I'm beating Dr. THW to the punch on this one. But when you get your writeup done, please post it in this thread.
Please, in this thread, no blind bashing of pistols. This is an "in your experience only" thread, no "I read in xyz magazine that..." Even better, keep this to guns you've actually shot; better yet, guns you've shot a lot.
While yes, this is sparked from the "glocks suck nards" comment, I'm interested in discussing pros and cons from any pistols, comparos and pictures very welcome (nay, encouraged!).
I'll state that originally, I was not a Glock person, at all. But, being a gun person, I'll take any chance I get to shoot any gun I can get my paws on. So naturally, that included Glocks. Eventually I decided to just try one of my own. To sum it up, it's not for sale.
So to start off....
What I like about the Glock platform.
- simplicity, both in design, operation, and disassembly. Draw, aim, fire.
- ruggedness, basically, short of going at it with an axe or a torch, not much you're going to do to it.
- reliability, not on par with Sig, but pretty dang good.
- ergonomics, minus the factory mag release, it fits my hand quite well.
- looks, call me crazy (I am, no worries there!), but I like the look of my Glock. All business. None of the no purpose slide contours, cuts, or other un needed frills. For that matter, much like the original 1911 governments.
- grip angle, return to natural point of aim is very similar between the Glock and the revolvers I own (Ruger & S&W).
- same trigger pull every time
- aftermarket, what can I say... there's a lot of it!
- lightweight, ~4" barrel, 15+1 capacity at ~21oz unloaded. Compare that to the all steel 1911 below.
- controllable for rapid fire
What I don't like.
- reliability, not as good as the Sig, won't cycle light target loads (Sig will), won't cycle when limpwristed (Sig will), and won't cycle wadcutter style rounds (Sig will).
- accuracy, compared to Sig or Kimber (say what you will about that) plenty good for combat, but no MOA guarantees!
1911s
Pros
- Uber accurate. 1 ragged hole at 10 yards was pretty common. Granted, I was shooting a Kimber, but I did similar with most quality 1911s I shot, including a 3" Springfield.
- Trigger...
- same trigger pull every time
- Looks...
- Good ones run like a top, so smooth, like art.
Cons
- weight, 34 oz unloaded, for 7 rounds. OUCH!!
- reliability, mine wasn't so hot. picky about mags (not really much of a complaint), but I did have to change the recoil spring regularly. As in, by 1k rounds the gun was a jam o matic heap.
- complicated assembly, intricate parts requiring fitting.
Sig
Pros
- reliable, "To hell and back" is putting it mildly.
- accurate
- reasonably light
Cons
- different trigger pulls
- high bore axis - harder to control with rapid fire
- thick! people talk about the Glock as being too wide, the Sig is noticably wider in the grip area
- boring, I mean, I jammed it once, due to a primer being sideways in the primer pocket. I've tried loading spent cases in the mag to simulate jams, but sometimes it will actually feed them, and I don't realize it till the gun goes 'click'.
- slide release placement, too easy to accidentally hold the release down keeping the slide from locking back on empty.
Did I mention the Sig is reliable?
Revolvers:
Ruger style (push button cylinder release)
Pros
- seriously heavy duty.
- same manual of arms as my primary carry (Glock).
- similar natural point of aim as the Glock.
- accurate
- reliable, other than ammo issues, the Ruger is trouble free.
- DA, so if a round doesn't go off, pull trigger again for new round.
- good looks
Cons
- heavy for capacity
- if ammo jams the gun, hard to clear. I have actually found case rims thick enough they wouldn't pass through between the breech face and cylinder. Only happened with one brand (A-merc), but it did happen.
- slower reloads than semi-auto
S&W
pros:
- Trigger
- reliability
- vies with 1911 for best looking gun ever.
cons:
- same as Ruger, other than not as durable
Comparing the Glock to the M&Ps and XDs I've shot / handled.
Please, in this thread, no blind bashing of pistols. This is an "in your experience only" thread, no "I read in xyz magazine that..." Even better, keep this to guns you've actually shot; better yet, guns you've shot a lot.
While yes, this is sparked from the "glocks suck nards" comment, I'm interested in discussing pros and cons from any pistols, comparos and pictures very welcome (nay, encouraged!).
I'll state that originally, I was not a Glock person, at all. But, being a gun person, I'll take any chance I get to shoot any gun I can get my paws on. So naturally, that included Glocks. Eventually I decided to just try one of my own. To sum it up, it's not for sale.
So to start off....
What I like about the Glock platform.
- simplicity, both in design, operation, and disassembly. Draw, aim, fire.
- ruggedness, basically, short of going at it with an axe or a torch, not much you're going to do to it.
- reliability, not on par with Sig, but pretty dang good.
- ergonomics, minus the factory mag release, it fits my hand quite well.
- looks, call me crazy (I am, no worries there!), but I like the look of my Glock. All business. None of the no purpose slide contours, cuts, or other un needed frills. For that matter, much like the original 1911 governments.
- grip angle, return to natural point of aim is very similar between the Glock and the revolvers I own (Ruger & S&W).
- same trigger pull every time
- aftermarket, what can I say... there's a lot of it!
- lightweight, ~4" barrel, 15+1 capacity at ~21oz unloaded. Compare that to the all steel 1911 below.
- controllable for rapid fire
What I don't like.
- reliability, not as good as the Sig, won't cycle light target loads (Sig will), won't cycle when limpwristed (Sig will), and won't cycle wadcutter style rounds (Sig will).
- accuracy, compared to Sig or Kimber (say what you will about that) plenty good for combat, but no MOA guarantees!
1911s
Pros
- Uber accurate. 1 ragged hole at 10 yards was pretty common. Granted, I was shooting a Kimber, but I did similar with most quality 1911s I shot, including a 3" Springfield.
- Trigger...
- same trigger pull every time
- Looks...
- Good ones run like a top, so smooth, like art.
Cons
- weight, 34 oz unloaded, for 7 rounds. OUCH!!
- reliability, mine wasn't so hot. picky about mags (not really much of a complaint), but I did have to change the recoil spring regularly. As in, by 1k rounds the gun was a jam o matic heap.
- complicated assembly, intricate parts requiring fitting.
Sig
Pros
- reliable, "To hell and back" is putting it mildly.
- accurate
- reasonably light
Cons
- different trigger pulls
- high bore axis - harder to control with rapid fire
- thick! people talk about the Glock as being too wide, the Sig is noticably wider in the grip area
- boring, I mean, I jammed it once, due to a primer being sideways in the primer pocket. I've tried loading spent cases in the mag to simulate jams, but sometimes it will actually feed them, and I don't realize it till the gun goes 'click'.
- slide release placement, too easy to accidentally hold the release down keeping the slide from locking back on empty.
Did I mention the Sig is reliable?
Revolvers:
Ruger style (push button cylinder release)
Pros
- seriously heavy duty.
- same manual of arms as my primary carry (Glock).
- similar natural point of aim as the Glock.
- accurate
- reliable, other than ammo issues, the Ruger is trouble free.
- DA, so if a round doesn't go off, pull trigger again for new round.
- good looks
Cons
- heavy for capacity
- if ammo jams the gun, hard to clear. I have actually found case rims thick enough they wouldn't pass through between the breech face and cylinder. Only happened with one brand (A-merc), but it did happen.
- slower reloads than semi-auto
S&W
pros:
- Trigger
- reliability
- vies with 1911 for best looking gun ever.
cons:
- same as Ruger, other than not as durable
Comparing the Glock to the M&Ps and XDs I've shot / handled.
