But Voodoo will retort that EL's preference is a "G" model Beretta, so "training wheels" still applies (at least for him) as this is decocker only and not a safety.Originally Posted by Kirk
Mas Ayoob? Yes, well, maybe he doesn't know the safety is unnecessary and merely training wheels as per our new mod. Perhaps Voodoo will enlighten him.
Last edited by Willard; 08-24-2017 at 12:22 AM.
I found it, it was DocGKR on another forum
"Because you are at greater risk for someone trying to take away your exposed pistol; a manual safety gives you a touch more time to react and mitigate such an attack...
As I have stated before, I strongly prefer having a manual safety on a pistol that is used for uniformed LE use and other open carry; I have twice seen officers' lives potentially saved when another person gained control of an officer's pistol, but the engaged manual safety prevented the weapon from firing--I don't like to think about the outcome if the pistols involved had been a Glock, Sig, XD, revolver, etc..."
I'm kinda intrigued by the Glock MHS. There was a discussion on Lightfighter where the concept of G17 grip/G19 slide was discussed, either in relationship to comps and/or optics, and it brought up some valid points.
From reading into the complaint/objection it seems like Glock got gigged on the safety design for being very difficult to manipulate (once again, pure conjection) and I'd hope it would be modular or removable, like an M&P safety, and someone comes out with a more useable aftermarket lever.
That said, there has been demand for a Glock with a factory manual safety and if you don't like it then don't buy it.
...and that means exactly what?
Jerry Miculek could probably out shoot anyone here with a revolver and they don't have safeties.
No one ever said it's a skill level indicator - but I understand where all the angst is coming from now, too bad people wouldn't just post what they thought instead of posting snarky comments (not you LockedBreech), but that's what the internet is about, isn't it?
Putting a safety on a Glock is most definitely like riding a bike with training wheels. Having a safety on a pistol which requires a safety (like a DA/SA gun for example) is part the design and almost required in some instances.
If someone were to put a safety on a revolver, every person here who thought my training wheels comment was stupid would all of a sudden think exactly the same as I do. Context matters, please don't make your own up.
VDMSR.com
Chief Developer for V Development Group
Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.
It has been brought to my attention that people took issue with my use of the term "training wheels," as such I'd like to apologize to anyone who took my "training wheels" post as a direct, personal, insult.
This thread is about the MHS Glock. Several posts before I posted the training wheels comment, a post was made about Glock selling MHS guns with a safety. My post was directly in response to that post (not the poster).
Locally, "training wheels" is commonly used nomenclature for guns with safeties, it was used when I went through the academy when discussing why we don't have safeties on our pistols, it is used by local instructors in regard to safeties, but it is definitely local and is not used outside my locale, or so I believe.
I erred in using a term which could not have been accepted online in any the way I meant it.
I did not, in anyway, shape or form, mean to speak negatively of anyone who uses a safety on another pistol. We are not talking about another pistol, we are talking about the MHS Glock and that was the context of my response. I was not speaking about Berettas, or HK's or SIGs or anything other than the MHS Glock and I was most certainly not attempting to directly insult anyone on their particular choice of pistol, if you took it as directly disrespectful of you particular pistol choice that is was not my reason for the post or the term "training wheels."
VDMSR.com
Chief Developer for V Development Group
Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.
So if a safety = training wheels it means a gadget = nut pad?
For me a MHS GLOCK with thumb safety, gadget, NY-1 and "-" connector with a grip chop to a 26 length would be 100% my ideal carry gun. All it would take is for GLOCK to put the safety in there and then 6 months later there would be the APEX safety drop in kit, which upgraded it to feel like a 1911.....
Last edited by Camovan; 08-24-2017 at 11:22 AM.
Sorry Tom...
I wish they'd go the other way and put a 17 slide on a 19 grip. No desire for the manual safety, though.
What is the reason for the larger grip? Fitting everyone's hands with gloves on, or added capacity, or both? Or something else? And why the shorter slide? Weight?
Glock's strategy for their MHS submission was to meet the requirements of both the compact and full size models with a single submission. The short slide/large frame combination allowed them to do so.
"When the phone rang, Parker was in the garage, killing a man."
So, this discussion came up on the Primary and Secondary Modcast recently. The rep from FN said this combination was the basis of design for the 509. I'm trying to remember exactly what the considerations were.
Basically, the larger grip results in a better hand fit (with or without gloves) for more people along with increased capacity. It also objectively results in a better shooting gun, and higher qualification scores, over the slightly shorter grip. The longer slide results in a longer holster, which means higher snag hazard (I guess it's muzzle length, not grip length that an issue for cop cars). The shorter slides also tend to cycle and track faster. The difference in sight radius between a 17 and 19 were negligible while the size considerations for a duty gun were greater.
Now, I can't state this information for a fact as I'm not a cop. And I would say listen to the modcast (I think it's episode 108; Gun Nerds 9) for a better understanding. The FN guy was saying the 509 configuration (and by infgerence the Glock MHS) isn't what customers think they want, it's what they need.
There's also the issue with RDS. Sight radius and bbl length don't matter, but having a shorter slide is better and easier while cycling.
I'd agree that Glock would do well to offer the reverse configuration as well for CCW (not duty) use. The MHS wasn't really CCW oriented. However, they'd do even better to just freaking offer a locking lug/block setup that fits the G26 or G34. (You know, like what the P320 did) and let customers mix and match. Gen 5 should have featured a consolidated locking setup.
Reply With Quote
