quote:

---

What I found funny was he said it wasn't a big deal either way, but then proceeded to tell everyone why they were wrong in more words than I ever turned in during college. He's a Glock homer and this is the perfect place for it. That doesn't mean he isn't in full denial.

---

Sheesh. Really? Can you show me anywhere that I've ever made the case than anyone besides me should be shooting Glocks? That I though Glock was the best handgun on the market for anyone but me?

Shoot whatever you like and have fun. It's all good with me.

Phideaux:

quote:

---

But why do you hate on me because I don't like left side drive cars and I can articulate why?

---

No hate intended, man. I like your passion and your ideas.

I am a little confused about why you might come on a thread about "Scenic drives in the English countryside" and proceed to talk about how left-hand drive cars suck and are inferior to right-hand drive cars.

But no hate. I enjoy reading you. I learn a lot from our interactions.

Fair enough man. I guess it evolved from the discussion on the 42, and Glocks decision to make a .380 rather than a 9mm like I think most were hoping for.

Passion begets passion fella. You've got passion, so that's was you got back! :-)

[This message has been edited by phideaux_2003 (edited 1/6/2014 4:46p).]

Still predict Glock's demise before the end of 2014 though...

quote:

---

Still predict Glock's demise before the end of 2014 though...

---

care to wager?

Will lonewolf make a conversion barrel for it to go 9mm??

Handled both the 41 and the 42 today. I personally am not a glock fan, but I can see both pistols doing well. For me, the 42 would not replace my LCP that I have for the simple fact I carry that in tshirt and shorts to run to te store and I think the 42 is a little heavy for me for doing that. It's not quite as big as my XDS but I am sure it will do just fine market wise. It had a pretty nice feel to it, granted I have small hands.

[This message has been edited by cplatt (edited 1/6/2014 6:14p).]

What is a "defensive shooter"?

Most of the competitive shooters I know, shoot custom 1911s/2011s, and carry Glocks. A few of us carry 1911/2011s.

Muscle memory is more than grip angle - its trigger reset, finger position, controls, mag releases, etc, etc, etc.

I might could go for a single stack Glock.

phideaux_2003:

quote:

---

lack of versatility regarding multiple platforms.

---

Just curious why you think this matters? WHo really cares if you have versatility over multiple platforms as long as you are good with what you own? I mean, If I carry a Glock, my wife carries a Glock, and our other house gun is a Glock, and we are both very good and comfortable with a Glock, why is it necessary or important for me or my wife to be proficient with a 1911?

quote:

---

care to wager?

---

Negative.

quote:

---

What is a "defensive shooter"?

---

A defensive shooter is someone who practices techniques, not for X counts or to punch paper, but to practice defending themselves with the gun they carry, in realistic situations. Drawing from concealment.

Basically like IDPA, SSP, CDP or SSR I guess?

quote:

---

Just curious why you think this matters? WHo really cares if you have versatility over multiple platforms as long as you are good with what you own? I mean, If I carry a Glock, my wife carries a Glock, and our other house gun is a Glock, and we are both very good and comfortable with a Glock, why is it necessary or important for me or my wife to be proficient with a 1911?

---

Reasonable question. Several answers.

1: I like to support companies I like, and I like more than one company.

2: Regardless of the fact that I currently only own one semi-auto, it doesn't do everything for me. I find other guns necessary for what I want to do. While I love my custom 1911, Ed Brown doesn't make a .22 pistol. They also don't make a small, concealable 9mm.

More importantly my biggest reasoning was not that versatility was the important issue, but that being efficient with the guns in that 95% of the market brings versatility. Ask someone who switches back and forth between a Glock and a 1911. It's like a completely different set of skills because the muscles are in a different formation.

OK. I understand why you want to do it, but I do not understand why anyone would criticize another for not. Or maybe I misunderstood you. It seemed to me that you criticized him for 'pigeon holing' himself. As if there was something really wrong with that. I just cannot see the problem with someone standardizing their pistols as long as they are proficient with them. I would never criticize that.

quote:

---

More importantly my biggest reasoning was not that versatility was the important issue, but that being efficient with the guns in that 95% of the market brings versatility. Ask someone who switches back and forth between a Glock and a 1911. It's like a completely different set of skills because the muscles are in a different formation.

---

At the part in bold: What?

quote:

---

OK. I understand why you want to do it, but I do not understand why anyone would criticize another for not. Or maybe I misunderstood you. It seemed to me that you criticized him for 'pigeon holing' himself. As if there was something really wrong with that. I just cannot see the problem with someone standardizing their pistols as long as they are proficient with them. I would never criticize that.

---

Also how I read it.

OK, just as an FYI, I've met quite a few of the "dark glasses, and beard" crowd, shooting USPSA and Steel Challenge matches in NC, as well as a number of professional shooting instructors for the military, and various Federal agencies.

(Met a few instructors shooting around TX - not as many of those high speed/low drag types around SA.)

Might be something you'd be interested in - while IDPA does reward shooting skill, those other disciplines seem to foster a higher level of it.

Never criticized, just poked him in the ribs a bit. :-)

But really, I guess it's mostly out of an "everything in moderation" mind set. If I never shoot anything but a 1911 with a custom 3.75lb trigger, I'm gonna get spoiled and my skills are going to diminish. It's natural, we get lazy.

I'll tell you a little story. At one point about 8 years ago a friend was doing about 10,000 rounds a year recreationally, in practice (defense) and in a few competitions. He is an excellent shooter by most any standard. He was shooting mostly a Springfield 1911 in .45ACP. That's about ~$3000 in ammo (reloading). About that time he realized he could save a bunch of money if he went to 9mm. Same number of bangs, only ~$2000 Or... 50% more bangs for the same money.

So he sold the 1911 and bought a Browning High Power. He shot 9mm for 4 years. Then he bought another 1911 in .45.

Despite the guns being very similar in design and feel, he couldn't shoot it worth a damn because he wasn't used to the recoil. The light recoiling well designed High Power had spoiled him. He has since moved back to a 1911 in .45 for primary work but shoot multiple calibers regularly.

I don't know if that makes any sense to you or not but it makes a lot of sense to me.

quote:

---

At the part in bold: What?

---

The Glock design rotates the wrist a little counter clockwise around the grip, then tilts it downward, pulling the radius forward and compacting the ulna into the humerus and destabilizing the joint and the lower arm.

The grip angle of many other handguns keeps the grip more vertically aligned, keeps the wrist joint compacted, helping control recoil, and permitting the ulna to pull on the tricep putting tension on the arm and stabilizing it.

quote:

---

OK, just as an FYI, I've met quite a few of the "dark glasses, and beard" crowd, shooting USPSA and Steel Challenge matches in NC, as well as a number of professional shooting instructors for the military, and various Federal agencies.

(Met a few instructors shooting around TX - not as many of those high speed/low drag types around SA.)

Might be something you'd be interested in - while IDPA does reward shooting skill, those other disciplines seem to foster a higher level of it.

---

I've shot a match once and had fun with it but I generally shy from most types of competition. I don't know why but I've never been a competitor. Wouldn't scoff at it if someone wanted me to do it with them though.

Oh, I'm not nearly good enough to be a "competitor", at least around SA - the level of skill in that town is impressive - quite a few masters, and at least one GM at most matches - but, its a fun way to develop skills/learn to shoot fast and accurately from awkward positions.

I love watching it too. Ever watch the Wednesday Night at the Range coverage of the pistol matches? It's like watching golf! It can be kinda boring if you're not in the mind frame.

When I meant "I'm not a competitor" I meant there's no way in heck I'm going to win - I still shoot w. them.

I even squad with them (I shoot open, so we mostly squad together - couple Masters, one GM, and one on the border between A and M, along w. my schlub "shooting B on a great day" butt.

I've been close to shooting at an "A" level on occasion, but I'm pretty much a low "B" shooter (took last year off, just about. Less than 2500 rounds)

Some other guys tend to be good as well, but they aren't as regular. (There's often one more M, shooting limited, and a pretty decent older fellow who shoots B as well - but he always shoots B.)







[This message has been edited by Bradley.Kohr.II (edited 1/6/2014 11:33p).]

A review from American Rifleman:

http://www.americanrifleman.org/article.php?id=27239&cat=0&sub=21&q=1

Personally, I find that if you are proficient with a Glock and not as good with another weapon you aren't shooting near enough of ANY of them. I own a few Glocks. Its what I carry. Its what I have shot for the last 15 years. I purchased a Sig from a buddy and my wife bought a P238. I was able to easily shoot them the first time I touched them. I really do not understand the argument of 'pigeon holing' yourself to a gun because it somehow makes you less adequate with another platform. Just doesnt compute for me.

quote:

---

Ask someone who switches back and forth between a Glock and a 1911. It's like a completely different set of skills because the muscles are in a different formation.

---

I have done exactly this, and I don't know anyone, myself included that picked up the 1911 and said "yeah, this is terrible, just can't shoot it."

In fact, I didn't notice anything different about the way it felt to shoot. What the hell is the argument here?

I think Im reminded of a graphic similar to this:



Seems a long way to go to justify not shooting a particular brand.


As for the G42, its a great idea for Glock to edge into the market. They waited for the time and it arrived. They will get a ton of buyers for it and while they are raking in those revenues, they will be (and probably are) developing a single stack 9mm for when it tails off.

And both will hopefully be every bit as Glock as their others in terms of reliability.

[This message has been edited by BrazosDog02 (edited 1/8/2014 3:17p).]

Nice graphic. Too bad the hand engages the rear more angled area of the grip rather than the center line of the grip.

Brazos - Seems like a long way to go to justify ONLY shooting one brand. That was my original point. That's pigeon holing. Skub said he shoots Glocks and that's it because "they just work for him."

He appears to have some kind of mental block that Glock is it and nothing else shoots the same. Otherwise, if the gun truly were just a tool to him, he'd keep that little LCP he's got rather than selling a perfectly serviceable "tool" and spending more money on a bigger gun that he's still gonna try and pocket carry. But that's not happening. He's kool-aid drinking Glock guy and more power to him. But that means he's stuck himself with nothing but Glock. It was by his own choice and admission. I just pointed it out.

[This message has been edited by phideaux_2003 (edited 1/8/2014 9:40p).]

quote:

---

He appears to have some kind of mental block that Glock is it and nothing else shoots the same. Otherwise, if the gun truly were just a tool to him, he'd keep that little LCP he's got rather than selling a perfectly serviceable "tool" and spending more money on a bigger gun that he's still gonna try and pocket carry. But that's not happening. He's kool-aid drinking Glock guy and more power to him. But that means he's stuck himself with nothing but Glock. It was by his own choice and admission. I just pointed it out.

---

Yeah, that's me. I totally stuck myself with Glock and nothing but Glock, and it was my own choice and my own admission, and man you totally called me out on it for reals, yo.

Now can we move on?


[This message has been edited by Skubalon (edited 1/9/2014 12:11a).]

In case you missed my sarcasm, I own and shoot a variety of guns. I own handguns from Glock, yes, but also Taurus, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Walther and Sig.

But I currently carry for personal defense either one of a variety of Glocks or a Ruger LCP. I shoot the other guns, but I never carry them concealed. The others are only found in the safe, in my nightstand or at the range.

Because I train more with the Glocks for personal defense use than I train with the LCP, it makes the most sense in my opinion to have consistency in my carry weapon. This consistency not only includes grip angle but also sight picture and trigger weight, travel, release and reset. Because in my opinion a carry weapon for personal defense is a choice that should be made carefully and then trained with meticulously until the specifics of the tool go away and what you are left with is something so instinctive that the tool itself gets out of your way entirely. THAT is why I prefer to have my carry weapons be consistent and on a standard platform. And if that's wrong, then I'm just wrong, and I'm good with being wrong.






(Now can we get back to discussing why the G42 sucks?)

[This message has been edited by Skubalon (edited 1/9/2014 12:16a).]

Phideaux, didn't you mention in another thread that you've sold off everything but a really high end 1911?

Why are you so critical of others "pigeon holing" when you've made the exact same choice?

Just trying to figure out the logic here.

quote:

---

Phideaux, didn't you mention in another thread that you've sold off everything but a really high end 1911?

Why are you so critical of others "pigeon holing" when you've made the exact same choice?

Just trying to figure out the logic here.

---

I'm currently down to just my 1911 as for semi-autos, yes, but because the grip angle of my 1911 is similar to that of 95% of the handguns out there, my practice with it is still going to benefit me very well if I switch to another platform. I get to choose from 95% of the market. If I chose a Glock, I'll have to tear down all my muscle memory and relearn how to shoot that gun.

Selling all other semi-autos I own happened to finance the custom 1911. All other handgun purchases since have been revolvers.

quote:

---

In case you missed my sarcasm, I own and shoot a variety of guns. I own handguns from Glock, yes, but also Taurus, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Walther and Sig.

But I currently carry for personal defense either one of a variety of Glocks or a Ruger LCP. I shoot the other guns, but I never carry them concealed. The others are only found in the safe, in my nightstand or at the range.

Because I train more with the Glocks for personal defense use than I train with the LCP, it makes the most sense in my opinion to have consistency in my carry weapon. This consistency not only includes grip angle but also sight picture and trigger weight, travel, release and reset. Because in my opinion a carry weapon for personal defense is a choice that should be made carefully and then trained with meticulously until the specifics of the tool go away and what you are left with is something so instinctive that the tool itself gets out of your way entirely. THAT is why I prefer to have my carry weapons be consistent and on a standard platform. And if that's wrong, then I'm just wrong, and I'm good with being wrong.






(Now can we get back to discussing why the G42 sucks?)

---

I never said you were wrong! I've said from the beginning that if you dig Glock, more power to you! I just pointed out that in choking to build your muscle memory around Glock, you've pigeon holed yourself into only using Glock for defense. You say it again here in this post above that you only carry Glock and the LCP, but that you're gonna get rid of the LCP for the 42. Am I right? Did you not say these things? Ok, so you own a bunch of handguns, but you only carry Glock, and that was a very important decision that you studied carefully. Ok. I get it. And the reason you chose that is because you like the way the Glocks shoot. Right? Glocks shoot differently than 95% of the handgun market. = pigeon holed.

quote:

---

...but because the grip angle of my 1911 is similar to that of 95% of the handguns out there...

---

You seem to be suggesting on one hand that going with something resembling "standard" (in this case, grip angle) is a good thing, and without that standard someone has pigeon-holed themselves into weakened fundamentals and the inability to effectively shoot 95% of the other guns in the world.

Then you tell me that you've bought a custom 1911, with what I am guessing is a pretty sweet single-action only trigger. Am I right?

So I suppose you've now eliminated from your training regimen the practice of working with DAO triggers, striker-fired triggers, DA/SA triggers, and any triggers on the market that aren't as super-sweet-silky-smooth as your custom 1911.

At the very least by shooting only a 1911 and revolvers you have eliminated striker-fired pistols from your training regimen, and that class of pistol comprises a HUGE segment of the market. I'd bet that 90% of pistol owners on this forum own at least one striker-fired pistol.

In fact I will argue that by shooting that super-sweet custom 1911 trigger, and you know it IS super sweet, that you will come to regard with disdain any trigger that isn't that super-sweet-silky love. That you will regard as awkward guns with long heavy trigger pulls and that don't break in precisely the same place. And then you will start to complain about stacking.

And then you will eventually come to the place that there is really only one kind of pistol, and that the one true pistol's name ends with "eleven", and then that all others who shoot something that doesn't end in "eleven" might be shooting but it's not really a pistol that they are shooting... it's "something else" - a plastic abomination before the Lord or something.

Am I right?

The correct terminology is "plasticine abomination."

And yep pretty damn close. I have eliminated striker and DA/SA and DAO practice as it pertains to semi-autos due to my selling them to fund the 1911. I do practice DA and SA with my revolvers though. But you're correct, there is currently a hole in my training.

I didn't suggest that there wasn't one though. And as soon as I have more than zero dollars to spend on guns, I'll have others. Including a Glock. I intend on rebuilding my collection.

[This message has been edited by phideaux_2003 (edited 1/9/2014 8:47a).]

You know I'm just rattling your cage right?

And yes, that Ed Brown trigger is like ice on a sheet of glass...

[This message has been edited by phideaux_2003 (edited 1/9/2014 10:06a).]