My opinion is that Glock shouldn't have given this model its own number. They should've just called it a G19 Gen 5 GM (for German Military or whoever this is being made for). Point being, giving the gun its own number seems like a waste. I don't have many other thoughts about this.
I hope theybring it here. They filed for a US patent. Glock 46. I love the beaver tail, front looks good. And a rotating barrel. Looks good. C,mon glock. If gen 5 sales are good it's a no brainer.[/QUOTE
Reply:
Hardly new, though in the intervening one hundred and twenty one years there are no doubt improvements in the design concept.
It's incredible how timely Bond's silencer is. They demonstrated it at 2018 SHOT. Of course it's a pure coincidence, since they of course wanted it for their own rotating barrel pistol. But still, way to go.
Technology had to change to get 40 mpg and send a man to the moon. It's pretty much topped out when it comes to sending a projectile from a barrel, at least the way Glock and some others do it. If you couldn't get 100,000 rds out of a Glock, I'd say they may need to keep up with technology, but they are there. Don't fix what isn't broke. Same could pretty much be said of 1911's...same old gun being built, everywhere. Only thing different, now, is some come with a bunch of fancy doodads.
So I remember some magazine reporting in September of 2017 with some photos a Glock they claimed was being tested by a German police department that is essentially a striker fired version of a PX4 Storm.
I’m not a troll. I’m legit curious. And why hasn’t there been anything else on this unless it’s fake. It’s been a year and nothing else can be found on the web except September 2017.
So I remember some magazine reporting in September of 2017 with some photos a Glock they claimed was being tested by a German police department that is essentially a striker fired version of a PX4 Storm.
I’m not a troll. I’m legit curious. And why hasn’t there been anything else on this unless it’s fake. It’s been a year and nothing else can be found on the web except September 2017.
I hadn't read about that. Quite a departure from Browning's barrel design but Beretta uses it successfully in the PX4 Storm and I sure others do as well. Interesting, thank you for sharing the article.
I’ve heard similar stories. IIRC the information was floating around about the same time as the release of the Gen-5. I thought it strange that Glock would release a new model when the most recent release wasn’t even dusty yet.
I read the same stories about the 46. Now days it's hard to tell what's real and what's fake. I will say that a Glock Armor that I know and respect states he has also has heard it's the real deal. Who knows for sure.
I read the same stories about the 46. Now days it's hard to tell what's real and what's fake. I will say that a Glock Armor that I know and respect states he has also has heard it's the real deal. Who knows for sure.
I’m really curious. I have a PX4 Storm and love it. But Glock is my favorite. Anxious to hear more about it. Thought there would be more replies on this thread.
So I remember some magazine reporting in September of 2017 with some photos a Glock they claimed was being tested by a German police department that is essentially a striker fired version of a PX4 Storm.
I’m not a troll. I’m legit curious. And why hasn’t there been anything else on this unless it’s fake. It’s been a year and nothing else can be found on the web except September 2017.
IIRC the design change was to meet requirements for a contract with German police that specified the pistol could be disassembled without pulling the trigger. I’m not sure if the rotating barrel was part of this engineering feat, or if it was an additional experiment Glock was playing with. Some claim that rotating barrels have a more desirable recoil impulse. If the 46 is offered in the US, I’d buy one. Like tomorrow.
Everybody on planet earth has a peoblem with recoil, some are just more willing to admit it than others. You can take a newbie or a USPSA grandmaster and let them run timmed drills with a 22LR pistol such as a Ruger MKII, then let them run drills with a full power centerfire. Splits and accuracy will be better with a rimfire. Every time. It’s science.
I know some folks have a lot of pride wrapped up in the ability to shoot magnum revolvers. I’ve shot my dad’s, up to a 500 S&W. I have a lot more pride in the times I’ve managed to shoot my sissy 9mm fast and/or accurately. JMO YMMV, etc
The Beretta PX4 also uses a rotating barrel. It is not a new idea. John Moses Browning patented a rotating barrel design. The fact it never became common is probably a good indicator that the alleged benefits don't add up.
FWIW, I consider the Grand Power K100 a much better gun than the PX4, I believe it is the Slovakian military service pistol and has been through an 80,000 round test.
How much longer does it take you to refine to a 98% grip? 2 tenths? How many splits are you going to shoot before the reload? How many transitions are you going to have a janky presentation on?
Only the full size PX4 Storm has the rotating barrel-- the Subcompact does not.
I think it is a cool visual marketing gimmick to see the barrel rotate. Other manufactured guns have one too-- the Grand Power, and the out of production Mauser (owned by Sig) handguns are 2 i know of (and owned). Personally, I am not impressed, and they make the design, tooling, and production more complicated (expensive) and user experience more complicated (putting it back together needs some focus to index it right).
Glocks are ugly, cheap to make, and cheap to buy, for a reason. Its as simple and as complex as it needs to be-- no more, no less. No one wants an expensive complicated hammer.
i think glock needs to update its technology and try something besides colors and different sizes on the exact same gun.
the 43 was just stupid on glocks part. should have carried more rounds and come out five years earlier. glock seems as stupid as the folks at harley ... that assume you have no other options ..
the sig P365 is a really awesome design. it shows someone was thinking. they have some minor issues to work out ( not as many as the g42 and g43) but they need to fix some minor issues.
Glocks are ugly, cheap to make, and cheap to buy, for a reason. Its as simple and as complex as it needs to be-- no more, no less. No one wants an expensive complicated hammer.
and look at the new porsche , BMW , and AUDI .... compared from the reliable cars of the 70’s and 80’s cars have gone insane with complicated stuff..
so maybe if you stick to an actual hammer it’s simple, but remember those are almost extinct ... it’s nail guns now.
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!