Question for Glock experts

Pistols of all descriptions.
Post Reply
User avatar
REDinFL
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: Pinellas

Question for Glock experts

Post by REDinFL »

Did the 4th generation changes, such as the grip insert option, change the grip angle or the “hump” at the back? I had gen 3 SF Glocks and wasn’t really happy with the hump- most prior experience was 1911, so I know there is a certain element of “what you’re used to.” I was thinking of giving them another try.

Thanks
Hurrah for the Bonnie Blue Flag that bears a Single Star.

User avatar
lakelandman
Posts: 800
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 1:12 am
Location: Lakeland

Post by lakelandman »

https://www.all4shooters.com/en/shootin ... fferences/


In expedient to protect the Glock patents, which were expiring, finally leaving the competitors new room for action? Or the fourth Glock generation really brings innovations?

The introduction of the Glock 17 semiautomatic pistol about thirty years ago represented a real revolution in the duty and service handgun world: a Polymer frame, striker firing mechanism, a semi-continuous double action trigger, and only automatic safeties were features that had never been seen previously all together.

Moreover, the handgun was built by a company that had absolutely no previous specific manufacturing experience and despite this, worked flawlessly.

After many years, we can say that the Glock has since defined a reference standard to which basically every other gun manufacturer in the world has been forced to be compared with. Today, the Austrian gun’s features are extensively copied; to the point that world leading manufacturers have modified their top models to look like it as much as possible: recent examples include the Walther CCP, the SIG P320 and the Heckler & Kock VP9!

Since its introduction, the Glock pistol also featured a series of improvements, and while most may seem like smaller adjustments, many other are quite substantial, both to the frame and to the pistol’s internal mechanism, which makes it possible to talk about "generations".

First gen Glock
The Armory.com
A 9x19mm 'first generation' Glock 17 semi-automatic pistol
The first Glock had a polymer frame sporting a plain, rounded dust cover (the part in front of the trigger guard that covers the recoil spring), with a grip that had its side panels only slightly roughened with the texture wrapping around the front and back strap, which were straight in shape.

The main recoil spring and guiding rod were separate, magazines were built completely out of plastic and the barrel had a thinner profile (also known as “pencil barrel”) compared to later models. This “First Generation” was available for a short number of years, but is still today featured in many American movies and television series..

Glock Gen 3 VS Gen 4: a generational comparison
Franco Palamaro
Three Glock 17 generations compared: from left, Gen 2, Gen 3 and Gen 4. Note the thumb shelf, and additional pin on the locking piece introduced in the Gen 3 pistol, and the different texture on the pistol grip plus improved and enlaregd mag release button on the Gen 4
In 1988, the “Second Generation” Glock was introduced: the grip had slightly raised side panels with the same texture as the previous generation, but the, still straight; front and back straps sported a deeply engraved squared checkering.

The magazines now featured a metallic “skeleton” over which the polymer was molded, significantly improving feeding; the barrel wall thickness was increased, the main recoil spring and guiding rod were assembled together in a “captive” configuration and the rear slide guide length was increased. The serial number on the frame was etched on a metal plate molded in the polymer frame (a few of the first Second Generation pistols do not have the metal serial number plate).

After a while, a third cross pin appeared in the handgun, to better support and distribute the energy transmitted to the polymer frame by the locking block, originating the “three pin system”, since then unmodified and still in use today.

In the Nineties, small updates had been made to the trigger mechanism and the “square” extractor was replaced by the 15 degree slanted version. In 1996, the Third Generation Glock appeared, still in production, commonly christened “Gen 3”.

The front strap of the Gen 3 pistol gains an ergonomic, ridged profile, with finger grooves; just above the grip’s side panels on the frame, ambidextrous thumb rests appear to guide the hand in a correct shooting position and the rear slide guides return to their original shorter length.

Shortly afterwards, the Glock pistol is updated with a new extractor with a loaded chamber indicator and an accessory rail molded in the dust cover to hold flashlights or laser aimers: this slightly updated configuration is the “true” Gen 3 Glock, while the preceding model is sometimes called the “Gen 2,5”.

The Gen 3 is the longest running Glock, but time inexorably goes by and the pressure from the competition increases constantly, so the Austrian manufacturer tries to adapt to the new trends, with a couple updated models that enjoy little success.

The first update introduces an ambidextrous magazine release, which is prone to malfunction and additionally is incompatible with the previous magazines. The second update, in 2009, is the introduction of the model known as RTF2 (Rough Textured Frame 2), featuring a grip covered with a new checkering texture made of tiny and very sharp, needle-like cones and a new scalloped slide serration design: personally we called it the “bed-of-nails Fakir version”, everybody else calls it the "Gen 3,5”.

Glock Gen 3 VS Gen 4: a generational comparison
Franco Palamaro
The new Gen 4 Glock 17 in the foreground the Glock 17 Gen 4, compared with the previous Gen 3 in the back
In 2010, the real Glock Gen 4 model was presented, with the Austrian manufacturer acknowledging the, up to then, unofficial Generation naming custom to the point of actually engraving it on the side of the handgun’s slide next to the model number. The Gen 4 pistol introduces many new groundbreaking features.

The outward appearance and esthetics of the handgun does not change much; the RTF2 checkering texture on the pistol grip changes to a less aggressive pattern, called RTF3. This new checkering improves grip and at the same time is comfortable in long shooting sessions at the range without gloves. Serrations on the slide return to the straight design.

On the Gen 4, the outstanding innovations are essentially two: a new recoil spring structure, and the possibility to add on the pistol’s back strap two different removable inserts to customize the grip size to the shooter’s hand. These two changes alone have caused the non-interchangeability of the main components with the previous models.

Glock Gen 3 VS Gen 4: a generational comparison
Thanks to the new interchangeable Backstrap options, and a slimmer pistol grip profile, the Glock Gen 4 can be easily configured to better fit the shooter's hand
The new recoil spring, for example, is telescopic: two coaxial spring elements are assembled together with a smaller, central guiding rod and a larger tube (similar to the recoil spring assembly previously used in the super-compact models of the Glock) and its diameter is significantly larger than the spring used in the previous Generations.

This required the modification of the front part of the slide, to accommodate the bulkier dual spring guide rod, and a different configuration of the frame front portion, wider and internally larger.

To adapt the pistol grip size to different hands, Glock devised an interesting concept: the Gen 4 frame grip is smaller than the previous generations, and the back strap new shape allows mounting one of two additional interchangeable inserts, increasing the trigger distance. The fact that the frame is basically shorter longitudinally also causes the trigger housing to be accordingly sized, therefore incompatible with previous generation pistols.
Everybody's got plans... until they get hit.

Wakko
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:11 pm
Location: South Florida

Post by Wakko »

Good article. Some new tidbits of information there.

User avatar
REDinFL
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: Pinellas

Post by REDinFL »

Thanks, Lakelandman. Lots of useful info.
Hurrah for the Bonnie Blue Flag that bears a Single Star.

User avatar
lakelandman
Posts: 800
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 1:12 am
Location: Lakeland

Post by lakelandman »

REDinFL wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:44 pm
Thanks, Lakelandman. Lots of useful info.
No problem good luck.
Everybody's got plans... until they get hit.

User avatar
ABOC
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:29 am
Location: Spring Hill

Post by ABOC »

REDinFL wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:58 pm
Did the 4th generation changes, such as the grip insert option, change the grip angle or the “hump” at the back? I had gen 3 SF Glocks and wasn’t really happy with the hump- most prior experience was 1911, so I know there is a certain element of “what you’re used to.” I was thinking of giving them another try.
When Glock came up with the Gen 3 SF guns [by shortening the regular Gen 3 grip front to back length] they had to make a new trigger housing to accommodate the shorter frames. In doing so they slightly changed the angle of the trigger connector which resulted in a slightly heavier trigger pull on the SF series versus standard Gen 3 Glocks.

Gen 4 Glocks have the exact same frame dimension and geometry [albeit with a different texture] as the Gen 3 SF models. They also use the trigger housing that was developed for the SF series. The only real improvement they made versus the gun you owned is that they fixed the connector to make the trigger pull on Gen 4 guns more like a standard trigger pull weight [And yet stock Glock Gen 4 triggers suck IMO].

Bottom line is that if you used to own a Gen 3 SF Glock and are now considering a Gen 4 the only real difference is going to be the grip texture and a stock trigger pull that's about 0.5lb lighter. That's it. And yes, I know that Glock made a gazillion changes between Gen 3 and Gen 4 with the new dual recoil spring, upgraded trigger bar, ejector etc... And none of these amount to anything or makes any significant difference to the end user.

PS: Glock is so far behind the curve nowadays that it's hard to come up with an objective reason to waste your time and money on what is little more than an overpriced and obsolescent platform. So unless you are one of these people (like myself) who got used to their crappy ergos, I would just advise you to skip them altogether and look at one of the many better and cheaper offerings out there.
"Tuez-les tous, Dieu reconnaîtra les siens" - Arnaud Amaury 1209

User avatar
REDinFL
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: Pinellas

Post by REDinFL »

Thanks very much, that’s exactly what I needed to know. I’ll just stick with my 1911. The funny thing is, the grip angle as defined by the front of the grip is the same as 1911, it’s that rear hump. You’ve saved me from a bunch of running around and a possible disappointment.
Hurrah for the Bonnie Blue Flag that bears a Single Star.

User avatar
45caldan
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 am
Location: Lakeland

Post by 45caldan »

ABOC wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 5:42 am
REDinFL wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:58 pm
Did the 4th generation changes, such as the grip insert option, change the grip angle or the “hump” at the back? I had gen 3 SF Glocks and wasn’t really happy with the hump- most prior experience was 1911, so I know there is a certain element of “what you’re used to.” I was thinking of giving them another try.
When Glock came up with the Gen 3 SF guns [by shortening the regular Gen 3 grip front to back length] they had to make a new trigger housing to accommodate the shorter frames. In doing so they slightly changed the angle of the trigger connector which resulted in a slightly heavier trigger pull on the SF series versus standard Gen 3 Glocks.

Gen 4 Glocks have the exact same frame dimension and geometry [albeit with a different texture] as the Gen 3 SF models. They also use the trigger housing that was developed for the SF series. The only real improvement they made versus the gun you owned is that they fixed the connector to make the trigger pull on Gen 4 guns more like a standard trigger pull weight [And yet stock Glock Gen 4 triggers suck IMO].

Bottom line is that if you used to own a Gen 3 SF Glock and are now considering a Gen 4 the only real difference is going to be the grip texture and a stock trigger pull that's about 0.5lb lighter. That's it. And yes, I know that Glock made a gazillion changes between Gen 3 and Gen 4 with the new dual recoil spring, upgraded trigger bar, ejector etc... And none of these amount to anything or makes any significant difference to the end user.

PS: Glock is so far behind the curve nowadays that it's hard to come up with an objective reason to waste your time and money on what is little more than an overpriced and obsolescent platform. So unless you are one of these people (like myself) who got used to their crappy ergos, I would just advise you to skip them altogether and look at one of the many better and cheaper offerings out there.
I agree. I like the M&P 2.0 much better.
Also like the Sig P320, Walther PPQ, Hk VP9 all more than any Glock...

Post Reply