[FrankenGunBuilder]

While Glock has done fantastic, there are so many third party parts for the Gen 3 from numerous providers, that worrying about that drying up is similar to worrying about finding parts for your AR if Colt were to go bankrupt (oh, wait... ). The parts will be there.

As for appreciation, Glock hasn't done that for me. They do hold value (not "new" price, but the "used" floor price is consistent). In fact, after inflation over decades, it is stunning that buying a Glock today costs almost exactly the same as it did twenty-five years ago! They have not appreciated in value, they have flatlined. That is great in terms of knowing what your Glock will be worth in two, five, fifteen years, etc., but is decidedly bad for Glock. They NEED people to buy new, and selling new guns at decades old prices means they either slashed costs or are losing margins! And competing against old guns is a painful reality of the gun business (one that cell phones, computers, washing machines, and automobiles do not share... their products are doomed to replacement in three to ten years, creating a whole new marketplace of future sales!).

Given what I’ve seen and take that for whatever it is worth, Glock finds new and innovative ways to sell the same gun to buyers with small changes. It’s cool as you can mix old with new and do fun things with builds. They also find ways to do things cheaper and cheaper to remain relevant and keep their margins.

We all know plastic parts are cheap and have probably gotten cheaper to manufacture over the years. Glock uses more plastic now than they ever have. The new 17L has a plastic nose piece which is much cheaper and faster to manufacture than a metal one. They have plastic optics plate covers which is cheaper and faster to manufacture than metal parts. They still use plastic sights which we know are cheaper to manufacture than metal ones.

Instead of raising the price of their guns, Glock’s strategy has been to control manufacturing costs and keep their prices stable. There is only so much of that you can do before inflation catches up and kills your profit. I’d bet their margins were much better 20 years ago than today but their niche is great reliability with an average price. They can and should do better and maybe with a changing of the guard we may see that in the future with better deigns, more options, and higher grade parts out of the box. I sure hope so as the platform is a good one and very versatile as seen in the aftermarket.

 

[ich.ni.san]

I got to shoot an RXM yesterday. It was comfortable in the hand and I liked the sights. Shooting it slow and deliberate, the trigger pull was smooth though travel seemed a little longer than a Glock. I was able to shoot it accurately without much effort. Doing some 10 yd doubles, I consistently shot the second shot a little low and I'm wondering if it was me or the change in grip angle from my Glock.

Anyway, I liked it. I don't feel any urge to get one, but I'd probably tell someone to be sure to check them out if they were looking for a good, reasonably priced handgun.

 

[boilergonzo]

Given what I’ve seen and take that for whatever it is worth, Glock finds new and innovative ways to sell the same gun to buyers with small changes. It’s cool as you can mix old with new and do fun things with builds. They also find ways to do things cheaper and cheaper to remain relevant and keep their margins.

We all know plastic parts are cheap and have probably gotten cheaper to manufacture over the years. Glock uses more plastic now than they ever have. The new 17L has a plastic nose piece which is much cheaper and faster to manufacture than a metal one. They have plastic optics plate covers which is cheaper and faster to manufacture than metal parts. They still use plastic sights which we know are cheaper to manufacture than metal ones.

Instead of raising the price of their guns, Glock’s strategy has been to control manufacturing costs and keep their prices stable. There is only so much of that you can do before inflation catches up and kills your profit. I’d bet their margins were much better 20 years ago than today but their niche is great reliability with an average price. They can and should do better and maybe with a changing of the guard we may see that in the future with better deigns, more options, and higher grade parts out of the box. I sure hope so as the platform is a good one and very versatile as seen in the aftermarket.

I totally agree.

For Glock, many questions remain. How much more can they pinch pennies and cut costs to avoid price increases, when inflation marches onward year after year?

More importantly, how can they compete if the people making competitive parts (or entire guns!) don't require the same enormous profits needed for Glock's oweners to fund more equestrian related toys?

For example, if a guy in South Carolina decides he can go from making $45k per year in the army or as a struggling CPA to owning and growing a small company and making a million dollar salary a year that he is happy with, what happens if Glock needs $500M a year in profits to be happy? Can they still compete with regards to costs and price?

It is all relative, and a LOT of garage shops have sprung up (like the Palmetto State Armory example noted above was just eleven years ago... they sold a total of TWO guns in 2014, and today are making 10,000 barrels per WEEK and sold 137,000 handguns in 2022!).

If these little shops can have lower manufacturing costs, lower profit-raking off the top, and lower sales and marketing costs, they are set up to provide fierce low end competition in terms of price (with the quality being similar).

Glock has a great name, but people also trust Ruger, PSA, and some support the myriad of folks selling Glock parts through places like Cheaper Than Dirt (there are LOTS of them, including Strike, Ghost, Lone Wolf, ETS, Leapers, Timney, TangoDown, Rival, Taran Tactical, Deltac, Grey Ghost, Whaton, Barsto, KKM, Zev, Cross Armory, Shield Arms, Tyrant, KI, Wing, Ballistic Advantage, Armaspec, Elite, Vickers, Swenson, Advantage Arms, CruxOrd, Ed Brown, Kriss, Storm Lake, LanTac, C&H, Pachmayr, Pearce, Zaffiri, etc.).

Regardless of how Glock fares financially in the coming decade, the parts for the Gen3 Glock-inspired builds are already rock-solid for the foreseeable future!

Consumers don't need the Glock name on it for the design to endure, much like the AR-15 and 1911! I like Glock and hope they endure! They have every built-in advantage to do so! But they have to want to do it...

 

[PilatusTurbo]

I totally agree.

For Glock, many questions remain. How much more can they pinch pennies and cut costs to avoid price increases, when inflation marches onward year after year?

More importantly, how can they compete if the people making competitive parts (or entire guns!) don't require the same enormous profits needed for Glock's oweners to fund more equestrian related toys?

For example, if a guy in South Carolina decides he can go from making $45k per year in the army or as a struggling CPA to owning and growing a small company and making a million dollar salary a year that he is happy with, what happens if Glock needs $500M a year in profits to be happy? Can they still compete with regards to costs and price?

It is all relative, and a LOT of garage shops have sprung up (like the Palmetto State Armory example noted above was just eleven years ago... they sold a total of TWO guns in 2014, and today are making 10,000 barrels per WEEK and sold 137,000 handguns in 2022!).

If these little shops can have lower manufacturing costs, lower profit-raking off the top, and lower sales and marketing costs, they are set up to provide fierce low end competition in terms of price (with the quality being similar).

Glock has a great name, but people also trust Ruger, PSA, and some support the myriad of folks selling Glock parts through places like Cheaper Than Dirt (there are LOTS of them, including Strike, Ghost, Lone Wolf, ETS, Leapers, Timney, TangoDown, Rival, Taran Tactical, Deltac, Grey Ghost, Whaton, Barsto, KKM, Zev, Cross Armory, Shield Arms, Tyrant, KI, Wing, Ballistic Advantage, Armaspec, Elite, Vickers, Swenson, Advantage Arms, CruxOrd, Ed Brown, Kriss, Storm Lake, LanTac, C&H, Pachmayr, Pearce, Zaffiri, etc.).

Regardless of how Glock fares financially in the coming decade, the parts for the Gen3 Glock-inspired builds are already rock-solid for the foreseeable future!

Consumers don't need the Glock name on it for the design to endure, much like the AR-15 and 1911! I like Glock and hope they endure! They have every built-in advantage to do so! But they have to want to do it...

Nail hit on head, my friend.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

Also... RXM FDE w/RXS? Anyway, I got a decent enough deal on a Bushnell RXS-250 ($76 shipped) so I figured I'd give it a whirl. Thoughts?

Fits right onto the RXM footprint, and looks like it was made for the RXM, which is a plus. Less overhang on side of slide like my 507C, decent build quality (seemingly) and large window size. No auto on, auto shut off, and there is a little emitter gleam on the window, but nothing that distracts. Dot is clear and precise, otherwise. Came with a pic/1913 rail mount, and a couple little nice tools. Can literally barely see the tops of front and rear sight at bottom of optic window, so I guess that's good enough. Basically just use the middle of the base of the optic and that's your backup sight.

I figured many people on Reddit and other places actually say it's not horrible for the money, if you're not after Trijicon duty level stuff. Thoughts? I'll guinea pig this one for us, too.

 

[Rich_J]

Recoil Assembly question? This is specific to the RXM, but more generally to Glock 19 Gen 3 clones I guess.

I bought a 15# RSA from NDZ to try out. Last range session, I put this in place of the Ruger factory RSA, which I understand is 18#. I shot my last mag of 10 rounds of Federal AE 115. No issues.

What I did notice was the slide seemed faster and the gun returned on target much quicker. There also seemed to be less, I dunno how to describe it, bounce? in the action?

Given this particular gun is my 2025 experiment, I plan to try some other ammo next session, with this lighter spring installed. This would include a mag or two of Speer Gold Dot 124+p, Federal HST, and Federal AE 124 (all of this is my normal carry or range ammo).

Is there anything wrong with shooting 124 with the reduced power spring, with a bit of +p?

The only recoil spring fiddling I've done (and it's not much) is to fit an 18.5# spring in my 1911 if I am shooting RA45 230+p JHP for instance. The gun pops a fair bit with that. Normally I use a 19 hammer and 17 flat wire combo for range use (Federal 230 AE FMJ). But other than that, I have no experience, and definitely none with Gen 3 Glocks.

I don't think this will be a problem, but I'd appreciate any insight.

 

[Rich_J]

...to fund more equestrian related toys?

Well played...well played.

 

[FTMFXR]

While Glock has done fantastic, there are so many third party parts for the Gen 3 from numerous providers, that worrying about that drying up is similar to worrying about finding parts for your AR if Colt were to go bankrupt (oh, wait... ). The parts will be there.

As for appreciation, Glock hasn't done that for me. They do hold value (not "new" price, but the "used" floor price is consistent). In fact, after inflation over decades, it is stunning that buying a Glock today costs almost exactly the same as it did twenty-five years ago! They have not appreciated in value, they have flatlined. That is great in terms of knowing what your Glock will be worth in two, five, fifteen years, etc., but is decidedly bad for Glock. They NEED people to buy new, and selling new guns at decades old prices means they either slashed costs or are losing margins! And competing against old guns is a painful reality of the gun business (one that cell phones, computers, washing machines, and automobiles do not share... their products are doomed to replacement in three to ten years, creating a whole new marketplace of future sales!).

Dead center bulls eye! Well put!

 

[pgg00]

Recoil Assembly question? This is specific to the RXM, but more generally to Glock 19 Gen 3 clones I guess.

I bought a 15# RSA from NDZ to try out. Last range session, I put this in place of the Ruger factory RSA, which I understand is 18#. I shot my last mag of 10 rounds of Federal AE 115. No issues.

What I did notice was the slide seemed faster and the gun returned on target much quicker. There also seemed to be less, I dunno how to describe it, bounce? in the action?

Given this particular gun is my 2025 experiment, I plan to try some other ammo next session, with this lighter spring installed. This would include a mag or two of Speer Gold Dot 124+p, Federal HST, and Federal AE 124 (all of this is my normal carry or range ammo).

Is there anything wrong with shooting 124 with the reduced power spring, with a bit of +p?

The only recoil spring fiddling I've done (and it's not much) is to fit an 18.5# spring in my 1911 if I am shooting RA45 230+p JHP for instance. The gun pops a fair bit with that. Normally I use a 19 hammer and 17 flat wire combo for range use (Federal 230 AE FMJ). But other than that, I have no experience, and definitely none with Gen 3 Glocks.

I don't think this will be a problem, but I'd appreciate any insight.

Need to watch for frame battering. Sometimes too light can cause damage to the slide as it impacts the frame during it's rearward travel

 

[Jim Watson]

What is next?
I figure when everybody has every color grip and sales drop off, they will bring out a longer grip so you can have a 19X clone. Then how about a shorter grip for a "26X?"

 

[PilatusTurbo]

What is next?
I figure when everybody has every color grip and sales drop off, they will bring out a longer grip so you can have a 19X clone. Then how about a shorter grip for a "26X?"

We're hopeful they do; but you might be right, that they'll save those ideas when sales need a bump instead of releasing now when we all want them.

 

[Jason D]

Something was bugging me about these Rugers for a while now, and it was the trigger pull being all over the place weight wise whenever you'd see a gun shill on youtube measuring the trigger pull. A box stock Glock is constantly the same from model to model, yet people were getting all sorts of numbers with these. I pulled out my old Lyman scale and got an average of 4 pounds on the dot with mine.

Then I bought a Lyman digital scale and could constantly get whatever numbers I wanted. If I placed the scale pretty much where the pad of your finger would be, I got 3 pounds 13 ounces averaged over 10 pulls. If I went low, it was two and a half, if I went high, it was 7 and a half. My old scale is just that, and may not be accurate any longer.

I wonder if any of the shills caught that, or just gave the high numbers to make the gun look bad to prospective buyers.

 

[Matt VDW]

What is next?
I figure when everybody has every color grip and sales drop off, they will bring out a longer grip so you can have a 19X clone. Then how about a shorter grip for a "26X?"

I want a G20-sized 10mm RXM. I like Glocks and I like 10mm but the chunkiness of the G20 grip has kept me from buying one.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

Something was bugging me about these Rugers for a while now, and it was the trigger pull being all over the place weight wise whenever you'd see a guns shill on youtube measuring the trigger pull. A box stock Glock is constantly the same from model to model, yet people were getting all sorts of numbers with these. I pulled out my old Lyman scale and got an average of 4 pounds on the dot with mine.

Then I bought a Lyman digital scale and could constantly get whatever numbers I wanted. If I placed the scale pretty much where the pad of your finger would be, I got 3 pounds 13 ounces averaged over 10 pulls. If I went low, it was two and a half, if I went high, it was 7 and a half. My old scale is just that, and may not be accurate any longer.

I wonder if any of the shills caught that, or just gave the high numbers to make the gun look back to prospective buyers.

Yeah, both my RXMs have triggers precisely analogous to a Gen 3 5.5 lb trigger but with a minus connector, bringing it right down to an average of 4.5 lbs +/- .25 lbs, consistently. Not bad at all. Yours is even nicer, it sounds

I want a G20-sized 10mm RXM. I like Glocks and I like 10mm but the chunkiness of the G20 grip has kept me from buying one.

My hope (probably won't happen) is that Ruger and Magpul would invest and do exactly all these things. Really just reinvent the entire Glock lineup, different calibers and grip sizes, and for less, with a badass optics cut system. I mean, it would be a hit. However, Ruger being Ruger, will probably under market them, and then under support them, options wise. I'd love to be wrong.

 

[pag23]

I want a G20-sized 10mm RXM. I like Glocks and I like 10mm but the chunkiness of the G20 grip has kept me from buying one.

My Lone Wolf Glock 20 complete lower came today, its not that bad and if I don't like the grip I can have TexasPoff work on it.

It's not for an RXM but a frankenbuild

 

[BBMW]

I bet these guns are a lot cheaper to manufacture than a lot of people think. I doubt and RXM costs any less to make than a Gen5 19 MOS. And it sells for $150-200 less. These guns probably cost no more than $150 to make, maybe less. And I don't know if that's changed much over the years.

Given what I’ve seen and take that for whatever it is worth, Glock finds new and innovative ways to sell the same gun to buyers with small changes. It’s cool as you can mix old with new and do fun things with builds. They also find ways to do things cheaper and cheaper to remain relevant and keep their margins.

We all know plastic parts are cheap and have probably gotten cheaper to manufacture over the years. Glock uses more plastic now than they ever have. The new 17L has a plastic nose piece which is much cheaper and faster to manufacture than a metal one. They have plastic optics plate covers which is cheaper and faster to manufacture than metal parts. They still use plastic sights which we know are cheaper to manufacture than metal ones.

Instead of raising the price of their guns, Glock’s strategy has been to control manufacturing costs and keep their prices stable. There is only so much of that you can do before inflation catches up and kills your profit. I’d bet their margins were much better 20 years ago than today but their niche is great reliability with an average price. They can and should do better and maybe with a changing of the guard we may see that in the future with better deigns, more options, and higher grade parts out of the box. I sure hope so as the platform is a good one and very versatile as seen in the aftermarket.

 

[boilergonzo]

Something was bugging me about these Rugers for a while now, and it was the trigger pull being all over the place weight wise whenever you'd see a gun shill on youtube measuring the trigger pull. A box stock Glock is constantly the same from model to model, yet people were getting all sorts of numbers with these. I pulled out my old Lyman scale and got an average of 4 pounds on the dot with mine.

Then I bought a Lyman digital scale and could constantly get whatever numbers I wanted. If I placed the scale pretty much where the pad of your finger would be, I got 3 pounds 13 ounces averaged over 10 pulls. If I went low, it was two and a half, if I went high, it was 7 and a half. My old scale is just that, and may not be accurate any longer.

I wonder if any of the shills caught that, or just gave the high numbers to make the gun look bad to prospective buyers.

I also noted numbers all over the map. When I bought two trigger gauges and started to play with them, I quickly learned why. Where on the trigger it is placed, and the direction of the pull matters a LOT! Since I am in the world of science, putting some effort into addressing this (special place on a special table where I can secure things at precise angles and pull very linearly!), and it worked wonders. But the variability is something I have noticed, too.

 

[boilergonzo]

I bet these guns are a lot cheaper to manufacture than a lot of people think. I doubt and RXM costs any less to make than a Gen5 19 MOS. And it sells for $150-200 less. These guns probably cost no more than $150 to make, maybe less. And I don't know if that's changed much over the years.

Manufacturing costs are likely very, very similar. The pellets they both buy to make mags and frames is from the same vendors. The milling machines they use for slides are from the same vendors. The injection molding equipment they use is from the same vendors. The metal treatment processes and ovens are known and similar. The steel they buy (disregarding new Trump tariffs!) is from the same steel mills. The labor costs of manufacturing a gun at Ruger's factories or at Glock Smyrna will be quite similar (Austria wouldn't be too much more).

In the end, the difference is how much profit one is willing to give up to be in this market, and how much profit one wants to skim off the top!

Glock skims enormous amounts of money off the top. Ruger isn't the same (as a publicly traded company, we can see what they do... for Glock we can just do equestrian math!).

The President and CEO of Ruger had a salary of $793,750, and earned a cash bonus of $553,244. The VP made $980,117 total. Glock made 431M Euros profit ($447.9M US Dollars), ALL of which was at the fingertips of Gaston (that year), and is now in full control of his wife, the heiress of the Glock company.

So if Ruger counts the bonuses and salaries of their executive staff, adds in $25M in profits for their stock holders as dividends, that leaves about $400M margin for them to play with and offer discounts to aggressively enter the market with a similar product at a lower price point!

Glock had huge margins and kept them (which is wise, no complaints here!). Ruger sees they can manufacture for the same costs while being able to accept a bit less margin and STILL make lots of money!

The cost of a Glock is likely around $100 to $150 manufacture, the rest of the sale cost is sales, distribution, marketing, taxes, R&D, legal expenses, future expansions, and profits!

Consider the fact that S&W sells some similar quality handguns like the Shield and Bodyguard for $250 to $300 at times, and they certainly aren't losing money on the deal. There is a lot of profit margin left to work with for Ruger and the RXM, and even more for Glock!

 

[boilergonzo]

Well, I fell for it, or the marketing, or the "gotta have it" or whatever, and I'm gonna guinea pig it for GT. I went and had a look at it, and I will say, I'm impressed. Walked out having purchased it for $395.99. Please enjoy the thread, all commentary positive, neutral, and negative welcome. I don't care if you like or dislike the new RXM, I'd still like to hear. I hope this will become the new thread for this thing moving forward, here on GT.


Thanks for reading. Fire away with the comments!

PilatusTurbo is in trouble...

This thread has been weighing on my mind, and today I put money down on my own RXM! I didn't have time to go through the NICS process today (had to pick up a kid at school), and the store was having trouble keeping them in stock. Since they only had one left, I put money down on it and set it back so I could return this weekend to fill out the forms. I will finish the deal in a couple days and bring her home! It wasn't cheap (just a couple bucks over $400) and I don't NEED it, but it seemed like fun. So now I have the size gun (G19 sized) that I always said I didn't really want or need. Kinda crazy. It is being set up to be my truck gun.

I did inspect the barrel (no issues!), so it is good to have been reading along to avoid at least one potential pitfall!

Add another one to the growing list of RXM owners.

Mr. President, how do I go about getting an application to join your RXM Fanboy Club? I hope the annual dues are reasonable!

 

[Jason D]

I also noted numbers all over the map. When I bought two trigger gauges and started to play with them, I quickly learned why. Where on the trigger it is placed, and the direction of the pull matters a LOT! Since I am in the world of science, putting some effort into addressing this (special place on a special table where I can secure things at precise angles and pull very linearly!), and it worked wonders. But the variability is something I have noticed, too.

The center bladed style Glock type triggers can be tricky to measure. Wheeler makes a gauge with an insert for these types of triggers, but I don't have much experience with their products. I've bought Lyman products for years, so tend to stick with that when I need something. I don't do anything special other than chucking a gun in a padded vise.