Nah.... I was trying to say that Glocks aren't impervious to breakage: http://frostedbutts.com/images/kB/terryg wrote:Anybody else click TAM's link and see the picture of the monkey with the Glock??? I think TAM is trying to say something here ...The Annoyed Man wrote:REALLY?? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&clie ... =&aql=&oq=Pacifist wrote:Maybe---if it's not a Glock.texanron wrote:...but should we change out certain parts on our firearms every 1000 rounds or so?
Don't get me wrong. When I have had people who aren't enthusiasts ask me what pistol they should buy for home defense, I'll usually recommend a Glock or a revolver of some sort. My wife chooses to carry a Glock 19. I've shot the gun on a number of occasions, and it is a well made gun. However, they are NOT absolutely without problems. I have experienced a couple of jams over the past couple of years with my wife's Glock. I'm an experienced shooter, and it isn't likely that it was due to limp-wristing. It could possibly have been the ammo—which is usually shot using either WWB, Fiocci, or American Eagle standard loads for practice ammo. My son has also experienced at least one jam, and so has my wife. Granted, that is a handful out of easily over 1,000 rounds, but in as much as we keep this gun clean and lubed, you can't blame it on maintenance.
Who knows the cause? All I know is that even though I consider the Glock to be a very reliable and simple to use platform, it isn't perfect either—which is the claim thrown in the face of those of us who prefer to carry 1911 pattern pistols.