Gun Abuse...Glock 21 subjected to horrible treatment

Ooh. That makes me hurt. Poor baby.

I guess it's good to know that your weapon will work when you need it, but that poor pistol.

Steve
 
Ooh! He shot it! I mean, actually aimed another firearm at it, and SHOT the slide of his Glock. Damn.

Poor baby. I wouldn't treat ya like that, so mean and bad...

John
 
I think he should send it back to the factory with an innocent note:

"Would you please look at my Glock? It doesn't seem to work anymore. Could you fix it please?"



munk
 
I'm sorry, but this just strikes me as one-upsmanship. Our intrepid tester looks around, nostrils flaring, and says "Watch Iss!!!". I have on occasion crawled thru some nasty stuff in my time....even so, I pretty well made sure it was me and not the weapon that took the brunt of the dirt. Why tempt fate?
 
munk said:
I think he should send it back to the factory with an innocent note:

"Would you please look at my Glock? It doesn't seem to work anymore. Could you fix it please?"



munk
Click to expand...

instead of paying for airmail, he can just toss it out of a plane with the note tied onto it.:rolleyes:
 
Part of me says "I am glad he is using a lower pressure round like the .45 instead of a .40 or 10mm." But then I think...."Why?"
 
Very interesting.

My own G21 received its new barrel, spring and guide rod a few weeks ago and is running flawlessly, although it occasionally hits me in the forehead with empties now. My preferred target is clay pigeons at 25 yards. If I'm holding for them, I often get them.

They are well built pistols, but this man may have been going a little overboard. I thought I was being overly rough when I "drop-tested" my Glocks to check the security of the Safe Action. (I was going to replace those sights anyway, after all...)

Edit: correction of grammar that's worse than usual. Chalk this one up to a long day at the office.
 
Well at least it is just a Glack that he is tormenting...:D



j/k guys...While I think they are severly overated I just dont see the point in this test (other than trashing a "decent" pistol)...Did he do a comparison with other pistols?? Nope! therefore I just wanna shake my head and go and read some of Cliff's stuff:p



DaverevolverboyBurke
 
I've got a S&W 340 that survived the "tumbling down a rocky slope with Mikes fat butt and a fully loaded pack on top of it test"

Gun worked fine, but it did decrease the value by about half....:o
 
I've seen this test before. I think it's great. No different than torture tests on knives. It's nice to see what they can take in a pinch.

Chuck Taylor left his under the ocean for 3 months as well as fired it while caked with cow poo, among other things.

Definately a breakthrough in firearms. I doubt that any other can handle anywhere near the abuse and keep running. (Though, I understand Sig comes close.)

I had a Glock 34 9mm that I used to shoot until it was hot, then toss it in a snowbank and watch it sink. Then, I'd shake it off, reload and go again.

I just got a new Glock 20 on Friday. It's my if-I-could-only-own-one-gun gun.

I collect, classic Smith & Wessons because I appreciate finely made firearms. But, when I want a weapon, it's Glock.

.
 
Seeing groups like that unnerve me. I'm just about to order my 1st handgun, and I've been seeing people talking about "excellent accuracy" only to find out they mean something like 3" groups at 25 yards, from a bench. What the heck? I can do that standing unsupported with my bow. A gun should do much better, shouldn't it? Maybe I'm ruined from shooting precision rifles. Hopefully this spattering can be attributed to all the junk and abuse everywhere, and the guy's just checking to see if it'll fire, rather than shooting well.
 
It might be different ballistics, or something. I know that I can produce far tighter groupings (taking into account the smaller projectile sizes) at 7 yards with a pellet pistol than with a centerfire. Firearms do weird things sometimes. One of my tricks was knocking nails down with an inexpensive airsoft pistol at five yards when I was on my last ship. It wasn't particularly difficult and I almost always got the nail, but I couldn't do it with a Beretta, or a Glock for that matter. (Nor did I mention that only the windage was important for this, as one had a good 2" of leeway in the elevation.) I used to hunt yellowjackets and dragonflies with a pellet pistol; again, I don't think that I could've done that with a centerfire. I'm not good enough with a bow to make a fair comparison.

3" at 25 yards doesn't strike me as bad. That's tighter than most people can hold for offhand. Well, me, anyway. :) My own accuracy standards aren't easy to put a number on. My competency is at the point where I know where the sights are when the sear trips and I'm honest enough to call a miss as a miss, so I tend to look at the entire package instead: are my hits, hits? If yes, it's good enough. If not, what is the problem? It's not the most precise system, but it's precise enough to let me know if something has gone wrong.

I've read too many gun magazines to bench most of my firearms anymore. It's kind of like reading Men's Health when you're cutting weight...no matter how well you're doing, you're not doing well enough.
 
I am a little less picky than you guys. At 15 yds, I am doing just fine
if I am placing all my fire in an area the size of the average heart and aortic arch.
Thats probably about a 5x5 in area or so.
That would be standing, 2 handed grip, rapid fire.
I have a hand tremor, and my friends are baffled that I shoot as competently as I do. Since I don't shoot any Walther or Hamerreli electro-trigger Olympic type pistols, I don't expect to be king gnat slayer.

DaddyDett
 
Good to see some are testing to the limit.

I love Glocks and am confident about the resiliency and durability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top