
MARSOC to drop Colt 1911s from service -
It appears that the last active duty component of the U.S. Military has retired the tried and true 1911. In an article by the Marine Corps Times, Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC), has officially announced that it is withdrawing the .45 ACP Colt Rail Guns (M45 MEUSOC 1911)from service...
www.thefirearmblog.com
Marines Allow Operators to Choose Glocks over MARSOC .45s
The Marine Corps has authorized MARSOC operators to carry Glock pistols, since many of the elite outfit's members prefer the popular 9mm over the custom .45 pistols the service bought them in 2012.
U.S. Army Rangers Choose Glock 19!
Several U.S. Navy SEAL’s and U.S. Marines Special Operations (MARSOC) selection of the Glock 19 as their primary handgun. It is reported the Army’s Delta Force carries the Glock 22. Previously the SEAL’s had mostly used the Sig Sauer P226, and the Marines had skirted with the MARSOC 1911. This...
www.bluesheepdog.com
Navy SEALs chose Glock 19 as their new sidearm
After a few decades, Navy SEAL operators will get a new sidearm. Navy SEALs chose Glock 19 as the replacement for their favorite Sig Sauer P226. The
special-ops.org
How the U.S. Military Slowly Fell in Love with Glock
Why was adoption of the Glock initially slow? How did it overcome those barriers? Why has it replaced 1911s, Sigs and Berettas as the sidearm of elite units?
nationalinterest.org
Of course, you and I are totally safe. World-class safe, I reckon.
But you see, one way the manual safety can be thought about is that it is for all the other guys milling around you, carelessly swinging their muzzles past your eyeballs, neck, and and crotch, so they don’t blow your head or balls off.
But I’m not anti-trigger safety. I own pistols like these, remember? Proponents of all the major types of firearm safeties all have merit, all have pluses and minuses. Horses for courses and all that.
Just think: if everyone, including you and I, was so perfectly safe, so perfectly competent, and so incredibly lucky to never stumble, be surprised, or get tired, well, then we wouldn’t need manual safeties, heavy triggers, grip safeties, drop safeties, loaded chamber indicators, OR trigger safeties on any gun.
We’d just have a simple hair trigger on everything. Because we are all so perfectly safe.
I never mentioned grip safeties, drop safeties, non-hair triggers, or loaded chamber indicators. The reason is self evident in my post.
I carry a Rem 700 for hunting. It is not unusual to find that the safety has been erroneously knocked to the off position. You can bet while hunting with my hunting buddy, I “stumble” get “surprised” and very “tired”.
Fortunately for my hunting partner, none of the above issues impacts his safety. I do NOT rely on the safety to keep him safe. I doubt he would hunt with me if that were the case. “Oh it’s ok, my safety is on”……..
Similar threads
