Gun Review: Glock 17 Gen 4

Glock is the single most popular manufacturer of handguns in the United States. Thanks to a marketing department that could sell bayonets to millionaires and billionaires, Glock’s brick-like semi-automatic pistols are universally recognized, glamorized and immortalized. Just ask 2Pac. Oh wait. I’ve avoided Glocks due to their association (in my mind) with Tupperware. After resisting Glock’s plastic fantastic siren song for more than a decade I finally decided to see if Glocks are all that and a bag of chips. So I asked, and I received and I shot the ever-loving crap out of Glock’s standard duty model: the venerable Glock 17.

This is the handgun that launched the style [that should have come to be known as] Glockhaus. The gun’s bare bones ballistic minimalism offers no frills, no extraneous machining. Just the things you need and nothing you don’t. It’s the firearms equivalent of Dragnet – just the facts, ma’am.

In that sense, the Glock 17 stands in stark contrast to the sexy, stylized look of the Smith & Wesson M&P. Or the Springfield XDm. Or any 1911 on planet Earth. Let’s face it: the Glock 17 is ugly. I mean, if the M&P is to guns what Sarai Givaty is to a white tank top, the Glock is what Bee Arthur is to the string bikini these days, if you can imagine that. OK, maybe you shouldn’t.

If Glock’s detractors could bring themselves to stare at Gorgon’s gun for more than thirty seconds, they’d see that Gaston’s mob have incorporated a ton of well-hidden, well-placed features within the Glockhausian aesthetic. The best of these: the loaded chamber indicator.

On other guns of this type, the loaded chamber indicator is blatantly obvious. The Springfield XD’s sticks up the top of the slide and looks rather jagged. For the Smith & Wesson, it’s an obviously drilled hole in the top of the chamber. Glock has smartly hidden its loaded chamber indicator on the extractor, adding a little metal job that’s flush with the slide when empty and angles out when loaded. It’s perfectly placed for a quick trigger finger check, exploiting a pre-existing feature instead of adding a purpose-built part.

Other little things stick out (so to speak) too, indicating intelligent engineering. For example, the chamber in the barrel fits flush and snug to the cutout in the slide, making for a smooth and continuous surface along the top of the gun. While it doesn’t improve accuracy or combat effectiveness, the design feature shows some careful thinking which, one hopes, carries through to the gun’s internal parts.

Glock takes a lot of heat for that Perfection motto. It reminds me of legendary football coach Vince Lombardi’s take on the subject: “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.” Judging from the Glock 17 G4, the chase is still on.

The G17′s safety action trigger provides a small amount of predictable, uniform slack up to a wall-like breaking point. The break itself is a little mushy. Never mind. The reset’s the thing.

After ignition, the G17′s trigger resets close to the breaking point with a SNICK that can be heard clear across a crowded gun range, ear pro or no. Well almost. But you sure can feel it in your finger and that’s a good thing, allowing rapid, positive and purposeful follow-up shots.

Compared to similar polymer framed pistols, the Glock’s go pedal isn’t the worst on offer. It’s not the best, but it certainly isn’t the worst. The 17′s trigger was designed for the masses, balancing safety with accuracy — tilting dramatically towards safety. More advanced shooters can choose from a wide variety of aftermarket trigger parts that will reduce and smooth-out the 17′s 5.5 lbs. trigger pull.

Number two on the list of gripes: grip texture. I get that it’s a duty gun; Glock prioritized firearm retention. But the average shooter will find it a tad uncomfortable. Shooters with massive paws (e.g., me) have other issues: the ridges on the front strap of the grip don’t line up with my digits. In Glockland, it’s adapt or die.

Gripe number three: plastic magazines. They’ve proven to be tough as nails and stand up to abuse just as well as any other magazine, but they’re considerably bulkier than their metallic brethren and, historically, their light weight and slightly rougher exterior has kept them from dropping free from the gun when you hit the mag release.

OK, their latest incarnations do drop free. But I’ve seen older mags sticking around where they’re not wanted (the magazine well of your gun) enough to color my opinion.

It’s easy to see why the masses migrate to Gaston’s gizmo. Thanks to the 17′s thick grip, the gun’s relatively low bore axis, its 4.49″ barrel and the fact that the pistol fires the most manageable of “serious” calibers, the 17′s recoil is not an issue. Newbies would find it downright comfortable, even. More experienced shooters will not be surprised to learn I was keeping about a 1 inch group at 15 yards, with one flier out of 5 rounds.

The Glock’s positive trigger reset makes it possible to “ride” the trigger and unleash lead at a furious clip. The Glock’s much (and I’d say unfairly) maligned factory sights — a “U and dot” style setup — make getting on target and accurately putting rounds downrange as easy as finding a Glock hater at a 1911 convention. FTFs? FTEs? As John McEnroe said, are you serious? Whatever else you can say about the G17, whatever was said about early spring issue-related failures, this gun just worked.

But not for me, exactly. I’m not saying the Glock 17 is uncomfortable, it’s just not perfectly sized to fit my hand. I’m sure there are people (millions, apparently) for whom a Glock is the gun they feel comfortable having and holding in good times and in bad. Anyway, there’s no denying that the Glock 17 is a solid shooter that gets the job done in terms of putting rounds downrange where you want ‘em.

Despite my gripes, the Glock 17 is a downright solid handgun. It’s reliable, built like a friggin’ tank, and has some pretty darn attractive features. It handles well, has tons of aftermarket mods and a booming accessories market to keep new Glock owners well stocked with various and sundry add-ons. It works, and for the money it’s a pretty good buy.

Specifications:
Caliber:              9mm Parabellum
Barrel:                4.4″
Overall:              7.7″
Weight:              22.04 oz. empty
Capacity:           17 (factory) / 19 (flush aftermarket) / 33 (lolwut)
Price:                 $500 (Buds)

Ratings (out of five stars):
All ratings are relative to other similar guns, and the final score IS NOT calculated from the constituent scores.

Accuracy: * * * *
Somewhere slightly south of Wilson Combat territory, and nowhere near Hi Point land.

Ergonomics (Handling): * * * *
For the most part its pretty good, but the grip just doesn’t do it for me. There are inserts available to change the size of the grip for larger hands. Unfortunately no interchangeable front straps for those finger grooves.

Ergonomics (Firing): * * * * 
A bit of mush in the trigger, but overall very enjoyable.

Reliability: * * * * *
There has been video after video of these guns being abused, and lasting throughout the entire ordeal in perfect working order. Glock wasn’t about to let me do anything drastic with my loaner, but I take the word of the dozens (hundreds?) of people who have tried to break theirs.

Customization: * * * * *
I’m pretty sure there’s a rail mountable candelabra somewhere designed to work with a Glock.

Overall Rating: * * * *
Good? Definitely. Possibly even great. Just not perfect.

 

avatar

About Nick Leghorn

Nick Leghorn is a gun nerd living and working in San Antonio, Texas. In his free time, he's a competition shooter (USPSA, 3-gun and NRA High Power), aspiring pilot, and enjoys mixing statistics and science with firearms. Now on sale: Getting Started with Firearms by yours truly!

69 Responses to Gun Review: Glock 17 Gen 4

  1. avatarjwm says:

    I agree that Glock’s work. But the only one that feels decent in my hand is the 21 and I don’t want to add another, more expensive round to my logistics train.

  2. avatarEsoteric says:

    I really like my 3rd gen 19.

    that being said, i agree that they are ridiculous solid but not quite perfect.

  3. avatarg says:

    A good, fair review. Glocks have a fairly reliable track record and are popular for a reason.

    For myself, like Nick, it just doesn’t feel comfortable in my large hands… is it the grip angle? The plastic? The grip texture? Dunno, but I still judge everything by my SIG P226.

    • avatarwally west says:

      The truth is, you should judge everything else against a Glock.
      I have been shooting guns for 42 years and I must say without a doubt, there is no more reliable firearm on the planet!!

  4. avatarJack Straw says:

    I’ve been a handgunner for 45+ years and like the author I recently decided to give Glock a try.

    I figured if they’ve been a commercial and critical success for over 20 years there must be something to them.

    A new G19 came home with me and…….I like it. Having been a bullseye shooter the trigger was a learning experience but what the heck, this is a service pistol after all.

    The grip doesn’t suit me like a CZ 75 does and the whole package is decidedly ugly but if push came to shove and I needed a piece for CQB I’d grab the Glock.

    • avatarmdc says:

      Nothing like a CZ grip.But my only Glock,the 20, took me into 10mm territory.Gun is a workhorse that can easily handle full power 10.

  5. avatarRalph says:

    The loaded chamber indicator is the reason why new Glocks cannot be offered for sale by FFLs in MA. The AG doesn’t like and won’t accept the Glock indicator, so the gun is not rated as safe and can’t be placed on the List. The AG likes the M&P witness hole just fine. Go figure.

    Like Nick, I don’t like those ridges on the handle. I have medium-sized hands and my figers end up on the ridges and not in between them.

    IMO, with all its faults, the G17 is the best pistol Glock ever made. When I needed to qualify for my Nevada permit and didn’t have my M&P with me, the gun I chose to rent for my shooting practical was a G17. It functioned perfectly, shot true and I scored a perfect round. That’s a big statement from a guy who doesn’t really like Glocks.

    • avatarJohn Fritz says:

      … Like Nick, I don’t like those ridges on the handle. I have medium-sized hands and my figers end up on the ridges and not in between them. …

      Interesting, I love those various kinds of ridges on handgun frames. As long as they fit the fingers, right? I’ve installed those Hogue soft rubber grips on all of my SIGs (that are sans Nills) and they transform the feel of the gun.

      • avatarRalph says:

        As long as they fit the fingers, right?

        Exactly. If it doesn’t fit, you must quit.

        • avatarNWGlocker says:

          … or if you love the platform so much, have someone mill the grooves away. Not worth it IMO. But then again my Gen4 G17 works great with my hands grooves and all. The G19 even better.

          Nick– Did you have a chance to play around with the back straps?

        • avatarAvid Reader says:

          The ghost of Johnnie Cochran returns!

        • avatarAndo says:

          You don’t pay someone to mill the grips, you just sand or file off the ridges.

    • avatarElliotte says:

      On the loaded chamber indicator, Nick said it could be checked by touch with a trigger finger, what about with a thumb for us southpaws? Not that I’m planning on getting one, just curious.

    • avatarAaronW says:

      Witness hole? Is that what happens to “guys who snitch?”

  6. avatarDyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    As someone who has owned a Glock or two longer than most people here at TTAG (bought my first one in ’87), they’re just a gun. There’s nothing ‘perfect’ about Glocks. They go ‘bang’ most all the time. They’re simple to work on… because their trigger system is a bunch of mashed-up sheet metal and plastic. To me, they’re just a tool, there is nothing about a Glock that makes my naughty bits tingle, because Glocks have all the aesthetic design qualities of a truck battery.

    Glock the company, however, have proven themselves to be masters of marketing. American gun companies should take careful note of Glock’s marketing tactics, including the salacious details of taking large LEO accounts out to boobie bars. Such tactics clearly work when one is trying to peddle one’s product to law enforcement.

  7. avatarDarth Mikey says:

    I can’t deny all the fans and the proven history on these guns, but they are just so not for me–it seems to be all about fit and feel. The grips are too 2X4-like, it doesn’t have any natural point for me (actually, I can’t feel it pointing at all), and combined with the trigger, though improved, it all manages to morph my accuracy into the “You’re in absolutely no danger if you’re standing more than fifteen feet away from me” range (which is just humiliating, so I blame the gun). As for recoil management, I just don’t get the praise. The cut of the grips just bite me wrong, and flip for me is among the worst I’ve shot (possibly because I can’t really get a nice grip on the things–I feel like I’m holding a stack of cell phones). For newbies, they are dirt-simple, but that flip issue isn’t just me: I’ve seen lots of FTEs (stovepipes) if you don’t have the grip strength or have tiny hands (my daughter–who can shoot her 92FS like Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon–actually managed to stovepipe every round in her second mag). (But my best-shooting-bud’s 16 year old loves her G17, so go figure.)

    I freely admit I’m an OFWG metal-frame fan, but trying to evolve with the times (and not lug 2+lbs all day) I’ve been giving the “tupperware” another try, and have found it’s not just about weight, it’s ergos. H&Ks are really nice but too pricey when I can get a new SIG or 1911 for the same cash (or less). The M&P feels good, low flip, but kicks a bit stiff (for me it feels surprisingly like a revolver) and the trigger needs help. But I just spent the day with a PX4 Compact and it shoots super sweet and accurate for me. (My rule-of-fit: If I can manage 1″ groups with a gun first time I pick it up, it’s made for me.) And it’s pretty. Really pretty. I am in trouble. (And I think my CZ is jealous.)

    • avatar16V says:

      I’ve seen lots of FTEs (stovepipes) if you don’t have the grip strength or have tiny hands (my daughter–who can shoot her 92FS like Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon–actually managed to stovepipe every round in her second mag).

      This is why I wouldn’t carry a Glock. let alone purchase one. First mission of any defensive arm is to go boom when I pull the trigger. Last thing I want is to be clubbed from behind and struggling to get off a couple of shots, when a gun stovepipes on the second round because I’m too injured, or just at the wrong angle, to iron-wrist it.

      I learned that range party trick 20 years ago when the marketing machine kicked into high-gear and all the tacticool slaves had to have one. I’ve done it dozens of times to many iterations, and I’m obviously not alone.

    • avatarBrett says:

      I can get head shots at 30 yards with my 19 about 50% of the time (not that I would ever do that in a DGU but just sayin’). Sounds like you might need some more trigger time with a Glock before you pass ultimate judgement.

      • avatarJoshinGA says:

        Glocks have been shown time and again to be more susceptible to limp-wristing than most other handguns, polymer or other wise. MAC did a video a while back on it. Seen a couple others as well.

        I will also add that Glocks in general dont point naturally for me…maybe its the grip angle and lack of grip contouring, but I just dont naturally shoot them well. All I know is that when I shoot every other gun I own well, and dont shoot a Glock well, I wont be adapting my shooting style to shoot one brand of gun better. Which is why the Glock went bye-bye.

  8. avatarDave says:

    Nick, this may not be the appropriate forum for my comment, but I have to say it somewhere: you (and the other writers, and most of the commenters, at TTAG) sure do write well! I’m never going to buy a Glock. Well, never say never. But I could read your reviews about them all day long.

  9. avatarJoseph says:

    My department issued the Glock in 1991. Wonder of wonders, the officers could carry it or not. I stuck with my 1911 until going to the Sig. When I retired from that department my Glock went with me. Now it’s my fishing gun, or I take it if I need to fly somewhere and check the gat in the baggage. If it gets lost it only cost me 24 years of my life, but no $$$. The only issue we had in the PD was that some (not all) women had functioning problems because of the polymer frame, which is not uncommon with all such guns. My current department issues Sig Sauer, which is what I personally carry when not using the Ruger LC9 for trips to the store. Going into Houston the Ruger and a Sig will be riding with me.

    Glocks are popular with a butt-load of police departments because they work and they are realitvely inexpensive. The agencies with money usually go with the Sig, including the Navy SEALS, Texas DPS, and the Secret Service. Nuff said.

    • Isn’t that the government, though? If you have money, spend it. You can always raise taxes. I’m not saying it’s a wast of money to have a Sig, just not a good indicator of why to chose one over another. That’s coming from someone who has a Glock and a Sig.

  10. avatarRon says:

    1st generation glock magazines were purposely designed to not drop free when the magazine release was depressed. It was one of the Austrian military’s requirements. It’s a European thing I guess… like odd magazine release placement. All the mags manufactured in the past 20 years or so drop free just fine.

    • avatarjkp says:

      This. And the non-drop-free mags have a slightly distinct look versus the drop-free mags. You’ll know ‘em when you see ‘em.

      • avatarRKBA says:

        The rear cut-out at the top of the magazine, between the feed lips, will be one of two distinct shapes:

        Square = ‘Drop Free’
        Round = ‘Non Drop Free’

        • avatarPaco says:

          And please let’s not forget that Glock mags are, in fact, METAL. They are covered in plastic. This was the only gripe I had with the review.

        • avatarkevin the iceman says:

          I have used everything from the browning 9mm semi to the sig. They all have their nigh and low features but all my reservations about the g17 gen 4 have been put to rest. It fires everytime and the recoil is alwost non existent. Its low maintenance overall one hell of a fine machine. I also like the fact that there is no flipping hammer sticking out at the back.

  11. avatarDanny McBee. says:

    It took me a long time to get over my hatred of Glocks. The first center fire handgun I ever worked with was a GI style 1911 with a trigger job, and pretty much any time I held a Glock in my hand it felt like a squared off Lego compared to my 1911.
    I had a particular distaste for the full size models as the massive hump in the back strap makes the gun fairly awkward to me. I didn’t care for the triggers the few times I messed with them either.
    I was intent on buying either an M&P9 or a XD9 (possibly a Px4), when a friend got me to shoot his 26 with the grip extension. I blazed through more ammo than I normally would with a firearm I didn’t like when I noticed something. The trigger (while crude compared to my 1911) wasn’t that bad, and I was hitting everything I aimed at. What finally swayed my favor towards the Glock was my highway patrolman cousin getting me to try his Glock 23. While I don’t care for .40 S&W I noted that the compact (I term I use loosely) frame Glocks actually fit me pretty well. With a few positive experiences and a note of the numerous Glock accessories I decided to pick one up to be my primary defensive handgun.
    I bought a brand new Gen 3 19 with a few magazines for a hair over $400 and I haven’t looked back. I haven’t got around to putting night sights on it yet, but I did put a Talon Grip on it to make it a little grippier. Nick is right about the sights being unduly hated; I’ve always liked 3 got sight pictures, but the bucket and ball sights didn’t hinder my ability to shoot fast and accurate with the 19. I’m not a hardcore Glocker, but if I could only pick one of my handguns to keep, it would definitely be my 19. It’s reliable, accurate, easy to maintain, and I can pick darn near any accessories for it I can possibly imagine. What more could I ask out of a $400 gun?

  12. avatarMark N. says:

    As shown by your link, the thing that sticks out the back tells you if the gun is cocked. The LCI is on top of the frame

  13. avatarv says:

    i remember my 1st gen 17, 19, 20, 21′s…
    they were all perfectly function and reliable…
    things got twitchy starting with gen 2… by gen 3 things were getting ‘meh’…
    gen 4, no thanks…
    having said that, if i had to have a 9mm and couldn’t get a P7M8 i would grab a 1st gen 17 with no worry’s, they worked…

  14. avatarry_ry says:

    I think you mean $550 at buds. If not then please post the link where I can buy a gen 4 17 for $455

  15. avatarAccur81 says:

    Glocks have literally a ton of bang for the buck. The handgun that I’m lusting of over most is the Sig MK 25, but I’ve got a loaded G27 and G35 (amongst other things of course) in my safe because I can afford them.

  16. avatarEric says:

    One other note: a Glock is typically the
    lightest gun in its class

  17. avatarstgabe says:

    For years i refused to follow the glock herd. I had picked them up and put them down faster than you can say, “no, thanks.” I’ve carried smith revolvers (357 snub & 4 inchers) sig p220 carry, walther ppk (jam-o-matic), walther ppq, ect. I was on the verge of picking up the m&p 9 when a client kept telling me his affection for the17. Went to the range and picked up a gen 4 g19. I figured I’d round a 100 rounds just to say it tried it out. I always hated the grip, it was just down right uncomfortable (gen 3 & earlier). But the gen 4 without a backstrap just ‘fit’, honestly i found myself grinning. 100 rounds later… i asked for another box. I couldnt believe this was a ‘glock’, I was converted. I’ve run 1000 rounds through mine without a single malfunction. Not one hickup. It eats everything from white box ball to p+. For me it is the best size-to-capacity-to-cost sidearm I have owned. The recoil is light, the muzzle flip is irrelevant, and it is disgustingly accurate. Ugly? Its grown on me. I trust it, faithfully. A glock is a tool, a reliable tool that has proven itself over and over again. Maybe its not ‘perfect’ for everybody, but it has certainly earned a place on my side.

  18. avatarMr Pierogie says:

    I’m not sure why so many people dislike the grip angle. It sort of resembles a scaled down grip of an Olympic competition pistol. And I can shoot a Glock much better than a much more comfortable HK, Sig or even the M&P. However, as reliable as Glocks are, I wish the quality was a little better. Their frames aren’t exactly perfect. But when you look at the gun as a whole, it’s a great package. It just works.

    • avatarMauser says:

      It’s not the Glock grip angle that is bothersome. The problem, for me, is the grip shape. The full size Glocks (G17, G22, etc.) have a hump in the grip that sits in the hypothenar area of the bottom of my hand. This provides a very uncomfortable grip and the gun does not point naturally for me. The compact models (G19, G23) have the hump situated higher in the hand in the palmar area. These are more comfortable in my hand and point more naturally. Here’s a little test to perform with an unloaded gun at the range: Focus with both eyes open at the target, close your eyes and remember the location of the target. From a low-ready position, point the unloaded pistol at the target with your eyes closed. Open your eyes. Are the sights lined up properly? Are you pointed at the target or very close to it? I can naturally point every pistol I own on target this way, including my G19. I can even switch between the G19 and my 1911, no problem. When I try this same test with my father’s G17, I find the front sight is way higher than the rear sight and my POA is above the target. The G17′s grip hump contacts the bottom of my hand, rather than nestling in the palm. This causes it to naturally point high for me.

  19. avatarJoe Grine says:

    My 1992 era Gen 2 Glock 17 has 25K rounds through it and is still 100% reliable. I chromed the slide because the factory finish on the slide was trashed, but otherwise it has been an outstanding firearm. I also own another Glock 17 (w/ consecutive serial number) which is in new condition. Love me some Glock!

  20. avatarPatrick says:

    My Glock 19 has everything I need, nothing I don’t, and has gone “bang” every one of the thousands of times I’ve wanted it to. To me, that’s about as close to perfection as it needs to be.

  21. avatarthedonn007 says:

    I had a 4th gen G22, but sold it. The grip just does not feel right. My CZ75 on the otherhand fitslike a glove.

  22. avatarJoe says:

    what’s with articles bouncing back up to the start of the queue?

    • avatarRobert Farago says:

      When they fall off the page, some people miss them. On occasion, we reshuffle them to the top for additional exposure.

  23. avatarSD3 says:

    I’ve come to believe that, despite never being a “glock guy”, there’s a G21 out there somewhere with my name on it.

    Now where’s that $570 again?

  24. avatarccchas says:

    GSSF (Glock Sport Shooting Foundation) members can buy new Glocks through the GSSF Pistol Purchase Program. Those prices are discounted from MSRP although maybe not so low as LE prices. A www search will find more information.

    • avatarPaco says:

      One other little side benefit to GSSF membership is the free guns! GSSF gives away somewhere between 10 and 30 guns at each outdoor match as RANDOM prizes (in addition to the first place shooters in each division). I’ve already won two that way and next year I’ll up my chances by volunteering as a range officer.

  25. avatarAvid Reader says:

    My G19 is with me almost all of the time when I carry, supplemented only by a G26 or a Ruger LCP when I really need small. I’ve had it for almost 20 years. I’ve put thousands of rounds through it and only had problems once-multiple FTF and FTE from one old box of S&W branded ammo I’d had around since the 70s. Other than that, it’s reliably eaten everything I feed it from WWB to PMC and Speer Gold Dot.

  26. avatartdiinva says:

    Glock is the Apple of firearms. A reliable, sturdy, well designed tool That gets the job done with a little bit of style. But like the iPhone 5, not really the best product out there and a little behind the competition.

    • avatarJoshinGA says:

      Glock has zero style. Apple is all about style. It would be more appropriate to compare their marketing strategies, as both have legions of loyal “fanboys” who would run out and buy the newest product they put out, regardless of what differences there are between the old and new.

    • avatarWLCE says:

      Glock is the Samsung of firearms. Comparatively inexpensive, consistently reliable, and offers many years of happiness, though they will do the job just as good, if not better in most cases, than Apple or any other brand.

      Dont like that? well too bad. that is the contention of almost every reviewer and consumer report in favor of Samsung vs Apple and Glock vs other brand. :D

      • avatartdiinva says:

        People confuse glitz with style. Like Bauhaus design, the Glock’s simplicity is what makes it stylish.

        Posted from my Samsung Note tablet.

  27. avatarPeter says:

    I picked up a gen1 G17 back when they first hit these shores, I liked the non drop free mags, with less than ten rounds they dropped free, somewhere north of 10 they would swell slightly and stick. This made perfect sense for a sidearm, you don’t want to accidentally drop a full mag in the mud of a battlefield.
    For me ,the appeal is multiple calibers and sizes with an identical manual of arms as well as the utility nature of the weapon.
    If you have your 3K, custom 1911 confiscated after a DGU or lost, you would feel pretty bad about it. With the Glock line you just go out and buy another one that is essentially the same for a few hundred bucks.

  28. avatarRodinKy says:

    Nick, been packing a Glock 27 now everyday for five years, been carrying concealed for 20 years, started with a Taurus PT101, I love the little Glock and bet my life on it to function when needed. I didn’t like them at first but now very seldom carry anything else.

  29. avatarJoatmon says:

    Picked up the G17 Gen4 this past weekend.This is my 3rd Glock, the others being a G26 Gen3 and a G23 Gen4. I have to say that I am totally impressed by my 3 Glocks. Accurate, reliable(no FTF’s, FTE’s, FTL’s, nothing) and fun. I have switched out most of my weapons and now only have Sig Sauer and Glocks. One exception is my S&W M&P Shield which will not get sold or traded. The G26 does outperform the Shield but is thicker and I still like the way the Shield fits my hand and it disappears when carrying.

  30. avatarC says:

    I disagree that they’re ugly. They’re functional. Aesthetically Concise might be a good term. I also think the AK is probably the sexiest gun ever made.

  31. avatarDON BOOZE says:

    it is a good gun

  32. A customer of ours referred us over to this page. We make custom Kydex holsters for the Glock 17, as well as most other makes/models. You can send me an email at ntcustomkydex@yahoo.com for more information.

    Please visit our Facebook page for more information and like us at http://www.facebook.com/northtexascustomkydex/

    Check out our APRIL SPECIAL on Glock holsters!

  33. avatarDave says:

    I just don’t get what the problem is with your gripes on the grip. I have massive hands. Nearly ten inches from bottom palm to middle finger tip. And I can grip the gun fine. Granted, my pointer finger barely makes it between the trigger and the trigger guard, but still, once it’s in there, I’m a happy shooter. I am six foot eleven, three hundred thirty pounds, and find this gun to be the best I have ever shot.

  34. avatarchase says:

    A Glock review that starts out with a tupperware comparison and continues in to how ugly they are. Oh the creativity, TTAG!

  35. avatarpinecarpenter says:

    Definitely not “perfect” but shoots better than a Beretta. Swept back grip isn’t for everyone. GlOCK 22 s are junk. Had a 40sw GlOCK and it was the worst gun I’ve ever owned. The 17 is better . New shooters looking for a pistol. Ask you dealer to hold a ruger SR then hold a GlOCK. You’ll like the ruger better.

    • avatarOrton Fallswell says:

      Since YOUR Glock 40 cal was “junk” that means all the hundreds of thousands of Glock 40 cal owners have junk too, right? I shoot best with a G23, but now that you said they are “junk” I must be wrong. Ruger SR series have had alot of problems, but they arent junk? You know what they say about opinions…….

  36. avatarMIke Wagner says:

    I started my law enforcement career carrying the issued Smith & Wesson model 10-4, 6 shot revolver then I was issued the Smith & Wesson 9mm, the Smith & Wesson 40 cal. then my department issue the Sig 40 cal. All were great guns.
    After being assigned to a federal task force I was issued the Glock Model 17 gen 4. I was reluctant to carry it. I had been on a assessment team in 1985 and voted against the Glock just because it was plastic and ugly. I was afraid it would crack or blow apart. But after 20 years of reliable service and firing it again 20 years later the range I must admit that I impressed with the low recoil, simple construction, weight and reliability. For a duty weapon or concealed carry weapon the Glock is light weigh, reliable, dependable and affordable. I now carry the Glock as my weapon of choice on and off duty and highly recommend it.

  37. Pingback: Glock 17 Gen. 4 | Gun & Gear ReviewsGun & Gear Reviews

  38. avatarBob Shields says:

    Very well balanced article/review. I also have large hands and have enjoyed a love affair with a gen.2, (no finger grooves), for many years now. I think the gen 2 with the Hogue grip sleeve would serve you much better. Your comment on the trigger reset predictability was right on. I can fire that gun accurately at an unbelievable rate of speed compared to others I have tried. I can empty 33 rounds in less than 5 seconds with head size accuracy at 25 yards.

  39. avatarduane says:

    I began my love affair with guns by falling for S&W revolvers and my first purchase was a 629 follow by a 625. Next up the Ruger SR1911 made its way into the rotation. I love the old school look and feel of these firearms and the Ruger is one of the best shooting guns I’ve ever fired but you know what my go-to pistol is in a shifty situation? My new Glock 17 gen 4. It’s light, eats any ammo, easy to break down if necessary and most importantly it’s accurate.

    I just can’t get the range time I’d like to so I need something that I can shoot well without running 10000 rounds through it a month. Out of the box I was satisfied with my accuracy with the Glock 17. And after a little warming up I was more than impressed.

    Couple this incredibly reliable weapon with one of the excellent pistol caliber carbine rifles and you have a formidable self defense package. My Glock and my Kel Tec Sub 2000 share ammo, mags and can both be carried on me completely concealed if need be. And I can shoot very well with both of them. Argue with that all you want but you won’t win.

    For the record I think the Glock design is one of the most esthetically pleasing pistol on the market. There is beauty in simplicity and minimalist detail. I dislike guns that are overly ornate and find many of them garish and tacky looking. Like something you’d see hanging out the window of a low rider filled with gangbangers. Flashy does not equal beautiful to me. To each his own I guess.

  40. avataradam says:

    I have a Glock17 (not gen 4). All the good things said about this gun are true. It’s an amazing gun and very easy to shoot well. But I can’t warm up to it. It’s ugly and it feels like an oversized water pistol in my smaller than average hand. Since I don’t enjoy it’s company, I don’t practice much with it and I don’t take it with me when choosing a carry gun of that size. I keep it by my bedside with night sights. That neither I nor an intruder will have to actually see her ugly face when I shoot him.

  41. avatarBobby N says:

    It is a given that the Glock is a great reliable gun. My personal favorite is the Gen 3 G19,not only for the way it fits, but also how it feels in the hand. Never cared for the texture on the Gen 4 models. But this is a personal preference and everyone is different.

    But, I have to disagree with this article and countless others that describe the gun as “ugly”. On the contrary, I find it to be one of the most elegant looking guns ever made. It is simple, clean, business like and the form is derived from function. Like another comment mentioned, they are apple-like and most people confuse bling with good looks. Glock, like Apple has done a commendable job of focusing on the product with evolutionary changes with each generation and spreading them across the product line which differs only in sizes and calibers. This is unlike most other companies for whom this changes with every product iteration.

    The M&P and others while certainly more ergonomic to some in their hands, are decidedly garish to look at. Every one of these (M&P, PPQ, P30) have all types of curves and circles on them. In the grip area, if these design elements add to the comfort, they are justifiable, the rest is sheer nonsense.

    The Glock G19 is visual perfection and balance at it’s finest in a handgun.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.