Gun Selection for Production USPSA

[jsneff]

An American Handgunner magazine many moons ago, wrote that Glock owned over 66% of all new law enforcement sales. That was years ago and left only a third of the pie for EVERY other pistol produced! I would think it is an even bigger gap today and same goes for Production Class dominance.

[Beretta Lover]

This is just for my own edification. I shoot Limited, but after Area 6 I think I will shoot a few matches in Production Class to get Classifed for the fun of it. When I do, I will most likely shoot my Hi-Cap Para 9mm because the weight, and my grip will be about the same as the SV. However, I may shoot a Taurus 24/7 that I have.

But I have noticed in matches, and in the reporting of the Nationals, etc that Glock seems to have a numerical advantage. Why so? Is it the availability of internal "Race Parts" for the Glock vs the XP, M&P, Para, etc? I know short of changing sights that there is NOTHING for the Taurus (which I love the feel of). The accuracy of one vs the other is negligable. There are top sponsored and unsponsored shooters using all of them.

Or is it just that a lot of shooters that start out as defensive shooters with a Glock, and then start shooting IDPA/USPSA/

Just wondering others thoughts.

Please lets not make this a Rah, Rah, my gun is better than yours silly thread.

Thanks,

Mark

Dude three things make a glock so viable for USPSA

Reliability

Easy to work on yourself

dont cost much to get started

There are guys in USPSA shooting $550 glocks crushing people with $2K and up limited guns

I will also say that I cant jump on the CZ, MP or XD bandwagon quite yet

I shot an XD for 6 -4 months, it broke 4 times, one roll pin, two barrel locking blocks and the trigger bar snapped in half

This gun had around 40K through it, SA was very good about repairing it very quickly, and the XD shoots great, I just got tired of it busting on me.

I have heard the CZs bust, I heard the slide stops and some other internals crack in the 20-40K range.

That MP looks good but it really hasnt been out there too long I personally dont know anyone who has a ton of rounds through one yet.

Factory sponsored shooters have multiple pistols to shoot, so the round count on the guns is lower, plus they have free parts and gunsmiths

There are a bunch of people with a gillion rounds through glocks though

[turbocomp38s]

any preference on the Glocks for production? Glock 17 or Glock 34? Thanks in advance. I can get the Glock 17 cheaper at academy sports but they don't sell the glock 34. I have to go to a gun shop/ store to buy that.

[AustinMike]

any preference on the Glocks for production? Glock 17 or Glock 34? Thanks in advance. I can get the Glock 17 cheaper at academy sports but they don't sell the glock 34. I have to go to a gun shop/ store to buy that.

Flex should be along anytime now to say "pick one and practice." He's right, either is fine for our sport. The G34 might have a slight advantage on longer shots with the longer sight radius. Hold them both and see which feels best to you. See if you can shoot both and compare. I'd check out the used or factory rebuild market. They're a little harder to come by in the G17 as of late, but you can find police trade-ins that are like new except for a little holster wear. That's what most of my Glocks are and they run just fine. No reason to buy new unless you want to take a picture of it in pristine condition before slapping grip tape all over it, wearing the black slide finish off with draw practice and dinging the heck out of the mag well practicing those reloads.

[spd522]

any preference on the Glocks for production? Glock 17 or Glock 34? Thanks in advance. I can get the Glock 17 cheaper at academy sports but they don't sell the glock 34. I have to go to a gun shop/ store to buy that.

An LE friend of mine has shot Glocks for years in Production and IDPA SSP. He started with a G17 as it was his duty/carry gun. Later he invested in a gamer G34. I keep telling him it was a waste of money as he has consistantly shot the G17 better. He is realizing that too.

You will find folks on both sides stating they shoot one better than the other. I have shot both and find I shoot my SIG better. DOH!

Craig

[Chills1994]

I heard a rumor not too long ago about Glock....

As far as Glock goes, if they really, really wanted to capture market share for the LE's they should have come out with their own shotgun and carbine, 15 or more years ago.

Imagine if you were a Glock sales rep and could get whole departments buying package deals of all three guns.

I think that's where Smith and Wesson is doing well at, marketing their Military and Police pistola and their Military and Police AR.

I know S and W is selling shotguns made in Turkey under their name, but I think they would be doing good to tacti-cool one of them up and market it as the M and P shottie.

Not to turn this into a hate thread, but...

Glocks cut my hand open.

They are ugly, even if they are painted Smurf blue

Everybody else shoots a Glock. I'm not one to follow the crowd. I do kinda march to the beat of my own drummer.

I already have the muscle memory built up/in for 1911's and Beretta's.

Like others have posted already, I see the Glock market share insiduously being chipped away by the likes of the M and P, and the XD.

In my neck of the woods, I just don't hear or see too much about the CZ's, at least not at the local matches.

I got to try out an M and P at the S and W bay at IDPA Nat's. I really, really liked the pistola. I think all the former Team Beretta shooters I talked to there were all shooting M and P's .

[ShooterSteve]

About the 17 vs 34 thing, take into account the overall use of the gun. I have a 35 and it shoots great and I wouldn't trade it for the world, but it is a little larger and heavier and bulkier, but it is primarily for uspsa and three gunning. If I were buying a gun as more of a carry type weapon, but plan on shooting matches every once in a while, the 17 may be better. About toughness, a buddy borrowed my 35 to shoot a three gun match that I couldn't go to. He wanted to gain a little edge with the longer sight radius and better trigger. He was using ammo from another friend who is a solid A shooter. He KB'd the gun at the match, but there was a Glock armorer there and they went through the gun to check it out and everything was fine. Couple stages later it happened again!! Again they totally went through the gun and could find nothing wrong. He had a couple burned spots on his hands and had a couple minor cuts, and not knowing why this was happening he stopped shooting the gun. When he got home he started pulling bullets and found some that had way to much powder in them. That was the reason for the KB. The amazing thing is that after that happened two times, allmost back to back, this gun runs like a top. Every thing you have heard about Glock reliability is true. Also for the accuracy, I have shot in three indoor glock matches. In two of them I was ONE freaking shot from shooting a perfect score. 49 10's out of 50 shots ain't bad, and I have to admit one of the shots that got pulled out was my fault after running clean at long distance. When they brought the targets back to the closer range I knew how close I was to shooting a perfect score...I wish there was a little yellow face for CHOKE!

[spd522]

I heard a rumor not too long ago about Glock....

As far as Glock goes, if they really, really wanted to capture market share for the LE's they should have come out with their own shotgun and carbine, 15 or more years ago.

Imagine if you were a Glock sales rep and could get whole departments buying package deals of all three guns.

I think that's where Smith and Wesson is doing well at, marketing their Military and Police pistola and their Military and Police AR.

I know S and W is selling shotguns made in Turkey under their name, but I think they would be doing good to tacti-cool one of them up and market it as the M and P shottie.

Not to turn this into a hate thread, but...

Glocks cut my hand open.

They are ugly, even if they are painted Smurf blue

Everybody else shoots a Glock. I'm not one to follow the crowd. I do kinda march to the beat of my own drummer.

I already have the muscle memory built up/in for 1911's and Beretta's.

Like others have posted already, I see the Glock market share insiduously being chipped away by the likes of the M and P, and the XD.

In my neck of the woods, I just don't hear or see too much about the CZ's, at least not at the local matches.

I got to try out an M and P at the S and W bay at IDPA Nat's. I really, really liked the pistola. I think all the former Team Beretta shooters I talked to there were all shooting M and P's .

You hit a lot of points I have heard, seen, or said myself over the years.

My PD had a few guys with big meaty hands. One of the great things about a Glock is that it sits low in the hand. One of the bad things about a Glock is it sits low in the hand. These officers got the web of their hands sliced up every range day and ended up switching to other guns.

Calls for a GLock Carbine have been around almost as long as Glock pistols. Why they never ventured into that market seemed like a foolish oversight. They would have sold them by the truckloads. It wouldn't have taken much redesign to do so.

Glocks are good guns, as are most others. I have never shot them that well, mostly because of the grip and angle. It is just different from my other guns. I will always shoot high with a Glock if point shooting. I have to change my grip to sight properly. 1911s, SIGS, CZ, Beretta, M&P, BHP all point pretty much the same.

However, I have heard numerous folks love the Glock because of the way it points. So its a good thing Glocks exist I guess.

I have shot a few M&Ps. I really like the feel and trigger but not so much the way they shoot. They seem to have an odd torque to them, even the 9mm. Maybe it was just me but it was more of a torque I have experienced in 40 cal polymer frame guns, not 9mm. So not being much of a polymer gun shooter, it was distracting to me. My Kahr P9 seems to have less felt recoil and torque than the M&P. Maybe it's just weird old me.

[cferree]

For me, the Glock platform just fits my needs. My open G17 turning into a Production gun with a slide change, mag release change and mag well removal. The grip/stance difference between my G35 for Limited, a G34 for Production and a G17 Open (w/slide ride optics) are the same.

I’ve got small hands so the S_I grip isn’t as ergonomic as the Glock’s for me. And I don’t have to be a classically trained gunsmith to be able to tune my guns to MY liking. I started out in USPSA in the early 90’s with a SS 45 and moved to a comped SS 38 super, but transitioned to Glocks due to economic reasons. I don’t see me changing in the near future.

[kitestir]

I have owned and shot both. I did tend to shoot the 34 a bit better becasue of the longer sight radius, but that was slow fire. When shooting rapid with it I really didn't notice much of a difference. The only thing that I did notice was on light loads(Reloads) I did tend to see the slide coming into battery more often. It is the first gun that I ever had that happen with.

I would suggest trying to shoot both. Go to a match and ask around. Most of the time guys will gladly let you run a few mags through a gun after the match is over.......

[safenate]

Agree with 99% of the above. I only starting shooting pistol after i got in the Navy, 95. It was a Beretta 92 and i thought it was great. While working on the range, i saw many Military 1911's show their cons. After some training, my team carried Sig 226 (9mm) and i thought they were awesome (just don't dive them in saltwater). Then we were issued some H&K Mk 23s, incredible. Most accurate pistol, i've shot. I got my own USP FS 45 and loved competing with it in USPSA (stock). Since then i got out of the Nav and was required to carry a G17 overseas doing security work for US Gov. My dad had a G22 and i hated it. I wanted to hate the G17, but it is reliable & accurate enough for combat/mild competition. I've bought Para LDA LTD S/S 16/40 (for sale by the way), H&K Expert in .40, H&K Tactical in .45, Witness 10mm/38S, and i'm selling/sold them all to afford a G34 and dies/components to feed it. I know that is a handfull of guns, but i still shoot about 500+ rounds of 22LR/wk in a 22/45 and reload several thousand rounds (40, 45, 38, 357, 500) yearly. I will get a 22 LR conversion for the G34 and feed it as much as i can. The Glock isn't 'perfection', but it is really close for much less than a competitive 1911 (and some would argue more reliable). I wouldn't shoot 40 in the small frame, but am hoping for a 20SF and 40 conversion barrel for major (or 9x21 barrel maybe). Glock is good, drink the Kool aid. Having said that, Sigs & H&K are still some of my favorites.

[photog]

I got to borrow a Glock for a local match, and I did really well with it, even with only 10 rounds of practice. They work, they are inexpensive, and they work. THat being said, I just couldn't get my head around shooting the MOST common pistol on the planet. Absolutely nothing wrong with Glocks, and if I ever get buy another Production setup, I just might get one. At the moment, I'm just sticking with Limited and my Witness Limited, doing what I can to stay simple.

[JKSNIPER]

Okay, I'm not buying that. SIG had a 30 year headstart, granted they were handicapped for awhile by a much higher price than the Glock, and haven't marketed as aggressively. The Beretta 92 has been around that long, as well; had the cachet of being a military service pistol; the Lethal Weapon movies; and was marketed heavily by Beretta after the military adoption. The basic Smith & Wesson 39 design has been around since the 1940s, the 59 since the 1970s, and they've both been marketed hard by Smith. If longevity and/or marketing were the deciding factors, SIGs, Beretta 92s and the Smith 39/59 pattern would trounce the Glock in popularity.

Reasons for Glock 9mm popularity (in no particular order):

(1) In the overall scheme of things, it's not a terribly expensive gun.

(2) Extreme reliability, especially remarkable when it's so dirty other guns would choke. I'm coming up on 13K through my latest Glock 17, I have yet to clean it even once, and it's never malfed. In the near future I'll probably break down and clean it, because I'm beginning to feel hideously guilty about that, but I don't really need to, reliability-wise.

(3) The guns are a lot more accurate than many people give them credit for. The G17 in particular I think has gotten a bad rap from certain gunwriters. This causes some people a serious mental block. Because they believe the guns aren't that accurate, they can't shoot them particularly accurately. And that simply isn't true. I have yet to fire the one-hole five-shot group my ego demands with my G17 or G34 (at 50 feet, the maximum distance possible at the indoor range on which I do the vast majority of my shooting) but I've shot numerous sub-1"ers, several of those with four rounds into one hole and a single flier a tiny bit away from the main group.

(4) A great size-to-weight ratio.

(5) A great magazine capacity-to-size-to-weight ratio.

(6) The easiest auto pistol on the planet to detail strip, as least as far as I know. The only gun I can think of that's even in the same class is the Makarov, and even there the Glock is a bit easier.

(7) The Glock is a modular gun. Modifying it is mostly just a matter of replacing drop-in parts with other drop-in parts.

(8) Add together #s (6) and (7), what you get is a gun with a HUGE number of aftermarket parts that the owner who's willing to put in the minor bit of work necessary to lean how to detail strip and reassemble the piece can actually use themselves with...

(9) ....no need for a pistolsmith's attentions.

(10) Short, light, consistent trigger pulls, out-of-the-box.

(11) Doing a trigger job is so simple that anyone with average hand-eye coordination and mechanical skills can do their own trigger work with absolutely minimum chance of screwing things up.

(12) They're very "soft" guns in the sense there are really no sharp edges on the piece to cut up your hands while manipulating it fast, or firing a lot of rounds in a single session. I've cut myself on just about every auto pistol type out there except Glocks. 1911s by contrast are a mass of sharp edges and angles. I even cut myself on my SIG P228 once, and SIGs are the only other pistol type I can think of that's even in the Glock's league in this area.

I think Duane here hit it on the head pretty much solid.

Glocks are :

1. Cheap

2. Easy to strip for cleaning

3. Easy to maintain

4. Reliable as far as shooting in dirty condition. NOT IMHO Durable which I define as being able to take some physical abuse and still function.

5. Easy to teach people how to use. Theres no decocking lever, no external safeties ..... you just point and pull the trigger and it goes bang.

6. I must disagree on the subject of accuracy. I have shot and still shoot FAR more accurate weapons. (I'm talking about right out of the box no modifications no aftermarket parts) I have shot a zillion rounds through the model 19 I had and now am shooting as much as I can through the model 17 I now have. (Dept issue) Accuracy is ....somewhat acceptable.

Took my son's .45 Kimber and shot a MUCH better group with it the first time I shot it than my Glock is capable of.

7. You can "smith it" yourself. No need for knowledge of the arcane art of gunsmithing and learning to be a precision machinist. Just strip the weapon and take out the part and drop in the new one and you've just modified your trigger or whatever.

Just remember one thing.....it may be the most popular gun on the market in Production class but is it the BEST weapon out there?

I think its the most popular because of the fact that its cheap and easy to use/learn.

You said in your post about how you're going to use your Para LDA .

My endorsement?

I get my Glocks for free through my department...and I choose to order (and spend my own $) for myself a Para LDA.

JK

[Flexmoney]

I got to borrow a Glock for a local match, and I did really well with it, even with only 10 rounds of practice. They work, they are inexpensive, and they work. THat being said, I just couldn't get my head around shooting the MOST common pistol on the planet. Absolutely nothing wrong with Glocks, and if I ever get buy another Production setup, I just might get one. At the moment, I'm just sticking with Limited and my Witness Limited, doing what I can to stay simple.

You know...that is just funny. When I started this game (around the year 2000)...people thought you were nuts to try to shoot with a Glock.

[SA Friday]

I got to borrow a Glock for a local match, and I did really well with it, even with only 10 rounds of practice. They work, they are inexpensive, and they work. THat being said, I just couldn't get my head around shooting the MOST common pistol on the planet. Absolutely nothing wrong with Glocks, and if I ever get buy another Production setup, I just might get one. At the moment, I'm just sticking with Limited and my Witness Limited, doing what I can to stay simple.

You know...that is just funny. When I started this game (around the year 2000)...people thought you were nuts to try to shoot with a Glock.

There's even an old thread lurking around somewhere about if anyone would ever win with something other than an S_I in Limited too. What did that guy with with?

[JThompson]

It's simple... they aren't true DA, so you can have a lighter trigger than you will get with a true DA... that's why there are so many striker guns out there. You don't have all that hammer mass to deal with..

[SouthpawG26]

Equipment surveys at the Nationals show Glock regaining marketshare in both PD and Open. This despite all the new toys on the block...

Edited August 29, 2008 by SouthpawG26

[leam]

Cheap, easy to use, easy to get rid of. Almost like my ex-wife...

I disagree with the "others have been there just as long" theory. While true, in the computer business we have the same thing going on. Several large vendors lost significant market-share because their hardware was too expensive to get the brain-share of the average new user. Some of them are effectively out of business now, even though they had a superior product.

Glock provides a wholistic package; gun, 3rd party stuff, training, armorer's classes, LE trade-ins, Glock matches, GSSF, etc. Easy to get in and stay in because there's lots of options.

Other guns feel better to me but few have the total package of the Glock. Until that changes Glocks will rule.

Leam

[Jman]

Leam,

Thats good. (I helped your spelling a bit )

Glock, the "holistic" gun solution. That's very good.

Jim

[Zerwas]

Glock pistols are extremely reliable, have a low bore axis and are extremely reliable. I know I am gripping the pistol correctly if I cut my right thumb (I am right handed with a hi thumb hold). I do this with my limited pistol as well. The bleeding is the indicator that I have the pistol low in my grip which is what I want.

I have to disagree with many of the posters however about the Glock being the best alternative. I do like Glock as I carry one in my duty holster every day that I work. I am a huge fan of the Smith and Wessons M&P line of pistols. I think it is better suited for many more people in terms of ergonomics. You can almost custom fit the pistol to a persons hand with the different sizes of backstraps. As far as reliability, it has been flawless. If I were a production shooter, I know the way for me to go would be the M&P. Felt recoil in this shooters humble opinion is actually less than the comparible Glock pistol. I have only had the chance to shoot the standard 4.25" barrel pistol and not the new long slide version. I understand the new long slide version has better recoil characteristics due to the extra metal out front. I have yet to try one, but if that is true, it must feel like a pop gun to fire, which means faster follow up shots...

I like the magazine well in the S&W better as well. It is cleaner than the Glock design. One look at both and you would see what I mean.

Again, I'm not Glock bashing as I do like their product as well. I just think S&W has an improved deisgn is all.

[Graham Smith]

It's simple. Glocks are the Corn Flakes of guns. There are a bunch of different versions, some expensive some not. They go well with all kinds of things and are easy to clean up afterward.

The easiest to find are going to be the G17 or G19, new or used. Either one will work fine for IPSC Production or IDPA Standard (is that the right term) and can be used for almost all of the shooting sports.

Arguably, the most versatile is the G22 (.40 S&W). That will go everywhere the 9mm's will plus will take you to Limited with only a couple inexpensive mods.

As a starter gun, they are hard to beat, providing they fit your hand and you are comfortable with them. Try and find one used, stick on some grip tape and shoot it as is for a while before making any modifications.

Edited August 29, 2008 by Graham Smith

[AZGunut]

Hi everyone,

Just my 2 cents. Locally here in AZ we actually more CZ's in productions than Glocks (Probably due to the fact that Angus is a local influence) I am willing to be that at this years Production Nationals that if you combine CZ's and the Smith M&P they will overcome Glocks dominance. Within 2 years I think the M&P with overcome Glock (Due to Glocks ergonomic issues and with more people exposed to other options)

[Irishlad]

I wouldn't under estimate the Dave Sevigny "factor" in selling Glocks either.

[JThompson]

I wouldn't under estimate the Dave Sevigny "factor" in selling Glocks either.

I would bet money 80% of those buying don't have a clue who Dave is.

[Irishlad]

I would bet money 80% of those buying don't have a clue who Dave is.

People deciding to buy a Glock for USPSA Production wouldn't know who Dave is?

Glock would be very unhappy if that were true!