Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gun-Parts & Access.' started by DirectDrive, Aug 10, 2018.
No. No. Absolutely not. Please stop with this nonsense.
They work great, and I have them on all my carry Glocks. It’s totally transparent to the user, and allows you to do the equivalent of the thumb on the hammer while you reholster like we used to be taught.
The purists will have a fit now.
If it fills a need for someone, there it is. I'm not a fan.
Very Very clever. I like it.
Makes much more sense than a grip safety or a decock lever, or the little trigger wedge device.
Cheaper, and less painful, than the trip to the OR to fix a pelvic (or worse) NDA injury. Potential lifelong injury, or even amputation of a limb if you are diabetic.
How about a discount for GT, or group purchase? Tau?
Old news. Do a search for the "Gadget"
Invented by this guy...
Looks like the weapon is taking a dump.
I have back plates that help me rack.
See, different strokes. I think earred and ringed backplates are a solution to a nonexistent problem - but just because I think that, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have them.
Not thanks, but I could see why someone might like one.
One drawback I see is it could potentially cause an issue in an ECQ scenario just like a external hammer being obstructed or you were having to force the gun into battery. Not all that likely, but still a possibility and something to consider.
not tonight, I've got a headache.
to each his own.
As was said, the "Glock Gadget" aka Tau Striker Control Device, has been available for a good while now. I have one on my G19 and it works very well. For those who don't know, this device was conceived and brought to market by two very knowledgeable shooters and was in development for quite a while before its release. It does not affect the function of the pistol in any material way, and if the hinged plate breaks off, the pistol is still 100% functional.
The sole and entire purpose of the Glock SCD is to allow the slide end plate to be ridden with the thumb when holstering. Any foreign object entering the holster that attempts to depress the trigger is therefore immediately appreciated.
I like it and would like one, but 79$ is a bit steep...on the other hand...compared to an U/D. it is dirt cheap
That's not completely accurate. One of the reasons I choose striker-fired guns is because I can manage to get off at least one shot under pretty much any circumstances. The same cannot be said about a hammer-fired pistol or a striker-fired one equipped with this device. For me that has some significance.
The way this device provides greater safety is the same reason it could prove to be a liability. Much like a manual safety, which I really don't care for either.
I bought one for my gen5 when they released the gen5 version.
As others have posted its transparent, does not effect the trigger pull. Pretty simple looks to have only 3 parts back plate , rocker and the pin holding it all together. Purists probably wont like but what's new they dont like anything.
Question what circumstance would this device prevent you from shooting?
The potential would be confined to ECQ(extreme close-quarter) scenarios. Anytime you have a self-defense encounter occuring at contact distances involving grappling(standing or grounded), disarm attempts or just two bodies violently clashing together, it's not an unrealistic possibility that the hammer or striker-control device on a pistol could become obstructed either by assailant grabbing for the weapon or just inadvertent contact. Or you could have to manually force the gun into battery when there is simply no room to retract the gun. Being grounded and having someone on top of you in closed/tight contact would be an example.
It's nice to think you will just simply be able to maintain distance or create space or hold a nice #2 retention shooting position, but that isn't always feasible from my observations of what occurs in force-on-force training as well as the real world examples I've studied and tend to view them as momentary or transitory positions. The Gracie's have recognized the difficulties of maintaining a traditional retention shooting position that they have incorporated the "G-wrap" into their Gracie survival tactics program/police defensive tactics.
I'm not saying it's likely to occur, but I view it similar to the risks of retention shooting with a ported barrel and feel it's something best avoided. Just my opinion YMMV.
The only circumstance in which this device would prevent the pistol from firing would be if the rear of the slide was pressed extremely forcibly against some immovable object. Having the rear of the slide pressed against your chest would not do it. Of course, in any such instance the slide would not cycle so one shot would be all you could possibly get off.
I imagine that someone might go through the mental gymnastics necessary to invent such a scenario, but the likelihood of such occurring is not worth the time required to invent one.
This device does not in any way interfere with forcing the slide back into battery. The hinged plate on the device does not move backward until the trigger is pulled to fully tension the striker.
Aftermarket Parts: Turning ‘Glock Perfection’ into Glock maybe. Proper training trumps mechanical marvels every time