I guess I'll just copy parts of my other post here.
"I don't think MAC is being a 100% honest here. He bashes Glock's supposed lack of innovation while wearing a CZ hat and while carrying a CZ 75 (so much "innovation" you know). And he has been teasing the Glock bashing session on his instagram for about a week now."
The CZ75 isn't SUPPOSED to be innovative, you goon. It's a design that is supposed to stay the same. Just like the 1911. Same basic design, with small improvements. CZ releases PLENTY of completely newer and differently designed firearms. But the 75, like the 1911, is supposed to stay fundamentally unchanged. The 75 is a very specific design. If you innovate away from it, it would no longer be a 75. It would be a shadow, or phantom, or P09, or P10c...
The guy is just an all-around a-hole, period. I left a comment on his video a while back about the whole Springfield drama, saying that "I won't boycott Springfield, not because I agree with their stance, but because I'm an adult." He got all pissy about that and left me some scathing reply about me not having any morals.
Grow up, MAC.
I like his Gauntlet tests, but yeah, the guy is a d-bag.
I agree. He could have reviewed it like the other stuff he does. And honestly, i could care less that it's a glock in the video, I'm more upset that he couldnt be professional about the actual review. One more thing, when he fired both glocks, was it just me, or did the gen three have one low hit (second or third shot) which would have thrown the whole spread out?
He failed to mention the changes that are the only real Gen5 design improvements:
1. Firing Pin Safety (wide trigger bar bearing surface)
2. Firing Pin (sturdy round impact tip)
3. Trigger Spring (compressed)
He cut the Gen5 a great amount of slack because there is:
1. No mention of how the elimination of the locking block pin weakens the foundation of locking block to frame.
2. No mention of how the G17 barrel and RSA are incompatible with ALL earlier generations of G17 barrels and RSAs, just to allow the FBI to stock only the G19 locking block for both pistols.
It amazes me how little many of the youtube big names actually know about the pistols they review...including Hitchcock 45.
2. No mention of how the G17 barrel and RSA are incompatible with ALL earlier generations of G17 barrels and RSAs, just to allow the FBI to stock only the G19 locking block for both pistols.
I don't remember any complaining about the new Gen 4 parts being incompatible with older designs, but it seems to be a huge negative to people with the Gen 5...
As for MAC, he's far and away the best gun reviewing YouTube channel, I look forward to watching this video.
Mac is another youtuber I follow, and even though he says he isn't bashing Glock, he is bashing Glock. From the orange magazine follower to shooting a larger group than an earlier gen, his snarky tone cannot be taken taken in any other way than "bashing."
This is just a drop in the bucket so it doesn't matter to me one way or another, so this video won't keep me from continuing to watch his channel. I like Glocks, but I will probably never have another full size or compact due to them causing me Glock knuckle. Since this us just a personal thing, I still recommend Glocks to others.
Mac is another youtuber I follow, and even though he says he isn't bashing Glock, he is bashing Glock. From the orange magazine follower to shooting a larger group than an earlier gen, his snarky tone cannot be taken taken in any other way than "bashing."
But but Glock hasn't done anything innovative since 40 years ago? lol, everybody else is playing catch up. Sure some may have some better qualities or whatever, but did any other company "innovate"? Even Sigs modular trigger system was not theirs. I think what we have here is group think in action. All the youtubers are bashing Glock and touting the CZ P10C just like they did the PPQ. I thought about getting a PPQ just because how cheap they were, but in the end to me it doesn't do anything better than a Glock 19. 15-20$ magazines are pretty nice too.
IMO, I've been shooting Glocks since the Gen2 first came out (my first Glock). I bought tons of different Glocks in different calibers since then in all generations. For me, I shoot them all well and enjoy shooting each one. My favorite is any one with a RTF2 grip, whether its a Gilly or VT. Other than that I don't see a huge difference among the generations. But people have different likes and dislikes and opinions. Also, I'd like to say when you buy a Glock, you buy into a system like no other handgun, whether it OEM or aftermarket.
I see where he is coming from. But i don't agree with most of it. The only thing i'm in total agreement with is that stupid cutout on the front strap. One of the dumbest idea's glock has ever had.
The CZ75 isn't SUPPOSED to be innovative, you goon. It's a design that is supposed to stay the same. Just like the 1911. Same basic design, with small improvements. CZ releases PLENTY of completely newer and differently designed firearms. But the 75, like the 1911, is supposed to stay fundamentally unchanged. The 75 is a very specific design. If you innovate away from it, it would no longer be a 75. It would be a shadow, or phantom, or P09, or P10c...
You missed my point pal. I wasn't talking about the gun itself. He raves (he is not the only one) about "innovation", while at the end of the day he carries a good old CZ 75. I was merely pointing out that dichotomy.
The same could be said about the Glock design, in order to have it work as it should.
You missed my point pal. I wasn't talking about the gun itself. He raves (he is not the only one) about "innovation", while at the end of the day he carries a good old CZ 75. I was merely pointing out that dichotomy.
What Tim (and lots others) are talking about, isn't innovation on the glock platform, its the fact that they haven't come out with a new pistol since day one. The glock 50, for example, could be an ENTIRELY new design. But they don't. The 17, is still the 17. They come out with new "generations" of the 17, instead of designing a NEW full sized 9mm.
Some look at this as a lack of innovation by glock. The Gen5 is just a new level of refinement on the Gen4, which is the same to the Gen3, and so on. It's still the same gun.
Just because you want a company to innovate with something new, doesn't mean you don't like the classics. They still work just the same as they did before. People still carry 1911s and 75s today for this very reason. In some ways, they are superior... pal.
I enjoy MAC reviews and videos. The gauntlet challenges are fun. I also take all YouTube advice with a very large grain of salt. It's entertainment. I'll shoot a Gen 5 soon, and find out for myself if I need it or not. Everyone gets so hot and bothered over the mere mention of "Glock" that it's hard to take their reviews overly seriously, both the fanboys and the haters.
The Gen 5 is in all likelihood an improvement over similar Gen 3 and 4 models if you want a 9mm. If you want something other than a 9mm it's a abject failure.
But since Glock's biggest customers are Police Agencies, and they are flocking to the 9mm like lemmings to the sea, releasing the Gen 5 in 9mm only sure seems like a sound marketing strategy.
The beauty of the Glock is that it is such a simple design that has few parts and a lot of reliability. While not "perfect" there is little to be done in the way of improvement except small teaks and minor ergonomic changes. I am glad to see the end of the finger grooves - which never made sense. The 42 and 42 style upgrades are improvements. I don't see the need for a ambi slide stop, would rather see for serrations, but those are not deal breakers for me.
Tim's review seems to me to be in the spirit of Colonel Charles Askins, who often wrote articles that damned a particular firearm just to get the attention. I'm not saying that Tim was just generating publicity for his channel, online shop or Patreon channel - but he did overstate his case some. At any rate he is entitled to his opinions.
I for one like the Gen 5 improvements and am thankful they are already accommodated in my G43 which is my EDC, and it is the best EDC I have had in nearly 50 years of carry.
Tims review of the Gen5 isn't the first gun he's had negative comments on. IIRC Ruger fanatics and HK groupies also had meltdowns on his reviews. Guess it's the Glockhead's turn to be easily offended. Honestly, if you are infatuated with a particular gun who cares what another's opinion of it is? I think it's funny myself. Unless your mother is a Gen5 Glock I wouldn't care what he said really.
The CZ75 isn't SUPPOSED to be innovative, you goon. It's a design that is supposed to stay the same. Just like the 1911. Same basic design, with small improvements. CZ releases PLENTY of completely newer and differently designed firearms. But the 75, like the 1911, is supposed to stay fundamentally unchanged. The 75 is a very specific design. If you innovate away from it, it would no longer be a 75. It would be a shadow, or phantom, or P09, or P10c...
That was very poor form IMO. He may be right about most if not all of what he said, I just didn't appreciate his snarky attitude.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Glock Talk
21M posts
185.2K members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to Glock firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, troubleshooting, accessories, classifieds, and more!