I’ve never read much of anything about glocks. I’ve owned one and sold one.
Welcome to the Internet, where having a strong opinion based upon a cursory inspection and misapprehension of basic functionality makes everyone an expert.
Stranger
I haven’t held them side by side, so what’s the difference? The official figures are identical widths, and the XD is 0.02" longer (Springfield also only gives the ones digit so not sure if that’s rounding). The G19 is 0.5" shorter in height is all, is that a huge difference?
No, I think they’re about the same size for a given barrel length. Neither are particularly concealable, but then, anything larger than a Walther PPK is really pretty difficult to conceal with on body carry from a trained eye without using a deep IWB in baggy trousers.
Stranger
I own a Glock .40 Gen 4, but I’ve lately been wanting to get something in the pocket pistol type size and I really like the .22 mini revolvers but idk if they are considered more of a fun novelty or what, anyone have an opinion on what are the best options for smaller guns/revolvers/whatever?
You mean the North American Arms single action revolvers? They’re well made for what they are, and they’re not going to blow up in your hand, but with that grip and barrel length you aren’t going to get any useful accuracy. They’re basically made for contact length encounters, especially the .22 Magnum that will blow most of the power charge out the muzzle still burning. The .22 LR has probably killed more people outside of the battlefield, but it usually does it slowly through infection and because it is so widely used in thr cheap handguns used by many criminals. I’d rather have a solid baton than for defense than rely on the stopping potential of a .22 pistol.
Stranger
Yeah that’s the one I meant I guess its really only practical as a “gut-buster” in some confined area where there is little room to move.
I don’t have anything against Glocks, but I’m not terribly impressed with them either. I don’t think that they are bad, but I don’t like the cheap plastic feel of them. If someone gave me one I wouldn’t refuse it, but I’m not about to go out and buy one for myself.
My self-defense weapon is a .44 magnum revolver, basically Dirty Harry’s gun (do you feel lucky, punk?).
My favorite handgun is a model 1851 Navy revolver. It’s cap and ball so it’s not so practical for self defense.
The only semi-automatic pistol I own is a .22 target pistol.
Problems with the neighborhood grizzlies?
Stranger
Personally I’m not a huge fan of Glock handguns. Their grip angle isn’t comfortable for me, the trigger isn’t great and they are simply a boring, blocky design - there’s no external hammers or anything interesting about them.
From a technical perspective, I accept the design is simple, rugged, more or less noob-proof, and functional. The Glock is also quite cheap, which adds to its popularity.
The New Zealand Defence Forces have recently decided to replace their Sig-Sauer P226 sidearms with Glock 17s, which I personally think is a stupid decision, but their rationale is the Glocks are waaaay cheaper (The Firearms Blog says they’re paying about NZD$950 each for the guns and lifetime servicing support) and as a backup weapon they’re perfectly cromulent and will function reliably in a rapid draw-quicksight-fire capacity without any hassles.
If I was a soldier and had a choice between the two, I’d want the Sig-Sauer though, no question.
Answering the OP’s question, the best “carry” handgun for me is small and simple. While I’d like to think of myself as cool and collected under pressure, the reality is I’m a middle-aged, cubicle-dwelling guy who trains only 3 or 4 times a year. I decided the best for me was the Ruger LCR. This is lightweight and simple to operate (no chambering rounds required) and is fairly comfortable. I’m reasonably accurate out to 20 feet with it. It’s small enough I can carry tucked into my swimsuit when we’re out on the lake.
The best handgun is one you’ll actually carry. I find the larger ones get really uncomfortable after awhile.
As for the Glocks, no opinion either way. I’ve never owned one.
A video of a fully automatic Glock and an extra long magazine.
They said it can fire at 1200 rounds per minute (20/sec)
It reminds me of an Uzi.
I want to like the Glocks but so far I haven’t found one that feels comfortable to shoot. I was excited about the Glock 43 when it came out but frankly would rather have a Ruger LC9s for the trigger and the general feel in my hand.
They all feel about the same in the hand, with variations for grip thickness. If one of them doesn’t work for you, none of them probably will. I personally find that it points way high for me, but I grew up shooting the Hi-Power so it and the CZ/Sig pattern guns point naturally to my training, while people who learned to shoot with revolvers seem to like the grip angle of the Glock better. And the Glock triggers are…well, not abysmal, but gritty. It says something that you prefer the trigger pull of a stock Ruger to that of a Glock. Unfortunately, trigger cleanness and break weight are just not properties that most service gun manufacturers pay much attention to, which is another reason I prefer the Sig despite the price premium.
Stranger
I shoot and/or own guns regularly, but I have never shot a Glock/have no opinion on them.
I like revolvers mostly and Glock doesn’t make them. I have never fired a Glock and I don’t have any friends who own them, either. I am thinking of getting a 9mm semi automatic, but the idea of getting a Glock never crossed my mind. I’m looking at Rugers, Springfields or Kahrs, since I have friends who own and like them and I’ve shot them.
I have 3 Glocks, two issued to me one I own. I don’t know how many rounds I’ve put through them but I’ve never had a failure and the bullets go where I want them to go.
What are the significant disadvantages to high capacity magazines? Some more bulk and weight? A less comfortable grip? Anything else?
How common is it for non-SF, non-sniping, non-ambushing people to fire precisely aimed shots when fighting within handgun range?
This ( http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html ) suggests that most of your shots will miss.
I haven’t found much info on how many hits are typically required to bring down someone but it’s got to be more than one on average, especially if you want them to cease being a threat immediately.
I like my Ruger LCR in .38SP. Easy to carry, will not jam or stovepipe, reliable. And yeah, again, easy to carry. Like pullin said upthread. The best carry gun is one you will actually carry.
That’s a little too simplistic. I would not recommend Glock to, for example, someone I know has poor trigger finger habits. That is a recipe for danger.
High capacity pistols have larger and wider frames, typically require larger grip and trigger reach (though manufacurers have improved on this), and the magazines are more expensive and stand out further on the belt.
It is possible for anyone with a modicum of training to overcome the spray & pray impulse, place the front sight on the target, align the slde, and fire with good trigger control. The key is training as you would in a firefight, over and over and over until safe and controlled handling becomes innately conditioned rather than just standing at a range stall and plugging rounds at a motionless target. Under stress, you will repeat and exaggerate all the habits you’ve learned in training, good and bad. One key is to dry fire practice regularly to instill good trigger technique, which can be done at home (making sure, of course, to load the chamber with a snap cap and remove all live ammunition to another room, and otherwise practice safe gun handling rules). The fact that many engagements with law enforcement result in police firing off dozens of rounds illustrates the lack of effective training standards in law enforcement, which poss a danger to other officers and the public at large. A single large caliber hit to the hip, kidney, heart, or head will almost certainly immobilize if not incapacitate a threatening individual.
Stranger
I have two. I’m not a “fanboy” by any means, my personal arsenal consists of many different makes and models, but I have no problem suggesting Glocks to people looking for a quality firearm. They’ve been around for a long time, they are well regarded, and they are competitively priced. As with any firearm they have their downsides, common complaints are the grip angle, chamber support, and disassembly procedure, but in the end it’s up to the owner to determine whether or not they can live with those issues.