So that frame is a 17 length with a 19 dustcover. To make the lot for the testing in the right polymer, they likely had to cut tooling for that, and those aren't cheap.... I wonder if this kind of frame will see the consumer market now that the Army doesn't have dibbs on it.
Considering that Glock is making RTF 2 pistols with gills again to jump start sales, I would say that the likelihood is good that we will this on the market in some form. They are no longer selling every Glock 19 pistol they make without question.
Last edited by call_me_ski; 06-28-2017 at 10:25 AM.
What are their current building costs?Originally Posted by warpedcamshaft
Last edited by ralph; 06-28-2017 at 10:37 AM.
If it starts four thousand new Internet threads about safeties on Glocks and striker pistols, curses upon them.
Blame the Army for that one.
This isn't Sig but I remember reading or heading from someone "in the know" that it costs Glock about $110 to build a pistol due to economy of scale. I imagine Sig's cost for the P320 is under $150 to manufacture.
Shoot more, post less...
The deletion of the finger grooves is the only thing I really like about these. If these ever hit the shelves I would look forward to handling one. But it doesn't offer much to me that the Gen 4 doesn't already do. I would love to have a family of Glocks with no finger grooves, but already owning a 17g4 I'll probably just wind up getting more gens to keep it all the same. The finger grooves aren't that big of a deal, and a Glock without them isn't worth the premium they will probably carry, in my mind.I don't have a lot of need for a "commander" set up on a Glock. If that's what other folks are looking for, then go for it.
A safety on a Glock would be okay. I'm not against them offering a version with a safety. I don't know if I would buy it, but I think that a lot of folks would be more comfortable with a weapon that has a safety. If that makes sense or not, or is the right choice or not is probably a great discussion for another thread (which I'm pretty sure has already been beat to death). The market for a safety frame Glock is definitely out there. I know both my parents would love a Glock if it came with a frame safety. They like everything about the Glock except it's lack of a safety. Regardless of if it's a need or not many people perceive it as one.
TL;DR Not for me, but could introduce some cool new stuff to the Glock line.
-Cory
Ambi Safety? Lanyard loop?
No, thank you.
I like the finger grooves but I understand those that do not.
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.
I wonder how user friendly that safety is.
I dunno... It seems that a G19 with a G17 frame falls in to the same category as all the other manufacturers that produce a gun just a bit bigger, or too much smaller, than a G19. It's almost as if Glock themselves are missing the mark they established with the G19. Oh, the irony.
Last edited by Inkwell 41; 06-28-2017 at 11:20 AM.
Reply With Quote