Glock Killer ?

[ORIGINAL TEX]

The real Glock killer may have finally been found – at least for me.

I hear this term, “Glock Killer” from time to time and although I understood the concept, it puzzled me a bit in that if you built something just a good as a Glock, why would anyone change from something that they were familiar with to something unfamiliar with no added benefit. It would seem to me that the so called Glock Killer would have to do what the Glock does, but do it better to a degree that someone would consider changing – a few did, but most did not. The Glock has a number of things going for it such as it is rugged, reliable, easy to use, easy to disassemble, and magazines are inexpensive. What it had going against it is poor ergonomics, a mushy trigger pull, expensive for the materials and number of parts you get, and just so-so accuracy. As far as the accuracy issue, it was always my belief that this was due in large part to the trigger. I believe it was Colonel Coop that once said half or more of accuracy was the trigger – or something like that.

To the best of my memory the first so called Glock Killer was the Smith and Wesson M&P, followed by the Springfield XDM, the SIG 320, and lately the CZ P10C. I thought the M&P no better than a Glock except that it had better ergonomics and a few features Glock did not offer such as a manual safety, magazine out safety, and changeable grip panels. This was in deed enough to gain some converts and the fact that many police departments picked it up did not hurt. The Springfield XDM offered a better trigger, a grip safety and somewhat better ergonomics, but never seem to take off like the M&P did. The Sig 320 did OK and the military picked it up, but it had a few issues. Lastly the CZ P10C offered almost everything better than a Glock except that is was not “as” easy to disassembled, although better than the M&P, and XDM, and the magazines were expensive.

Glock finally went to changeable back straps and made a few other changes through the generation four series and then in my opinion came much closer to their advertised “Glock Perfection” with the generation five version where the trigger and accuracy improved and the mag well was flared. I have owned or do own all of the pistols mentioned above and have carried and/or competed with them. In my opinion, the CZP10C has come closest to being a so called Glock killer, but it has not overwhelmed Glock yet and probably will not. Its ergonomics are much better, its trigger much better and its accuracy much better, - but it is still a pain to disassemble and the magazines are expensive.

One of things I don’t care for on a Glock is the inability of make sure I can safely holster it if I have to do so without looking it into the holster. On my M&P I have a manual thumb safety that I can engage, and on the XDM I have a grip safety that I can engage by placing my thumb on the back of the slide when holstering. Granted, the CZP10C and Sig 320 do not have these either of these features, although I understand the SIG can be had with a manual thumb safety.

What would a pistol have to be in order to be a Glock Killer and could it be that without beating the Glock in all important areas such as ergonomics, initial purchase price, accuracy, trigger, cost of extra magazines and ease of disassembly. I think I may have found it – for me at least. Other than its ease of disassembly it exceeds the Glock in all areas, and has a couple of added features that I like. It is a new model so only time will tell if it is as rugged and reliable as a Glock, but its lineage has proven to be very rugged and reliable even if its parent company has had spotty quality control in the past.

What I have found has a great trigger with a short reset, a manual safety that does not have to be used, superior ergonomics and grip texturing, has inexpensive magazines, is very accurate, and is inexpensive to purchase. In addition this pistol can be converted to double action only by removing a part and up grading the striker spring to one just a little stronger – Glock striker springs work. Even the manufacture does not know their gun has this double action only feature.

Here is how I came to find this possible Glock Killer. A while back I needed something really small that held a decent number of rounds (9x19) and was cheap enough that if it got destroyed, turned out to be junk, or got lost/stolen, I would only be mildly miffed. One day while perusing the gun counter at Academy I found that they had a Taurus G2C on sale for $179. It held twelve rounds, was smaller and thinner than a Glock 26 and its predecessor, the G2, had gotten pretty good reviews – and it had a lifetime guarantee. I purchased it and have run at least 3K rounds through it with nary a hiccup or malfunction. It has a nice trigger and is accurate as all get out if I do my part. I can make a perfect score about 90% of the time on a Texas CHL practical test with this pistol at twice the distance and half the allotted time. I don’t think I could do that if it was not accurate and did not have a good trigger. I can do the same with my Glock 19, but the mushy trigger makes it a real challenge at 30 yards for the last ten rounds.

I came to really like this little G2C and ended up carrying it quite bit, but wished that I had a version that was more the size and capacity of the Glock 19 and still just as thin as the G2C. I even at one point emailed Taurus R&D and told them they needed a larger version of the G2C. I got a reply to my email with a “Thank you, we will take it into consideration”, only to see an advertisement for the new G3 in a gun magazine about two weeks later. Apparently they had already seen a market for what I had suggested long before I suggested it. I started checking You-Tube for G3 reviews and found plenty – all having good reviews.

The other day Academy finally started receiving G3s and they were on sale for $249, although the one I purchased actually ended up only costing me $149. I will explain that later. The G3 is essentially the same size as my Glock 19, but is thinner, has much better ergonomics, and a much better trigger. It came with one 15-round magazine and one 17-round magazine, which exactly the way I like to carry my G19 – the spare being a G17 magazine.

In my first range session I was very impressed by the accuracy, but I should not have been. The G2C had been very accurate also. Since this is a striker fired pistol with a drop safety that blocks the striker from going forward, and has a trigger safety like a Glock, I can choose to use or not to use the manual thumb safety. I do use it, but one could use it only to facilitate safer re-holstering and then thumb it off and carry it that way. This pistol does use a pre-cocked striker like the XDM, meaning its spring is completely compressed and the trigger just releases it. On a Glock the striker spring is only partially compressed then the trigger, when pressed to the rear, compresses it the rest of the way and then releases it at full compression. Almost a sort of weird double action - and a little like the plunger on a pin ball machine, if you’re old enough to remember those.

Dimensionally, the Glock 19, CZP10C and the Taurus G3 are almost exactly alike in length, width and height, down to the tenth of an inch and ounce, so no one is really the winner in these areas. It gets down to ergonomics, triggers and cost, and cost is where the Taurus G3 really wins out. The fit and finish is not as nice as the Glock in many respects and certainly not better that the CZP10C, but this does not seem to affect its ability to compete with the others where it really counts.

Is this pistol, that is far less expensive than a Glock, has a better trigger and ergonomics than a Glock, is as accurate as or more accurate than a Glock, and has a life time warranty going to be a “Glock Killer”? Time will tell, but it pretty much is for me. I will most likely sell most of my Glocks and keep only the G17 I use for GSSF matches and a G48 that I carry in certain situations. It is unlikely I will be purchasing any Glocks in the future.

This Taurus G3, as well and the G2C, have what Taurus refers to as second strike capability, meaning that if the round does not go off, a second pull of the trigger gives you a second try at via the same kind of operation a Glock uses. There is a paddle that is below the striker foot when the first single action attempt is made, but then rises up on the long second try stroke. It grabs the striker foot, moves it to near full spring compression and then releases it. It is a rather smooth and easy long stroke. Keep in mind that this second long pull of the trigger only takes the striker spring compression to about 90% of what it was with the first single action type trigger release. This still works because the primer should already have a pretty good dent in it from the first hit. This double strike feature is not something that I would be prone to use because due to many years of training and shooting, a failure to fire would result in a Roll, Tap and Rack even before I realized I was doing it. Sort of like pulling my hand away from a very hot surface. I don’t have to think to myself, “Gee that is very hot” and then pull my hand back – it just happens without really thinking about it. However, for someone that has been shooting double action revolvers for most of their life, this second strike maneuver might come more naturally.

However, what this does is offer an opportunity to turn the G3 or the G2C in a light Double Action Only (DOA) semi-automatic. All one has to do is disassemble, remove the single action sear, and install a slightly stronger striker spring. Since the striker springs are the same diameter as a Glock striker spring, the factory Glock spring will work and it appears that it is slightly stronger. If you need something even stronger then I am sure Wolff Springs could supply you with one. I have actually tried this on the G2C and had no misfires with three to four boxes of CCI Blazer, Monarch and Wolf ammunition. It is like having a slim 13 shot revolver with a light smooth trigger pull. The manual thumb safety still works in this configuration as does the drop safety and trigger safety. This might be an option for someone who has not been trained or practiced enough to keep their finger out of the trigger guard until a decision to shoot is made – meaning less chance of a negligent discharge helped along by a short single action trigger stroke.

Taurus is apparently unaware that the pistol can be converted to operate this way.

I would not have thought about until I read a post on some forum by a person who wanted to find some way to have the G2 carried in the long stroke double action mode and then have it convert to single action after the first shot. It was for safer carrying according to the poster and I believe he also wanted to leave the manual safety disengaged. I could see his point, but did not agree with it – I thought the pistol perfectly safe, as is, as long as you carried it in a holster. His solution, believe it or not, was to remove the slide, insert a cartridge into the chamber, and then very carefully put the slide back on without setting the striker back to its single action position where it would be after normally chambering the first round. That procedure in itself seemed a little unsafe to me, but that is what he wanted.

If Taurus wanted to, I believe they could install a small switch or pin that a person could use to move the single action sear out of the way, converting the pistol to DAO, but they would still need a little stronger striker spring – or a weaker striker rebound spring.

If you can find a range with a G3 in its rental fleet, I think you should give it a try. You might be pleasantly surprised. If the Taurus logo still puts you off, I suggest you view the many YouTube videos that rave about the G2C and now the G3. Taurus has stepped up their game and now producing some of their gun in Florida.

Why my Taurus G3 only cost me $149 and not $249. I work for a brewery that gives its employees two free cases of beer each month plus and extra six cases if we have safe quarter, and extra if you go a whole quarter without calling in sick. They hand out this beer once a month. I don’t really drink that much beer and we are allowed to gift or sell what we have in our que to other employees. I believe a case of beer goes for around $20. I had twenty-two cases in my que and was able to gift ten cases to a co-worker for $10 a case, which put me $100 towards a new fire stick. I don’t think he is an alcoholic, but I think he has a couple of retired relatives that are giving it a good try. Not everyone has this opportunity, but I thought someone might find it interesting how I got the price down to $149. I could have saved a little more if the G3s had arrived early enough to be purchased on Veterans Day when Academy was offering vets, police officers and first responders 5% off. I think this would be the pistol I would recommend to someone who cannot spend a lot of money for one and can’t put in a lot of trigger time.

[dlh]

Thanks for the detailed review!
I was wondering how the Ruger SR9 compares to the Taurus G3?
I have two Glock 9 mm handguns---the Glock 26 and the Glock G45--both have operated flawlessly but these guns are generally just north or just south of 600 bucks so you are talking some cash if you want one.
Always good to look at handguns that cost less that may or may not be as reliable as Glocks.

[cmgee67]

The real Glock killer may have finally been found – at least for me.

I hear this term, “Glock Killer” from time to time and although I understood the concept, it puzzled me a bit in that if you built something just a good as a Glock, why would anyone change from something that they were familiar with to something unfamiliar with no added benefit. It would seem to me that the so called Glock Killer would have to do what the Glock does, but do it better to a degree that someone would consider changing – a few did, but most did not. The Glock has a number of things going for it such as it is rugged, reliable, easy to use, easy to disassemble, and magazines are inexpensive. What it had going against it is poor ergonomics, a mushy trigger pull, expensive for the materials and number of parts you get, and just so-so accuracy. As far as the accuracy issue, it was always my belief that this was due in large part to the trigger. I believe it was Colonel Coop that once said half or more of accuracy was the trigger – or something like that.

To the best of my memory the first so called Glock Killer was the Smith and Wesson M&P, followed by the Springfield XDM, the SIG 320, and lately the CZ P10C. I thought the M&P no better than a Glock except that it had better ergonomics and a few features Glock did not offer such as a manual safety, magazine out safety, and changeable grip panels. This was in deed enough to gain some converts and the fact that many police departments picked it up did not hurt. The Springfield XDM offered a better trigger, a grip safety and somewhat better ergonomics, but never seem to take off like the M&P did. The Sig 320 did OK and the military picked it up, but it had a few issues. Lastly the CZ P10C offered almost everything better than a Glock except that is was not “as” easy to disassembled, although better than the M&P, and XDM, and the magazines were expensive.

Glock finally went to changeable back straps and made a few other changes through the generation four series and then in my opinion came much closer to their advertised “Glock Perfection” with the generation five version where the trigger and accuracy improved and the mag well was flared. I have owned or do own all of the pistols mentioned above and have carried and/or competed with them. In my opinion, the CZP10C has come closest to being a so called Glock killer, but it has not overwhelmed Glock yet and probably will not. Its ergonomics are much better, its trigger much better and its accuracy much better, - but it is still a pain to disassemble and the magazines are expensive.

One of things I don’t care for on a Glock is the inability of make sure I can safely holster it if I have to do so without looking it into the holster. On my M&P I have a manual thumb safety that I can engage, and on the XDM I have a grip safety that I can engage by placing my thumb on the back of the slide when holstering. Granted, the CZP10C and Sig 320 do not have these either of these features, although I understand the SIG can be had with a manual thumb safety.

What would a pistol have to be in order to be a Glock Killer and could it be that without beating the Glock in all important areas such as ergonomics, initial purchase price, accuracy, trigger, cost of extra magazines and ease of disassembly. I think I may have found it – for me at least. Other than its ease of disassembly it exceeds the Glock in all areas, and has a couple of added features that I like. It is a new model so only time will tell if it is as rugged and reliable as a Glock, but its lineage has proven to be very rugged and reliable even if its parent company has had spotty quality control in the past.

What I have found has a great trigger with a short reset, a manual safety that does not have to be used, superior ergonomics and grip texturing, has inexpensive magazines, is very accurate, and is inexpensive to purchase. In addition this pistol can be converted to double action only by removing a part and up grading the striker spring to one just a little stronger – Glock striker springs work. Even the manufacture does not know their gun has this double action only feature.

Here is how I came to find this possible Glock Killer. A while back I needed something really small that held a decent number of rounds (9x19) and was cheap enough that if it got destroyed, turned out to be junk, or got lost/stolen, I would only be mildly miffed. One day while perusing the gun counter at Academy I found that they had a Taurus G2C on sale for $179. It held twelve rounds, was smaller and thinner than a Glock 26 and its predecessor, the G2, had gotten pretty good reviews – and it had a lifetime guarantee. I purchased it and have run at least 3K rounds through it with nary a hiccup or malfunction. It has a nice trigger and is accurate as all get out if I do my part. I can make a perfect score about 90% of the time on a Texas CHL practical test with this pistol at twice the distance and half the allotted time. I don’t think I could do that if it was not accurate and did not have a good trigger. I can do the same with my Glock 19, but the mushy trigger makes it a real challenge at 30 yards for the last ten rounds.

I came to really like this little G2C and ended up carrying it quite bit, but wished that I had a version that was more the size and capacity of the Glock 19 and still just as thin as the G2C. I even at one point emailed Taurus R&D and told them they needed a larger version of the G2C. I got a reply to my email with a “Thank you, we will take it into consideration”, only to see an advertisement for the new G3 in a gun magazine about two weeks later. Apparently they had already seen a market for what I had suggested long before I suggested it. I started checking You-Tube for G3 reviews and found plenty – all having good reviews.

The other day Academy finally started receiving G3s and they were on sale for $249, although the one I purchased actually ended up only costing me $149. I will explain that later. The G3 is essentially the same size as my Glock 19, but is thinner, has much better ergonomics, and a much better trigger. It came with one 15-round magazine and one 17-round magazine, which exactly the way I like to carry my G19 – the spare being a G17 magazine.

In my first range session I was very impressed by the accuracy, but I should not have been. The G2C had been very accurate also. Since this is a striker fired pistol with a drop safety that blocks the striker from going forward, and has a trigger safety like a Glock, I can choose to use or not to use the manual thumb safety. I do use it, but one could use it only to facilitate safer re-holstering and then thumb it off and carry it that way. This pistol does use a pre-cocked striker like the XDM, meaning its spring is completely compressed and the trigger just releases it. On a Glock the striker spring is only partially compressed then the trigger, when pressed to the rear, compresses it the rest of the way and then releases it at full compression. Almost a sort of weird double action - and a little like the plunger on a pin ball machine, if you’re old enough to remember those.

Dimensionally, the Glock 19, CZP10C and the Taurus G3 are almost exactly alike in length, width and height, down to the tenth of an inch and ounce, so no one is really the winner in these areas. It gets down to ergonomics, triggers and cost, and cost is where the Taurus G3 really wins out. The fit and finish is not as nice as the Glock in many respects and certainly not better that the CZP10C, but this does not seem to affect its ability to compete with the others where it really counts.

Is this pistol, that is far less expensive than a Glock, has a better trigger and ergonomics than a Glock, is as accurate as or more accurate than a Glock, and has a life time warranty going to be a “Glock Killer”? Time will tell, but it pretty much is for me. I will most likely sell most of my Glocks and keep only the G17 I use for GSSF matches and a G48 that I carry in certain situations. It is unlikely I will be purchasing any Glocks in the future.

This Taurus G3, as well and the G2C, have what Taurus refers to as second strike capability, meaning that if the round does not go off, a second pull of the trigger gives you a second try at via the same kind of operation a Glock uses. There is a paddle that is below the striker foot when the first single action attempt is made, but then rises up on the long second try stroke. It grabs the striker foot, moves it to near full spring compression and then releases it. It is a rather smooth and easy long stroke. Keep in mind that this second long pull of the trigger only takes the striker spring compression to about 90% of what it was with the first single action type trigger release. This still works because the primer should already have a pretty good dent in it from the first hit. This double strike feature is not something that I would be prone to use because due to many years of training and shooting, a failure to fire would result in a Roll, Tap and Rack even before I realized I was doing it. Sort of like pulling my hand away from a very hot surface. I don’t have to think to myself, “Gee that is very hot” and then pull my hand back – it just happens without really thinking about it. However, for someone that has been shooting double action revolvers for most of their life, this second strike maneuver might come more naturally.

However, what this does is offer an opportunity to turn the G3 or the G2C in a light Double Action Only (DOA) semi-automatic. All one has to do is disassemble, remove the single action sear, and install a slightly stronger striker spring. Since the striker springs are the same diameter as a Glock striker spring, the factory Glock spring will work and it appears that it is slightly stronger. If you need something even stronger then I am sure Wolff Springs could supply you with one. I have actually tried this on the G2C and had no misfires with three to four boxes of CCI Blazer, Monarch and Wolf ammunition. It is like having a slim 13 shot revolver with a light smooth trigger pull. The manual thumb safety still works in this configuration as does the drop safety and trigger safety. This might be an option for someone who has not been trained or practiced enough to keep their finger out of the trigger guard until a decision to shoot is made – meaning less chance of a negligent discharge helped along by a short single action trigger stroke.

Taurus is apparently unaware that the pistol can be converted to operate this way.

I would not have thought about until I read a post on some forum by a person who wanted to find some way to have the G2 carried in the long stroke double action mode and then have it convert to single action after the first shot. It was for safer carrying according to the poster and I believe he also wanted to leave the manual safety disengaged. I could see his point, but did not agree with it – I thought the pistol perfectly safe, as is, as long as you carried it in a holster. His solution, believe it or not, was to remove the slide, insert a cartridge into the chamber, and then very carefully put the slide back on without setting the striker back to its single action position where it would be after normally chambering the first round. That procedure in itself seemed a little unsafe to me, but that is what he wanted.

If Taurus wanted to, I believe they could install a small switch or pin that a person could use to move the single action sear out of the way, converting the pistol to DAO, but they would still need a little stronger striker spring – or a weaker striker rebound spring.

If you can find a range with a G3 in its rental fleet, I think you should give it a try. You might be pleasantly surprised. If the Taurus logo still puts you off, I suggest you view the many YouTube videos that rave about the G2C and now the G3. Taurus has stepped up their game and now producing some of their gun in Florida.

Why my Taurus G3 only cost me $149 and not $249. I work for a brewery that gives its employees two free cases of beer each month plus and extra six cases if we have safe quarter, and extra if you go a whole quarter without calling in sick. They hand out this beer once a month. I don’t really drink that much beer and we are allowed to gift or sell what we have in our que to other employees. I believe a case of beer goes for around $20. I had twenty-two cases in my que and was able to gift ten cases to a co-worker for $10 a case, which put me $100 towards a new fire stick. I don’t think he is an alcoholic, but I think he has a couple of retired relatives that are giving it a good try. Not everyone has this opportunity, but I thought someone might find it interesting how I got the price down to $149. I could have saved a little more if the G3s had arrived early enough to be purchased on Veterans Day when Academy was offering vets, police officers and first responders 5% off. I think this would be the pistol I would recommend to someone who cannot spend a lot of money for one and can’t put in a lot of trigger time.

They actually do make a device for the Glock that makes it as safe as any hammer fired gun.
https://taudevgroup.myshopify.com/produ ... rol-device

[Tex1961]

They actually do make a device for the Glock that makes it as safe as any hammer fired gun.
https://taudevgroup.myshopify.com/produ ... rol-device

That's a pretty cool idea.. My issue is any gun that I am going to use as my EDC is making modifications to it.... I've read over and over on multiple forums where guys will take a stock gun, change the triggers, springs, etc. etc. and then get frustrated because they start having problems with it at some point.... To me, that striker plate while probably would never be an issue, is just one more potential failure point... Give me a good old stock off the shelf pistol and maybe add some grips or if your so inclined new sights.... Other than that, I'm good to go....

[surferdaddy]

My “Glock Killer,” well...not really as I will always love my Glocks. But this is my appendix carry piece. Not sure you can find another da/SA in this weight and size with this good a single action trigger. The double action is heavy but doesn’t stack and I like it’s weight for appendix carry.

I will say that I’ve never been 100% comfortable appendix carrying Glocks.

Surfer

[The Annoyed Man]

I have a 1911 in .45 ACP.

I have a M&P45.

I have a XD-M45 Compact 3.8.

I have a XDS45.

I carry 9mm Glocks (19, 43, 26, 17, in order of frequency of use). The others are all good pistols, and I have carried them all at one time or another. But once I bought my first Glock for carrying, I stopped carrying the others. As I’ve mentioned many times, I started carrying Glocks because that’s what my wife carries, and I wanted her to be familiar with the manual of arms for my gun if something were to happen to me. She’s not a "gun-person", and she’s not very adaptable to different platforms; whereas adapting comes easily to me. That’s literally the only reason. But after having carried Glocks for a few years now, I’ve decided that I really like them. Mine are all Gen4. There’s no such thing as the "perfect pistol", and the pursuit of finding the "one gun to rule them all" is a fool's errand. They are mechanical devices....that is all. Just as there is no "one perfect car", there is no one perfect gun. I could do without the finger-groove bumps on the front strap, and while I appreciate the interchangeable backstraps and being able to reverse the magazine release button (I’m a lefty), I’d have appreciated an ambidextrous slide stop lever.

I do agree that the Glock grip angle is slightly wonky compared to the others, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work. It’s just different is all, and one can adapt to it or not as one chooses. The grip angles on the other 4 models listed above are either identical, or close enough to identical to one another, that switching platforms should feel familiar to the user. But the truth is that the articulation of the human wrist joint is marvelously adaptable. My wife owned a G19 for years before I bought my first Glock, and I never once felt that switching from shooting my 1911 to shooting her Glock, back to back, was any kind of big deal. It’s my personal opinion that people make too much mountain out of too little molehill when it comes to grip angle. I think trigger and sights are way more important, and either is easily upgraded. (By the way, I feel the same way about grip angle on AR15 rifles. The more vertical grip is supposed to be better than the original A2 grip angle; but I own ARs with both grip styles, and I don’t think it really matters that much.)

My Glocks are all Gen4. There’s no such thing as the "perfect pistol", and the pursuit of finding the "one gun to rule them all" is a fool's errand. They are mechanical devices....that is all. Just as there is no "one perfect car", there is no one perfect gun. I could do without the finger-groove bumps on the front strap, and while I appreciate the interchangeable backstraps and being able to reverse the magazine release button (I’m a lefty), I’d have appreciated an ambidextrous slide stop lever. I do think that the takedown levers on the M&P and the XD-M/XDS are superior to the Glock's dinky little takedown buttons which are uniquely designed to frustrate the fat-fingered when trying to field strip the gun for cleaning. (Gaston, please! BOTH of these microscopic little buttons have to be pulled down simultaneously to release the slide forward? Seriously?) Btw, I noticed on the Taurus website that the G3 appears to use us the same ridiculous takedown buttons, in the same position, as are found on the Glocks.

But am I going to run out and replace my Gen4 guns with a raft of $600 Gen5s? Nope. Some day I’ll take a dremel to those finger grooves and grind them off. I’ve made slingshotting the slide into battery my normal protocol now, so I don’t care about an ambidextrous slide stop any longer. In short, I’ve adapted to the gun....because I’m an adaptable human being.

Regardless of brand/platform, upgrading sights is a given for me, unless the pistol in question already came with good night sights. I came to striker-fired pistols from the 1911 world, so I can appreciate a nice clean single action let off. But, I just didn’t find adapting from a 1911 trigger to a striker trigger that hard. It’s analogous to adapting from the tuned Timney trigger on my Remington 700, to the mil-spec trigger on one of my ARs.....just not that big of a deal to me. I have put trigger upgrades (Timney drop-ins) into one of my AR lowers, and into my SCAR 17—the SCAR's OEM trigger pull came in at a little over 8 lbs and was horrible. But as a general thing, mil-spec AR triggers are tolerable, and so are OEM Glock triggers. I’m not trying to hit targets at 100 yards with my pistols, and as long as the pull weight is under about 5-6 lbs, the quality of the trigger is irrelevant to me. Lighter is better of course, but I can live with 5-6 lbs. There is a gun-safety argument to be made against having too light of a trigger pull in a handgun that might be fired in anger. I’m less concerned about what a prosecutor might say, than I am about the increased possibility of a negligent discharge under stress. The Glock trigger is just heavy enough to address my concern in that area, so I don’t worry about the pull weight.

Anyway, thanks for your review of the Taurus G3. As you said, it looks like it could be a decent suggestion for someone on a tight budget, looking for decent self defense pistol. But do I think it’s a "Glock-killer"? No, not anymore than I think Glocks are 1911-killers....which they are not.

[casingpoint]

This:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features ... e-recalled

This article casts a big shadow on Taurus. But after reading it, if I was going to trust carrying another Taurus, it would be a Model 856 revolver. I haven't set up to post pictures here yet, but google Taurus 856/images and there is plenty of eye candy if you ever liked the Colt Detective Special of yore. At an affordable price that kills all Glocks NIB.

[K-Texas]

One thing that looms large for the Glocks is the after-market. It's most likely only second to the 1911 in terms of add-ons to personalize it for the individual shooter. Most of my 9mm Glock experience has come with the G19s my shooting partner has carried for years.

I would like to make 1 very clear point about the Gen V Glocks however. It's not being advertised by Glock, except they're statement that the Gen Vs have "Marksman" barrels that are supposed to provide better accuracy. Here's the issue: handloaders that bought Gen Vs and began handloading for them found that they have shorter chambers. With Glock's aggressive opposition against the use of handloads, it leaves them an out for any liability concerns. Otherwise, I can't think of any other reason why Glock wouldn't make this a very clear issue. They simply shortened chambers to reduce the amount of "Bullet Jump" to enhance accuracy. Never mind what you were using previously.

All factory ammo has to be short enough in OACL to work for any chamber they might be loaded into. Previous Gen Glocks did not have chamber-length restrictions. So . . . most factory ammo is quite a bit shorter than the generous chamber dimensions. Meaning, a longer "bullet jump" from the case to the barrel's leade/throat etc. This can result in less optimal accuracy. Same principle as reloading for your rifle. For my SP's G19s, mostly Gen 2s and a Gen 3 he didn't keep long, I loaded 9mm longer for his pistols which wasn't really any different than the OACL I use for my pistols. For many years now, I have not bought any 9 x 19mm pistol that has a short throat. The last was an excellent CZ P-01 that my SP bought at a gunshow essentially because of the good price. He didn't have much use for it, so I bought it from him. For as long as I can remember, even going back to the first US Importer of CZ Pistols, all of their 9 x 19s are short throated. The only logical reason I've ever come up with for why they did and do that is because with the first CZ 75s imported by Magnum Research, the CZ 75 was also available in 9 x 21mm. The 9 x 19mm case extended by 2mm. More recently IWI had the 9 x 21 pressure rated at 33,000 CUP/35,000 PSI and standardized by SAAMI. Exactly the same as the Max Average Pressure, MAP, as the 9 x 19mm. That's quite a lot of neutering considering the pressures that were allowed for 9 x 21mm previously. I have a Vihta Vuori #2 load guide from the early 1990s where the data for the 9 x 21mm used a Max Pressure rating of 42,800 PSI/CIP. That's still a good bit higher than the "suggested" limit of 9 x 19mm +P+ at 40,000 PSI. So, by shortening the chambers of CZ 75s in 9 x 19mm, if a 9 x 21mm load was accidentally inserted in the 9 x 19mm it would put the pistol out-of-battery, preventing it from firing. Otherwise, the CZ 75s were identical, including magazines. Only the barrel and recoil spring differed. There are of course suggested remedies like reaming the chamber of CZ 75 barrels to achieve a longer throat, but less than sterling results are typical.

Now, as far as my Glock killer, my pistol goes into the same category as the G17 with a 4.49" barrel. The barrel in my Canik TP9sa is 4.47" and there are no chamber-length restrictions for the Canik TP series pistols. Therefore, I load to longer OACLs than what is possible for MOST 9 x 19mm pistols these days. I've owned most of the G17 competition and today, my SP has 3 S&W M&Ps including his Shield. The other 2 are Mod 2 pistols with the 4" Compact and the 5" version. Excellent pistols as is his HK VP9. But with any load, factory or handload, if a JHP doesn't have the slimmest and longest of profiles, i.e. the Ogive, loads must be quite short.

There were all kinds of crazy opinions in the early days of the Canik TP9sa which was the first upgrade of the TP9, essentially a clone of the Walther P-99. What made the TP9sa different was the change to an excellent single-action trigger mechanism. As good as you'll find on any stock striker-fired pistol. The thing that confounded some reviewers is the decocker at the top of the rear slide. It was pronounced as Voo-Doo by a couple of YouTube reviewers right away because they obviously did not understand Canik's reason for using it on a single-action pistol. Once decocked, the trigger mechanism is dead, and they couldn't get past that, and Canik not being a widely known commodity at that time, there was not sufficient info concerning this. The decocker is there so that it can be applied when you remove the slide from the frame as many pistol-makers have done in one form or another to allow disassembly different than Glocks where the trigger must be pulled before the slide can be removed.

One reviewer did a second take on the Canik TP9sa after his new HK VP9 choked in his "Mud Test." Where he had stated originally that the decocker was a bad idea. So, he cocks the pistol on an empty chamber, ties the pistol behind his pickup truck and pulls it around. He found his concerns to be unwarranted; the TP9sa did not accidentally decock. I've seen other guys just trying to debunk that myth by throwing the TP9sa into dirt and sand berms behind the target stands. NADA. Accuracy has been excellent with my example and my loads are lengthened to suit the chamber, but only a few loads have been over 1.142"/29mm, and they were 147 gr. JHPs. I don't load 115 gr JHPs and no FMJ.

Another thing occurred after I bought my TP9sa sight-unseen. I had never so much as held one previously, and obviously, the great price was an inducement: the count for loads fired while still meeting the NATO accuracy spec at 25 meters has only increased since the TP9sa was introduced. Now it's at 60,000 rounds. I've seen other manufacturers mention very high round counts in testing, where Glocks always faired well, but it is not what they warranty. I've had the TP9sa for 4 years now and shoot it more than any other pistol I own. Partly because my original intention was to use it for testing handloads. I confirmed with Century Arms that the pistol was +P rated before I bought it. +P isn't a great issue for me because I was handloading back when the 9 x 19mm MAP was 35,700 CUP vs 33,000 CUP today. And if tested by SAAMI PSI transducers, the +P they established at 38,500 PSI is little more than the previous standard of 35,700 CUP. But by switching to PSI testing, they didn't bother to explain that they lowered the standard pressure rating to 33,000 CUP/35,000 PSI. Same pressure, different test methods.

When the Canik SF-Elite was introduced there were some feed issues. Right away it was discovered that weaker 115 gr. cheap stuff didn't provide enough slide energy to fully operate it. It was a simple matter of issuing lighter recoil springs. I have not taken a political view on the Caniks being made in Turkey. I just mention that their president is a turkey. But, to avoid being hypocritical, some might want to consider the country of manufacture of their own pistols before they berate someone elses, i.e. the Axis countries of Germany, Austria and a few others come to mind. And what is occurring in Turkey today could suggest that they're close to ousting the Islamist whacko in the next election, not too far away. They remain the NATO country with the 2nd largest Army, and his warming to Moscow and Russian military hardware is his position; not shared by the rank and file Turk. But as yet, he's not exactly Adolph Hitler.

If there is a genuinely better 4.5" poly-frame, striker-fired pistol available, even to include the SIG P-320/M17, I'd sure like to hear about it.

[Beiruty]

Just a get Canik and thank me later. A SAR9 is even an excellent pistol for less.
I am biased I never liked the Glocks

[Tex1961]

Just a get Canik and thank me later. A SAR9 is even an excellent pistol for less.
I am biased I never liked the Glocks

[K-Texas]

Just a get Canik and thank me later. A SAR9 is even an excellent pistol for less.
I am biased I never liked the Glocks

Hopefully I suggested as much. I can't speak for all of the Turk manufacturers, but Canik and Sarsilmaz are pretty solid. I also owned the SARGUN 9 that had a very good recoil reduction system reminiscent of the early HK USPs. Unfortunately, the Turks seem to confound themselves in how they name their pistols. The newer SAR 9 has little in common with the SARGUN 9 which was renamed the ST-9.

[ORIGINAL TEX]

The real Glock killer may have finally been found – at least for me.

I hear this term, “Glock Killer” from time to time and although I understood the concept, it puzzled me a bit in that if you built something just a good as a Glock, why would anyone change from something that they were familiar with to something unfamiliar with no added benefit. It would seem to me that the so called Glock Killer would have to do what the Glock does, but do it better to a degree that someone would consider changing – a few did, but most did not. The Glock has a number of things going for it such as it is rugged, reliable, easy to use, easy to disassemble, and magazines are inexpensive. What it had going against it is poor ergonomics, a mushy trigger pull, expensive for the materials and number of parts you get, and just so-so accuracy. As far as the accuracy issue, it was always my belief that this was due in large part to the trigger. I believe it was Colonel Coop that once said half or more of accuracy was the trigger – or something like that.

To the best of my memory the first so called Glock Killer was the Smith and Wesson M&P, followed by the Springfield XDM, the SIG 320, and lately the CZ P10C. I thought the M&P no better than a Glock except that it had better ergonomics and a few features Glock did not offer such as a manual safety, magazine out safety, and changeable grip panels. This was in deed enough to gain some converts and the fact that many police departments picked it up did not hurt. The Springfield XDM offered a better trigger, a grip safety and somewhat better ergonomics, but never seem to take off like the M&P did. The Sig 320 did OK and the military picked it up, but it had a few issues. Lastly the CZ P10C offered almost everything better than a Glock except that is was not “as” easy to disassembled, although better than the M&P, and XDM, and the magazines were expensive.

Glock finally went to changeable back straps and made a few other changes through the generation four series and then in my opinion came much closer to their advertised “Glock Perfection” with the generation five version where the trigger and accuracy improved and the mag well was flared. I have owned or do own all of the pistols mentioned above and have carried and/or competed with them. In my opinion, the CZP10C has come closest to being a so called Glock killer, but it has not overwhelmed Glock yet and probably will not. Its ergonomics are much better, its trigger much better and its accuracy much better, - but it is still a pain to disassemble and the magazines are expensive.

One of things I don’t care for on a Glock is the inability of make sure I can safely holster it if I have to do so without looking it into the holster. On my M&P I have a manual thumb safety that I can engage, and on the XDM I have a grip safety that I can engage by placing my thumb on the back of the slide when holstering. Granted, the CZP10C and Sig 320 do not have these either of these features, although I understand the SIG can be had with a manual thumb safety.

What would a pistol have to be in order to be a Glock Killer and could it be that without beating the Glock in all important areas such as ergonomics, initial purchase price, accuracy, trigger, cost of extra magazines and ease of disassembly. I think I may have found it – for me at least. Other than its ease of disassembly it exceeds the Glock in all areas, and has a couple of added features that I like. It is a new model so only time will tell if it is as rugged and reliable as a Glock, but its lineage has proven to be very rugged and reliable even if its parent company has had spotty quality control in the past.

What I have found has a great trigger with a short reset, a manual safety that does not have to be used, superior ergonomics and grip texturing, has inexpensive magazines, is very accurate, and is inexpensive to purchase. In addition this pistol can be converted to double action only by removing a part and up grading the striker spring to one just a little stronger – Glock striker springs work. Even the manufacture does not know their gun has this double action only feature.

Here is how I came to find this possible Glock Killer. A while back I needed something really small that held a decent number of rounds (9x19) and was cheap enough that if it got destroyed, turned out to be junk, or got lost/stolen, I would only be mildly miffed. One day while perusing the gun counter at Academy I found that they had a Taurus G2C on sale for $179. It held twelve rounds, was smaller and thinner than a Glock 26 and its predecessor, the G2, had gotten pretty good reviews – and it had a lifetime guarantee. I purchased it and have run at least 3K rounds through it with nary a hiccup or malfunction. It has a nice trigger and is accurate as all get out if I do my part. I can make a perfect score about 90% of the time on a Texas CHL practical test with this pistol at twice the distance and half the allotted time. I don’t think I could do that if it was not accurate and did not have a good trigger. I can do the same with my Glock 19, but the mushy trigger makes it a real challenge at 30 yards for the last ten rounds.

I came to really like this little G2C and ended up carrying it quite bit, but wished that I had a version that was more the size and capacity of the Glock 19 and still just as thin as the G2C. I even at one point emailed Taurus R&D and told them they needed a larger version of the G2C. I got a reply to my email with a “Thank you, we will take it into consideration”, only to see an advertisement for the new G3 in a gun magazine about two weeks later. Apparently they had already seen a market for what I had suggested long before I suggested it. I started checking You-Tube for G3 reviews and found plenty – all having good reviews.

The other day Academy finally started receiving G3s and they were on sale for $249, although the one I purchased actually ended up only costing me $149. I will explain that later. The G3 is essentially the same size as my Glock 19, but is thinner, has much better ergonomics, and a much better trigger. It came with one 15-round magazine and one 17-round magazine, which exactly the way I like to carry my G19 – the spare being a G17 magazine.

In my first range session I was very impressed by the accuracy, but I should not have been. The G2C had been very accurate also. Since this is a striker fired pistol with a drop safety that blocks the striker from going forward, and has a trigger safety like a Glock, I can choose to use or not to use the manual thumb safety. I do use it, but one could use it only to facilitate safer re-holstering and then thumb it off and carry it that way. This pistol does use a pre-cocked striker like the XDM, meaning its spring is completely compressed and the trigger just releases it. On a Glock the striker spring is only partially compressed then the trigger, when pressed to the rear, compresses it the rest of the way and then releases it at full compression. Almost a sort of weird double action - and a little like the plunger on a pin ball machine, if you’re old enough to remember those.

Dimensionally, the Glock 19, CZP10C and the Taurus G3 are almost exactly alike in length, width and height, down to the tenth of an inch and ounce, so no one is really the winner in these areas. It gets down to ergonomics, triggers and cost, and cost is where the Taurus G3 really wins out. The fit and finish is not as nice as the Glock in many respects and certainly not better that the CZP10C, but this does not seem to affect its ability to compete with the others where it really counts.

Is this pistol, that is far less expensive than a Glock, has a better trigger and ergonomics than a Glock, is as accurate as or more accurate than a Glock, and has a life time warranty going to be a “Glock Killer”? Time will tell, but it pretty much is for me. I will most likely sell most of my Glocks and keep only the G17 I use for GSSF matches and a G48 that I carry in certain situations. It is unlikely I will be purchasing any Glocks in the future.

This Taurus G3, as well and the G2C, have what Taurus refers to as second strike capability, meaning that if the round does not go off, a second pull of the trigger gives you a second try at via the same kind of operation a Glock uses. There is a paddle that is below the striker foot when the first single action attempt is made, but then rises up on the long second try stroke. It grabs the striker foot, moves it to near full spring compression and then releases it. It is a rather smooth and easy long stroke. Keep in mind that this second long pull of the trigger only takes the striker spring compression to about 90% of what it was with the first single action type trigger release. This still works because the primer should already have a pretty good dent in it from the first hit. This double strike feature is not something that I would be prone to use because due to many years of training and shooting, a failure to fire would result in a Roll, Tap and Rack even before I realized I was doing it. Sort of like pulling my hand away from a very hot surface. I don’t have to think to myself, “Gee that is very hot” and then pull my hand back – it just happens without really thinking about it. However, for someone that has been shooting double action revolvers for most of their life, this second strike maneuver might come more naturally.

However, what this does is offer an opportunity to turn the G3 or the G2C in a light Double Action Only (DOA) semi-automatic. All one has to do is disassemble, remove the single action sear, and install a slightly stronger striker spring. Since the striker springs are the same diameter as a Glock striker spring, the factory Glock spring will work and it appears that it is slightly stronger. If you need something even stronger then I am sure Wolff Springs could supply you with one. I have actually tried this on the G2C and had no misfires with three to four boxes of CCI Blazer, Monarch and Wolf ammunition. It is like having a slim 13 shot revolver with a light smooth trigger pull. The manual thumb safety still works in this configuration as does the drop safety and trigger safety. This might be an option for someone who has not been trained or practiced enough to keep their finger out of the trigger guard until a decision to shoot is made – meaning less chance of a negligent discharge helped along by a short single action trigger stroke.

Taurus is apparently unaware that the pistol can be converted to operate this way.

I would not have thought about until I read a post on some forum by a person who wanted to find some way to have the G2 carried in the long stroke double action mode and then have it convert to single action after the first shot. It was for safer carrying according to the poster and I believe he also wanted to leave the manual safety disengaged. I could see his point, but did not agree with it – I thought the pistol perfectly safe, as is, as long as you carried it in a holster. His solution, believe it or not, was to remove the slide, insert a cartridge into the chamber, and then very carefully put the slide back on without setting the striker back to its single action position where it would be after normally chambering the first round. That procedure in itself seemed a little unsafe to me, but that is what he wanted.

If Taurus wanted to, I believe they could install a small switch or pin that a person could use to move the single action sear out of the way, converting the pistol to DAO, but they would still need a little stronger striker spring – or a weaker striker rebound spring.

If you can find a range with a G3 in its rental fleet, I think you should give it a try. You might be pleasantly surprised. If the Taurus logo still puts you off, I suggest you view the many YouTube videos that rave about the G2C and now the G3. Taurus has stepped up their game and now producing some of their gun in Florida.

Why my Taurus G3 only cost me $149 and not $249. I work for a brewery that gives its employees two free cases of beer each month plus and extra six cases if we have safe quarter, and extra if you go a whole quarter without calling in sick. They hand out this beer once a month. I don’t really drink that much beer and we are allowed to gift or sell what we have in our que to other employees. I believe a case of beer goes for around $20. I had twenty-two cases in my que and was able to gift ten cases to a co-worker for $10 a case, which put me $100 towards a new fire stick. I don’t think he is an alcoholic, but I think he has a couple of retired relatives that are giving it a good try. Not everyone has this opportunity, but I thought someone might find it interesting how I got the price down to $149. I could have saved a little more if the G3s had arrived early enough to be purchased on Veterans Day when Academy was offering vets, police officers and first responders 5% off. I think this would be the pistol I would recommend to someone who cannot spend a lot of money for one and can’t put in a lot of trigger time.

They actually do make a device for the Glock that makes it as safe as any hammer fired gun.
https://taudevgroup.myshopify.com/produ ... rol-device

Yep I have seen that device an considered getting one for my G48, but the price (IMHO) is way out of line

[jason812]

My “Glock Killer,” well...not really as I will always love my Glocks. But this is my appendix carry piece. Not sure you can find another da/SA in this weight and size with this good a single action trigger. The double action is heavy but doesn’t stack and I like it’s weight for appendix carry.

I will say that I’ve never been 100% comfortable appendix carrying Glocks.

Surfer

I have multiple Walthers. The ergonomics are great and for a striker fired gun, the trigger is pretty good. My dad and brother have XDM's and the trigger on the PPQ is way better. In my opinion at least. The XDM trigger to me, while light, is not crisp. Even the PPS has a decent feeling trigger. I've thought about getting a P99 with the AS trigger just to add to the collection.

[surferdaddy]

I recommend the P99, I loved my PPQ but was never completely comfortable carrying it with its trigger. The P99 solved this for me.

Surfer

[jason812]

I recommend the P99, I loved my PPQ but was never completely comfortable carrying it with its trigger. The P99 solved this for me.

Surfer

I have one with the QA trigger. If I would have known about the AS trigger, I would have picked it over the QA.