Glocks Work. Period. End of story.

[Brad69]

So we all agree this Glock thing is just a fad !

Dead Duck is just in a “experimental” phase!

If you sell rvb a weapon and it doesn’t work he will shove up your &#4 !

“newsflash” dedicated gun guys believe that x number of rounds need to be fired before we believe it can be trusted for real world use.

Yea this thread is going to be epic!

 

[edporch]

True story: The OP of this thread had cross posted it from GT. And then got banned from GT for being a troll. Yup, he is so much of a fanboy that he got banned from GlockTalk for being a fanboy troll. You really have to be over the top to get banned from GT for being too much of a Glock fanboy.

Funny you should say this.
I ALSO found the original post over on the FAL Files site in the Glock section.
This guy gets around!

Glocks Work. Period. End of story. - The FAL Files

 

[SouthernStar25]

So we all agree this Glock thing is just a fad !

Dead Duck is just in a “experimental” phase!

If you sell rvb a weapon and it doesn’t work he will shove up your &#4 !

“newsflash” dedicated gun guys believe that x number of rounds need to be fired before we believe it can be trusted for real world use.

Yea this thread is going to be epic!

Going to be? It's there.

 

[Voldemort]

I wrote this up for a buddy who was caught up in typical gun forum debates over Glock and how Glock does not "innovate" and ... well, you know how it goes. FWIW...


Re. Glock and innovation...
Here's the deal...Glock has provided the world with the most combat-tested, combat-proven firearm ever invented, selling hundreds of millions of them. They are easy to use. Easy to maintain. Easy to shoot. A trained monkey can field strip them. An average IQ human can detail strip them. There are tens of thousands of after-market parts and gizmos for them. You can customize them to your heart's content.


But on the other hand, they perform reliably and consistently right out of the box, even with their stock crappy sights. They get the job done. They are intended to be and always have been combat-accurate handguns useful for CQB situations of every description. They are legendarily resistant to abusive environmental conditions and abusive human operators.
Glock does not need to "innovate" ... they just need to keep their quality control strong and keep churning out these marvelous polymer-framed wonder guns.


The Glock inspires endless online debates among mostly keyboard warriors who have never gone in harms way, never experienced the terror and thrill of the two-way range and have never heard, let alone fired, a single bullet fired in anger in their lives, and hopefully never will. Let these types debate, whine, cry and otherwise *****/moan/debate about Glock not "innovating" all they want. The rest of us will just smile and nod and say, "That's nice, honey."
Glocks work. Period. End of story.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1VD1D1hLsQ



I wrote this up for a buddy who was caught up in typical gun forum debates over Glock and how Glock does not "innovate" and ... well, you know how it goes. FWIW...


Re. Glock and innovation...
Here's the deal...Glock has provided the world with the most combat-tested, combat-proven firearm ever invented, selling hundreds of millions of them. They are easy to use. Easy to maintain. Easy to shoot. A trained monkey can field strip them. An average IQ human can detail strip them. There are tens of thousands of after-market parts and gizmos for them. You can customize them to your heart's content.


But on the other hand, they perform reliably and consistently right out of the box, even with their stock crappy sights. They get the job done. They are intended to be and always have been combat-accurate handguns useful for CQB situations of every description. They are legendarily resistant to abusive environmental conditions and abusive human operators.
Glock does not need to "innovate" ... they just need to keep their quality control strong and keep churning out these marvelous polymer-framed wonder guns.


The Glock inspires endless online debates among mostly keyboard warriors who have never gone in harms way, never experienced the terror and thrill of the two-way range and have never heard, let alone fired, a single bullet fired in anger in their lives, and hopefully never will. Let these types debate, whine, cry and otherwise *****/moan/debate about Glock not "innovating" all they want. The rest of us will just smile and nod and say, "That's nice, honey."
Glocks work. Period. End of story.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1VD1D1hLsQ


I wrote this up for a buddy who was caught up in typical gun forum debates over Glock and how Glock does not "innovate" and ... well, you know how it goes. FWIW...

Re. Glock and innovation...
Here's the deal...Glock has provided the world with the most combat-tested, combat-proven firearm ever invented, selling hundreds of millions of them. They are easy to use. Easy to maintain. Easy to shoot. A trained monkey can field strip them. An average IQ human can detail strip them. There are tens of thousands of after-market parts and gizmos for them. You can customize them to your heart's content.

But on the other hand, they perform reliably and consistently right out of the box, even with their stock crappy sights. They get the job done. They are intended to be and always have been combat-accurate handguns useful for CQB situations of every description. They are legendarily resistant to abusive environmental conditions and abusive human operators.
Glock does not need to "innovate" ... they just need to keep their quality control strong and keep churning out these marvelous polymer-framed wonder guns.

The Glock inspires endless online debates among mostly keyboard warriors who have never gone in harms way, never experienced the terror and thrill of the two-way range and have never heard, let alone fired, a single bullet fired in anger in their lives, and hopefully never will. Let these types debate, whine, cry and otherwise *****/moan/debate about Glock not "innovating" all they want. The rest of us will just smile and nod and say, "That's nice, honey."
Glocks work. Period. End of story.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1VD1D1hLsQ

is this a term paper?

 

[SouthernStar25]

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Funny you should say this.
I ALSO found the original post over on the FAL Files site in the Glock section.
This guy gets around!

Glocks Work. Period. End of story. - The FAL Files

Glocks work! Spread the word!

 

[Trapper Jim]

B. What kind of centerfire gun is in 75%+ of the shooters' hands...(including 90%+ of the people who need the re-fires)?

Should be able to master this game then....even with two hands

 

[Dead Duck]

Such an easy choice....

SIG

GLOCK

 

[Twangbanger]

Should be able to master this game then....even with two hands

Bzzzt...the question was looking for an answer phrased in terms of the name of the gun.

The correct answer, sports fans, was the 1911. There is still precisely one (1) shooting event left which is dominated by the original 1911 design. It's called "Bullseye," and unlike most other pistol sports, re-fires (or "alibis" in game-talk) are allowed for gun malfunctions.

More to the point: if you changed the rulebook to eliminate re-fires, I would guess conservatively that probably 10% of the shooters in a given match would not even be able to get all their rounds downrange, much less in the target. Yes, the guns are tightly-fitted and running light springs. But under the modern rules, re-fires almost always hurt your score (since only the lowest-scoring 10 shots are counted), and for whatever reason, people still cannot manage to get their rounds downrange. And these are not newie-putzes; these are experienced competitors who know the 1911 inside-out and have been shooting it for decades, in most cases.

Furthermore and still, I would bet that once the aforementioned hypothetical rule-change had a chance to shake out, and everyone had bought themselves a Lee Factory Crimp Die (who didn't already have one), and made a New Year's Resolution to chamber-check their rounds more religiously....I would still bet that in 6 months' time, that number of "alibi shooters" would still only be cut in half.

 

[STFU]

Such an easy choice....

SIG

Oh my! Now I understand why I love my Sigs. The Sig-ness is real.

 

[700 LTR 223]

Oh my! Now I understand why I love my Sigs. The Sig-ness is real.

I guess now I know why I've always liked SIGs!

Have to give credit here as this same "Glocks Work. Period. End of story" thread only lasted about 16 replies before being shutdown on another forum.

 

[NHT3]

Wish that was the case with the Glock 42 I bought here from the classifieds - first range session experienced 3 malfunctions out of 10 rounds of Federal FMJ. Was good with Remington and Aguila FMJ. Just don't have lot of confidence in a pistol for defense that has failures with FMJ ammo. Too bad as the G42 shoots pretty well for me.
View attachment 73380
20 rounds at 7 yards.


That pretty much sums it up for me as I have never come across and entire line of pistols that felt so wrong in my hand , that is until the introduction of the G42 and G43 - those fit my hand remarkably well.

If it ran reliably with two brands of ammo and didn't with the third brand did it ever cross your mind that the AMMO may be the problem??
Unlike people, all ammo is not equally created.
[FONT=&amp]NRA Life Member / [/FONT]Basic Pistol instructor[FONT=&amp] / RSO[/FONT][FONT=&amp]

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]"Under pressure, you don't rise to the occasion, you sink to the level of your training. That's why we train so hard" [/FONT][FONT=&amp]
[/FONT][FONT=&amp]Unnamed Navy Seal[/FONT][FONT=&amp]

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]“Ego is the reason many men do not shoot competition. They don't want to suck in public” [/FONT][FONT=&amp]
[/FONT][FONT=&amp]
[/FONT][FONT=&amp]Aron Bright[/FONT]

 

[88E30M50]

If it ran reliably with two brands of ammo and didn't with the third brand did it ever cross your mind that the AMMO may be the problem??
Unlike people, all ammo is not equally created.

Man, ain’t that the truth! I have to scan every box of Remington UMC 9mm that I open for short rounds. There are at least 3 in each box of 250 that are dangerously short. Some are as much as .110 short.

 

[cce1302]

Also posted on firearmstalk.com, thefiringline.com, theakforum.net

Probably some others. just likes drive by posting, apparently.

 

[700 LTR 223]

If it ran reliably with two brands of ammo and didn't with the third brand did it ever cross your mind that the AMMO may be the problem??
Unlike people, all ammo is not equally created

After my Walther PPK/S ran the remaining 40 rounds without a hitch I am more inclined to lean towards the gun. Owned about a dozen semi-autos before this G42 and I don't recall one ever having a malfunction with FMJ ammo. It appears that some of the early G42s did have problems.

 

[churchmouse]

Also posted on firearmstalk.com, thefiringline.com, theakforum.net

Probably some others. just likes drive by posting, apparently.

The OP has not been back since he started this thread.

Is this his work or did he take it from someone.

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

I remember my first beer too!

 

[CopperheadL]

Not meaning to stir the pot too much, but you state "Glock has provided the world with the most combat-tested, combat-proven firearm ever invented, selling hundreds of millions of them". the glock was invented in 1982. The 1911 originated in the late 1890's and was adopted by the US Army in 1911. It seems to me that there is no way the glock can be considered as "the most combat-tested, combat proven firearm ever invented" when it has such a limited time and tested history when it is really compared to pistols like the 1911, and revolvers that i have not mentioned. I think your statement is laughable at best.

 

[Dead Duck]

Not meaning to stir the pot too much, but you state "Glock has provided the world with the most combat-tested, combat-proven firearm ever invented, selling hundreds of millions of them". the glock was invented in 1982. The 1911 originated in the late 1890's and was adopted by the US Army in 1911. It seems to me that there is no way the glock can be considered as "the most combat-tested, combat proven firearm ever invented" when it has such a limited time and tested history when it is really compared to pistols like the 1911, and revolvers that i have not mentioned. I think your statement is laughable at best.

But James Yeager hates 1911s so obviously they suck.

 

[indiucky]

Revolvers work. Period. End of story.....