Tye wrote:Why not start from scratch on another series?
Because they got it right the first time. Any improvements since involve minor changes for operator convenience. I know of very few functional changes that ever made it more reliable. How much more reliable can you be than 100%? The steel recoil spring guide rod prevented the guide rod from ever melting, but it's also been proven that the original Glock would continue to run reliably even if the recoil spring guide rod melted out of it so there is no improvement in reliability there (only ease in reassembly after melting the rod). The unsupported chamber issue was only an issue for ammunition that was handled improperly to start with. There were minor issues when Gen 4s came out but they were caught after the first run and corrected and everyone has at one time or another suffered production flaws from various vendors.
I rejected Glocks from the first moment I held one in 1987. I hated them (due to grip angle). Talked total
on them. But then I shot one and ate every word I ever said about them. I have (specifically for carry) handguns ranging from in value from $200 (used Sigma) to $4,000 (Dan Wesson Titan). I buy more guns in a year than most gun owners buy in a lifetime, and yet as I sit here and type this I'm wearing my Gen 4 Glock 19. I'm always looking for something that does it "better", but despite a collection well into the hundreds, I just keep going back to my Glock 19. It's not that I'm loyal to
Glock because I'm not; I'm loyal to performance
and I just haven't yet found anything that does it better. If I do, I'll change.