Previous Post
Next Post


GLOCK has announced two new additions to its MOS — or Modular Optic System — line of pistols. GLOCK’s press release follows, and expect a TTAG review shortly! . . .

GLOCK Releases Two New MOS Pistols:

G17 Gen4 in MOS & G19 Gen4 in MOS

Las Vegas, Nev. – Jan. 18, 2016 Today, GLOCK, Inc., announced the release of two new pistols to join theModular Optic System (MOS) series, the G17 Gen4 in MOS and the G19 Gen4 in MOS.

Now, two of GLOCK’s best selling pistols are available with milled slides designed specifically to be adaptable to multiple optic systems without costly customization. The G17 Gen4 MOS and G19 Gen4 MOS are the ideal addition to the series as the market continues to trend toward optic-ready everyday carry and defense.

“We’re seeing more and more professional trainers recommend the use of optics for primary and defensive use,” stated Josh Dorsey, vice president at GLOCK. “Optic ready pistols will enable faster target acquisition when a reflex sight is mounted.”

Both pistols are chambered in .9mm and do not differ in specifications from their respective standard models. Other MOS pistols, introduced in January of 2015, are the G34 Gen4 MOS, G35 Gen4 MOS, G41 Gen4 MOS, and the G40 Gen4 MOS.  The new models were unveiled today at the Range Day for SHOT Show and will be on display at the GLOCK booth (#12254) throughout the week. The pistols will be available for purchase at retailers in the following weeks.

To learn more about the new MOS pistols, visit


Above:  The new G17 Gen4 MOS


Above: The New G19 Gen4 MOS

About GLOCK, Inc.

GLOCK is a leading global manufacturer of firearms.  The simple, safe design of GLOCK’s polymer-based pistols revolutionized the firearms industry and made GLOCK pistols a favorite among military and law enforcement agencies worldwide and among pistol owners. In 2016, GLOCK celebrates its 30th Anniversary in the United States. Renowned for featuring three safeties, GLOCK pistols offer users of every lifestyle confidence they can rely on.  GLOCK, Inc. is based in Smyrna, Georgia.  For more information, please visit

Previous Post
Next Post


      • It’s in the official Glock press release, it must be true.
        “Both pistols are chambered in .9mm and do not differ in specifications from their respective standard models. Other MOS pistols, introduced in January of 2015, are the G34 Gen4 MOS, G35 Gen4 MOS, G41 Gen4 MOS, and the G40 Gen4 MOS. “

        • It’s pretty obvious by now that Glock has hired some j-school graduate who interned at the NY Times or some similar paper.

          We should now anticipate the future press release where Glock announces they will start shipping magazines that hold only bullets instead of cartridges…

    • If your in charge of writing the press release for a product it should be a product you understand. If you don’t have the knowledge find a proofreader who does. Honestly someone should be punished (unpaid leave, pink slip) as this just gives guys like us more eggs to throw.

        • Glock = Honda mentality. Great products, but both brands absolutely refuse to take any risks. If Glock made a 1911 to compete with Sig and Springfield, I’m sure they’d sell a ton. If they made a single stack G19 or 23, those would sell great too. And I don’t see why they couldn’t come up with a rifle to compete with IWI, Sig or CZ. I don’t expect them to design revolutionary new products, but their lineup is seriously lacking.

        • Glock is pretty responsive. To LE decision makers. That’s their target market. Guarded jealously. With their civilian marketing strategy centered around “civvies buy what they see LEOs, and instructors deriving most of their income and stature from training LEOs, carry.”

          So, optics are coming to a beat cop near you…… For the safety of innocent New York bystanders, if nothing else. And Glock gets to enjoy yet another round of departments trading in perfectly good firearms for a new-and-improved version.

          Us non LEOs without hands large enough to comfortably palm Gastons big head, want a long (6″) slide MOS in .357 Sig.

    • From Glock, probably not. They want to sell more guns. You will have to wait for the Lone Wolf version.

    • Per Glock, the only way to get a new slide is to send in your old one. The new slide will NOT have a SN on it.

      • Glock is the only handgun manufacturer I know of that serializes slides and barrels.

        Are there any others? Anyone know why they do this, ’cause it isn’t a legal requirement…

        • Other brands do it, but not necessarily on all models. My CZ 75 PCR has all 3 parts serialized. So does my XDs. But Springfield does not do that on their 1911s. Neither does CZ on their Dan Wesson brand pistols.

        • Some countries require that the barrel, slide, and frame are all serialized together for legal reasons. That’s not true here in the United States but if you wanted to send guns out of the country to somewhere that requires this, you’re already set. And 99% of the Glocks ever made will never have a barrel or slide change done.

      • I would be willing to send in the slide off my G17 to exchange for the MOS version.
        As long as the cost is reasonable.

        • It want be reasonable, Glock would want you to buy a new model…. Lone wolf will come up with one or the Glock Store in Calif will……

        • Your probably better off just buying the gun rather then the slide due to cost of slide by itself. You might spend 200$ more on the entire pistol. Or order the mounting plate from Glock and have a gunsmith fit it for less then half the cost of the slide, this way you can purchase the rmr or delta point and still be under the cost of a new one.

  1. I want to know about the slide as well. I’d love to just buy the slide as an add on to my g19.

    • Sounds like a good excuse to buy another pistol to me 😉

      If you dont want any fancy bells and whistles or custom cerakote jobs, custom shops like Lone Wolf or Suarez will mill your G19 slide for a red dot for ~$150 or so. It can get real expensive real fast though if you want them to coat it, or mill a cover plate if you ever want to remove the optic, or if you want a custom rear sight dovetail etc etc etc.

  2. You cannot just buy the slide. You also have to buy the thick-walled conversion barrel. This is needed to handle the .9mm rounds.

  3. When a company has nothing new or original to peddle, this shows just how silly they will become in order to justify taking more of your money: Injection-molded cheez-whiz with a reflex sight on top!

    • I didn’t know you had such low regard for Glocks. Is it just the material, dull design, or is there a problem you have with the function?

  4. Meh. I’m 33, and I’m going to use a pistol optic until I can’t see the front sight. But it’s nice to see factory options before I may need them.

    And before anyone gets all upset, no I’m not anti competition guns.

    • If they evolve like Rifle optics did, they’ll be obviously valuable to almost anyone in a decade or so. And people who are Glock buyers, are almost by definition a pragmatic bunch, not particularly beholden to tradition for tradition’s sake.

  5. Still almost everyone places iron sights on optic wearing handguns in the wrong spot. The backup irons need to be placed in front of the optic so they do not interfere… they are called backup sights but are almost never treated as such.

    • Better question: Why don’t RMRs and other pistol optics have a backup notch built into the top of the base? Then all you need is a front sight that aligns with the backup notch, and you can remove the rear conventionals altogether.

      To answer your question, though: The rear sight dovetail is near the back of the slide already. Putting the optic in front of that only requires milling a flat mounting area. Putting the optic at the back means you would have to mill that area before the dovetail for the rear irons is milled, and then mill a new dovetail in the middle of the slide. The machines probably aren’t set up for that, I’m guessing. Also, with your method, the backup sight radius would be rather short. Finally, the backups do not interfere with the optic anyway, so I don’t see the point of your argument. Keep in mind that pistol optics like this generally do not co-witness with the irons; the irons aren’t tall enough. Even on ARs & other rifles, the backup rear sight is behind the optic, and they work fine there (assuming your optic isn’t a big scope that blocks the BUIS from deploying, and has to be removed).

      • Not all irons are the same height, width, or sight radius. If The RMR came with that feature, they’d need to make a front post for every pistol and rifle it can mount to.

      • The extra work is well worth it, the advantage of the red dot is that you can focus only on the target and superimpose the dot onto it. The backup sights to the rear naturally impedes the ability of your eye to do that. The reduction of sight radius by 1/2 inch is not at all significant as red dots are used on full frame and compact handguns, the backup irons on those are still placed as far or further than a sub compact gun. This sight radius is more than effective for up close combat/self defense shooting (especially since they will only be used in the highly unlikely event of the red dot actually failing.

      • You actually can co-witness iron sights and reflex on this design all you have to do is get suppressor sights because they are higher. However if you get suppressor height night sights you run the risk of washout. So you better off just leaving factory height iron sights as a backup just in case your reflex breaks or breaks off this way you can still aim.

  6. So Glock thinks we all of a sudden care they are repackaging the same product over and over when their competitors are innovating and refining?

    • Technically this counts as a refinement. As if there’s really any revolutionary designs in the pistol market nowadays anyway. Fifty bajillion 1911s, a gajillion striker fired pistols, and a gajillion revolvers. Though they might be refined somewhat, they are all the same old technology that works the same way it used to. The only new design that comes to my mind in the handgun world is the Chiappa Rhino. I’m sure there are a couple others that I overlook, but my point is, there is no real reason for you to give Glock a bad rap for “marketing the same thing,” especially since many people apparently want to keep buying it.

      • Competitors have started making offerings with modular firearms, actually good striker triggers, refined ergonomics that only someone willfully ignorant won’t acknowledge as better then Glock, among other things that have eclipsed and surpassed the G4. If we didn’t have the president making a lot more first time gun owners, I would imagine that the G would be ceding market share to the also rand that are building bonafide better mousetraps. The grievances with the Glock design are well documented at this point, and gray frames and half hearted attempts at slide mount optics aren’t upping the game any.

  7. Stupid slide mounted optic. When was the last time you met somebody who could consistently track the red dot without it disappearing off the frame after every shot? This is even worse than a front sight that dips below the rear blade every time. Mount the red dot on the FRAME. Or go with a barrel-mounted front sight. Glock should’ve done the latter if they’re catering to the competition crowd.

    • You must not be familiar with Carry Optics. It’s a new division in USPSA. It’s basically production class but with slide mounted red dots. Looks cool.

      • I’m an old school Open guy. Once made a custom maker deck out my G17 with all kinds of gimmicks, including an RMR and a 3-port compensator. Even with the comp, the dot did not want to stay within the field of view after the slide hits the rearmost of the travel unless I gripped the gun tight enough that my trigger finger couldn’t run as fast as I wanted. On my SVI open guns in 38 super comp this has never been a problem, the dot could be tracked through the entire recoil impulse. On “long” range shots or extreme close range this does not matter. Anything between 5yd and 50yd I found the slide-mounted to be much slower than a frame-mounted CMore or just a plain fiber-optic iron mounted to the barrel.

  8. Question for those who already have a MOS Glock; does the optic interfere with racking the slide? I generally prefer overhand racking to slingshot.

    • I wouldn’t say it interferes. But is definitely gives you less natural of a grip if you intend to stay off the ejection path

        • You won’t regret it. Run plain irons of your taste if you use the gun for defensive purposes. Use the money of an RMR to buy cheap ammo and train to learn the dynamics of the gun. You will soon go past the stage where some newbies find the red dot helps. If you intend to compete, buy a mount that attaches to the rail on the dust cover and goes over the slide to mount the red dot.

      • It doesn’t interfere with racking the slide at all. In fact, with my hand over the optic, my fingers fall perfectly across the serrations. The optic actually functions as a natural stop, ensuring that your fingers are right where they should be. It actually forms your hand in the perfect shape and position to rack. At least for me.

    • I do not however I have seen people racking their slide by putting their hand I front of the reflex and pulling back so if you do it this way there should not be an issue. I’ve seen racking handles on slides not but that’s just too much for me.

  9. The base plate on the Glock 19 in the top photo doesn’t quite line up with the grooves in the slide. This would really bother me on my personal gun. Honest machining marks are fine but this is a QC issue.

  10. If I worked for Glock I’d make a Gen 5 with a stainless barrel, stronger frame, front frame serrations, and a better trigger. My next gun may be a Smith 4006 TSW. Or a 686 .357. Or a “new” design from the SHOT show – notwithstanding a coupe of slow going AR builds. And possibly a 1911 build.

Comments are closed.