Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    I know there is not a lot of love for the SIG 320 series, but SIG does get credit on the Fire Control Unit that allows owner to swap grips, slides and calibers at will.

    Glock really lost ground with this idea, and it was even copied on the Zev pistols to allow modularity (if I remember correctly).

    Swapping uppers on full sized 9, 40 and 357 SIG Glocks was one of the great selling points. I used to wish for a Glock Pistol Pac (like Dan Wesson did with revolvers) that included, for example, a Glock 17 with a 34 and 17L upper all in one case. Or same in 40 with a 22, 35 and 24. If they had a universal lower that worked with compact uppers, it would be damn near perfect.

    If only there was a Glock 19 sized lower that fit all the slides in 9mm, from the 26 to the 17L, THAT would be useful. But Glock wants to sell full sized guns complete and never really pursued slides as individual purchases.

    So glad Suarez International was innovating while Glock ignored forward cocking serrations, red dots and suppressor height sights, barrels threaded metric instead of 1/2 x 28 and still foists the crappy MOS system on the public.

    With the Gen 3 patent expired, I see little reason to look to Glock for Glocks. SI has better solutions that work better.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2014
    This should have happened 10 years ago...just saying.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Meh. I'm at the point where I think Glock is starting to realize they've saturated the market. Everybody has a Glock...or three. If they want to sell more guns, they will need something new to sell.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Harris View Post
    The 19X/45 lower is a 17 length grip with a 19 length dust cover. The 47 and 17 are similar but not exactly the same.
    Quote Originally Posted by Screwball View Post
    For the DHS/CBP solicitation, they asked for three firearms; full-size, compact, and sub-compact.

    The requirements wanted X amount of parts to swap between the the full-size and compact. Thought was for parts simplification… it is easier to have one recoil spring assembly to swap in multiple guns. Everything else besides barrels, slides, and frames/backstraps pretty much work with either. Doing the 19 RSA, it met the requirement.

    For CBP OFO, it doesn’t matter since we are just issued the 19 across the board. But for AMO and BP, where both the 47 and 19 are in the field… the idea had some merit. Well, until CBP realized that they got the guns so cheap that if something happens to one… shred it and issue another. They didn’t do Glock armorers training to save the money.
    That clarifies it for me. Thank you.

    Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts