Defensive Carry banner

21 - 40 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
I'm a bit confused; I read another article about the M series and it was reported that this will not be available to the general public, but I don't understand why.

Upgrades include:
Smoother edges for better draw
Ambi slide release
Ambi mag release
Flared magazine well
and a modified trigger.

Why would this not be available to the general public? is there more to it?
sssshh........... it has auto targeting built in so they don't have to know how to aim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,592 Posts
Dude, it's on the internet and has been through the very precise, upstanding, and legitimate AR15.com, also heard that Brian Williams was involved in the design. IT IS SO VERY BEYOND TRUE, TAKE IT TO THE BANK!
My cousins neighbor's friend's wife said he heard it was the pistol Brian Williams actually carried on several black ops.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
631 Posts
I'm still talking crap about the Gen 4s, and now they are coming out with another Gen? That's not going to leave me much time to talk crap about gluten free food, hybrid cars, skinny jeans, emo music, man purses, and kale farming.

I like my Gen 3s as much as I like my flip phone and the 8 track player in my truck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
If I got to pick what the combination of mods which should mark the new standard, the guns would look like this:

View attachment 151073 View attachment 151081

I would also add the ambi slide release and two pin take-down. Aren't you glad I'm not in charge?
Quite glad, the sights need to be behind the dot, and the slide needs to be relieved more to mount the dot lower so you can have co-witness. Other than that, yes those mods should be the new standard.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
33,763 Posts
Quite glad, the sights need to be behind the dot, and the slide needs to be relieved more to mount the dot lower so you can have co-witness. Other than that, yes those mods should be the new standard.
Why, pray tell, does the rear sight need to be behind the optic? Those are back-up irons, not co-witness sights. The only times they are to be noticed are when the RMR quits, and for point shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OD*

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,653 Posts
If Glock is going to be releasing new versions as often as Apple phones, they are going to have to start adding dashes to the roll mark for their versions. Next summer, G19-6. November will see the G19-6.2, just in time for Christmas shopping. You can even get an online iTunes discount on it.

Perfection -7.2.1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,171 Posts
They coulda stopped at Gen 3 as far as I'm concerned. I probably coulda been satisfied with just the Gen 2's for that matter. Some folks might like the "M", but I'm not interested. BTW, the magwell is just gross!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Why, pray tell, does the rear sight need to be behind the optic? Those are back-up irons, not co-witness sights. The only times they are to be noticed are when the RMR quits, and for point shooting.
1 easier to pick up if RMR goes down, 2 longer sight radius in case of same 3 aids in picking up the dot, which is generally more important for newer users of the RMR than those who have significant trigger time as this speeds up the learning curve.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
33,763 Posts
1 easier to pick up if RMR goes down, 2 longer sight radius in case of same 3 aids in picking up the dot, which is generally more important for newer users of the RMR than those who have significant trigger time as this speeds up the learning curve.
I've had it both ways, and the Suppressor sights pick up with equal ease when the rear sight is mounted in front of the RMR as when mounted behind it. The superiority of longer vs shorter sight radii is subjective at best. The rear mounted rear sight offers absolutely nothing speed-wise in picking up the dot.

One thing the rear-mounted BUIS does do is make for a noticeably-higher holster ride when carried along the belt line.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
33,763 Posts
View attachment 151873

I'm confused. If Glock is "Perfection," why have they taken five generations to improve it? Where the first four rubbish? Are they saying this generation is finally perfection?
Anything past a third generation gets a pass from me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
A G17 (or honestly even a G19) would be just fine as a service pistol for most parts of the US Military (or for anyone's military when you get right down to it). Fielding both (G17 for overt use, G19 for folks that need a more compact option) might be an even better idea - after all, different users within the military have different requirements. What an MP in uniform needs is similar to what an M240 gunner needs...but doesn't truly align all that well with what a pilot or a CID detective needs. It might be helpful if the standard pistol supports what SOCOM needs, but let's be 100% honest....we've already established beyond a shadow of a doubt that if the "big Army" pistol doesn't do what SOCOM wants it to, they'll purchase whatever they want off the shelf.

The one obstacle that I see is that in the past the "Big Army" pistol has frequently needed to have some "bells and whistles" that Gaston's tupperware perfection doesn't have - like an external mechanical safety, or the ability to "second strike" a hard primer. I'm not going to argue that these are necessary or even truly desirable - but the decision making process and risk aversion of senior field grade officers that fill most of the bureaucratic slots within the big Army procurement machine does mean that they will probably require a manual safety to reduce the perceived chance of Corporal Bloggins shooting himself (or herself) in a sensitive portion of the anatomy.
 
21 - 40 of 48 Posts
Top