GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-02-2012, 11:50   #1
Marshall_tx
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The Lonestar State
Posts: 21
Is Glock aiming at cutting costs recently?

I really admire the simplicity and strong reliability of Glock's, reason being why I have 4 of them (not much by some people's standards). But I first bought my first Glock in 07, the model 23. Ever since then I've bought some and sold some. But when I disassemble to clean them there is somewhat of a notable difference, perceived by me at least, of the different build materials. I just bought a 22, 2 days ago and when I field stripped it, the insides looked different, for starters, the 22 looked like it had some sort of a plastic rail support on the front rails, whereas my 07 Glock 23 does not have the "supports". Also, the locking blocks look like they're plated on the new ones and I've been seeing as to how allot of people are noticing excessive wear and signs of wear on the locking block whereas my Glock 23 has no signs of wear at all on the inside from shooting some 5,000 rounds through it. I haven't given it much thought, but recently the M&P's have caught my attention, it looks like they've made their own polymer version of the Glock, and have done a mighty fine job at it. I know Glock is made in Austria, but I honestly would not be surprised if they've been importing some of the internal's from China like the springs, extractor's, locking blocks, or others of the sort. Because while these parts are very small, when they order 50-60,000 I'm sure they can cut costs and try to rely on their past success to keep people coming back. Then again, I'm just playing devil's advocate . I really like Glock's and between the HK's, and Sig's I've had in the past, I've only held onto the Glock's because I don't see any other handgun taking the Glock's position as leader in utility, reliability, and simplicity and that's all I really look for. I'm not a big fan of firearm's that don't go 'bang' every time their trigger is pulled.
Marshall_tx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 12:21   #2
NCHeel
Senior Member
 
NCHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Charlotte N.C.
Posts: 443
I have seen the plastic things you are talking about. My 19 has them but the 26 does not. The 26 is newer so that rules out a design change to produce it cheaper. I think the big deal is GLOCKS are made to be service weapons. They have never cared for aesthetics. They function but now-a-days people want something to be pretty also. GLOCk has never been into that. If someone wants a safe queen get a Kimber.
__________________
Gen4 G17, G19, G26. Love the Gen4's.

NRA certified RSO
NRA Instructor for pistol, rifle and shotgun
NRA Instructor for PPIH and PPOH
NCHeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 12:40   #3
Marshall_tx
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The Lonestar State
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCHeel View Post
I have seen the plastic things you are talking about. My 19 has them but the 26 does not. The 26 is newer so that rules out a design change to produce it cheaper. I think the big deal is GLOCKS are made to be service weapons. They have never cared for aesthetics. They function but now-a-days people want something to be pretty also. GLOCk has never been into that. If someone wants a safe queen get a Kimber.
I 100% agree, Glock needs to stick to what they've been known for, a quality, functional, durable firearm. The last thing we need from them is the company trying to round off the edges from their "2x4" and trying to replace functionality with form.
Marshall_tx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 12:54   #4
samurairabbi
Dungeon Schmuck
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 6,922
Glock produces INTERNALLY only three parts: frame, slide, barrel. All other parts are OEM from outside suppliers.
__________________
Samurai Rabbi
samurairabbi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 13:09   #5
SJ 40
Senior Member
 
SJ 40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 6,394
Like you said if a gun doesn't go bang it's not of any value. I love my Glocks and everyone goes Bang every time no matter the ammunition it's feed. I am always on the lookout for Glocks,I'm just not interested in any Glock produced after 12/06 but that's just me.
SJ 40
SJ 40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 13:54   #6
mr00jimbo
Senior Member
 
mr00jimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurairabbi View Post
Glock produces INTERNALLY only three parts: frame, slide, barrel. All other parts are OEM from outside suppliers.
where are they outsourced to?
__________________
"Learning to shoot with a Glock is like learning to drive with a car with a smashed windshield and two flat tires."
-Yo
mr00jimbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 14:07   #7
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,846
Well

some pictures would be nice.
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 14:33   #8
DocWills
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 471
ALL gun companies outsource. What and who depends. Ruger and smith get a lot of very surprising orders in the US.
There are a bunch of Euro companies capable in that sort of thing.
__________________
There is no cure for stupid, but ignorance may be healed in the Forums.
DocWills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 14:47   #9
samurairabbi
Dungeon Schmuck
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 6,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr00jimbo View Post
where are they outsourced to?
All over Europe and, probably, Asia. In the late nineties, Russia was a major source of OEM Glock parts.
__________________
Samurai Rabbi
samurairabbi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 16:34   #10
Chuck TX
CLM Number 243
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Chuck TX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 6,324
Did they start using MIM parts?
__________________
"Come and Take it!" - Texans, October 2, 1835
Chuck TX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 16:53   #11
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,077
A few months, maybe half a year ago it seemed fairly accepted that Glock was behind in production by several hundred thousand pistols. I have not heard recently if they are still behind and if so how much. Perhaps the reason for changes in parts was to speed up production and any changes in quality are a result of attempting to make more parts faster rather than any cost cutting move. That is, of course, just a rambling guess with no facts to back it up at all.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 17:50   #12
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,441
Quote:
Is Glock aiming at cutting costs recently?
I don't know, but the testimonial evidence is that the Gen 4 Glocks have derailed Glock's stellar reputation for total out-of-the-box reliability, extending even to the late model Gen 3 products.

Gaston Glock is getting up there in age and perhaps has allowed others without his attention to important factors to supplant his decision-making process. Just sayin' ...

One thing's for sure, I'm certainly happy with my 2007 Glock that is the only firearm I own that has been absolutely perfect since Day One with every FMJ and JHP ammo put through it.
__________________
Rocket Scientist

Last edited by unit1069; 11-02-2012 at 17:52..
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 20:00   #13
Yertology
Member
 
Yertology's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: ten i see
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJ 40 View Post
I'm just not interested in any Glock produced after 12/06 but that's just me. 40
I'm curious, why this date?



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
22C RTF2
22 RTF2
Gen4 22 KKM 40-9
Yertology is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 20:21   #14
SJ 40
Senior Member
 
SJ 40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 6,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yertology View Post
I'm curious, why this date?



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Some say the use of MiMed parts were first used by Glock some time in 07,some say 09. I don't know for sure and I know Glock isn't going to say.

What I do know is by limiting myself to that date,unless the gun has been back to Glock they do not contain MiMed parts.
Such as extractor or locking blocks.

The use of MiMed parts maybe of no consequence to some I would rather not have/use them. So for me I limit my self to 12/06 serial numbers and prior,which is not very limiting to me as all the Glocks I own function with Perfection.
SJ 40

Last edited by SJ 40; 11-02-2012 at 20:22.. Reason: spelling
SJ 40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 20:46   #15
Made in Austria
Senior Member
 
Made in Austria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,704
I don't think Glock is cutting too much on the costs. I have a couple gen4's and they are all very reliable now, just like the old ones which I have as well. I also can't complain about the gray dull finish, it's holding up well so far.

The only thing they had major problems with are the extractors. Some of them are/were out of spec. I am sure one of their extractor MIM molders is/was out of spec because not all gen4's came with problems out of the box, and the ones which had problems can be fixed by replacing and tweaking extractors. I fixed the erratic ejection of two gen4 G19 and a few gen4 G23 by replacing extractors with new different numbered OEM extractors.

All of them still work like a sewing machine. The first one I fixed was a G23 gen4, it has now about 3500 through it and still shoots and ejects like it should.

MIM parts are normally not bad as long as they are in spec and done/molded correctly.

Last edited by Made in Austria; 11-02-2012 at 20:53..
Made in Austria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 23:08   #16
AustinTx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tx
Posts: 8,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJ 40 View Post
Some say the use of MiMed parts were first used by Glock some time in 07,some say 09. I don't know for sure and I know Glock isn't going to say.

What I do know is by limiting myself to that date,unless the gun has been back to Glock they do not contain MiMed parts.
Such as extractor or locking blocks.

The use of MiMed parts maybe of no consequence to some I would rather not have/use them. So for me I limit my self to 12/06 serial numbers and prior,which is not very limiting to me as all the Glocks I own function with Perfection.
SJ 40
I am slightly amused at people that buy a gun, made by injecting molten plastic, into a form and worry about MIM parts in it. Assuming, Glock's bad extractors are MIM (which I'm not sure anyone knows, positively), They don't work because they aren't the right size or shape. Evidently people can tell they're the wrong size, by eyesight.

Locking Blocks: My old Gen 3 Glocks appear to have some sort of molded locking blocks, in them and never broken one yet. The ones I checked, have a sprue from the mold.
AustinTx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 23:10   #17
AustinTx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tx
Posts: 8,051
Coke changed Coke and almost went broke. Glock changed the Model 17 and messed up the most reliable 9mm ever made, looks like.
AustinTx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 00:37   #18
whirlibird
Junior Member
 
whirlibird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Eastern Plains Colorado
Posts: 11
Most manufacturers make changes to make less costly products to increase market shares and profits. Be it MIM parts, injection molding, casting, etc.

Engineering changes are also made to increase reliability, reduce wear or failures, etc.

The end question is not what costs can we live with but what cost is our life worth?

For example, most 1911 makers use MIM parts in some place or another, often many.
But a few, still cling to refusing to use MIM parts. The difference is a couple of hundred dollars to start, normally.

What happens? People buy the cheaper product because it 's cheaper. Rather than considering if it's better or not.

Take the Glock for example, at @$500 you get a gun remarkably reliable, reasonably accurate and one that takes a tremendous amount of abuse. Same with the XD, M&P and others.

Jump to three times that price and people start having chest pains, brain issues and they can't find the ability to carry a gun that costs that much. However for that price you get something that's just as reliable as the Glock, much more accurate and one that will only increase in value over time. Note I didn't mention model or make.

Compare it to cars.

Buy the Toyota, it runs and keeps on running.
Buy the 'Vette, it runs and takes a little tinkering but holds its value over the years.

They both do the same thing, one just looks a whole lot better doing it.

As far as change goes, people are generally against it, and occasionally with good reason.
One of our local deputies bought a brand new Sig 226. And comparing it to my 25 year old 220, there were a major number of differences. The trigger was terrible, the locking block was rough as a corn cob (MIM), machining changes, etc. He didn't even keep it a week.

Evaluate change on it's own merits.
__________________
Rule .303, not just for historical purposes anymore.
whirlibird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 05:12   #19
Yertology
Member
 
Yertology's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: ten i see
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by whirlibird View Post
Most manufacturers make changes to make less costly products to increase market shares and profits. Be it MIM parts, injection molding, casting, etc.
But the price tag on a new gen4 is 20-30$ more than a new gen3? This thread is depressing



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
22C RTF2
22 RTF2
Gen4 22 KKM 40-9
Yertology is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 05:35   #20
SJ 40
Senior Member
 
SJ 40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 6,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTx View Post
I am slightly amused at people that buy a gun, made by injecting molten plastic, into a form and worry about MIM parts in it. Assuming, Glock's bad extractors are MIM (which I'm not sure anyone knows, positively), They don't work because they aren't the right size or shape. Evidently people can tell they're the wrong size, by eyesight.

Locking Blocks: My old Gen 3 Glocks appear to have some sort of molded locking blocks, in them and never broken one yet. The ones I checked, have a sprue from the mold.
Yes the locking blocks at least around mid 2000 at least in the examples I have seen are investment castings as are the extractors.
Ruger long ago perfected and proved investment casting,when done with proper steel and properly heat treated has excellent strength and wear longevity.
SJ 40
SJ 40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 06:03   #21
RonS
Senior Member
 
RonS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Oh, USA
Posts: 10,180
Glock is a mature product. You can only do so much with it. Reduce costs to increase margin. Make small improvements to justify raising the price, market like mad to convice people that it is worth buying.

Their competitors are free to copy the best features and optimize their products and processes based on Glock's strengths and weaknesses and how the market sees them. Some people wanted Glock to add a manual safety. Boom, who makes polymer handguns with manual safeties now? Some people complained Glocks are bulky and feel funny in their hand. SR9 anyone, MP9?

I went with the Glock, but I'm very into brand loyalty, unless you piss me off I do business with what has worked for me in the past. I like the simpicity, I like the availability of parts, the service reputation and the fact that my last Glock was a great gun.
__________________
Decent law abiding people must fear criminals and the law while criminals have nothing to fear.
RonS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 08:48   #22
cajun_chooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: So. Louisiana
Posts: 552
isn't it amazing when a company makes a product that is just about perfect... they go and change it ??? why ?
cajun_chooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 09:40   #23
samurairabbi
Dungeon Schmuck
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 6,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by cajun_chooter View Post
isn't it amazing when a company makes a product that is just about perfect... they go and change it ??? why ?
This can occur when the Big Kahuna of a privately held company decides change is something he would like to do just for the sake of doing something to pass the time. If this is indeed happening within the Glock organization, we consumers will just have to tolerate it and hope that phase passes.
__________________
Samurai Rabbi
samurairabbi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 10:07   #24
cajun_chooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: So. Louisiana
Posts: 552
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurairabbi View Post
This can occur when the Big Kahuna of a privately held company decides change is something he would like to do just for the sake of doing something to pass the time. If this is indeed happening within the Glock organization, we consumers will just have to tolerate it and hope that phase passes.
or consumers could quit buying their products... and when their profits dwindle... maybe they would take notice
cajun_chooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 10:36   #25
jupiter
Senior Member
 
jupiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: North Mississippi
Posts: 707
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTx View Post
I am slightly amused at people that buy a gun, made by injecting molten plastic, into a form and worry about MIM parts in it.
Using your logic, you shouldn't mind if they make your glock barrel and locking block out of Tin. It would be amusing to think certain parts may need to be made better/stronger!

I would rather pay a little more and maintain high standards than compromise on quality in ANY way.
__________________
I hate Chevy Silverado pickups!

Last edited by jupiter; 11-03-2012 at 10:37..
jupiter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
glock, locking block, quality, reliability
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 13:04.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,160
346 Members
814 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42