articles

forum home > articles home

In 2003 I wrote about SIGs and traditional double action automatics in general. At the time I'd settled on the SIG as the pistol I preferred for self-defense, after a couple decades of preferring the 1911.  In that article I wrote that I had some experience with Glocks but that Glocks were not for me.

How times change.

While I still own, shoot, and enjoy both 1911s and SIGs, the pistols I use for self-defense today, including concealed carry, are Glocks.  Because this is a pretty big change for me I thought I'd talk about why I like Glocks.  Yes, I said it--I like Glocks.  A lot of people (including me early on) would say that Glocks are good tools for some jobs but that they really engender no pride of ownership, no enjoyment beyond knowing you've chosen a good reliable tool.  We are afraid to admit we actually like them beyond that, especially us older fellas who started out with blue steel and walnut, and maybe stainless steel if we were really radical.  I have spoken those words many times, but today I will admit that I really like Glocks.  I enjoy owning and shooting them.  I have them in all five sizes made and because of that I can do anything with them that I want to do with a pistol.  I carry them mostly, but I also have competition-suitable models and have used them in Glock Sport Shooting Foundation matches and in bowling pin matches.

Although I have fired all sizes of Glocks and shot them in all calibers except .357SIG, I think two things really converted me--the influences of friend and excellent shooter Jerry Webb, and finally deciding to own one myself.  You can have good access to friend's guns but until you can go to the range whenever you want and shoot as much ammo as you want through a given pistol, you will never really know if it is the gun for you.  I learned that a long time ago as I worked my way through different action types, sometimes loving and sometimes hating the guns I owned. Yet for some reason I'd always been resistant to Glock charm.

I think the passage in 2004 of concealed carry for law-abiding citizens in my current state of residence pushed me toward Glock as well.  I'd carried both as a deputy sheriff and as a licensed private citizen in California but moving to Ohio meant no carry for many years.  By the time I began carrying again I suddenly appreciated two aspects of the Glock very much--light weight for comfortable all-day carry, and the absolute ease of maintenance. Carrying a blued or even stainless steel handgun concealed in the summer always meant a wipe-down every day and a more in-depth maintenance weekly.  Glocks still need regular maintenance but the daily wipe-down is unnecessary in my experience because there is almost nothing to rust on a Glock handgun.  The Tennifer process on the slide and barrel is a deep heat treatment that renders the steel "unrustable," if I can make up a word, and of course the polymer frame is impervious to most any damage in routine use.

Okay, Glocks are lightweight and it doesn't take much to care for them, but isn't that true of many similar handguns?  Sure it is. The Springfield XD, the Smith & Wesson M&P pistol, and many other polymer pistols are available today.  The S&W uses a similar process on their slides called Melonite.  I don't believe Springfield does, sticking with standard bluing, but I may be wrong or not up to date on that.  Regardless, why have I gone to Glocks instead of XDs or M&Ps?  For that matter, what was wrong with my SIGs? Not a darn thing.

The primary reason I went to Glocks was because they are "pull & go" like a SIG or other DA auto, and yet they have a consistent trigger pull for each shot.  They also have a short trigger reset similar to a 1911.  If you want to shoot fast you must exploit trigger reset, and most TDA autos like the SIG do not have short resets.

Once I really got into Glocks I came to realize how simple they were, simple to the point of being revolutionary in the rather stodgy world of pistol design.  Detail stripping a Glock, while not routinely required, is very simple, and even more, changing the fire control parts is simple for one with training.  I have not taken the Glock armorer class as that is only offered to the police and certain FFL holders, but I have read The Complete Glock Reference Guide from Ptooma Productions three times through, and I have gotten comfortable fiddling with my Glocks.  

The standard Glock trigger is about 5.5lbs.  Glock offers their New York 1 (NY1) trigger at about 8.5lbs and their New York 2 (NY2) at about 12+lbs.  (The NY2 is useless in my opinion.)  Additionally they offer their competition trigger at about 3.5lbs.  While not all combinations of fire control parts are compatible, there is some flexibility here.

The most popular carry gun triggers are probably the standard and the NY1.  The standard is a great pull weight, while the NY1 adds another degree of "mental safety."  There is something comforting to a bit more weight, and initially I went to the NY1 on my carry guns.  The trigger pulls were too heavy, although the quality of the trigger was probably better.  The standard trigger continued to be the pull weight I was comfortable with, but the standard trigger is sproingy.  If you have fired a Glock at all you know what I mean.  At some point I got a Glock with the competition trigger and found out that Glock triggers don't have to be sproingy and heavy.  Still, a 3.5lb. trigger is too light for carry in my opinion.  I know some 1911 guys like triggers that light but they aren't me and I don't.  By mating the trigger connector from a competition trigger to a NY1 trigger spring, one gets the standard pull weight of around 5.5lbs with a better trigger feel, and very little "sproing."  Additionally, the NY1 trigger spring module is a much better, more heavy-duty spring set-up. With extensive use the standard trigger spring can and will break. The NY1 is far less susceptible to breakage.  I currently have the competition connector and NY1 spring in my three primary Glock defensive pistols, a model 27, a model 23, and a model 35.

Therein lies what I consider a major advantage to Glock pistols over the competition.  One cannot buy drop-in parts and change the entire complexion of his pistol's trigger with the other models.  That said, XDs and M&Ps come with nice triggers from the factory, and neither one is as sproingy as a Glock factory trigger.  If the XD or M&P trigger is not to one's liking they can be gunsmithed, as my friend Jerry has done a trigger job on one of his M&Ps with nice results.  Still, this requires skills not all of us have.  With the Glock, anyone with average intelligence and the proper instruction can manipulate his trigger without ever taking a file to metal. That's a big plus in my book.

Another aspect of defensive pistols I find very important are sights.  I happen to LOVE Glock sights. I'm 52 as I write this and I can no longer acquire a fast sight picture using the all-black sights I preferred most of my adult life. Glock's bright white outline rear sight and white dot front sight are fast for me, for my eyes.  They are much faster than the three dot sights found on the XD and M&P.  Still, sights can be changed and only time and money are keeping any of us from having our favorite sights on our favorite pistols no matter what they came with from the factory.

 
Even in a photo the bright white Glock sights jump out at you

Pistol fit is a third major concern with any defensive handgun. The gun must be sized so that we can hang on to it securely, but most importantly, we should be able to reach the trigger with a proper firing grip on the gun.  The standard Glock pistol frames (all calibers but .45ACP and 10mm) fit me fine.  XDs and M&Ps also fit me fine, as does the Taurus 24-7 (which is probably the best feeling pistol I have ever held in my hand).  Smith & Wesson has also made their grip frames modular and include three sizes of inserts so that practically any shooter can fit the gun to their hand.  This is becoming more and more common, although Glock and Springfield have not jumped on that bandwagon yet.

The final major piece of the defensive pistol puzzle is of course the most important one, and that is solid reliability.  I've rarely experienced any modern pistol design that isn't extremely reliable, and even the old designs like the 1911 and Hi-Power can be made reliable.  We should always test our own pistols before we rely on them--enough said on that.

If you've read this far you've realized that while I've said what I like about Glocks, I've also left the door wide open for XDs, M&Ps and others.  Yep.  What I like is what I like, and the fact that I have gone from 1911s to SIGs to Glocks over the course of my adult life has taught me that not only is pistol preference an extremely personal thing, it is also not something that will never change.  We must all choose what works and what fits, but also what we like.

I've come to like the business-like look of the Glock pistol.  Is that important?  Sure, once the stuff I mentioned above is dealt with.  Life is too short to use a pistol you can't stand, even if it is just skin deep. I happen to think Springfield XDs are ugly.  I know--to a casual observer the Glock and XD are two peas in a pod.  If you see 'em that way you're wasting your time reading this paragraph.  If you recognize them as quite different, keep reading--they are.  Two primary differences are the grip angle and height of the slide.  The XD has a more 1911-like grip angle than the Glock, which has a greater angle between grip and slide.  These guns point differently, and you need to find what works for you.  The XD also has a higher bore axis, which is to say that the slide is taller and the barrel sits further above your hand than in the Glock. Sure, that's a bit esoteric but it comes into play in shooting especially when trying to shoot fast.  I think the Glock fits me better and is more comfortable.

I have a great appreciation for the S&W M&P and it is a bit more graceful looking than the XD or Glock, but I don't feel comfortable holding one.  They seem a bit slippery to me.  Not exactly a bar of wet soap, but they feel insecure in my hand.  Two of my friends dislike my SIG P239 in the same way--in that case they feel like the grip is too small and they don't feel secure with it.  By all means, don't use a pistol that makes you feel that way.  If possible try and shoot one enough to know that is in fact the case, but don't use a pistol that doesn't engender a comfortable feeling.

The Taurus 24-7 is another contender in the short-stroke, striker-fired, polymer pistol race.  I bought one in .45ACP.  It feels great in my hand--truly awesome.  The excellent-feeling trigger is single-action-only and there is a thumb safety like a 1911.  They have Heinie "straight eight" sights on them.  Yet mine was not 100% reliable and sits in my safe awaiting sale at some point.  Personal pistols must be reliable or everything else is wasted.

There are many other pistols out there today which are pull & go, have good triggers, and are worthy of your consideration.  I'm not trying to convince anyone that my choice should be their choice. People who do that are asses.  They show their ignorance in not realizing that only you can choose the right defensive handgun for you.  I'm only here to say that I like Glocks best for defensive duty these days, and I really enjoy shooting them in general.  I don't foresee anything changing anytime soon, but history has shown me that may not be the case. 20Aug08

 Update:

Since writing this article I've added three Glocks to my battery, the thin-slide Glock 36 in .45ACP, the new Glock 21SF .45ACP (SF for "short frame") which has made the large frame .45 accessible to those with other than King Kong mitts, and a Glock 19 9mm.  The two .45s have shown they can handle the ammo I carry and are working as my carry guns as I write this, and the G19 is working out as a great range gun and back-up to my identically sized G23 .40 caliber guns. 

I have put the 3.5lb. or "minus" connectors, called that because they have a "-" stamped into them, in all my pistols except the ones that already came with them and put NY1 trigger springs in them as well to give that clean pull which is really about six pounds, I think.  The only exception is my competition-only G24, which retains its factory original minus connector but standard trigger spring for an ultra-light trigger.  Not a street gun!  My G35 came with the same set-up but as I do carry it and use it for home defense, it has the NY1 spring to increase the trigger pull to match my other defense-oriented Glocks.

I have also upped the recoil spring weights on my .40s from the factory weights of 17lbs. (full size guns) and 18 lbs (compact guns) to 20lbs, this after much reading* and talking to my knowledgeable friends.  I believe that because the Glock Company is very concerned about interchangeability of parts in their pistols they sometimes compromise in choosing which way to go between calibers and between frame sizes--for example the same size recoil spring assembly serves the G22, 35, and 24, even though all three have different length slides.  They build a stop into the frame to allow the short guide to work in the long slide!  Interchangeability is the cry from Austria.  But in heavy use in America it has been found the.40s especially need heavier recoil springs.  My pal Jerry Webb is of the mind the .45s also need upping.  It seems the 9mms are fine with the factory weights. 

I've also made some minor changes not because I absolutely had to but because I could, and because I'm a .  Instead of the plastic front sights, which are probably one of the only two weak points, I've gone with steel--same sights but steel instead of plastic.  Trijicon makes them for Glock and Glock distributes them.  My Imagefavorite Glock OEM distributor, Glockparts.com, as well as Lone Wolf Distributors, have carried them.  Glockparts.com also has an Ameriglo front sight (at right) that is more conventionally shaped but has the identical sight picture, also steel.  Both install the same way with the 3/16" hex nut.  The Ameriglo sight even comes with an inexpensive nut driver. 

The other change was to replace the plastic guide rods with ones made of stainless steel in order to avoid breaking the plastic tab that fits into the the slot on the front of the barel lugs.  This happens enough that the steel guide rods seemed good insurance so I did this while changing to different springs. (15May09)

 Update II:

Since the last time we checked in I've converted my second generation Glock 22 to a back-up competition pistol.  As it was never carried and I couldn't see it ever being carried, and as I now prefer to have one of my third generation pistols with rails and thus the capability to mount a gun light for home defense, it seemed like the perfect idea to convert the G22 to competition use.  My G24 GSSF pistol is also a second gen gun and I love the smooth, no-fingergroove grip for competition.  Both guns are externally the same except for barrel length (6.02" vs 4.49"). 

The G22 is an old cop gun so I refinished the slide with Brownell's Aluma-Hyde II.  Sights are an Ameriglo Combat Target rear from their set #GT-502 which features an extremely wide rear sight for older eyes, all black, coupled with a standard Glock, all-steel front sight which I customized by filling in the white dot with epoxy and refinishing in all-black.   This set-up is identical to what's on my G24.  I've also changed the trigger set-up to a minus connector and standard trigger spring like the G24. 

Why two competition pistols for a fellow who is at best a casual club shooter?  Always have a Plan B!  When I first changed sights on my G24 I didn't install the front sight properly and didn't realize it until arriving at the match--my test-firing went okay but the sight was loose the morning of the shoot.  Fortunately I had one of my carry Glocks with me.  Now I can have a second Glock set up the same as my game gun should anything break.  If one can be redundant, why not be redundant? (30Sep09)

 

Image



copyright 2008/2009 by the author, all rights reserved.



Uploaded: 8/20/2008