Glock 2.0 - what the Gen IV should have been

[barrelmaker_2002]

I own a G19. Specifically, a Gen III RTF2 with regular sights. I carry it. I shoot IDPA with it. I bought a Lone Wolf barrel so I could reload for it. Pretty much one of two guns that I shoot way more than any other.

My previous Glock was a G26. I sold that to fund the purchase the G19.

Anyway, I like Glocks, but I am realistic. Some people do not. And more importantly, the Gen IV Glock was/is a disaster. More of a disaster than the original RTF finish, which I hated*. They should be embarrassed for taking a warmed-over idea, executing it poorly, changing a few settings on the milling machine and calling it a new gun.

So I propose that Glock design a new gun. A Glock 2.0 if you will.

What they should keep includes:
- same basic sizes, calibers, etc.
- same finish, same materials
- the RTF2 and the Gen III grip texturing (customer choice)
- smallest # of parts possible

What they should change:
- fix the trigger for pete's sake. The XD and the FNP both have better striker triggers.
- add a second strike capability to the trigger (or stop saying it is like a revolver)
- add front slide serrations
- add a rail to the compact guns**
- modify design to allow dis-assembly w/o pulling the trigger
- slightly extend the length of the take down lever ends
- make a grip plug standard or close off that section to dirt
- make the trigger guard less blocky. Square it fine, but the current shape is pointless. Well actually it is pointy and that I do not like
- undercut the trigger guard more
- make the back strap adjustable, but use a system that does not suck (like with slide-in inserts)

Anyway, I like my Glock a lot but I am not blind to its flaws. The design is over 20 years old. It is time for a significant upgrade and/or second model.

I am putting on my flame suit and I await your replies.

Notes:
* I love the RTF2
** a rail may not be the most useful thing on a smaller pistol, but they look cool and cool = sales (sad but true).

 

[Don]

I won't flame you for owning a glock, I own 3 myself. However I will flame you for the apple computer.

 

[Cam]

I own a G19. Specifically, a Gen III RTF2 with regular sights. I carry it. I shoot IDPA with it. I bought a Lone Wolf barrel so I could reload for it. Pretty much one of two guns that I shoot way more than any other.

My previous Glock was a G26. I sold that to fund the purchase the G19.

Anyway, I like Glocks, but I am realistic. Some people do not. And more importantly, the Gen IV Glock was/is a disaster. More of a disaster than the original RTF finish, which I hated*. They should be embarrassed for taking a warmed-over idea, executing it poorly, changing a few settings on the milling machine and calling it a new gun.

So I propose that Glock design a new gun. A Glock 2.0 if you will.

What they should keep includes:
- same basic sizes, calibers, etc.
- same finish, same materials
- the RTF2 and the Gen III grip texturing (customer choice)
- smallest # of parts possible

What they should change:
- fix the trigger for pete's sake. The XD and the FNP both have better striker triggers.
- add a second strike capability to the trigger (or stop saying it is like a revolver)
- add front slide serrations
- add a rail to the compact guns**
- modify design to allow dis-assembly w/o pulling the trigger
- slightly extend the length of the take down lever ends
- make a grip plug standard or close off that section to dirt
- make the trigger guard less blocky. Square it fine, but the current shape is pointless. Well actually it is pointy and that I do not like
- undercut the trigger guard more
- make the back strap adjustable, but use a system that does not suck (like with slide-in inserts)

Anyway, I like my Glock a lot but I am not blind to its flaws. The design is over 20 years old. It is time for a significant upgrade and/or second model.

I am putting on my flame suit and I await your replies.

Notes:
* I love the RTF2
** a rail may not be the most useful thing on a smaller pistol, but they look cool and cool = sales (sad but true).

What makes them a "disaster"? Because you don't like it? My wife finally wants a Glock after handling the new model.

Buy the XD or whatever if the trigger is better.

Did Glock at some point say that the trigger is like a revolver? If so, I've missed it.

The compact guns do indeed have a rail. Look at the front of your 19.

Whats wrong with the disassembly procedure? Pull the trigger and don't worry about it.

The space where you want a grip plug is there for a reason.

Where is the trigger guard "pointy"? Can't square it off without points.

There is more to the changes than what you are seeing on the outside. Not saying it is worse or better, just that I don't know if you have all your facts.

There you go! Fixed most of your identified flaws. (You did say you had a flame suit on!)

Bottom line, I don't understand why people get on here and makes posts like this. If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple. I don't like Browning Hi-Powers, but that doesn't mean they are full of "design flaws". If the Glock design is 20 years old, how old is the 1911 design for cryin' out loud? They don't change it because it works!

Rant over.

 

[matthewdanger]

Not sure I agree on the disaster part.

I like (maybe even love) the Glock trigger just the way it is. Light doesn't always equal good. The Glock trigger's main strength is the reset. It is fast and very positive, especially with the NY1 trigger spring. I wrote a bit about it here: My Favorite Glock Trigger Set*Up Jerking the Trigger

I definitely agree heartily on these points:
- undercut the trigger guard more
- make the back strap adjustable, but use a system that does not suck (like with slide-in inserts)
- make a grip plug standard or close off that section to dirt

I could live with this but wouldn't want to pay extra for it:
- add front slide serrations

Is there enough length on the dust cover of the compact models to allow for a rail with normal dimensions?

 

[Cam]

I won't flame you for the Apple! This makes you a smart man!

 

[CVictor]

My complaints about glocks:

Sloppy over-sized sights
Weird grip angle
Unsupported chamber
Uglier than sin

 

[Joe Williams]

What the Glock needs is a factory barrel with fully supported chamber, and conventional rifling.

I would say a better grip shape, but there's something about the Gen 4 Glock shape that I like.

 

[Vince49]

I own a G19. Specifically, a Gen III RTF2 with regular sights. I carry it. I shoot IDPA with it. I bought a Lone Wolf barrel so I could reload for it. Pretty much one of two guns that I shoot way more than any other.

My previous Glock was a G26. I sold that to fund the purchase the G19.

Anyway, I like Glocks, but I am realistic. Some people do not. And more importantly, the Gen IV Glock was/is a disaster. More of a disaster than the original RTF finish, which I hated*. They should be embarrassed for taking a warmed-over idea, executing it poorly, changing a few settings on the milling machine and calling it a new gun.

So I propose that Glock design a new gun. A Glock 2.0 if you will.

What they should keep includes:
- same basic sizes, calibers, etc.
- same finish, same materials
- the RTF2 and the Gen III grip texturing (customer choice)
- smallest # of parts possible

What they should change:
- fix the trigger for pete's sake. The XD and the FNP both have better striker triggers.
- add a second strike capability to the trigger (or stop saying it is like a revolver)
- add front slide serrations
- add a rail to the compact guns**
- modify design to allow dis-assembly w/o pulling the trigger
- slightly extend the length of the take down lever ends
- make a grip plug standard or close off that section to dirt
- make the trigger guard less blocky. Square it fine, but the current shape is pointless. Well actually it is pointy and that I do not like
- undercut the trigger guard more
- make the back strap adjustable, but use a system that does not suck (like with slide-in inserts)

Anyway, I like my Glock a lot but I am not blind to its flaws. The design is over 20 years old. It is time for a significant upgrade and/or second model.

I am putting on my flame suit and I await your replies.

Notes:
* I love the RTF2
** a rail may not be the most useful thing on a smaller pistol, but they look cool and cool = sales (sad but true).

I'd say,Go for it! Then we could have a thread on here to talk about our Darrens!

 

[Joe Williams]

Oh, and a light rail that you could actually use without causing a sizeable number of the guns to malfunction.

 

[HICKMAN]

He keeps winning, pretty much running it stock except for sights:

It's his Limited 10 gun, he could put an aftermarket barrel, different trigger, magwell and tons of other stuff, but doesn't need to. He dominated Limited and Open shooters with a simple Glock last Sunday.

Many won't carry the smaller Glocks with a lighter trigger, because it's their carry gun. But the G34/35 trigger is just fine.

 

[HICKMAN]

My complaints about glocks:

Sloppy over-sized sights
Weird grip angle
Unsupported chamber
Uglier than sin

Sights on most handguns are swapped out based on the user's need.

weird grip angle to you, many of us are unaffected by it. Dunno why I can pick up and handgun and still hit what I aim it.

8 time National Champion Bob Vogel:

Since the beginning of 2006 I have shot Glock pistols exclusively in competition. Prior to this I had shot 1911 style pistols (STI) for three solid years. My number one reason for preferring the Glock is the grip I am able to get on the pistol. Because of the grip angle and the way the pistol is built I can get a much higher and more secure grip with the support hand. This in effect translates into a shooting stance that is more effective in controlling recoil.

First of all "unsupported chamber" is a misleading term: all barrels must support the round in the chamber. Furthermore, all guns that use the modified Browning action have partially supported chambers. In order to make the Glock function reliably with the widest possible selection of ammunition it has a looser tolerances than say "match" barrels. My Storm Lake barrel had to be sent in to be opened up because it was too tight my reloads that had been properly sized and case gaged.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder:

 

[FreeLand]

What they should change:
- add a second strike capability to the trigger (or stop saying it is like a revolver).

This would be great for the movies! That way when an actor picks up a cocked but unloaded Glock and pulls the trigger multiple times (and it goes "click" each time) I don't have to be distracted by the fact that what just happened, couldn't really happen.

On a serious note, all my pistols are Glocks, but I think the XDM has a noticeably better trigger straight from the factory. I also think a compact and sub-compact version with a slimmer frame would sell well.

 

[HICKMAN]

On a serious note, all my pistols are Glocks, but I think the XDM has a noticeably better trigger straight from the factory. I also think a compact and sub-compact version with a slimmer frame would sell well.

well, it better, it's their "match" version, which is part of the price difference, much like the m&p pro and the G34 are upgraded versions

 

[Aszerigan]

I wrote a scalding review of the Gen4 Glock 17 when I first saw one at Bradis. Got alot of flack for it. I wasn't impressed at all, and won't let my Gen3's go for a Gen4. No way.

 

[shooter521]

I wrote a scalding review of the Gen4 Glock 17 when I first saw one at Bradis. Got alot of flack for it. I wasn't impressed at all, and won't let my Gen3's go for a Gen4. No way.

Link?

I like the new recoil assembly, the (slightly) reduced grip and new texture. The enlarged/extended mag catch I can take or leave, and the add-on backstraps do nothing for me since I wouldn't use 'em. I'm not in the market for any more Glocks right now, but if I was, I'd give the Gen4 serious consideration.

My

 

[matthewdanger]

On unsupported chambers: Glock started adding more support several years ago. The most .40S&W Glocks are much better.

On the light rail causing malfunctions: The new Gen4 shows promising signs of moving past that. That is part of the reasoning behind the new double recoil spring module. The new spring module may be the best thing to happen to the .40S&W Glocks.

 

[45calibre]

What makes them a "disaster"? Because you don't like it? My wife finally wants a Glock after handling the new model.

Buy the XD or whatever if the trigger is better.

Did Glock at some point say that the trigger is like a revolver? If so, I've missed it.

The compact guns do indeed have a rail. Look at the front of your 19.

Whats wrong with the disassembly procedure? Pull the trigger and don't worry about it.

The space where you want a grip plug is there for a reason.

Where is the trigger guard "pointy"? Can't square it off without points.

There is more to the changes than what you are seeing on the outside. Not saying it is worse or better, just that I don't know if you have all your facts.

There you go! Fixed most of your identified flaws. (You did say you had a flame suit on!)

Bottom line, I don't understand why people get on here and makes posts like this. If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple. I don't like Browning Hi-Powers, but that doesn't mean they are full of "design flaws". If the Glock design is 20 years old, how old is the 1911 design for cryin' out loud? They don't change it because it works!

Rant over.

i think they call it a DAO trigger

 

[theturtle06]

i think they call it a DAO trigger

They call it a "Safe Action" trigger. A true DAO would go "click" every time you pulled the trigger. The slide has to be racked for the striker to drop in a Glock - in execution it's closer to SAO than anything.

 

[Lanser]

What makes them a "disaster"? Because you don't like it? My wife finally wants a Glock after handling the new model.

Buy the XD or whatever if the trigger is better.

Did Glock at some point say that the trigger is like a revolver? If so, I've missed it.

The compact guns do indeed have a rail. Look at the front of your 19.

Whats wrong with the disassembly procedure? Pull the trigger and don't worry about it.

The space where you want a grip plug is there for a reason.

There is more to the changes than what you are seeing on the outside. Not saying it is worse or better, just that I don't know if you have all your facts.

Bottom line, I don't understand why people get on here and makes posts like this. If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple. I don't like Browning Hi-Powers, but that doesn't mean they are full of "design flaws". If the Glock design is 20 years old, how old is the 1911 design for cryin' out loud? They don't change it because it works!

^ What he said.

 

[barrelmaker_2002]

When I say disaster, I mean sales disaster. If the gun was a vast improvement over the Gen III, they would sell a ton of them. Thus far however, the Gen IV has pretty much flopped and Glock will likely retain the Gen III in their line up indefinitely.

When I saw rail on a compact, I mean the baby Glocks. Glock may call the G19 a compact, but that is their term. I have a G19 and I do not consider it a compact by any means.

Glock has had over 20 years to improve the trigger. They have not. They could make the gun safer by not requiring a trigger pull for dis-assembly. They did not and this is costing them sales to gun that have that feature, particularly in the LE market where most of the users are not "gun people" and are more likely to have an AD.

The comparison to the 1911 is barely true. The basic design of the 1911 is unchanged, but advancements in the gun have drastically improved it. If 1911's had only come along as far as the G17, then 1911's would have tiny sights, no beavertail, a less than memorable trigger, mediocre accuracy and on and on....

As for the Glock trigger, it is OK, but they have done little if anything to improve and there are other striker fired guns that have better triggers. And the reset is just OK - very positive but quite long. Further, I cannot count how many times I have heard the trigger described as being like a revolver

I like Glocks and I will continue to carry one. However, the gun has not been improved enough over time and their market share is falling as a result. The major differences between the G17 Gen I and the G17 Gen IV is basically the rail, the recoil spring and minor tweaks to the frame shape and texture.

Regardless, the Gen IV is a let down. And I wrote this post to point out that Glock needs to innovate more of they want to maintain or grow their market share. Just because I have owned two does not mean I have no business offering suggestions for improvements. The alternative is people who have never owned a Glock taking smack about it based on rumors and second hand information.

My G19 is a gun that I am willing to trust my life to, shoot a lot and compete with. But they can do better and their competitors clearly are doing so. There is a distinct possibility that my next carry gun will not be a Glock and that is a shame because of all of the muscle memory have developed with the Glock platform and the funds invested in holsters and the like.

Of course, it will probably take me 20 years to wear this one out, so it will be a while before I need a new EDC gun.