Glock 2.0 - what the Gen IV should have been

[mvician]

 

[STEEL CORE]

My thoughts? My Glock-19 2nd gen, GS prefix from long ago, LEO trade in from who knows where, or how many rounds through it. I added Trijicon N/S and a NY-1. That to me is how all Glocks should be....K.I.S.S. principal. (I realize we all have different opinions) but a stock Glock is how Glock Inc should be, if it aint broke dont fix it.

 

[kingnereli]

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 agree with you on most points. There are a few that wouldn't be deal breakers like front cocking serrations and field stripping without pulling the trigger. My list of required changes is much smaller. The trigger, the chamber, the grip and the lack of a safety.

If the people at Glock where smart they would be doing exactly what their compotion is doing. That is factory options. The M&P and XD lines are offering very user friendly options - optional safeties, optional backstraps, optional finishes. With glock the only options are small,medium or large and caliber. Glock has a large and loyal following so taking the design back to the drawing more would at least compromise that loyalty. They should incorporate these options into the existing guns in a way that those who are content with their current form could have it (only with a better trigger and properly sized and supported chamber) and those of us that recognize glocks to be reliable quality pistols yet can't get over some of the design flaws could finally get a glock that suits us.

It seems like there are a large number of young or new shooters that are landing in S&W's and Springfield's camps for this reason. They're attracted to handguns that are adaptable, personalizable and user friendly. Glock isn't used to have this kind of competition. They need to develop the mindset that every M&P and XD sold is a glock that didn't get sold.

In regards to the gen 4 glocks, when I heard the first rumblings of a new generation and read that there would be a system of backstraps I was actually excited that glock might just be taking the first step down the road I described earlier. The mere existence of user option feature on a glock pistol, even if it was only one, was promising. Then the pictures and some more detail came out and I realized that this new backstrap system simply made the pistol go from big, to really big, to friggen huge. Where they could have had an integrated system that could adjust grip girth and angle like the M&P and XD they now have a system that will only satisfy loyal glock customers that are accustomed to the gorilla grip. It seems they just don't get it.

Post Script: It's refreshing to see some that adamantly prefers glocks and is still reasonable enough to recognize they're faults. That's rare around these parts.

 

[kingnereli]

It's a shame Lone Wolf doesn't make those frames for the large frame 20/21 guns.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Here's my upgraded Glock:

 

[barrelmaker_2002]

That is sweet, I had not seen that before.

 

[barrelmaker_2002]

Couple other comments...

One of my friends reminded me off line that the FNP is not a striker fired gun. He is correct and I simply forgot this. I will not choose a DA/SA gun for carry, so that takes the FNP off my list. For my carry gun, the trigger must be the same every time.

I realized another feature I would like to see and that is ambi (or at least reversible) controls). Actually, knowing that the trigger bar would be in the way of relocated slide release, I would settle for an ambi or reversible mag release.

I have a friend who has one the Steyr pistols that Indy_Guy_77 shared photos of. I have neverr shot it, but I like the sights and the trigger is not bad. Not great either, but not bad. Definitely a solid choice.

 

[Disposable Heart]

Personally (opinion), the Glock is just fine as is. Adding doodads detracts from the gun's simplicity, what a combat gun was designed to be. Take the 1911 for example, plain jane M1911. Col. Cooper had a whole laundry list of things that he thought detracted from the gun's simplicity and were unneccesary and could actually harm you in a gunfight.

Improving a Glock, yes, but many of the items on the OP's list REDESIGN the Glock to be a XD or similar.
-Sights: YES! At minimum, add 10-20 to the base cost for steel, slightly (not by much) slimmer profile sights.
-Backstraps: I am 50/50 on this. I think the grip is perfect on the small ones, bad on teh big ones. Everyone is different. But if they design it, make it a simple, yet DURABLE method to retain the grip strap.
-Trigger is fine, leave it alone.
-Stainless finish: Maybe. Maybe, most from an aesthetic standpoint. I would say not make many of them, but offer a matte "stainless" look to some of the models, like a Hard Chrome or something. Mix it up a little.
Dual recoil springs: NO NO NO! Adding more parts to a simple gun or crazy recoil systems because some wuss doesn't like .40's snap will only result in something extra to break.
-Metal guide rod: Factory metal guide rod? Yes. I have seen (though rare, but still) plastic guide glock rods fail. Would be just another step in the correct direction for this combat gun.

 

[DrPrepper]

It sounds like your upgraded Glock is a Smith M&P.

What they should change:
- 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)

I am pretty sure the Smith fills those items.

First post!

 

[barrelmaker_2002]

I agree fully. One of my motives for starting the thread was the serious competition that Glock is getting from S&W and Springfield. If you look at the LE market (where the real money is made), Glock, Springfield and S&W get invited to most of the dances. Glock used to be the belle of the ball but now the "shine" has worn off and their competition is the primary beneficiary.

 

[mvician]

It's a shame Lone Wolf doesn't make those frames for the large frame 20/21 guns.

Give 'em some time, these are still the protoype frames....it's been almost 2 years in the making to get these out.

That is sweet, I had not seen that before.

the prototypes were just released a couple weeks ago.

 

[kwatters]

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.

To each his own, I sold my Gen1 Glock a long time ago and never looked back, until recently, as soon as I picked up the Gen4 it fit my hand like no other Glock has.
The trigger could be better but nothing is perfect.

 

[theweakerbrother]

I am looking forward to getting a G23 GEN IV when they come out.

 

[barrelmaker_2002]

Another correction....

....I would settle for an ambi or reversible mag release.

The Gen IV offers a reversible mag release.

 

[HICKMAN]

I just can't wait for the new Gen4 G34's.....

 

[shooter521]

I just can't wait for the new Gen4 G34's.....

Or, on the other end of the spectrum, G26s.

 

[TomN]

I like my Gen4 G17. A lot of what has been posted here about the new Glock's faults are pretty much personal opinion which is fine, but most are opinions I don't really share. I have NO problems with the grip angle, trigger system, grip texture, backstrap system, etc. I've never had an issue with dirt getting in the hole by the backstrap, and I really put mine through the ringer when training. I agree that the dual recoil spring may not have been the best decision, and the sights are crap, but even then they've been vastly improved by changing the front sight from being pinned in to actually being screwed in. If you want an SD or an M&P then by all means buy one. As someone that's owned almost all the polymer pistols made today at one time or another, I can honestly say that they ALL have some sort of issue, either cosmetic or safety related that one can complain about. The OP mentioned that Gen4 sales are a disaster. What source are you using for this information, I'm very curious.

 

[TomN]

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.

I haven't seen your review so forgive me, but what about the way it shot didn't you like? I think that the Gen4 G17 shoots even better than the older models. The recoil is much less and it's more accurate in my hands, probably because the frame to slide fit is a bit tighter.

 

[HICKMAN]

It sounds like your upgraded Glock is a Smith M&P.

What they should change:
- 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)

I am pretty sure the Smith fills those items.

First post!

no, the M&P is an upgrade of the Sigma...

 

[b0r0b]

There's only ONE topic on the planet that I am overly opinionated on and just a plain douche if you will...Apple products. Buy any gun, car, wife, boat, sand, mulch, juice, clothes or toilet paper that you like..but Apple products are STRAIGHT UP, DOWN and ACROSS yuppie minded tools of douchery.

The only product Apple produces that is worth a second look is a traditional iPod. Why is it the only item they sell worth a second look? It's the only item old Stevie can't "hitler-ize" like he does with everything else. Damnit I wish the ass cancer would have just finished him off.