Glockers, why all the hate? Fans of Old Slabsides...why all the hate? Don't you understand that the two operate exactly the same way? Don't you know that they're more alike than they are different?
Fans of the Glock claim that their favored sidearm is a modern design compared to the 110+ year-old technology of the old warhorse.
But, is it?
Since the beginning of firearms development and evolution, everybody borrowed on their predecessors' ideas. Ain't no sin in that. Browning did it. One need only do a quick study of the Model 1892 and 1894 carbines to see the influence of Christian Sharps' falling block action. He got the idea for the push button detachable box magazine from Hugo Borchardt, and headspacing on the case mouth from Georg Luger.
But, the Glock serves as a study in borrowing ideas from those who came before...and in this case...many years before. Modern? I don't think so. Some improvements, to be sure...but that applies to everything. It's the natural order of things.
Everything that you see in the Glock came from somewhere else,and much of it predates Browning's 1911. Let's look at it.
But, first...a disclaimer.
The Glock is a good, solid pistol. If it weren't, it wouldn't still be around. It would have gone the way of the Chau Chat.
Sliding breechblock...Browning.
Front slide dismount...Browning.
Tilt barrel locking system...Browning.
Short recoil operation...Borchardt and Luger.
Push button detachable box magazine...Borchardt and Luger.
Striker fire...Borchardt and Luger. The pre-staged striker was present on the 1907 Roth-Steyr.
Double column/single feed position magazine...Saive and Browning.
Integral barrel feed ramp...Saive.
Frame mounted underbarrel readily removable action spring...Browning.
Left side extractor/right side solid mount ejector...Browning.
Camming barrel engagement and disengagement with frame cross member activation...Saive.
The use of synthetics/plastics for the receiver was first seen in the HK VP70...over 50 years ago.
So, the claims of modern technology just don't hold water. Most of the features of the pistol are older'n dirt.
Right down to...
This.
Fans of the Glock claim that their favored sidearm is a modern design compared to the 110+ year-old technology of the old warhorse.
But, is it?
Since the beginning of firearms development and evolution, everybody borrowed on their predecessors' ideas. Ain't no sin in that. Browning did it. One need only do a quick study of the Model 1892 and 1894 carbines to see the influence of Christian Sharps' falling block action. He got the idea for the push button detachable box magazine from Hugo Borchardt, and headspacing on the case mouth from Georg Luger.
But, the Glock serves as a study in borrowing ideas from those who came before...and in this case...many years before. Modern? I don't think so. Some improvements, to be sure...but that applies to everything. It's the natural order of things.
Everything that you see in the Glock came from somewhere else,and much of it predates Browning's 1911. Let's look at it.
But, first...a disclaimer.
The Glock is a good, solid pistol. If it weren't, it wouldn't still be around. It would have gone the way of the Chau Chat.
Sliding breechblock...Browning.
Front slide dismount...Browning.
Tilt barrel locking system...Browning.
Short recoil operation...Borchardt and Luger.
Push button detachable box magazine...Borchardt and Luger.
Striker fire...Borchardt and Luger. The pre-staged striker was present on the 1907 Roth-Steyr.
Double column/single feed position magazine...Saive and Browning.
Integral barrel feed ramp...Saive.
Frame mounted underbarrel readily removable action spring...Browning.
Left side extractor/right side solid mount ejector...Browning.
Camming barrel engagement and disengagement with frame cross member activation...Saive.
The use of synthetics/plastics for the receiver was first seen in the HK VP70...over 50 years ago.
So, the claims of modern technology just don't hold water. Most of the features of the pistol are older'n dirt.
Right down to...
This.
Last edited: