Glock mags are cheap enough that it wouldn’t bother me, but sounds secure enough that it ain’t necessary.
Last edited:
New Glock
- Thread starter Laufen
- Start date
Glock mags are cheap enough that it wouldn’t bother me, but sounds secure enough that it ain’t necessary.
I agree, and I'd be leery of trusting it with any ammo if I experienced that type of malfunction. I was mainly just wondering about it because of the difference of the projectile shapes on 9mm fmj vs .40 fmj since you said that you had seen it happen with a G27 but never a G26.
I haven’t seen very many G26’s on the range. My old agency issued the G22 and G27, as did/do a large number of Georgia LE agencies. Because of this, I have seen a large number of G27’s in action, but very few G26’s.
Im no fan of the 27. Dont care for 40 in general but in the 27 is more annoying than normal imo.
Always hated the G27. When I started at Marietta PD I carried my personal S&W 442 for my on-duty BUG. Later, MPD purchased G27’s for all officers and we had to carry those if we wanted a BUG. Hated it.
Even as a .mil pistol, why put more plastic on the bottom of the G19's grip? From what I remember, MARSOC, SEALs, and Rangers have all purchased G19s and have been pleased with them. Why couldn't Big Army do the same?
Keep in mind that Glock lost the MHS contract because of price. I work in manufacturing and I can tell you that it's a lot cheaper, faster, and easier to run into the warehouse and put some part that you already make onto a thing that you also already make (e.g.: a G17 mag into a G19) than it is to engineer, prototype, troubleshoot, redesign, remake, and test again (maybe repeat this process?) and then finally manufacture a new thing (e.g.: a G19 frame that is taller). I'm not going to say that Glock could have avoided being out-bid by SIG if they'd just cut out the G19X frame because I don't actually know what it cost Glock to make that change, but there's no way that it was cheaper to come up with the G19X than to just put a thumb safety on a tan G19 (Glock thumb safeties and tan Glocks are not common in the USA but both have existed for years).
I'm not hating on the G19X is a CCW pistol, I'm hating on it as a goofy configuration in general. That said, at the end of the day, it is still a Glock so it's not going to be junk; it's just not a model that does anything better than a G19 and that does a couple of things worse so I'll not buy one.
H
Hoss
Guest
H
Hoss
Guest
We already know. The Dr. called with your blood work earlier. I lied and said I was you. It’s positive.
H
Hoss
Guest
H
Hoss
Guest
Did they ever fire the guy that said, "fuck it, let's jump on the 45 gap train before it's overcrowded...."?
Then the “goofy configuration” is not Glock’s fault.......they followed the parameters of the contract. The G19 frame did not fit the criteria specified in the MHS contract, so Glock couldn’t just slap a safety and a lanyard ring on a G19, paint it tan, and call it a day.
Glock already had a frame that was taller than the G19.......it’s the one that comes on the G17. The only other difference between the G17 and G19 frames are the length of the rail/dust cover. The frames are molded and it’s simple to make a simple change, like shortening the rail/dust cover on a G17 frame.
Yep, from the Feebs on down. DHS has mandated that all their agencies HAVE to switch to 9mm.