4th gen glock revealed

Glockaholic said:
the rear grip inserts are like the M&P from Smith & Wesson, change the inserts depending on your hand size.
Click to expand...

A bad copy job if you ask me.

They don't seem to get that a grip has multiple dimensions.

Their new backstraps just address the 'depth' of the grip size and not the width at all.


Not being a Glock afficianado, it looks like just about every other Glock to me.

.
 
Talk about a "tough house"! BTW, I love my Glocks. Not one KABOOM, FTF, FTE in 10 years. Eats everything I throw at them. And it's got no gizmo's sticking out all over it to flip, push, pull or squeeze. Just point and shoot. I even gave up on cleaning them 5 years ago, no need. Lube? Don't need no stinkin lube.
 
Not being a "Glock guy" if I saw that in the case at a gun store I don't think I would notice it was any different from a new 3rd gen Glock. If I did notice something clearly different with the grip than I would ask to see it since currently I wouldn't buy a Glock because I don't like the grip.

Of coarse being from MA I wouldn't care anyway as I can't have one even if I wanted one. [angry]
 
Titan said:
A bad copy job if you ask me.

They don't seem to get that a grip has multiple dimensions.

Their new backstraps just address the 'depth' of the grip size and not the width at all.
.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you would address that. Glock already has just about the narrowest double stack handguns on the market. You can't make it any narrower without radically altering the design of the pistol. You'd also lose capacity in the process.

I guess my point is, you can't get there from here, not unless you want Glock to start making single stack handguns. (Which some folks would love
to see... )

-Mike
 
FreeWillie said:
Glocks are on the Approved Roster dated 09-2009. The roster does not classify by generation.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. Most dealers are scared away from selling them by the CMR940 (AG's consumer safety handgun regulations) bullcrap.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
I'm not sure how you would address that. Glock already has just about the narrowest double stack handguns on the market. You can't make it any narrower without radically altering the design of the pistol. You'd also lose capacity in the process.

I guess my point is, you can't get there from here, not unless you want Glock to start making single stack handguns. (Which some folks would love
to see... )

-Mike
Click to expand...

Mike,

You're right, of course, about there not being much of an option, but one of the reasons I dislike Glocks, is the double stack grip width (and any double stack grip), since I can only have 10 rounds in MA. I understand pre-ban mags can be had, but given the 10 round general limit and the (more or less) inherent limit in 1911s, I've just never had any warmth for a double stack grips.

I love my M&Ps!
 
M1911 said:
But they don't meet the AG's consumer protection regulations, and thus new Glocks are not generally available in MA.
Click to expand...

I was being factitious. The Approved Roster means nothing. The AG has the final say. So explain to me why we have an Approved Roster. Let's petition Deval to rid us of the hacks that produce a roster that is meaningless. Let's start holding them to their own devices. When hacks start loosing jobs because another hack has more power, well you see where this can go, I hope.
 
Last edited:
Titan said:
Mike,

You're right, of course, about there not being much of an option, but one of the reasons I dislike Glocks, is the double stack grip width (and any double stack grip), since I can only have 10 rounds in MA. I understand pre-ban mags can be had, but given the 10 round general limit and the (more or less) inherent limit in 1911s, I've just never had any warmth for a double stack grips.

I love my M&Ps!
Click to expand...

I'm confused by your statement here.

The M+P's are also double stack handguns, even the .45 is, although with the .45 its a little different because the grip is likely thinner than it is on a Glock. The 9/40/357 M+Ps are not really more or less thicker than a Glock is of the same caliber. The only thing that really changes is the front to back size of the grip due to the inserts.

-Mike
 
FreeWillie said:
I was being factitious. The Approved Roster means nothing. The AG has the final say. So explain to me why we have an Approved Roster.
Click to expand...

The roster itself isn't entirely meaningless. You might want to read this handgun compliance faq stickied in the MA gun laws forum:

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=37553

There are TWO tiers of compliance in MA. One is by law- that's what the list is for. The other tier is via the AG's office through BS "consumer safety" regulations imposed by the office.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
The roster itself isn't entirely meaningless. You might want to read this handgun compliance faq stickied in the MA gun laws forum:

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=37553

There are TWO tiers of compliance in MA. One is by law- that's what the list is for. The other tier is via the AG's office through BS "consumer safety" regulations imposed by the office.

-Mike
Click to expand...

So the AG has the final say and the roster means nothing and is BS. So let's demand that the "list" fall to the AG and lets fire all the people that generate the useless roster. Big savings for a state that is well over budget.

I hope that you're getting my drift here..... why do we need two agencies when we can do with one? Let's dump the hacks that make the fake roster.
 
Last edited:
drgrant said:
I'm confused by your statement here.

The M+P's are also double stack handguns, even the .45 is, although with the .45 its a little different because the grip is likely thinner than it is on a Glock. The 9/40/357 M+Ps are not really more or less thicker than a Glock is of the same caliber. The only thing that really changes is the front to back size of the grip due to the inserts.

-Mike
Click to expand...

I understand, it's just that the M&Ps feel (to me, at least) much less blocky and bulky than most double stacks. I see the inserts on the new Glocks as essentially a one dimensional fix, whereas the M&P backstraps effect essentially two dimensions.

Perhaps it would have been simpler, if I just said that the M&P was the only double stack I fancy due to its superior ergonomics.

.
 
drgrant said:
The roster itself isn't entirely meaningless. There are TWO tiers of compliance in MA. One is by law- that's what the list is for. The other tier is via the AG's office through BS "consumer safety" regulations imposed by the office.
-Mike
Click to expand...

So lets get gun loving Roster People and a gun loving AG..........................

Oh wait I just remembered where I live, forget I said that [rofl] [rofl] [rofl] .
 
Do you think the cheesy plastic guide rods will break just at the wrong time like the other generation Glocks did?
Maybe I could melt one down and make a carrying case for a decent gun.
 
jasons said:
So there should be no legal issue adding the second cut-out to a pre-ban mag, right? (As long as a mag still works in the gun it was originally designed for it's legal to modify it?)
Click to expand...

You might land yourself in felony territory with that. Not because the modification itself is illegal, but because Glock's legal department has stated that a mag is pre-ban unless it has an ambidextrous mag release cutout or LEO/military only markings.

So depending on how much the cutout you make looks like the Glock factory cutout, you could get hosed.

fbirdquik6 said:
Why not just buy a real M&P?
Click to expand...

Plastic rails, 10 round mags only in ban states, lack of resistance to rust...

drgrant said:
I guess my point is, you can't get there from here, not unless you want Glock to start making single stack handguns. (Which some folks would love
to see... )
Click to expand...

They have with the G36, which is excellant gun as far as I've seen.

Kahr's (especially the polymer ones) are nearly identical to Glocks, striker fired, only they're slim framed. I have no idea why Glock hasn't cornered that part of the market, because it obviously is working out for Kahr.

I'd really like to see Glock get into slim frames.

xring said:
Do you think the cheesy plastic guide rods will break just at the wrong time like the other generation Glocks did?
Click to expand...

I've never once had one break in the tens of thousands of rounds I've put through Glocks, and I've never seen so much as a picture of a broken guiderod.

Change it out every 3,000 rounds as suggested and you should be fine.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Glock 21 MOS Gen 5 FTF issues
Replies
23
Views
519
Cuz
Cuz
Glock 29 Gen 5: Subcompact 10mm
Replies
27
Views
589
Alex9661
Alex9661
Juniors First Glock
Replies
9
Views
289
SKumar
SKumar
13 Democrat State Attorneys General Target Glock, Decry ‘Machine-Gun Glocks’
Replies
9
Views
366
Reptile
Reptile
Glock OEM Performance Trigger(s)
Replies
7
Views
123
Ron Jablonski
R
Back
Top Bottom