What aftermarket item do you want for the PPQ? Everyone is making holsters, 10-8 and Dawson make sights.
What aftermarket item do you want for the PPQ? Everyone is making holsters, 10-8 and Dawson make sights.
For me it is not so much the extensive factory and aftermarket support offered by glock as it was the ease of maintenance that appeals to me. As a budding shooter, the simplicity of repairing or upgrading my glock was what saved me the cost of a gunsmith. It's also the reason I got interested in working on guns. It was so easy to just fix my own gun that I just took that idea and ran with it. I've never sent a gun back to the factory thus far. Whether a good or bad thing I don't know lol
It seems that my "contributions" to the forum are not appreciated. Roger.
What exactly are you asking for then? Or contributing? It seems there has been a lot of very good answers on what is deemed support. I guess I do not understand why this thread was started given the levels of views on support from different end users. You would think the question was answered, or is everyone supposed to agree that a Ruger or Steyer can be called "supported"
Not exactly, and there is no need to be snippy about it.
You asked people for their thoughts on the "support" idea. This obviously means different things to different people. When they lay out their thoughts and logic behind this idea and you decide to disagree.
OK, disagree, but don't tell people that the concerns they have and the logic behind their decisions is wrong because you don't agree with it or it doesn't fit your particular needs or into your paradigm.
I pointed out my thoughts on "support", from an admittedly LE agency centric viewpoint, and one colored by a heavy into FoF training background, you didn't like my answer.
Your concerns are not my concerns, and vice-versa. That doesn't make my concerns invalid. Live with it.
I'll say ubiquitous is a most important quality in and of itself, it's appeal is two fold.
First, the easy availability of spares to keep a high round count or broken gun running is very real. I shot with a gent this spring, he had been waiting 3 months for a replacement PPQ barrel.
Second, is our visceral need for de-massification. While couched in all sorts of practical justifications, at some point, most high frequency users become designers. Ubiquity of the base unit means the interchangeable parts for customization are wide ranging. This desire to customize or "improve" weapons is ingrained in our psyche and can be traced back to the first caveman who diamond wrapped a piece of vine around the handle of his club to improve his grip. Ubiquity and reliability of the base unit lowers the financial barrier to this customization which feeds popularity and widens the stream of aftermarket parts that come to market.
Me, I just bought a Steyr L9 a1 and learned how to bend Kydex so I can make a holster for it. Since shooting it, have been mulling over filing up a replacement rear sight. Yes, I'm that kittened up.
YMMV
Oh, and BTW, I recall taking a wait and see approach to the Steyr even though I liked those guns a LOT when they first came out, and I shot them rather well when we had several for T&E. Steyr went basically out of business right after that point. Where would I, or my agency, have been if we had committed to the Steyr back then? That's right, up the proverbial creek.
It's easy to make some cool looking guns, to get flashy ads and to get some good press (Colt 2000, S&W Sigma or Caracal anyone?), but one needs, IMHO, an established weapon system if they are going to commit to a platform for serious carry and training use.