If Glock Never Happened

[Richardb]

If Glocks had never been invented the time line of history would have been different and I would still be a primarily Ruger Revolver guy.

[Greg45FL]

I think Glock's success was due to two primary reasons, especially in the military/police arena. Reliability and Cost. I am old enough to remember when Glock first came out and they were cheap compared to most other handguns. Glock has proven to be extremely reliable and when you compare the cost of a Glock against say a SIG P226 which was popular for many many years, the Glock is much more economical for a military or police department to purchase. I was reading an article the other day on major police departments in the US and I was surprised at how many were using SIG P226, S&W and others. I thought a lot more would have been using Glocks. I own handguns from a variety of manufacturers and I think Glock has an excellent product line. I think they are a little slow to make changes and come out with new products, but they have pushed other manufacturers that otherwise would have not produced a polymer pistol to do so. In the end the consumer wins.

[Bucky]

On 9/9/2017 at 3:43 AM, Rabbi said:

I do think Police would have used revolvers longer.  In the U.S. the Glock has had it's most profound commercial effect on the LE market.  

Seems at least in my area, most department transitioned to semi autos, before eventually transitioning to the Glock. Most being S&Ws. 

[Bucky]

On 9/9/2017 at 3:43 AM, Rabbi said:

I do think Police would have used revolvers longer.  In the U.S. the Glock has had it's most profound commercial effect on the LE market.  

Seems at least in my area, most department transitioned to semi autos, before eventually transitioning to the Glock. Most being S&Ws. 

[Bucky]

On 9/9/2017 at 3:43 AM, Rabbi said:

I do think Police would have used revolvers longer.  In the U.S. the Glock has had it's most profound commercial effect on the LE market.  

Seems at least in my area, most department transitioned to semi autos, before eventually transitioning to the Glock. Most being S&Ws. 

[Bucky]

Not sure how that tripe tap occurred. 

[mlk18]

I was not only around when Glock really hit the market, I was a rookie police officer in a small agency with about 125 officers. My department had a mixture of old fellas carrying S&W Model 10 heavy barrels and younger guys like me carrying Beretta 92F's. The Beretta 9mm was very common around here, as were the S&W 2nd & 3rd gen autos. Glock's entrance into the police world was based almost entirely on pricing, sales tactics, and marketing. The command staff in every department within a days drive from me only cared that the selected gun be reliable and inexpensive, nothing else mattered. And in some department's very little has changed to this day. I am not ripping on Glock, just pointing out the realities of police purchasing. In recent years some departments have gotten better and now allow the officers to choose from a list of approved handguns (a smart move), but during Glock's rise to market share dominance it was all about coming in as the low bid option and throwing in free holsters, offering up great trade values on old guns, etc. My department ended up switching to the Glock 17/19 because they could almost buy two Glocks for the cost of one Beretta. And for the record, qualification scores have never been as good with the Glock as they were in the old days with those Beretta 92F's. Might have been the guns, might have been that in the past more people came on the job already being very familiar with guns and shooting. Can't say for sure.

I was a police firearms instructor for over 10 years during my career, have been to over a dozen instructor or shooting schools, and taught at the police academy. If Glock never existed we would probably still be carrying new and improved versions of those old designs like the 92F, P226, or 5906's. Or someone else would have come along and developed the next best thing. Probably the latter. I see people on my firing line with a wide variety of metal framed and polymer framed handguns. They are pretty much all reliable, they are pretty much all accurate, and pretty much every officer manages to put in a passing score. So if Glock never existed we would be just fine. It was the taxpayer who won out when Glock was invented. Well the taxpayer and Gaston's kids.

[PATCHMAN]

If no Glock, the S&W 39 and 69 series would rule.  We might even be at the 4th generation S&W 39/69. 

Sig would be doing good too.   

[PATCHMAN]

3 hours ago, Bucky said:

Not sure how that tripe tap occurred. 

Slam fire.  It sometimes happen!    

[JoeIsuzu]

On 9/10/2017 at 10:03 AM, Nestor said:

HK was first with the polymer frame pistol if I can recollect correctly. Glock difference was possible because he approached the project with manufacturer's mind, never being influenced by previous exposure to the gun market.

That's why his manufacturing cost was so much lower than competition. That's also why the pistol became so popular with budget stranded police agencies and subsequently civilian users. I love that simplicity. It's the only pistol that I can work on myself without any discomfort. It's reliable, functional and robust. What's not to like?

I'm pretty sure that HK would follow up with more pistols if not for Glock and polymer would eventually become a new standard anyway, but thanks to Glock we know it went as it went. Great benefit to all of us.

Sounds a lot like Leo Fender's business model for success.

He built a product for a niche market and it exploded into a worldwide,  world-class item.

My only fear from past histories of such successful entrepreneurial largess is the ultimate buy-out by a bean-counter in the disguise of a benevolent dictator who eventually destroys the product by cheapening and outsourcing raw product into complete assemblies using the next great labor source: Bush Pigmies.  

IF we're gonna allow speculation, then my speculation holds as much water as any other speculation. 

[AgentM79]

If Glock never came along, LE would have certainly stayed with revolvers for a few more years.  The wheelguns would have trended towards DAO (i.e. NYPD), and we might have even seen new frame designs which eliminated exposed hammers.  The Alvarez case would have made this an attractive option to LE Admin.  As far as the semi-auto in LE was concerned, DAO weapons from S&W and Beretta would have dominated.  Guns like the S&W 5946/6946/4586 and Beretta 92D would have been popular; they had significantly improved trigger pulls over their DA/SA counterparts.  Instead, Glock killed 'em!  These guns were pretty much gone by Y2K, and we were all carrying drastic/fantastic plastic.  Glock sold your agency a total system - weapon, armorer course, and instructor training.  The safe-action system, tough slide treatment, low parts count, and polymer frame redefined the industry.  No-one has come up with anything better since, and the Glock pistol is a mature, multi-generational product.  Always best in 9mm chambering, Glock will remain "#1" due to the "9mm Renaissance".

In short, DAO revolvers and semi-autos from Beretta and S&W.

Edited July 1, 2018 by AgentM79

[Citra47]

It is impossible to say what exactly the handgun world would have looked like without Glock's entry. There are too many variables. The use of revolvers by police was beginning to change before Glock hit the market in the U.S. but civilian acceptance of semi auto pistols would have been slower without the "Glock Age". When I began shooting "big bore handguns" as a youngster [anything bigger than a .22] the majority of guns available around me were 1911's, Luger's and Walther  P38's along with some 1917 S&W's and 1917 Colt's. A number of Nambu pistols were available to look at but there was no ammo. All the semi-auto's had problems and there was a distinct distrust among the general public of them as defensive weapons. If a 1911 jams in battle you normally had supporting fire for support. If it jams while defending your home..........you may be screwed. Ammunition was another thing. .45 ACP ball ammo had a reputation as a pretty good fight stopper but the 9mm did not nor was it a target accurate round. Hollow-point ammunition did not exist until several years later and then it was iffy in use for many years. 

Shortly after we got involved in Viet Nam S&W was really moving forward with their double action 9mm pistols. The Navy Seal's use of the S&W Model 59 in that war I believe really helped the 9mm's image in the U.S. The Sweedish K subgun also in 9mm got some exposure. Of course, Europe was enamored with the 9mm round. 

By the time the military began looking for a new handgun, S&W was in good shape, Colt was still behind the curve and most Americans figured S&W might supply the new handgun although a good many of us wanted to still see the .45 ACP used. Beretta winning the bid surprised many Americans; it should not have. Beretta's adaption was a political concession to our NATO allies, most especially Italy. In the end, the 92 series handgun turned out to be a good, solid gun but it did have to go through many growing pains.  

I truly believe Glock's entry into the gun world, most especially U.S., opened up a whole new competition between gun manufacturers that would not have happened otherwise anytime soon. I believe our manufacturers were so stunned they had no idea which way to turn for sometime after Glock hit our shores. Even with H&K's use of polymers 10 years prior, those guns never took off and everyone just kind of forgot about them. The striker fired concept actually goes way back, but after John Browning came along, most manufactures forgot about that too. 

So, from me, thank God Gaston Glock made that handgun bid to the Austrian Army. The world still might not have reached this point if he had not do so.

[t4terrific]

If there was no Glock, my CZ75 Compact 9mm would be my EDC. That’s assuming that the Glock 19 didn’t inspire similarly sized compact polymer pistols.

[t4terrific]

I wonder if Beretta would have gotten more traction here, if Glock had never made the scene? I never cared much for the Berettas personally, but it being chosen as the US Armed Forces sidearm AND not having to contend with the competition from Glock might have changed the game for them.

The Sig p229 would certainly have a lot of the market share. Beretta’s 92 series is just so big for EDC.

[Bucky]

9 minutes ago, t4terrific said:

The Sig p229 would certainly have a lot of the market share. Beretta’s 92 series is just so big for EDC.

I own a Beretta 92 Compact and a P229. The Beretta is the more concealable of the two, IMO. 

[NDcent]

I'll have to go along with S&W 3rd gens holding their own in LE much longer; plastic gun popularity was probably inevitable though.

[stk10767]

On 9/9/2017 at 2:00 AM, Eric said:

If the Glock pistol had never been built, what do you think things would look like today? What type of pistol and what brands do you think hold Glock's current market share? What pistol or pistols would hold that 65%+ of police pistol contracts? How about military pistol contracts that Glock holds? How much impact did Glock have on the state of firearms technology and on design, manufacturing and buying trends?

What would a world without Glock look like?

I remember the Walther PPQ was pretty popular in the beginning.  Maybe they took thier cue from Glock?  

[Borg warner]

On ‎9‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 10:03 AM, Nestor said:

HK was first with the polymer frame pistol if I can recollect correctly. Glock difference was possible because he approached the project with manufacturer's mind, never being influenced by previous exposure to the gun market.

That's why his manufacturing cost was so much lower than competition. That's also why the pistol became so popular with budget stranded police agencies and subsequently civilian users. I love that simplicity. It's the only pistol that I can work on myself without any discomfort. It's reliable, functional and robust. What's not to like?

I'm pretty sure that HK would follow up with more pistols if not for Glock and polymer would eventually become a new standard anyway, but thanks to Glock we know it went as it went. Great benefit to all of us.

The first polymer pistol was the HK VP70 introduced in1970. it was also one of the first "wondernines" if you don't count the Browning Hi-power, but the VP70 had an 18 round mag. A friend of mine bought one in the late seventies and I got to shoot it a few times and it had a HORRIBLE DA Only trigger with what must have been a 18 pound trigger pull. It was also big and heavy almost like a Hipoint but not as ugly. I much preferred the Hk P7 which was not polymer and not a wondernine but was a really nice gun and is one of my all time favorites. I got to shoot one of those around the same time as the VP70 and I really liked the squeeze-cocker design.

The Glock may not have been the first polymer pistol but it was the firs truly successful polymer pistol and what was really even more revolutionary about it was it's trigger with it's point and shoot simplicity. If the Glock hadn't come along we'd all have been shooting shooting DA/SA/Decocker/Crunchentickers for many years like the S&W 39/59 and the Beretta and the Sig.

Either that or 1911's which would be my choice if there were no Glocks. Colt could have built a double stack 9mm Wondernine which would have been a great alternative to the S&W's and they could have even made one in Lightweight Commander configuration. I think Colt actually did make a few 9mm Commander proto types around the same time S&W developed the 39 but the Colt was a single stack.

 

 

[Will Beararms]

S&W would have held on to the market with the 4000 series longer.  

HK would have emerged as the preeminent polymer pistol. 

Beretta 92’s would have filled more LEO holsters. 

Sig would be what sig has become. 

Edited July 7, 2018 by Will Beararms

[JTMac]

I don't think we would see nearly as many polymer or double stack guns.  They would have existed in increasing number regardless, but it was the Glock's tremendous success that created much of the demand.

I think Smith and Wesson's presence would be significantly larger and Beretta's at least slightly so, mainly with police departments. 

I'm of the opinion that most guns are actually pretty terrible.  There are two great handguns (the 1911 and the Glock), a handful of OK handguns, and the rest are awful.  Even with the Glock driving the market, so many terrible guns are manufactured and sold.  Without the Glock for everyone else to compete with, think how much worse it would be.  

[Bucky]

7 hours ago, Borg warner said:

The Glock may not have been the first polymer pistol but it was the firs truly successful polymer pistol and what was really even more revolutionary about it was it's trigger with it's point and shoot simplicity. If the Glock hadn't come along we'd all have been shooting shooting DA/SA/Decocker/Crunchentickers for many years like the S&W 39/59 and the Beretta and the Sig.

Either that or 1911's which would be my choice if there were no Glocks. Colt could have built a double stack 9mm Wondernine which would have been a great alternative to the S&W's and they could have even made one in Lightweight Commander configuration. I think Colt actually did make a few 9mm Commander proto types around the same time S&W developed the 39 but the Colt was a single stack.

The Commander was originally chambered for 9mm. Also, the 39 was a single stack as well. The 59 was the double stack. 

[Bucky]

6 hours ago, JTMac said:

I don't think we would see nearly as many polymer or double stack guns. 

Perhaps we wouldn’t have seen as many polymer guns, but the double stack wave was already on its way. 

[DUBSY]

On 7/1/2018 at 5:36 PM, AgentM79 said:

drastic/fantastic plastic.

+1

[Glock1911]

Maybe the BHP would still be in production.