Glocks

[Milf Dots]

No, it is that straight forward. Gen 5 mags fit all previous generations. Gen5 small frame Glocks have Gen4 magazine catches. Gen4 magazines fit in Gen1/2/3 small frames. Gen1/2/3 magazines fit in Gen 4/5 in the right hand configuration only. The 19X is the only exception and it is just the floor plate.

Thanks for proving my point that it wasn't as straight forward as you first claimed- your explanation of my point is a good one. I'd just add that anyone who wants to avail themselves of the swappable mag release button on gen 4 and 5 Glocks must have gen 4 or 5 Glock mags.

The two Glocks I had were good pistols, but Beretta, CZ, Walther, Sig, and HK have taken striker pistols to the next level.

That about covers it, so I'm out.

 

[308pirate]

But what about the Gen 6 mags!!!!!!

Those will only fit CZ P-10s

 

[308pirate]

Beretta, CZ, Walther, Sig, and HK have taken striker pistols to the next level.

On that we agree

 

[Yaremkiv]

Little known fact: gangstas hold Glocks this way while shooting so the serial numbers fall off so the guns become untraceable. Glock doesn’t use loctite on the serials.

I love learning new things

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Thanks for proving my point that it wasn't as straight forward as you first claimed- your explanation of my point is a good one. I'd just add that anyone who wants to avail themselves of the swappable mag release button on gen 4 and 5 Glocks must have gen 4 or 5 Glock mags.

The two Glocks I had were good pistols, but Beretta, CZ, Walther, Sig, and HK have taken striker pistols to the next level.

That about covers it, so I'm out.

Glock hasn't made Gen3 magazines since 2010. You were trying to insert some kind of contradiction where none existed. You can't go out and buy Gen3 magazines unless they are used or NOS. Glock small frame Gen5 magazines fit all previous generations, as did Gen4. Gen3 magazines fit all other generations but only in right handed configured Gen4/5 because Glocks were only right handed magazine release in Gen3 and older. There isn't any kind of ambiguity or mystery, this has been known for more than 10 years. The G19X is the only exception to any of this and it has nothing to do with the magazine body.

 

[TurboTrout]

Just get a polymer 80, all the good of a Glock, none of the bad, and all the good mods are already done, plus freedom

 

[Shooter McGavin]

If I were to look at a Glock 34, which I have one, I would get a CZ. The only reason I see for the 34 is comp shooting and the CZ Shadow 2 is better in every way.

 

[Yondering]

Just get a polymer 80, all the good of a Glock, none of the bad, and all the good mods are already done, plus freedom

No, you've got that backwards. All of the bad, none of the good. P80 pistols are for range toys. Friends don't let friends carry P80 garbage.

And to the other subject - about half of the big box of mags I use for competition are Gen 5 mags; I use them all in the Gen 4 and Gen 5 guns interchangeably, have been for a while now. Some people here need to learn how to verify the stuff they think they "know" before opening their mouths about it.

 

[Makinchips208]

Gen 4 is perfect. Gen 5 might be a little more perfecter.
Forget cz, h&k, sig, walther, etc, they are not more reliable and for 98.7% of shooters they are not more accurate.
If you want more accurate get a Staccato.
And please don’t do the p80 thing.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

The gen 5’s are where it’s at, it’s like a different gun.

Not sure what everyone’s confusion about the mags are but gen 5 mags will work in any previous generation Glock. They’ll also work in a 19X if you swap the base to a gen 4/earlier or aftermarket like Vickers, or modify the lip of the gen 5 base plate.

 

[TurboTrout]

No, you've got that backwards. All of the bad, none of the good. P80 pistols are for range toys. Friends don't let friends carry P80 garbage.

And to the other subject - about half of the big box of mags I use for competition are Gen 5 mags; I use them all in the Gen 4 and Gen 5 guns interchangeably, have been for a while now. Some people here need to learn how to verify the stuff they think they "know" before opening their mouths about it.

Not seeing how, but it does reflect on who built it and who much they care, I’d happily carry mine, probably over 2,000 rounds through it and zero malfunctions. Even it’s first box of ammo, zero issues. Plus the geometry is nice for those who mostly shoot 1911/2011s

 

[308pirate]

Forget cz, h&k, sig, walther, etc, they are not more reliable

They may not be more reliable, but they are just as reliable with superior ergonomics to Glock.

Just to make sure I wasn't full of shit I bought a 17 and a 19 this summer and ran the 17 with an SRO in about half of the USPSA matches in the second half of the season plus ran a shit ton of dry fire in the meantime with it.

I did OK with it, and had some match wins and top 3 finishes, but it was a lot more work to do so than with my P-10F or P-09 that I have setup for Carry Optics.

So they're now both for sale

 

[308pirate]

If I were to look at a Glock 34, which I have one, I would get a CZ. The only reason I see for the 34 is comp shooting and the CZ Shadow 2 is better in every way.

Or a P-10F if you want to stick to sub $600 plastic striker guns

 

[Ledzep]

 

[Ledzep]

If I were to look at a Glock 34, which I have one, I would get a CZ. The only reason I see for the 34 is comp shooting and the CZ Shadow 2 is better in every way.

I have been more impressed with my Shadow 2 than any other modern handgun. Worth swinging the extra couple hundred bucks over plastic for a range/competition gun (a bit heavy to carry). For plastic I'm a VP9 fan.

 

[Fig]

I love learning new things

 

[Yondering]

Not seeing how, but it does reflect on who built it and who much they care, I’d happily carry mine, probably over 2,000 rounds through it and zero malfunctions. Even it’s first box of ammo, zero issues. Plus the geometry is nice for those who mostly shoot 1911/2011s

Oh wow, 2,000 rounds! You’ve really proven that out! You must shoot a LOT and definitely have the experience to prove these are good!

Meanwhile there are a lot of them out there with failures within the first few hundred rounds, including broken frames.

The #1 appeal of a Glock is reliability. If you really think your bargain basement DIY hack job is “better” than a Glock with all the development and testing behind them, then there’s either a whole lot you don’t know, or a lot you haven’t considered.

The grip angle thing is kind of stupid too and just reflects inexperience with a wider range of pistols. Most truly experienced shooters figure out that “ideal” ergonomics in a pistol is just personal preference based on what you’ve practiced with. If you mostly shoot 1911s then a Glock can feel weird. If you mostly shoot Glocks then a 1911 can feel weird. Neither one is more right than the other.
Of course if you shoot a lot of different guns on a regular basis they all start to fit just fine. It’s not the gun, it’s you and it’s all in your head.

Edited for clarity

 

[308pirate]

The ergonomics thing is kind of stupid too and just reflects inexperience with a wider range of pistols. Most truly experienced shooters figure out that “ideal” ergonomics in a pistol is just personal preference based on what you’ve practiced with. If you mostly shoot 1911s then a Glock can feel weird. If you mostly shoot Glocks then a 1911 can feel weird. Neither one is more right than the other.
Of course if you shoot a lot of different guns on a regular basis they all start to fit just fine. It’s not the gun, it’s you and it’s all in your head.

Yeah, Glock's considerably larger girth around the grip (something objectively measurable) compared to other handguns with narrower metal magazines is not an issue despite one's hand size.

What a fucking moron......

 

[AngryKoala]

Thanks for proving my point that it wasn't as straight forward as you first claimed- your explanation of my point is a good one. I'd just add that anyone who wants to avail themselves of the swappable mag release button on gen 4 and 5 Glocks must have gen 4 or 5 Glock mags.

The two Glocks I had were good pistols, but Beretta, CZ, Walther, Sig, and HK have taken striker pistols to the next level.

That about covers it, so I'm out.

HK, Walther and sig yes.....CZ and Beretta... the p10 is gross.

 

[Makinchips208]

They may not be more reliable, but they are just as reliable with superior ergonomics to Glock.

Just to make sure I wasn't full of shit I bought a 17 and a 19 this summer and ran the 17 with an SRO in about half of the USPSA matches in the second half of the season plus ran a shit ton of dry fire in the meantime with it.

I did OK with it, and had some match wins and top 3 finishes, but it was a lot more work to do so than with my P-10F or P-09 that I have setup for Carry Optics.

So they're now both for sale

Well that’s a lot more than I have done!
And how can we relate that to the op, what gen were the Glocks? 4 or 5?

I have been eyeballing a CZ...

 

[E. Bryant]

 

[308pirate]

Well that’s a lot more than I have done!
And how can we relate that to the op, what gen were the Glocks? 4 or 5?

I have been eyeballing a CZ...

They were Gen 3s

 

[1moaoff]

Wtf. I guess I need to stop interchanging magazines from ALL full size glocks since it can't be done. Must be all mine are bad.

Just took 19x mag and inserted into
Gen4 34
Gen 3 17
Oh and yes it works in all my 17,19 and 26 variants

 

[roostercogburn98]

I feel dumber after reading most of this post

 

[JAS-SH]

I hear the gen 5s are smoother and absorb recoil better due to the springs and new slide design. Honestly i don’t know but I can tell you they are hard to come by it just happen that my local gun store had a gen 5 arrive today. Most people don’t like the finger grooves on the 4s but I do. I may grab this one it is Christmas and feeling the need

I've had both. Model 26s. I can't tell the difference in recoil. And a moot point with defensive +P 124 grain rounds. As for accuracy at the Glock level, it's always about the archer, not the arrow . Most people I shoot with and who have shot both of my guns didn't do any better with either.

 

[JAS-SH]

Gen 4 is perfect. Gen 5 might be a little more perfecter.
Forget cz, h&k, sig, walther, etc, they are not more reliable and for 98.7% of shooters they are not more accurate.
If you want more accurate get a Staccato.
And please don’t do the p80 thing.

Just so happens that I've owned or shot all the ones you mention, and then some more. My Walther Q5 Match has been 100 percent reliable with zero malfunctions going on 2000 rounds (pic below), and is my most accurate striker fired handgun by a large margin. Can't say the same thing about my Glocks.

Glock accuracy is still very good and to be fair to my Glocks 90+ percent of the problems have been due to compressed mag springs or people using a lighter than normal grip. Loaded Glock mags MUST be rotated every 3-4 weeks religiously. After they start to go I replace them with +10% springs. The way to know is to not use one of the mags and compare that new spring to the ones used on a regular basis. When the used mag spring is close to 3/4 of an inch shorter replace it!!!

Walther Q5 Match:

 

[Yondering]

Yeah, Glock's considerably larger girth around the grip (something objectively measurable) compared to other handguns with narrower metal magazines is not an issue despite one's hand size.

What a fucking moron......

Hahahahahaha!!!! Is that why you’re so mad at the world all the time - cause you have little girl hands? That must be a real bummer for a little Napoleon like yourself. Hahaha

Guess I should have clarified I wasn’t talking about midgets; most of you anti-glock fanbois complain about the grip angle, not the girth since people with normal size hands don’t have an issue with it.

You’re priceless.

 

[308pirate]

Hahahahahaha!!!! Is that why you’re so mad at the world all the time - cause you have little girl hands? That must be a real bummer for a little Napoleon like yourself. Hahaha

Guess I should have clarified I wasn’t talking about midgets; most of you anti-glock fanbois complain about the grip angle, not the girth since people with normal size hands don’t have an issue with it.

You’re

You sound like the typical c class shooter. Always on the bottom, the way you like it.

 

[Holliday]

Well she’s not sexy but she’s reliable….. Gen III circa 2007. aprox. 6000 rnds through her.

 

[Yoteski]

This thread highlights that this is a precision rifle site.....

 

[TurboTrout]

Oh wow, 2,000 rounds! You’ve really proven that out! You must shoot a LOT and definitely have the experience to prove these are good!

Meanwhile there are a lot of them out there with failures within the first few hundred rounds, including broken frames.

The #1 appeal of a Glock is reliability. If you really think your bargain basement DIY hack job is “better” than a Glock with all the development and testing behind them, then there’s either a whole lot you don’t know, or a lot you haven’t considered.

The grip angle thing is kind of stupid too and just reflects inexperience with a wider range of pistols. Most truly experienced shooters figure out that “ideal” ergonomics in a pistol is just personal preference based on what you’ve practiced with. If you mostly shoot 1911s then a Glock can feel weird. If you mostly shoot Glocks then a 1911 can feel weird. Neither one is more right than the other.
Of course if you shoot a lot of different guns on a regular basis they all start to fit just fine. It’s not the gun, it’s you and it’s all in your head.

Edited for clarity

I guess if you built it bubba style you could have all those issue, but if you’re that sloppy of a person you’ll probably have a issue trying to shoot your G19 as you probably have skittles, a 40 round, a snap cap, and a hand full of steel case rounds in the mag, that was after trying to show how much of a operatorz you are by mistreating the firearm every chance you get, to show how “battle ready” it is

Honestly glocks are not some beautiful masterpiece, they are cheaply made and shipped by the pallet for lower social status people to be able to hit a minute of man at the command of their political leaders. It’s a mass produced gun for a pass produced shooter. But don’t let me get in the way of hero worship, your favorite meter maid probably has one, so you know it’s elite tactical shit hot stuff!

 

[Yoteski]

If you mostly shoot 1911s then a Glock can feel weird. If you mostly shoot Glocks then a 1911 can feel weird.

Actually, if you mostly shoot 1911s then a Glock can feel weird. If you mostly shoot Glocks then a 1911 can feel amazing....

 

[Yondering]

You sound like the typical c class shooter. Always on the bottom, the way you like it.

Quite possibly true. Fortunately for me I don’t judge my self worth or anyone else’s based on bullet golf scores.

If I did, this pile of crap, and the unpictured pile of Glock pistols I’ve won could give me an ego worse than yours. That would be bad.

Just petty regional stuff but I may have pulled a Glock trigger a couple times:

 

[Yondering]

Actually, if you mostly shoot 1911s then a Glock can feel weird. If you mostly shoot Glocks then a 1911 can feel amazing....

I was a hard core 1911 shooter for a while before picking up Glocks about 15 years ago. They all feel pretty good to me.

Most people miss out on the main valid complaint about Glocks - the triggers are harder to master to shoot well. The guns are mechanically accurate but a lot of people think they are only good for “minute of man” or something like that because they don’t put in the effort to master the trigger pull. A 1911 or tuned CZ or Tanfo in comparison are easy. Heck even my Canik clone of a Walther with just a couple spring swaps has a better trigger than any Glock ever (although to be fair both the Canik and Walther PPQ series triggers are pretty decent usually right out of the box). If a guy wants to complain about Glocks, that’s a valid complaint.

 

[AngryKoala]

I was a hard core 1911 shooter for a while before picking up Glocks about 15 years ago. They all feel pretty good to me.

Most people miss out on the main valid complaint about Glocks - the triggers are harder to master to shoot well. The guns are mechanically accurate but a lot of people think they are only good for “minute of man” or something like that because they don’t put in the effort to master the trigger pull. A 1911 or tuned CZ or Tanfo in comparison are easy. Heck even my Canik clone of a Walther with just a couple spring swaps has a better trigger than any Glock ever (although to be fair both the Canik and Walther PPQ series triggers are pretty decent usually right out of the box). If a guy wants to complain about Glocks, that’s a valid complaint.

The DA on a HK is about the only trigger I complain about. Glock triggers aren't bad once broken in but as you stated they are not the best. Shadow Systems did it right with the glock design.

 

[JAS-SH]

I was a hard core 1911 shooter for a while before picking up Glocks about 15 years ago. They all feel pretty good to me.

Most people miss out on the main valid complaint about Glocks - the triggers are harder to master to shoot well. The guns are mechanically accurate but a lot of people think they are only good for “minute of man” or something like that because they don’t put in the effort to master the trigger pull. A 1911 or tuned CZ or Tanfo in comparison are easy. Heck even my Canik clone of a Walther with just a couple spring swaps has a better trigger than any Glock ever (although to be fair both the Canik and Walther PPQ series triggers are pretty decent usually right out of the box). If a guy wants to complain about Glocks, that’s a valid complaint.

I would agree with this, though I would add that it is not difficult at all to get used to a Glock trigger. One thing I like about that trigger is the really positive reset. Around two decades ago I started a practice of doing defensive 7 yard drills. The drill I use to this day gives me a really good idea of my max spread when shooting fast.

The drill consisted of dumping a whole box of ammo (50 rounds) as fast as I could (excluding reloading) onto a 8-inch target at 7 yards. "As fast as I could" means not shooting before I reestablished a good sight picture, resetting the trigger and pressing again, around +/- a second. I never fully release the trigger in between shots. I hold it back pressed under the reset until I recover the sight picture. The Glock gave me a much better feel for that reset than my 1911s.

Later on I got faster and graduated to 3-inch targets . I also abandoned the Gen 3 .40 for a Gen 4 26 in 9mm. I could never shoot the 40 very well - did not like the sharp, fast recoil. Below are two pics, of those early 8-inch results. Yes, I was more accurate with the 1911. But in a defensive situation the spread difference would not make any difference on the results! I'll dig around for pictures of the newer 3-inch target results.

 

[E. Bryant]

I don't do typical "bullet golf", just a very limited amount of stuff combining shooting and movement against resistance, so take my words accordingly; I.e. largely ignore them.

It is my opinion that all the things we tend to obsess over when discussing combat/SD handguns don't matter under actual physical stress. Grip angle, trigger pull and reset, sight-over-bore distance - all are largely meaningless after doing something like a gurney carry or sandbag throws while wearing a 25lb plate carrier.

I'm an active mountain biker and thus am accustomed to performing gross motor skills under physical stress for, like, hours at a time, and I still turn into a moronic robot if you ask me to put some shots into a generously-sized target at moderate distances after 30 seconds of hard anaerobic work. I'm not enough of a gun Goldilocks to care about the nuisanced differences between the respective triggers of a Gen 5 Glock and FN 509 when I'm three minutes into a course of fire that has my hands and forearms cramped so tightly from flipping a 200lb tractor tire that I can barely open my fingers to manipulate the controls, and I bet that very few others are any different.

Am I comically slow at a rectangular course of fire that requires 25ft of total movement at a brisk walk? Yep, sure am. Do I create training scars by incorporating moderate physical stress into my limited range time? Quite possibly. Feel free to mock me for this (I'll try to use it as fuel to get better instead of allowing it to bruise my delicate ego), and understand that I'm sincerely not trying to mock or demean anyone's skillset or preferred shooting discipline.

For those that haven't done this sort of stuff, I'd really encourage any efforts to do so - do some basic farmer's carries or kettlebell swings or even just wind sprints, and then transition immediately to basic target drills. Do it with a few different pistols if you've got the stamina for multiple efforts. See if characteristics like trigger reset really matter once fatigue has accumulated to the point that it's simply difficult to execute a simple draw stroke.

And with all that, I know what I'm doing for strength training this morning. It's clear and 36F right now - that's close to optimum temps for working hard without sweating like a beast.

 

[salks]

Dosen't matter what forum or what the original topic would be if it has GLOCK in the title it always gets interesting.

 

[308pirate]

Quite possibly true. Fortunately for me I don’t judge my self worth or anyone else’s based on bullet golf scores.

If I did, this pile of crap, and the unpictured pile of Glock pistols I’ve won could give me an ego worse than yours. That would be bad.

Just petty regional stuff but I may have pulled a Glock trigger a couple times:View attachment 7759239

GSSF is teeball..............LOL

Your self worth seem to be derived from owning some black plastic pistols made in Austria, given how you react to any criticism of them.

 

[Yoteski]

Although I've been jesting a bit in my previous posts, the only pistols I own are Glocks. I'm also a Glock certified armorer. But, with that being said, I can't for the life of me understand why Glock has dug their heels in on the stupid ass hump. Good Lord, it would be so easy to make interchangeable backstraps that actually did something instead of their backstraps that make their already large grip larger. They are legit too big.
Most poor trigger control can be minimized with proper grip. But take a 100 lb female and try and establish a proper grip with a full size Glock; it's very difficult and sometimes not possible.
Teaching streamlined trigger control is fairly simple on a Glock. Simply ride the trigger and don't break contact. If you can feel reset, all the better, but with new shooters, teaching them to find reset under time is a fools errand. Finding reset under time and stress is established through thousands of rounds of dryfire and live fire.
Again, you have to overcome deficiencies of good trigger control with a good grip. When a shooter, especially a brand new one, can't get a proper grip on the weapon, it becomes a cycle of frustration for the shooter and the instructor. This is magnified when you increase caliber size/pistol size with a Glock. Glock completely ignores that millimeters do matter because PeRfeCtIon! I, along with a ton of other shooters, find that I shoot Gen 4 Glocks left of center of the bullseye. As I gain distance, this is magnified. My trigger control is good, it's all in my grip. Gen 5's without the finger grooves seem to be better. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why Glock is so enamored with keeping their stupid hump.

 

[TurboTrout]

Although I've been jesting a bit in my previous posts, the only pistols I own are Glocks. I'm also a Glock certified armorer. But, with that being said, I can't for the life of me understand why Glock has dug their heels in on the stupid ass hump. Good Lord, it would be so easy to make interchangeable backstraps that actually did something instead of their backstraps that make their already large grip larger. They are legit too big.
Most poor trigger control can be minimized with proper grip. But take a 100 lb female and try and establish a proper grip with a full size Glock; it's very difficult and sometimes not possible.
Teaching streamlined trigger control is fairly simple on a Glock. Simply ride the trigger and don't break contact. If you can feel reset, all the better, but with new shooters, teaching them to find reset under time is a fools errand. Finding reset under time and stress is established through thousands of rounds of dryfire and live fire.
Again, you have to overcome deficiencies of good trigger control with a good grip. When a shooter, especially a brand new one, can't get a proper grip on the weapon, it becomes a cycle of frustration for the shooter and the instructor. This is magnified when you increase caliber size/pistol size with a Glock. Glock completely ignores that millimeters do matter because PeRfeCtIon! I, along with a ton of other shooters, find that I shoot Gen 4 Glocks left of center of the bullseye. As I gain distance, this is magnified. My trigger control is good, it's all in my grip. Gen 5's without the finger grooves seem to be better. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why Glock is so enamored with keeping their stupid hump.

why would I work to master a defective design? Is there a huge gain from investing my time learning to shoot a Glock, when there are tons of other options that don’t require relearning?

 

[JAS-SH]

I, along with a ton of other shooters, find that I shoot Gen 4 Glocks left of center of the bullseye. As I gain distance, this is magnified. My trigger control is good, it's all in my grip.

LOL! Like This? When new with a Glock 35. I adjusted the rear sight quite to bring it back and it helped. I've done this to all my Glocks.

 

[Yoteski]

why would I work to master a defective design? Is there a huge gain from investing my time learning to shoot a Glock, when there are tons of other options that don’t require relearning?

They're relatively cheap, and they work with minimal maintenance right out of the box. Other companies have caught up and surpassed them. Glock will rest on its laurels because of LE sales.. Agency department policies have hamstrung individual officers from using a handgun which is catered towards fit.

 

[Ledzep]

That's where I'm at with it. Yes, Glock is a baseline, a standard. Great, that doesn't mean it's the only thing anyone should ever buy. People get off on shit like that "Only 1911", "Only Glock", "Only Colt 6920"..... whatever, man.

At the end of the day, Glock wouldn't exist as it does without Browning, and all the striker pistols on the market today wouldn't be what they are without Glock.... But if I can have a "Glock" in a frame that doesn't feel like shit in my hand, and a trigger that's not a 9lb mush, better sights, at about the same price... Why the hell not?

It's like Leupold Mk4's. Yeah they were one of the best things going at a point in history, Yeah you can train to use mil/MOA, but there's so much shit out there now that's more user friendly-- there's no reason to be dogmatic about it. With the manufacturing tech that's out there today, and especially going forward, if Glock puts out the same pistol "Gen 6, 7, 8, etc." and continues down that road with 1970's/80's designs they're going to get passed up. It's popular now, there's a flood of aftermarket now, and probably going forward for a long time, and it'll stick around because of large LE following, but at some point the incrementally better designs will win the right contracts and become the new standard. It's Glock's game to lose, and IMO there are at least 4 companies with a head start.

 

[hafejd30]

Glocks for me fit excellent. I have Gen 3 with groves and Gen 5 without. The only guns I can bring up with my eyes closed and be naturally on target without using sights.

My next best for me is my 1911

Followed by sig/Springfield XD/Ruger

S&W MP was the worst

Just out of what I use or have used

 

[308pirate]

They're relatively cheap, and they work with minimal maintenance right out of the box.

That's no longer a Glock advantage. I can go buy a similar pistol from any of the mainstream makers and get the same qualities for the same price.

I will give Glock the maintenance simplicity championship, though the CZ P-10 is very close.

 

[hafejd30]

We had a Glock 22 out of the box that wouldn’t fire. Brand new. The idiot that was issued it never test fired it and had been carrying it prior to qualifying.

I’ve seen a lot of glocks and sigs on the range. They ALL fail sooner or later especially with neglected maintenance

Find a gun that naturally fits you well. If you have access to several brands and a 7 yard range then practice bringing them up and shooting without sights. The guns you fit best with will tell you

 

[Holliday]

I was a hard core 1911 shooter for a while before picking up Glocks about 15 years ago. They all feel pretty good to me.

Most people miss out on the main valid complaint about Glocks - the triggers are harder to master to shoot well. The guns are mechanically accurate but a lot of people think they are only good for “minute of man” or something like that because they don’t put in the effort to master the trigger pull. A 1911 or tuned CZ or Tanfo in comparison are easy. Heck even my Canik clone of a Walther with just a couple spring swaps has a better trigger than any Glock ever (although to be fair both the Canik and Walther PPQ series triggers are pretty decent usually right out of the box). If a guy wants to complain about Glocks, that’s a valid complaint.

Yea it took a while for me to admit it but the triggers are shite.......

 

[Holliday]

Glocks are freakin’ simple to maintain. One Sunday morning I decided to do an initial detail strip on my Smith and Wesson Shield.

It’s like the head honcho over at Smith and Wesson said “Go get me the biggest asshole engineer you can find to design the Shield.”

 

[Naaman]

Wow, I'm late to this party, but gonna chime in in response to the OP anyway...

I have a Gen 3 and a Gen 5. My issued duty gun is a Gen 2, and the gun I usually qualify with is a Gen 4.

The grip texture on the Gens 4 and 5 is WAY better than the previous versions.

As for triggers, some say there is no difference, but I do notice a difference between the Gen 4 and Gen 5 trigger feel. I prefer the Gen 5. It's still "mushy" like a Glock, but somehow it's also more tactile/crisp/positive/whatever... at least in my experience--especially on reset.

Using the same sights (Trijicon Bright n' Tough) on my 19 (Gen 5) as on my 17 (Gen 3) I can shoot tighter groups with the stubbier Gen 5... take that for whatever its worth. I did get to compare my Gen 5 19 against one of the Gen 4 17s at work (standard Glock steel sights). Still shot better with the Gen 5 19 (knocked down 8" plates faster and with fewer misses--could have been the due to the sights). Again, anecdotal, so take it with a grain of salt.

In my opinion, if you're buying a model you don't already have, get the Gen 5, if available. If you already have a Gen 3 or 4 of a particular model, only update if you have cash burning holes in your pockets.

I don't have a lot of experience with various brands of pistols, but I can say this. Shot my FIL's SIG 229 (or whatever the SEALs used to carry... 226?), and the trigger was a huge disappointment. Now, to be fair, his pistol is California'd, so it may be some kind of compliance thing, but there was literally NO reset on the trigger. When you let off looking for a reset, you just get a limp trigger (no spring force "assisting" your trigger finger back). Once you let ALL the way off the trigger, it kinda "falls" into place and you can shoot again... I really didn't know what to think... I was really disappointed. Also, the high bore axis on the SIG, relative to Glock, really did feel outdated to me... maybe it's the way I've been trained to grip a pistol, but it did feel top heavy. When I look at other brands of pistols (CZs being the exception), I see this high bore axis and it puts me off... but I'm just one guy on the internet with a bunch of opinions.