Glock Talk banner

Why Does Glock Offer Two Gens At Same Time?

5K views 66 replies 42 participants last post by  Kladdagh 
#1 ·
There's some of us that would purchase a Gen 2 over a 3 or 4, so if it's consumer choice, why not add another into the mix?

It seems odd that two versions would be produced at the same time.

Is it to cover contracts that have extended time periods to provide coverage for Gen 3 LEO and military contracts worldwide?

To offer a lower price point model?

To continue to amortize the Gen 3 specific production equipment?

Consumer loyalty to the Gen 3?

If anyone bumps into Gaston at an airport, please ask him for us.
 
#5 ·
The California restriction against 4s would seem a factor. Still, other MFRs have just pulled out of CA entirely.

And it's not like Glock is calling the Gen 3 a "CA compliant" model. Now that I say that, that's stupid because it would limit the market for them outside of CA.

Where I worked, every once in awhile a S&W M&P would show up with a 10 round mag, instead of the proper hi-cap mag. Seems like they would have better control over inventory.

Not sure about the CA but very well could be.

Any other theories?
 
#30 ·
The California restriction against 4s would seem a factor. Still, other MFRs have just pulled out of CA entirely.
IIRC, Ruger sells two versions of their newest pistol. One for Kali with a magazine disconnect feature; and another for the sane world without the mag disconnect. I've passed on several Rugers with the mag disconnect; and removed it from others (22/45).
 
#7 ·
Ah, so those are approved for purchase by the US. Apparently the Gen 4s never went through that approval process then.

Then the Gen 4's were offered as a way to keep up with competition / the whole adjustable-abiity thing.
 
#8 ·
Did Colt stop making series 70s after the series 80s came out? I don't think it is odd at all.
 
#10 · (Edited)
Welp, that's a good point.

Customers want them. I'm hoping the "gen 5" non-grooved models trickle into civilian consumption soon, too
As for California, it's not about jumping through hoops; the roster is effectively closed, if memory serves (barring someone actually doing that microstamping bull****). If manufacturers had any stones, like Ronnie Barrett, there would be no sales or support to CA LE agencies, but that's too tempting and large a market. Plus, most of the best companies are European, complete with European, statist mentalities.
I agree, CA is for all practical purposes closed, and microstamping will be the final nail in the coffin.

Glock 5?! That I was unaware of, found this ...https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/leaked-photos-gen-5-glock-17m/

So .. if the Gen 5 gets released to civilians, that would suggest the Gen 3's would be discontinued. Existing Govt contracts would have to update for Gen 4 and/or 5.

EDIT ... these pics shows more http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/16/photos-new-glock-17m-leaked/details

Looks like I derailed my own thread!
 
#9 ·
Customers want them. I'm hoping the "gen 5" non-grooved models trickle into civilian consumption soon, too
As for California, it's not about jumping through hoops; the roster is effectively closed, if memory serves (barring someone actually doing that microstamping bull****). If manufacturers had any stones, like Ronnie Barrett, there would be no sales or support to CA LE agencies, but that's too tempting and large a market. Plus, most of the best companies are European, complete with European, statist mentalities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vba and JMag
#23 ·
Gen 4 Glocks aren't illegal to own in California, FFL just can't sell them to the general public (same for all "off-roster" pistols). Perfectly legal to own if you can find one for sale by ppt (basically from LE or someone who moved into the state with the off-roster weapon). That's why a Glock 43 costs around $700 in California. Similar outrageous prices for any popular off-roster make/model. Anyone interested can Google 'California handgun roster' to get an idea how bad it is.
 
#26 ·
I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that the fundamental reason that Glock still sells third generation pistols is not really about California or about contracts but rather that they still make money from those guns, that they are profitable.
 
#31 ·
Given we all get one guess, I am going to guess it is all of the above, CA market, government(s) procurement, market segmentation (offering lower POS prices for a lower price point buyer), volumes still justify production, fully amortized tooling costs, etc. Just a guess though..
 
#27 ·
Because their are many that are still unimpressed by most of the gen4 guns in comparison to the gen3 and would NOT buy any Glock brand new if all we could get was gen4. The gen4 is series of upgrades that are poorly thought out. Glock might get it right with gen5.
 
#32 ·
The Gen4 Glock is a great hit in Kaliphornia. It's the only generation purchased by state and local government agencies. Apparently, only plebeians are forbidden the purchase of equipment equal to that of their rulers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lockback
#33 ·
Glock told us in Armorer's school that sales to Kalifornia was one of the main reasons the Gen3 is still made. It is on the "Accepted" list of the "left" coast.
And IIRC, Kalifornia requires a ridiculous number of test pistols to be submitted for acceptance testing, something like 50, or more. And at no cost to Kalifornia, the manufacturer must absorb the cost. Glock said "No". You know as well as I do that all of those pistols are not needed for testing. They are probably going to wind up as under the table "testing" take home goodies for many corrupt "officials".
I truly hate Commifornia, and refuse to deal with anyone or anything that comes from that Liberal La La land.
It will be only fitting when Commifornia finally falls off into the Pacific Ocean. The sad part will be the loss of the poor populace, that will indeed be tragic.
 
#35 ·
It isn't about how many guns are tested. It is about a thing called micro stamping. Any new semi must have it (along with a lot of other things) to be certified as a "safe" handgun. The fact that micro stamping doesn't exist just makes it all the more "safe" from a progressives point of view.

Essentially, no new semi pistols are sold by dealers in CA to non-exempt persons.
 
#36 ·
I guess when distilling everyone's input, for me this boils down to ...

"Because there's still a market for them"

Whether due to CA, consumer preference, Gov't contracts it all adds up to a money making endeavor.

I still wonder what happens to the Gen 3 if/when the Gen 5 goes civilian.
 
#37 ·
It isn't about how many guns are tested. It is about a thing called micro stamping. Any new semi must have it (along with a lot of other things) to be certified as a "safe" handgun. The fact that micro stamping doesn't exist just makes it all the more "safe" from a progressives point of view.

Essentially, no new semi pistols are sold by dealers in CA to non-exempt persons.
^^^ This!
Only 3 pistols are required to be submitted but because all new guns submitted must conform to the micro-stamping and Loaded Chamber Indicator no new gun can make it on the roster. Add to that if the manufacture so as much as changes the source of one of it's springs or even the shape of the grip on a gun already on the roster, it is considered a new gun and must be resubmitted. Since they don't have the new micro-stamping or LCI then they are unable to be California compliant. Nice way to implement back door gun control which is the true motive of the handgun roster.
 
#40 ·
How many versions of "Glock Perfection" have to be made before it is true? If it was 15 years ago why change? The Gen3 is still the standard. Tried and true. If the grip is too big, try another brand. Winchester made the same rifle for decades without a change. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
#41 ·
The "still a market for it" thing is what I'm thinking. Likely also many of those military and LEO contracts (and probably CA) would take more effort to change to the Gen 4 than to keep churning out the Gen 3.

Me, I prefer Gen 4, they fit my hands best and I get less "Glock knuckle" from the Gen 4's.

It is amazing how emotional people seem to get about the Gen 3/4 debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: michael_b
#42 ·
The "still a market for it" thing is what I'm thinking. Likely also many of those military and LEO contracts (and probably CA) would take more effort to change to the Gen 4 than to keep churning out the Gen 3.

Me, I prefer Gen 4, they fit my hands best and I get less "Glock knuckle" from the Gen 4's.

It is amazing how emotional people seem to get about the Gen 3/4 debate.
I'll not lie. I still get pretty mad thinking about how I got issued a basically untested gun in the past (gen4 17) that had to go through a spring recall and was less durable than my previous gen3 17. Frankly I could accept the gen4 guns if not for that idiotic texture they are still using. Gen3 guns never were drop prone because of the texture on the gun. Who else other than Glock uses such an easily damaged texture? Glock is cruising on its reputation at this point and it's willingness to sell for zero profit or a loss to get contracts. I honestly feel that if they don't take the guns in a new direction they'll one day become a minor player in the handgun market as more and more folks wake up to the fact that perfection was more perfect in previous generations.
 
#46 ·
I don't disagree, really. I just think w/ that kind of populace, why did the people let the state go down the toilet. Something is very wrong if the population actually feels that way. I would say the Kalifornia has too many Liberals, and they can go fall into the Pacific, et all. Us Texians won't stand for it, ever. Just look to our history if you don't believe me. We are ready to do what we need to stop the human rot called Liberalism.
And that bullchit that you have heard about Texas being up for grabs in the election? Absolute demicrap spin, period. Trump will carry Texas, np. Except for Austin. That city is eat up w/ the Liberal psychosis. Being a liberal IS a disease, something is very, very wrong w/ their brains to the point of being mentally ill.
 
#62 ·
Like you said, liberalism is a disease...a virus. For whatever reason, high population cities seem to turn liberal. It's not just California. Look at NYC and Chicago or pretty much any big city.

And it's not just Austin that's turning blue in Texas. Dallas and Houston are also changing the state. Again, high population centers seem to turn blue.

But to the purpose of this thread. Why multi generations? Like everyone said: there is still demand for Gen3 so why stop? At this point the profit margins are bigger than ever for Gen3.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top