The Glock 48 is dumb: Change My Mind

[Jeff22]

I bought a Glock 48 when they came out a few years ago.

I had no specific need for it, but I bought one because I support the concept of a single stack G19 sized gun. (I have a Kahr K9, P9 and T9 that I accumulated over the years that are about the same size platform)

I found it very pleasant to shoot. I qualified with it and occasionally carry it off duty (loaded with Hornady Critical Defense 115 grn)

I can think of a dozen people I trained over the last thirty years who would have benefited from a gun this size because they had really small hands. Two were males. I wish Glock had invented this gun years ago, when they came out with the baby Glocks. I have big hands and long fingers so it isn't an issue for me, but it is an issue for a lot of people.

The Glock 48 would make a good duty gun for cops with small hands, provided that somebody made an appropriate duty holster for it.

[Hot Cereal]

I was able to go hands on with a 48 MOS today. Honestly, I almost bought it. One thing that jumped out to me, and this is purely subjective, but the RSA seems to be heavily sprung compared to a Gen5 19/45. I put all three side by side and determined I liked the 45 the best. I didn’t buy any because I really don’t need another 9mm. As has been said in this thread, I think the 48 should use its own RSA, purely based on feel, which means nothing and is purely subjective.

[GJM]

I was able to go hands on with a 48 MOS today. Honestly, I almost bought it. One thing that jumped out to me, and this is purely subjective, but the RSA seems to be heavily sprung compared to a Gen5 19/45. I put all three side by side and determined I liked the 45 the best. I didn’t buy any because I really don’t need another 9mm. As has been said in this thread, I think the 48 should use its own RSA, purely based on feel, which means nothing and is purely subjective.

The factory recoil spring weight is 22 pounds for the model 48 and 17 pounds for the model 45, so you could have saved yourself a trip to the LGS if that factor is important to you.

[CLaw]

I almost bought a 48 MOS myself the other day... I like the size, weight, and that I can mount a dot. Hunk this thread has caused me to hesitate...

I was able to go hands on with a 48 MOS today. Honestly, I almost bought it. One thing that jumped out to me, and this is purely subjective, but the RSA seems to be heavily sprung compared to a Gen5 19/45. I put all three side by side and determined I liked the 45 the best. I didn’t buy any because I really don’t need another 9mm. As has been said in this thread, I think the 48 should use its own RSA, purely based on feel, which means nothing and is purely subjective.

[Hot Cereal]

The factory recoil spring weight is 22 pounds for the model 48 and 17 pounds for the model 45, so you could have saved yourself a trip to the LGS if that factor is important to you.

I don’t dive that deep into the spec details.

Seriously though, I wonder if it needs to be be sprung higher given the tolerance window mentioned here, but that weight would make the gun difficult to operate. I’d imagine an RSA sized to the 48 and not a 43X would probably allow it to use a lighter spring weight, but I don’t know enough about that black magic to provide any accurate info other than my own speculation.

[M2CattleCo]

A longer spring would have greatly improved the reliability/tolerance of the 48.

An opportunity missed.

[octagon]

A longer spring would have greatly improved the reliability/tolerance of the 48.

An opportunity missed.

And such an easy opportunity to miss. Glock already has the technology and tooling for RSA in single or double spring configuration from Gen 1,2,3,4 or 5 Glock 19/23s that use the same length slide. I would be curious if someone like Apex,the Glock Store, etc.. might come out with a retrofit RSA kit that allows an end user to use earlier Glock 19 RSA or their own slide that allows for it without modification.

[luckyman]

A longer spring would have greatly improved the reliability/tolerance of the 48.

An opportunity missed.

I don’t know; I’m skeptical Glock engineers would have been so inept as to not consider other options from their own inventory.

I could picture where they made their choice based on weighting requirements differently, like saving .05$ per pistol, or maybe having an easier to rack slide in the LGS being seen as a sales advantage for their target demographic, but I have to imagine they at least considered options from the viewpoint of reliability.

[Hot Cereal]

I think it was simply just “put a longer slide on a 43X”- done. Doesn’t the 34 use a 17 RSA?

[JPedersen]

You're making me rethink my plan to liquidate a hoard of 3953s.

I am in line IF you liquidate. Regret selling mine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk