Book about Glock

BAMAAK

"THE RISE OF AMERICA'S GUN" by Paul M Barrett. Interesting book about Gaston and how he and a man named Karl Walter turned Glock into what it is. It touches on lots of incidents that affected not only Glock but other companies like S&W. One part I was intrigued by was the fact that S&W changed hands so many time in the 80s/90s, including being partners with Taurus and how the S&W management was not concerned about the "plastic" gun even as Glock was outfitting LE agencies all over the country. It wasn't until some brit company named Tomkins and the new CEO came in and asked the engineers what was on the design board to compete with Glock and was told nothing. His response was Build Something and if you can't, copy the mother$%^#@&, which they did, called it the Sigma and promptly got sued by Glock. They settled out of court and Gaston then beat them to the punch with a .40 S&W Glock 22 which he swiped some samples of from the SHOT show. P/O ed S&W pretty bad.

It talks about poor quality control of smith guns in the 80s and 90s. Is that true? Would you stay away from S&Ws from that era? Since they were built along side Taurus in some cases, that makes some sense. I guess much of smiths tooling and designs stayed with Taurus when they dissolved.


Thoughts and comments?

Durwood

BAMAAK wrote: »

It talks about poor quality control of smith guns in the 80s and 90s. Is that true? Would you stay away from S&Ws from that era? Since they were built along side Taurus in some cases, that makes some sense. I guess much of smiths tooling and designs stayed with Taurus when they dissolved.


Thoughts and comments?

I've owned a lot of Smiths from the 80s and 90s. There is definite spottiness in QC, but if you haven't owned or at least closely examined Smiths from the 50s or 60s maybe even early to mid 70s you might not realize the extent of the slip in fit and finish. When I'm looking for a S&W I try to get examples from the 60s or early 70s unless the model I'm looking for wasn't made then.

5280 shooter II

I wouldn't touch a Smith Automatic with a ten foot pole.......20 foot for the newer ones, with one caveat, their 1911, I have one and it's sweet.......kinda hard to screw up a proven design, but Bigslug would demand to differ.

Now the revolvers are another case.......I've had a new 629 with the underlug weight system, and currently own a 66-2, it's just dead sexy! I also have a Glock 23/19 (conversion barrel), and a 20.......used to own a 21. I like Glocks for what they are.....no nonsense pistols you can play with to make them fit your hand with a Dremel, but I love my Sig 229 too, it just melts in your hand and is accurate as all get out.

I like the idea of this..........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTalnzcO0xk

Durwood

5280 shooter II wrote: »

.kinda hard to screw up a proven design, but Bigslug would demand to differ.

No, it was easy, they put an external extractor on it:rotflmao:

5280 shooter II

Ooooooohhhh! Here we go about that! lol! Hey if an external works on a Sig and a Glock, why can't it work on a 1911 design. You don't need to "tune" it............Look, even Taurus could'n't screw it up as long as their machine workers weren't stoned.....PT1911 has been one of their most successful runs outside of the PT92......no matter how many Rednecks buy a Judge. Taurus had faith lost cause some of their stuff came out crappy.......early revolvers were awesome for a low price........but this isn't about Taurus, it's about Smith. Or actually, about the Evil Glock Empire.

I like my Blocks cause I can shoot whatever's in my hand, in you can't, you suck in the not so good way and need to get better at handling different firearms.

Jack Burton

Irony: Upon getting my ccw permit in '94 or '95 I chose the T-word PT945 as there was no places like this back then to waive me off. Failure to fire, failure to extract (despite external extractor) was a common occurrence at the range. OMG the stove pipes that thing would do. The LGS I bought it at graciously sent it back to the factory where it came back only slightly improved. Within a week I traded it in on a S&W 4516-2 and loved it despite it's all stainless heft. I still have the S&W but have retired her from active duty as I began carrying a G30 since about '01.

Teach

S&W waded ankle-deep into a steaming pile of crap when they conspired to screw their civilian customers by climbing into the sack with the government. Unless it's a Model 10 or something similar from back in the dark ages, I'm not interested!
Jerry

Bullgator

I read that book - good read. Originally Gaston Glock envisioned a selling price of $300 for the Glock 17 but his people convinced him (and probably correctly) that at that price the Glock would be seen as a Saturday night special and perceived as cheap junk. It was almost a perfect storm that swept Glock into the success they achieved. I also liked the part where a 70 year old Gaston Glock fought his way out of an assassination attempt with his fists.

fideau

Teach wrote: »

S&W waded ankle-deep into a steaming pile of crap when they conspired to screw their civilian customers by climbing into the sack with the government. Unless it's a Model 10 or something similar from back in the dark ages, I'm not interested!
Jerry

Haven't you heard that in 2001 Tompkins sold S&W to Saf-T-Hammer and all that stupidity ended? S&W had lost 40% of it's sales after the Clinton fiasco. There were a lot of angry people selling off their old S&Ws too. Wish I could have bought more. Silly people. S&W has come back strong and I believe back up to their old standards. But I still avoid those made in the Tompkins era.

breamfisher

They still have the ignition lock on the revolvers, no? Out of general principle, I won't buy a revolver that's got such an unneeded, occasionally unsafe piece of gear on it. I love Smith and Wesson revolvers, have owned a total of 4, but all of mine don't have the "mother may I?" switch on them.