[wmhawth]

As I have always said, it it has a trigger, I can shoot it.

If given a few rounds for familiarization I can usually shoot one gun about as well as the next.

 

[demanic]

If given a few rounds for familiarization I can usually shoot one gun about as well as the next.

Excellent!

 

[gasmitty]

For me, getting used to the Glock trigger takes more acclimation than the grip angle.

 

[Chuck808]

I think the more swept back grip angle of the Glock, as well as the low bore axis work together to let the gun get the least amount of leverage on the shooter, and be flat shooting. Its easier to hold a joint locked out or completely compressed than in the middle of its range of motion. Extending my arms out and extending my wrist down seems to help me keep my wrist locked and use my elbows, arms, and body to control the recoil instead of my weaker wrists.

Its what I started on, and its what Im most comfortable with. Im sure if I started on something drastically different, Id be more comfortable with that, but I do think the steeper grip angle does have some objective benefits, regardless of what the shooter is most familiar with.

 

[SDGlock23]

Honestly I've never had an issue with the grip angle on Glocks. I didn't know they were supposed to be "bad", but I liked them and shot them well. Having had handguns that have a more "natural" grip angle, I just don't really see the big deal.

 

[QuickQuestionAnon]

Bear in mind... everything I'm about to say is ANECDOTAL evidence... but let me say this...

Most (not all but most) guys I meet (emphasis on the "I meet" part) who shoot Glocks primarily... whenever I introduce them to an M&P or a CZ, they tell me it feels better to shoot, and they feel like they are more accurate.

On the flip side, whenever I introduce a 1911, M&P or Sig shooter to Glocks... MOST times they hate the experience.

Admittedly, I've met people on the other side who told me that they preferred the feel and/or accuracy of the Glock to their previous platform... but they are the minority.

Check this guy out, he loves Glocks, he defends the Glock grip angle... he calls it a feature. He actually competes with Glock... But listen till the end of the video on how much he has been swayed by the M&P.

 

[JD]

I think more people are swayed by the overall better ergonomics of those guns vs the 2x4 grip of the Glock which has nothing to do with the angle.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[retired deputy]

i think probably a good number of folks will make up their own mind regardless of what i think...

no different than than my manual transmission pickup.....i appreciate the driving experience....my wife does not.
so she never drives my truck......life is good......

 

[bmcgilvray]

Don't really like Glock, but don't really care about any grip angle difference. If I chose to embrace Glock I'd get used to it through familiarization.

Hah! I can drive (and have owned and driven) vehicles with manual transmissions, but I don't choose to at this point in time. I can adapt to Glock grip angle, but don't choose to at this point in time.

 

[wmhawth]

My guess is that the Glock grip angle in reality doesn't have much to do with why some people do not care for Glocks and choose not to own them. To each his own. In my opinion the grip angle isn't much of an issue.

 

[Rexster]

I’ll go with “Design Feature.” It seems to work, for plenty of folks. It works, for me, starting with the Gen3. (Pre-Gen3 pointed inconsistently, in my hands. The angle stayed the same, as Gen1/Gen2, but something else about the Gen3 just worked better, for me.)

Notably, a 1911, with a flat MSH, points perfectly well, for me, and has, since my first one, in 1982 or 1983. There was no learning curve; it just fit. When I bought my first Gen3 Glock, in 2002, it pointed perfectly well, from the first time. There was no learning curve. I have been able to use these two designs interchangeably, since that time. (The Gen4 was a significant improvement, but the paintability part was good, for me, as of the Gen3.)

The Glock trigger can give me fits, but that is a different subject.

 

[ShooterGranny]

I think more people are swayed by the overall better ergonomics of those guns vs the 2x4 grip of the Glock which has nothing to do with the angle.

@JD There you go - again - right on the button! It is that oblong/square grip that gives so many people fits, making it a lot more challenging to get the center of the grip in the center of the web of the hand. I've seen too many people who are gripping a Glock with one of the "corners" in the center of the web of the hand. That does not make for "natural pointing" in any way. It also prevents the center of the slide from lining up perfectly with the radius bone in the arm. Gripping a Glock properly with the center of the grip in the center of the web of the hand is not a "natural" thing to do for way too many people, even though it can be learned.

Put an M&P with its nice rounded grip in that hand and the gun "wants to line up" just right.

The above is a result of my observations, combined with my personal experience. And even with all of that, I shot Glocks quite well for over 20 years before my thumb and wrist bones got totally trashed DUE TO holding the grip with the "corner" in the web of my hand.

 

[QuickQuestionAnon]

I think more people are swayed by the overall better ergonomics of those guns vs the 2x4 grip of the Glock which has nothing to do with the angle.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

I'm not so sure if grip angle doesn't play a role. Check out this video from Shadow Systems...

Trevor basically talks about the NPOA (natural point of aim) system they developed with their backstraps... Honestly, I think it is genius and makes a whole lot of sense on why they went that route.

Every Glock clone these days seems to be veering away from the original Glock Hump and Grip Angle (Zev, Shadow Systems, P80, Rock Island STK100, PSA Dagger, etc.)... there has to be a reason.. and if you watch the video below, Trevor's explanation about the "natural point of aim" makes sense.

 

[JD]

I'm not so sure if grip angle doesn't play a role. Check out this video from Shadow Systems...

Trevor basically talks about the NPOA (natural point of aim) system they developed with their backstraps... Honestly, I think it is genius and makes a whole lot of sense on why they went that route.

Every Glock clone these days seems to be veering away from the original Glock Hump and Grip Angle (Zev, Shadow Systems, P80, Rock Island STK100, PSA Dagger, etc.)... there has to be a reason.. and if you watch the video below, Trevor's explanation about the "natural point of aim" makes sense.

You do understand that changing backstraps does not alter grip angle, right? The angle of the grip stays the same. You're just adding more or taking away less material to shift how the gun sits in your hand.

The physical angle of the grip stays the same.

This dates all the way back to the 1911 when moving from the flat mainspring housing to the arched mainspring housing and the 1st modern variant as done by HK on the P2000.

You can't tell me that the 1911 has a superior grip angle and when they had to change out the parts to elevate the natural POA for the entire US Armed Forces.

The butt of the gun is not a grip angle issue, this is an ergonomics issue and yes, Glock sucks at it.

Edited to add: they (Shadow Systems) say it right in their details.

Replacement backstraps for the MR918 and MR920 pistols. Our NPOA system (Natural Point of Aim) changes the perceived grip angle of the pistol and affects how the pistol points. Experiment and select the backstrap that naturally matches your own perception of muzzle elevation and get on target fast

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[QuickQuestionAnon]

Edited to add: they (Shadow Systems) say it right in their details.







Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

I'm not saying you're wrong, but Shadow System has pushed both narratives both in videos and even on other pages on their website:

Our frames feature the groundbreaking Shadow Systems NPOA backstrap system, which fundamentally changing the grip angle of the gun to meet the shooter’s natural point of aim.

 

[JD]

Yeah, that's a no go from me, the overall grip and looks to be exactly the same as a Glock.


I understand that we're getting into nuance, we'll talk more about natural point of aim in a little while. Got yard work waiting.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[LimaCharlie]

The Glock grip angle was never an issue for me. Striker fired triggers are an issue for me. Give me a 1911 or a single-action revolver and I am happy.

 

[JD]

As a teaser, this is what a 100% natural point of aim with a relaxed wrist looks like with my P30L

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[QuickQuestionAnon]

As a teaser, this is what a 100% natural point of aim with a relaxed wrist looks like with my P30L

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

lol really? Watching you point that HK reminds me of those exaggerated infomercial ads. Hold the pistol and then point your finger in front as if you are pointing at something. You are obviously pointing downwards. 😂

 

[JD]

lol really? Watching you point that HK reminds me of those exaggerated infomercial ads. Hold the pistol and then point your finger in front as if you are pointing at something. You are obviously pointing downwards. [emoji23]

If you're actively engaging your wrist to adjust elevation, it's not a 100% natural point of aim.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk