They can’t be that reliable if they were the only gun that couldn’t take that round.
They only won due to glock not hitting the modularity requirements. There was a law suit even. Read more into it, Sig provided a turd, Glock didnt get with the times. Glock still dominates military and LEO sales and is equal in the competitive market. Show me proof glock had issues regarding function during that test? Sig had lots just read that report. Also theres been numerous PDs that switched from p320 back to Glocks due to the QC issues.
Their score was less than sigs. The lawsuit claimed there were biases during the testing and that led to the lawsuit that they lost
I provided proof from credible sources. Also they cant be unreliable if they dominate the world in military and LE sales and have that much of a presence in competitive shooting. Sig has 10x more recalls due to QC but somehow that isnt a big deal? The only recall you acknowledge is the one against Glock…that sounds more like bias,tbh.
Did you read the report? Show me a military report from another country that uses glock with those issues?
And how many countries and PDs use Glocks…yet none of those issues, the Sig getting picked was just pinching pennies and they got what they paid for…a piece of shit. Glock failed on modularity and price , most likely.
We have went at it over this on here in the past. I am a former p320 guy. I really tried to like it but its a peice of shit, in general. I dont particularly like Glock either but Glock makes a functional crudely basic pistol with a good track record in most circles including from guys in the industry that have far more credentials than a one-off ammo manufacturer. So what if it cant shoot every type of ammo when at least it shoots most types of ammo unlike the p320 which now has the military ordering special ammo due to reliability issues.
I know the 320 was a turd. It’s because they tried to compete with cheaper guns. Sig P320’s are an economy model and they are crap. I can agree here.
I agree with you on that. Now thanks to you I am going to have to go start a “fuck Glock” thread to even out my mood. Really plastic is meant for sex toys and steel or aluminum is meant for real guns. The government probably would rather arm people with whats cheapest, not best.
Of coarse it’s biased. They are reliable because of their loose tolerances which is the exact same reason they are the weakest chambered semi auto on the market and was proven by this rounds recall.
I won’t say you can’t throw them in the mud and leave them for a year and pick them up again and shoot them. What I am saying is they aim like dog shit, look like bricks, triggers that are sloppy as hell, and an action that feels like sand paper to rack back. And yes that’s all opinions that makes it biased. Is it B/S? Nope it honesty.
Did any one notice that this recall was due to their .45acp ammo. It was only .45acp and just for a few months of mfg. They fixed the BAD AMMO now all of their ammo works with Glocks.???
So what are we debating about? You can now shoot all of their improved ammo in all Glocks.
IMO knowing what I know about reloading and pushing the limit. Here is my theory.
Mind you it is just a theory. Bad thin weak or overly brittle brass in looser chambers can cause devastating results, especially with hot loads.
A frangible bullet compared to a lead one is lighter for its size and has less malleability. Thus it must be matched closed to the barrels size as it will not conform to the grooves and seal like a copper jacketed lead will( how do I know this I have dug them out of the bank, the solid copper and frags have no rifling marks on them, except maybe a scratch or 2…
I have experimented with frags and nobody has figured out how to make them weigh as much and act like a copper jacket lead bullet.You can not change the properties of metal beyond a certain point. I know, I alloy metal for a living
. So… to make them work well, this means a higher peak pressure right from the start instead of a slowed build up of pressure being a bullet that is sealing to the barrel as it goes.
My guess is since the Glock was designed to be a battle gun and was made to loose tolerances, so It could shoot any ammo at the time.Along with the fact that .45 acp is a bigger cambering than another available clambering.
I figure there was a problem with the brass they were using. Maybe the alloy was not right or they were just cutting corners to save money.THE BRASS was defective and could not handle the pressures in the less supportive chambers, thus causing issues up to and including severe damage to the gun, and a safety issue…So recall, switch to a different brass mfg process or alloy, shift the blame by the way the recall post was worded and a few reps spreading modified info into the web. Mark it up as lesson learned then restart production.
I agree with most of that actually. Its a decent workhorse but ugly and about as refined as a sand paper dildo. If I didnt want to bother with tons of training, armorers etc and had to arm a group of people with handguns it would be Glock …its simple , crude and dependable. If I wanted the best handgun possible I wouldnt even consider Glock. Their motto shouldnt be “Perfection” it should be “It functions”
Do the gen 5s have unsupported chambers? Ive blown a Glock up , a gen 2 .40 s&w model. I was using pretty hot handloads.
I believe it is a mater of some ones customer service wording things in a way that is somewhat truthful but deceiving enough to give a different mental image. Those shifting the majority of the blame to another party.
Of course nobody would do that right because us Americans are always honest and forthright.
It was only a recall for glock owners, no one else. At the end of the statement it says the recall is for no other caliber or handgun
Only for .45ACP Glock owners Using Only RIP Ammo in .45acp made within a couple months. Problem fixed, So no problem.
Besides I personally would never own a 45 ACP Glock. I think it is a bad caliber match for a Glock. Besides My colt is .45 acp and it was specifically designed around that caliber… So If I were to go with a Glock for the next purchase or build it would be a .40sw with a 9mm conversion barrel.
P.S. if you ever hear me say “I really like Pie” that means I have pretty much said all I am going to say about something and not dishonoring your opinion I prefer to bow out of the conversation right now. Least till the subject changes a bit.
BTW… I realy like pie
Apple pie is for people llke lonewolf, real men eat cherry pie.
So the weakest link was?
I’ve had a couple G21’s and like them
that said I have no striker fire guns at this time
Not that i think the 45 Glock is crap. I really have no opinion of them in 45 at all.
Would not own one as a first Glock purchase.
Just that I am nostalgic purists, if that makes any sense.
So I like owning my “first purchase” guns in one of the calibers they were 1st designed to shoot. So as far, as I know, the first Glocks were produced in 9mm and 40 SW. I have never owned a Glock. So I would want my first Glock in 9mm or a 40SW Glock.
I know that may sound weird to some, but that is just how I roll.
I wouldnt buy a Glock in anything but 9mm or .40 sw anymore …even then im not feeling the tactical turds anymore. Like @mjrfd99 says “plastic is for dildos” , my guess is thats why Antifas love them. It kind of feels at home for them somewhere between a dildo, hair dryer and an airsoft gun.