I guess that's one way of applauding S&W and Springfield. Glock is having to imitate THEIR features and upgrades to the polymer pistol platform
Get back to me when either of them file a successful lawsuit against Glock.
So this is the new Glock?
- Thread starter oleheat
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Get back to me when either of them file a successful lawsuit against Glock.
So you're telling me that Glock hasn't added features to their guns because their competition did? Beaver tail, backstrap replacements, ambidextrous ease...
Yep. Everybody borrows something from someone.
Glock was no different in that regard. From the polymer to the barrel lockup borrowed from Browning himself.
HK was the first in polymer; GG just managed to take the concept to such heights that hardly no one remembers it.
Glock was no different in that regard. From the polymer to the barrel lockup borrowed from Browning himself.
HK was the first in polymer; GG just managed to take the concept to such heights that hardly no one remembers it.
They have some manula safety models for a couple of European Militaries. The problem with the US DOD buying them is a matter of verbage. The Joint Pistol Program for instance mandated that the pistol not be SAO. Glock's Safe Action is SAO. You will continue to see a rize in the popularity of Glock's in the US DOD but it will be in Small Agencies and Units that can afford to buy their own. For instance the Navy is about to hand out 19's to its aviators.
I met Gaston Glock at Ft Bragg in 2006. He seemed to be a very soft spoken conservative man. That would fit with what you guys are saying. He is making money hand over fist right now. I am sure he has capitalized his Austrian and US factories and all of the dies, molds, and tooling are paid for. His most popular models have a 16 to 18 month backlog of orders. He might as well be printing money. Adding new models would only add additional cost. If he is being honest with himself and his team and they realize they aren't game changing designs why bother?
Everyone waiting on a Glock Carbine.....give up. It probably won't ever happen. If it did happen what would it do? Be better than an AR? Doubtful. Be better than an AK? Doubtful. When Glock didn't submit an entry into the Austrian MoD Carbine replacement trials that should have been enough evidence for people to let go of the dream.
I would love to see a single stack 9mm Glock. My guess is because of the materials and thickness of those materials required to provide strength to the grip and the Magazine it would end up really not being that thin. Glock does a .380. It's huge and it sucks. .380s in general suck and personally I don't see why anybody would want one outside of clever marketing.
What you will see from Glock in the near term is they will continue to build the best 9mm Service weapons and the most popular .40cal Service Weapons in the World. Thats it. no sizzle. If you want sizzle buy a SiG.
Everyone waiting on a Glock Carbine.....give up. It probably won't ever happen. If it did happen what would it do? Be better than an AR? Doubtful. Be better than an AK? Doubtful. When Glock didn't submit an entry into the Austrian MoD Carbine replacement trials that should have been enough evidence for people to let go of the dream.
I would love to see a single stack 9mm Glock. My guess is because of the materials and thickness of those materials required to provide strength to the grip and the Magazine it would end up really not being that thin. Glock does a .380. It's huge and it sucks. .380s in general suck and personally I don't see why anybody would want one outside of clever marketing.
What you will see from Glock in the near term is they will continue to build the best 9mm Service weapons and the most popular .40cal Service Weapons in the World. Thats it. no sizzle. If you want sizzle buy a SiG.
I read an article in a business magazine a while ago. It wasn't concerned with the actual product per say. According to the article the profit margin on a GLOCK 65% before it goes to the wholesaler. Of course they switched to polymer b/c of lower costs of production versus machining/casting, etc metal. GLOCK didn't invent any specific thing but he put in together into a handgun that works and cheap to build. Plus they knew how to market them better than anyone else. Those of us old enough to remember know that the media generated hysteria that started when GLOCK's first came into the market place didn't hurt getting name recognition for his product.
Dave
Dave
Don't take this the wrong way, but one has to wonder if Glock will become more open to the idea of new products when Robert Glock controls the company (assuming he does), akin to what happened at Ruger in the years following WBR...Robert designed the G36- which is arguably the closest thing to "something different" Glock has offered- to this day.
It's hard to argue with what GG has done, from the standpoint of building his business into a colossus. But purely from a gun guy who'd like to see something new, I wonder how much of the "stay the course" attitude is strictly due to the man himself? After all- this is the man who refused to alter his pistol for the US Military's pistol trials in which the Beretta M9 eventually won out. Just thinking out loud.....
After all- this is the man who refused to alter his pistol for the US Military's pistol trials in which the Beretta M9 eventually won out
What year did this take place?
The Glock 17 did not participate in those trials. It wasn't a matter of it being altered. The Contract Award was written to include a provision that after X amount of guns the pistols had to be produced and serviced at a US Factory. At the time Glock was a small company and had no intentions or ability to open a US Factory.
The only guns allowed to compete after the down-select were from: Colt (Double Eaglish Thing), S&W, Beretta, SiG, and Walther. After the 2nd down-select the 92F and 226 shot it out. Contrary to popular legend the 226 didn't "win" and then not get chosen. The 226 did perform very well, it did cost less per gun but it cost more as a unit than the 92. The Gov, when using the type of purchase authority that was used is required all things being equal to select the cheaper product. Hence the M9 not the Non-M designated 226 became the Sidearm of the US Military. The M-11 (a SiG 228) came into being a couple years later as a limited procurement and issue item.
Glock 19s are currently in use with several SOCOM member Units, The JSOC, The Air Force, The Navy, and DIA. The Big Army is hung up on using mechanical means to insure safety rather than teaching troops fundamental weapon handling skills so if a new pistol is purchased to replace the M9 it will certainly have a manual safety. The Army is the kinda organization that would mandate the wearing of a belt and suspenders rather than train someone how to adequately fasten his pants. Any procurement success the Army and Marines have with Small Arms and Individual Equipment is purely in-spite of themselves. All that being said I would be more than shocked if a Handgun Trial was held. There really isn't a need. The M9 is adequate for what it is. The folks that need a better Secondary Weapon have the power and funds to source them. Considering the money the Army is about to spend on it's Interim Carbine Replacement Program ( the name may have changed to something more permanent sounding) I would be shocked if they aske for more cash to buy pistols.
Glock 19s are currently in use with several SOCOM member Units, The JSOC, The Air Force, The Navy, and DIA. The Big Army is hung up on using mechanical means to insure safety rather than teaching troops fundamental weapon handling skills so if a new pistol is purchased to replace the M9 it will certainly have a manual safety. The Army is the kinda organization that would mandate the wearing of a belt and suspenders rather than train someone how to adequately fasten his pants. Any procurement success the Army and Marines have with Small Arms and Individual Equipment is purely in-spite of themselves. All that being said I would be more than shocked if a Handgun Trial was held. There really isn't a need. The M9 is adequate for what it is. The folks that need a better Secondary Weapon have the power and funds to source them. Considering the money the Army is about to spend on it's Interim Carbine Replacement Program ( the name may have changed to something more permanent sounding) I would be shocked if they aske for more cash to buy pistols.
Damn , dude ! That kind of talk will get you drawn , quartered , AND banned around here .
I saw this not long ago....IIRC, I thought the built-in profit margin was actually 68% per pistol and was one of the highest, if not THE highest, of all pistol manufacturers. The article also listed S&W profit margin at the lowest, again IIRC, at 32%.
A 68% profit margin sure seems like a hell of a mark-up.
S&W is still capitalizing their investment in molds, tooling, etc for their M&P revival. In a few years they will be making money hand over fist also. Guns are a commodity and there fore worth whatever the market will bear.
