Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,433 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Its a fully pre-cocked single action is my understanding.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,726 Posts
With the addition of HK, Beretta, and Walther, to the striker party, it looks like Glock is quickly becoming a commodity, and the fight will soon devolve to a price war.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,569 Posts
The only thing Glocks really have going for them at this point is price. The rest of the good brands have brought what the Glock brings and often better without having to do any mods. I'm not sure there will be any price war, as these brands have been selling their striker fired guns at their normal prices for years now. At 525 though, the new Beretta does seem to be taking a direct shot at Glock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
With the addition of HK, Beretta, and Walther, to the striker party, it looks like Glock is quickly becoming a commodity, and the fight will soon devolve to a price war.
Walther has been in the mix for number of years, as has Beretta. Also Steyr, Springfield, S&W, SIG, Ruger, FN...I don't think that the relatively recent addition of the H&K offerings is going to change a lot for the market in terms of creating a price war. What it (hopefully) may create is a push by some manufacturers to smooth out their striker fired triggers and offer features that shooter actually want - like the adjustable grip and texture of the VP9.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,569 Posts
I agree, prices are for the most part just fine (The VP9 notwithstanding since its quality is well below its price IMHO). Everybody needs to have a Walther PPQ M2 trigger as far as I'm concerned, and they all need to include extra backstraps like the Glock and a few others. Do that for me and don't be a jam-o-matic or ammo sensitive, and I'll have an awfully hard time choosing one over the other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,433 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Dave your one of the few people I ever heard complain about a Vp9 quality. What is it that you don't like?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
Looks like everyone is innovating and changing things up, appears Glock is falling behind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,077 Posts
Looks like everyone is innovating and changing things up, appears Glock is falling behind.
Just the fact that every new "Glock" pistol created by every company out there is being compared to "the Glock original" shows that is far from true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
"Glock Perfection" in my opinion is derived from the notion that less is more, that simple beats complex. Hard to compete with less is more, especially when Glock is about as lean as you can get. The new kids on the block go the other direction thinking more is more. Depends on what you want. The longer I think about it, the more Glock makes sense. Hard to appreciate fully starting out.

In some ways, Glock is way underpriced regardless of how cheap they are to make. They have perfected simplicity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,077 Posts
"Glock Perfection" in my opinion is derived from the notion that less is more, that simple beats complex. Hard to compete with less is more, especially when Glock is about as lean as you can get. The new kids on the block go the other direction thinking more is more. Depends on what you want. The longer I think about it, the more Glock makes sense. Hard to appreciate fully starting out.

In some ways, Glock is way underpriced regardless of how cheap they are to make. They have perfected simplicity.
Agree. They are sleek and simple in appearance, compared to some like an XD or this new HK that looks like they were crapped out of Ben Grimms body.

I doubt very seriously if another Glock copy is going to affect the Glock over all....but it it confirms to the thinking few, that they must have gotten it right the first time.

Ironically, it's sort of like the Colt 1911.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GraySkies

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,306 Posts
In some ways, Glock is way underpriced regardless of how cheap they are to make. They have perfected simplicity.
I don't really get that logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Litespeed

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,622 Posts
I agree, prices are for the most part just fine (The VP9 notwithstanding since its quality is well below its price IMHO). Everybody needs to have a Walther PPQ M2 trigger as far as I'm concerned, and they all need to include extra backstraps like the Glock and a few others. Do that for me and don't be a jam-o-matic or ammo sensitive, and I'll have an awfully hard time choosing one over the other.
Walther sure has figured out that trigger. They also had the interchangeable back strap in the late 90's. Then they ushered in the new craze in sexy slim with the PPS (not the first, just turned the buying craze from hi cap 9mm). Glock finally added adjustable grips and a slim 9mm (just not in the same gun lol).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
I don't really get that logic.
If you assume reliability is derived from simplicity and fewer moving parts, and if you assume reliability is king, then the innovator who comes up with the simplest reliable design deserves a higher price point. You are paying for the guaranteed result, not what it costs to build it. If it's patented up, maybe no one can duplicate it without making it more complex (in reality not duplicating it). Takes great engineering to simplify. Takes less engineering to makes things more complex, as backwards as that sounds.

And the simplicity goes beyond just reliability. The Glock has all you need in minimalist design, meaning the slide release is not oversized like my USP. There is no huge safety/decocker like my V1 USP. The G23 is smaller than the USP but carries more ammo. Etc, etc. etc. What you get is what counts, round count, concealability, dependability, and you get them at the top of the class in each category. It becomes a perfect concealable weapon with few downsides and few extraneous doodads that overcomplicate what needs to be done.

Because Glocks are hard to beat in key categories, it deserves a premium price. Other guns are better at providing a Cadillac full of gadgets to what end? If the Sig 320 can convert to multiple calibers but at the cost of rounds per pound or the high cost of new frames, is it any better than a Glock that is simpler to build, maintain, repair, modify, use, and cheaper to outfit and replace?

They deserve a high price also for their market share which helps them dominate in after market gear and resell value.

The biggest difference is the trust you have in buying a Glock. You know it will go bang everytime (essentially) without costly break-in ammo. It's basically a sure bet. That's worth a significant premium to their build costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,306 Posts
If you assume reliability is derived from simplicity and fewer moving parts...
That's a poor assumption. A smaller number of parts in no way implies greater reliability, and therefore does not imply added value.

What you get is what counts, round count, concealability, dependability, and you get them at the top of the class in each category.
That's debatable, and mostly subjective. I have an XD-SC that would be classed with a G26 as a subcompact 9mm. The XD holds three more rounds, while the G26 is more concealable. Which is better? The answer depends entirely on the needs of each particular user.

If the Sig 320 can convert to multiple calibers but at the cost of rounds per pound or the high cost of new frames, is it any better than a Glock that is simpler to build, maintain, repair, modify, use, and cheaper to outfit and replace?
How is a Glock simpler to build, maintain, repair, modify, use, or cheaper to outfit or replace than a P320? The retail price for P320's has so far been on line with or slightly less than comparable Glocks. The entire design is modular. MSRP on new frames for a P320 is $45, which I doubt you'll find Glock frames for, and buying one doesn't require a 4473.

They deserve a high price also for their market share which helps them dominate in after market gear and resell value.
There is something to that, though again the value is subjective. It depends on what a particular user wants for additional gear and how likely they are to sell the gun.

The biggest difference is the trust you have in buying a Glock. You know it will go bang everytime (essentially) without costly break-in ammo. It's basically a sure bet. That's worth a significant premium to their build costs.
It certainly was for the first 25 years it was around. It's not today, when you can say the same thing about (at the very least) M&P's and XD's, and probably a number of other options. It remains to be seen about this HK, of course.

So, the long and short of it is, it depends what the user needs and wants. If a Glock meets his needs and wants somewhat better than a competitor, then paying a premium for it makes sense, for him. But I don't agree that there's something objectively better about Glocks that justifies the premium. There really isn't.
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top