Glock Talk banner
13K views 191 replies 103 participants last post by  Turk3196 
#1 ·
For me, it has to be auto cartridges chambered in revolvers. I mean, really? Is the evolution of the revolver and their cartridges over the past 100 years not perfected enough for you?

I've never held a revolver in, say, .38 Special, and thought "yes, I wish I had this in......9mm Auto!" That's just really stupid. What can't I do with a hot-loaded .38 that I can do with a 9mm? Or even a .357 Magnum?

That being said.....I certainly wouldn't say "no" to a Charter Arms Pit Bull in .45 ACP if it landed on my doorstep. To me, that's a modern interpretation of the old .45 Colt of yesteryear. And I like that.

But all the rest of it is just stupid. 10mm Auto in a revolver? I love Rugers, but that's just a really stupid idea. Be a man....get a .41 Magnum.

So what about you? What is your pet peeve when it comes to firearms?
 
#2 ·
1. Any gun that is difficult to field strip.

2. Any gun that comes with only 1 magazine. 4!!!! I want to see 4!!!! Even it if means paying more.

3. Any gun company that announces a product, and then doesn't deliver it. Completely unacceptable.

4. Any gun company participating in gun control efforts. We all know how I feel about the father of the 10rd magazine limit, Bill Ruger.
 
#3 ·
A scope mounted incorrectly to the point it has canted cross hairs.

See through mounts.

Sometimes scopes work on a lever action for me and sometimes they dont. If I have to raise my face off the stock to see through the scope, thats a definite pet peeve.

I dont mind used guns, with signs of honest day to day wear. But I dont like abused guns and dont like "bubba'd" guns unless bubba knew what he was doing.
 
#8 ·
I want to add: single-stack versions of full sized Semi-Autos.

I've never held a full size gun and thought "yes, that's right....I want LESS rounds in this pistol!"

I can't understand why anyone would sacrifice firepower for convenience of carry. Is carrying a single-stack Glock 43 REALLY worth giving up 4 additional rounds (or more with a mag extension) that you could get with a Glock 26?

I used to carry a Glock 22 when I had my CWP. I never held that in my hand and thought "yep, I want less rounds in this carry gun". With a spare mag in my pocket, I had 31 rounds of .40 firepower.

It's heavier? Oh well....I'll live.
 
#21 ·
My pet peeve is a variation of this: show and tell when not at the range or perhaps gun store.

We're at grandma's house and cousin just got his CCW permit or has just bought a new pistol. He unholsters his pistol to show it off. Problem is there's practically no safe direction to point it and there are kids in the vicinity. The only thing anybody got out of that was danger and higher blood pressure.

I've added "no show and tell" to our house's gun safety rules. Everybody else in our house thinks it's an official rule.
 
#14 ·
Speaking only for myself, the only use I see for it is late-night runs to the store, when you don't want to get dressed in anything other than sweats or PJ bottoms and a sweatshirt. For me, the 642 that I had was comforting in my pocket, and it was the right weight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bama_glock
#18 ·
For me, it has to be auto cartridges chambered in revolvers. I mean, really? Is the evolution of the revolver and their cartridges over the past 100 years not perfected enough for you?

I've never held a revolver in, say, .38 Special, and thought "yes, I wish I had this in......9mm Auto!" That's just really stupid. What can't I do with a hot-loaded .38 that I can do with a 9mm? Or even a .357 Magnum?
I’d have to strongly disagree with you on the point that revolver cartridges have been perfected. In fact, quite the opposite. Most revolver rounds make inefficient use of space, due to being made longer for the sole purpose of not being able to be chambered in their less powered counter parts, ie so a .357 doesn’t fit in a gun only able to handle .38 special.

Consider that the 9x23 is ballistically equivalent to the .357 Magnum (or 9x33R), yet is 30% shorter.

The other issue with the longer case is that it could lead to ejection issues. Most revolvers don’t have an ejector rod long enough to fully eject a .357 or even a .38 special case. Shorter cases are easier to load and unload. In fact, before the move to 9mm, most competitive revolver shooters used to use .38 long Colt cases for their competition loads for this very reason.

Consider this, J Frames today are made on a .357 size frame, even the 38s. A dedicated 9mm framed J frame could be a centimeter shorter overall.

That being said, using a rimless round in a revolver isn’t a perfect solution. However, if there was still a market, they could surely make a better revolver round.
 
#116 ·
Hmm,
I’d have to strongly disagree with you on the point that revolver cartridges have been perfected. In fact, quite the opposite. Most revolver rounds make inefficient use of space, due to being made longer for the sole purpose of not being able to be chambered in their less powered counter parts, ie so a .357 doesn’t fit in a gun only able to handle .38 special.

Consider that the 9x23 is ballistically equivalent to the .357 Magnum (or 9x33R), yet is 30% shorter.

The other issue with the longer case is that it could lead to ejection issues. Most revolvers don’t have an ejector rod long enough to fully eject a .357 or even a .38 special case. Shorter cases are easier to load and unload. In fact, before the move to 9mm, most competitive revolver shooters used to use .38 long Colt cases for their competition loads for this very reason.

Consider this, J Frames today are made on a .357 size frame, even the 38s. A dedicated 9mm framed J frame could be a centimeter shorter overall.

That being said, using a rimless round in a revolver isn’t a perfect solution. However, if there was still a market, they could surely make a better revolver round.
Hmm, new round idea; "9mm rimmed"?
 
#19 ·
I want to add: single-stack versions of full sized Semi-Autos.

I've never held a full size gun and thought "yes, that's right....I want LESS rounds in this pistol!"

I can't understand why anyone would sacrifice firepower for convenience of carry. Is carrying a single-stack Glock 43 REALLY worth giving up 4 additional rounds (or more with a mag extension) that you could get with a Glock 26?

I used to carry a Glock 22 when I had my CWP. I never held that in my hand and thought "yep, I want less rounds in this carry gun". With a spare mag in my pocket, I had 31 rounds of .40 firepower.

It's heavier? Oh well....I'll live.
Yeah, I don't get that one, either. I've been carrying a G23 for years, plus spare mag or two on the other side.

It's not as if the G26 is 3 in. thick and the G43 is 1/2 in. thick. The latter is less than 3/16 in. thinner. I'm not giving up four rounds for that!
 
#46 ·
I doubt people think, gee I want less rounds. I think it’s more like, we’ll id rather have a gun than no gun. Personally, my 43 only gets about 10% Carry time, but when it does, a bigger gun is simply a no go.

In my experience, if I have my 43, a 26 simply wouldn’t do. However, any time I could use a 26, I find I could with little more effort do a 19. A 19 as often as possible, and a 43 when needed, makes a quite versatile combination.
BradD above gets it. I mean, is that extra little bit of size REALLY worth skipping out on extra rounds?

Or is weight a factor as well? 4 extra rounds add up that much?

One final note, I don’t get certain things being a “peeve”, especially things that are popular. Not everything works for everyone. Little single stack pistols are selling like hot cakes. Many people who carry them are just not going to carry a full size pistol, and they are certainly better than nothing.

Some may find the opposite to be a peeve. For example, the non LEO citizen that carries a full size pistol with mounted flash light, two reloads, a backup pistol, and a reload for it, two knives, hand held flashlight, and pepper spray. Seems a bit extreme, but who am I to judge? I’ll save my distain for those that will vilify us for simply owning guns, and want to restrict that, or take it away completely.
I should note for everyone that the first post was not directed at anyone, nor was it personal against anyone's viewpoints of preferences with revolvers or guns in general. I just don't get it, and that's just my way of expressing it; that's all.

Auto cartridge revolvers with clips reload much faster than revolver cartridges with speedloaders - that's why they are dominant in competition.
I get competition. But do you want to spend more for a custom-caliber revolver for EDC when there are "standard" revolvers available out there for less, and with far more availability?

Speaking only for myself.....I don't.

If I want a gun chambered in a semi-auto cartridge....then I'll get a semi-auto gun. A gun that was actually designed for the cartridge.
 
#20 ·
I want to add: single-stack versions of full sized Semi-Autos.

I've never held a full size gun and thought "yes, that's right....I want LESS rounds in this pistol!"

I can't understand why anyone would sacrifice firepower for convenience of carry. Is carrying a single-stack Glock 43 REALLY worth giving up 4 additional rounds (or more with a mag extension) that you could get with a Glock 26?

I used to carry a Glock 22 when I had my CWP. I never held that in my hand and thought "yep, I want less rounds in this carry gun". With a spare mag in my pocket, I had 31 rounds of .40 firepower.

It's heavier? Oh well....I'll live.
I doubt people think, gee I want less rounds. I think it’s more like, we’ll id rather have a gun than no gun. Personally, my 43 only gets about 10% Carry time, but when it does, a bigger gun is simply a no go.

In my experience, if I have my 43, a 26 simply wouldn’t do. However, any time I could use a 26, I find I could with little more effort do a 19. A 19 as often as possible, and a 43 when needed, makes a quite versatile combination.
 
#22 ·
One final note, I don’t get certain things being a “peeve”, especially things that are popular. Not everything works for everyone. Little single stack pistols are selling like hot cakes. Many people who carry them are just not going to carry a full size pistol, and they are certainly better than nothing.

Some may find the opposite to be a peeve. For example, the non LEO citizen that carries a full size pistol with mounted flash light, two reloads, a backup pistol, and a reload for it, two knives, hand held flashlight, and pepper spray. Seems a bit extreme, but who am I to judge? I’ll save my distain for those that will vilify us for simply owning guns, and want to restrict that, or take it away completely.
 
#66 ·
One final note, I don’t get certain things being a “peeve”, especially things that are popular. Not everything works for everyone. Little single stack pistols are selling like hot cakes. Many people who carry them are just not going to carry a full size pistol, and they are certainly better than nothing.

Some may find the opposite to be a peeve. For example, the non LEO citizen that carries a full size pistol with mounted flash light, two reloads, a backup pistol, and a reload for it, two knives, hand held flashlight, and pepper spray. Seems a bit extreme, but who am I to judge? I’ll save my distain for those that will vilify us for simply owning guns, and want to restrict that, or take it away completely.
How easily you are shaken by the opinion of an anonymous forum member. Are you trying to convince him or yourself?
 
#24 ·
For me, it has to be auto cartridges chambered in revolvers. I mean, really? Is the evolution of the revolver and their cartridges over the past 100 years not perfected enough for you?
Auto cartridge revolvers with clips reload much faster than revolver cartridges with speedloaders - that's why they are dominant in competition.
 
#25 ·
MY peeve? During the Assault Weapon ban of the 90's we learned that if we abandon trying to make all of our AR's look just like what the military uses, we could build a wide variety of really cool guns - now that's it's over, the market has shifted back to people trying to look like operators with M4's and all barrels are 16" and usually profiled to attach the M203 you aren't allowed to own.
 
#26 ·
My pet peeve is the whole “operator/don’t tread on me/3p2a” business that’s all over social media.

I think it’s a bad look for gun owners in general and I’ve never been a fan of grown men in their 30s and 40s announcing to the world that they are tough in some capacity.

Guns serve a lot of purposes, none of which should be making someone look cool or tough or trying to impress women.
 
#30 ·
Either an SKS or a Ruger 10/.22 that is all tacticooled out. Those stupid "AK mag." conversions for the SKS that NEVER work and why in Hades would anyone invest near $1K into a Ruger 10/.22??!?

Just stupid! And you're not saving money doing that instead of just getting what you really want, an AK or a Remmy 700 SPS. Lol!
 
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