Not really. The Glock 19 as it exists is not going anywhere. Sig sells a lot of their carry pistols, which have a similar compact slide on a full size grip, despite the availability of compact models. Also, The sig p320 compact is much closer in height to a glock 17 than a Glock 19. So another way to look at it is that Glock is able to offer a full size grip while giving up very little to "compact" sized competitors in the height department.Originally Posted by Jfpatch
Last edited by call_me_ski; 06-28-2017 at 11:28 AM.
I wonder why the need for a lanyard plug when they've already got a lanyard hole in the backstrap of every gun. Also, that's a new mag release profile isn't it?
Last edited by RAM Engineer; 06-28-2017 at 01:20 PM.
It looks somewhat interesting; I'm fine with Glocks either with or without the fingergrooves. I assume the logic for a full-size frame on a compact slide is to provide increased capacity with a slightly decreased draw time. Personally, I'm again fine with the capacity of my G19 as it is, and equally so with my G17...
The safety probably appeals to the appendix-carry advocates (i.e., a OEM out-of-the-box solution as opposed to having to go The Gadget route; great for some, but I don't appendix carry, so I don't personally desire the safety. Presumably the lanyard loop also provides a plug for the receiver cavity, so that's a good idea.
Nice, but I'd not feel particularly compelled to run out and buy if/when they became available. But that's me.
Best, Jon
RTF2 guns (without fish gills ) and Olive guns have been available all along. Just not for the US market.
Welcome to Africa, bring a hardhat.
There are so many variations out there now - I would have thought they would just consolidate the features for MHS. Gen4, MHS, Summer Special, 19M...
Right side safety looks incredibly dainty to me for a duty pistol
Yup and they are bring them back onto the market in the US with and without the Gills.
I would like to get one in hand. I don't think it looks dainty per se. It seems similar to all the other safeties on striker fired pistols of late.
Last edited by call_me_ski; 06-28-2017 at 02:03 PM.
I'm guessing it has more to do with military environmental testing (i.e. dust) than lanyard utility.
Apparently it was an issue during testing according to the GAO response.
Manual Safety
Glock also alleges that the Army deviated from the solicitation by assigning extra weight to the manual safety in the joint warfighter ergonomics subfactor and the early warfighter acceptance subfactor. Protest at 9. The Army contends that evaluation of the safety was reasonably part of the RFP’s stated evaluation criteria. MOL/COSF at 24-25.
In reviewing a protest challenging an agency’s evaluation, our Office will not reevaluate proposals or substitute our judgment for that of the agency, as the evaluation of proposals is a matter within the agency’s discretion. Computer World Servs. Corp., B-410513, B-410513.2, Dec. 31, 2014, 2015 CPD ¶ 21 at 6. Rather, we will review the record only to determine whether the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the stated evaluation criteria and with applicable procurement statutes and regulations. Id. In evaluating proposals, an agency may take into account specific, albeit not expressly identified, matters that are logically encompassed by, or related to, the stated evaluation criteria. MINACT, Inc., B-400951, Mar. 27, 2009, 2009 CPD ¶ 76 at 4; Independence Constr., Inc., B-292052, May 19, 2003, 2003 CPD ¶ 105 at 4.
With regard to the joint warfighter ergonomics subfactor, the Army assigned Glock’s proposal a weakness after “[DELETED]” which could result in an “[DELETED].” AR, Tab 3, SSDD, at 14. In addition, during testing under the early warfighter acceptance subfactor, the Glock handgun [DELETED] was “[DELETED].” Id. Offerors were informed that the Army would evaluate the ability of the user to operate the safety as part of the joint warfighter ergonomics subfactor. RFP at 390, ¶ M.3.2.2.4. The solicitation also highlighted that overall safety was a priority, noting that proposals could be disqualified for “safety issues,” as determined by the agency testers. RFP at 6. The [DELETED] on the handgun was reasonably encompassed by the factors disclosed to Glock. MINACT, Inc., supra. Furthermore, [DELETED], we do not think that the Army placed undue emphasis on the safety in the evaluation. This protest ground is denied.
"When the phone rang, Parker was in the garage, killing a man."
Better this than the push-through safety Glock has put in some guns...
Local police bought some (bunch of corrupt idiots), and of course some more with no safety.
JSGlock34, That is interesting. I didn't have an opportunity to read the entire GOA report. Shame that so much was redacted. I would like to see how these feel in the hand. I prefer the grip hum profile on my 17 pistols to my 19 pistols. I never really tried to imagine what the addition of a safety might do to the ergonomics.
Reply With Quote
