GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols , First Look at New GLOCK 17 & 19

Duncan Johnson gives AmmoLand News our first look at the GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols.
GLOCK fanboys rejoice, a new generation is born, and as always it’s GLOCK perfection. The fifth generation has arrived for the G17 and G19 handguns.

GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols
GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols , The wait is finally over, Gen 5 is here!
Duncan Johnson
Duncan Johnson

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- K.I.S.S. Keep it Simple, Stupid. Not so long ago, I had a teacher tell me that.

When he said to keep it simple, that didn’t mean do the bare minimum. He was saying to do what was needed, without trying to look cool or flashy. Still doing what was asked for, without comprising what your goals are. For GLOCK, their goal is creating the perfect defensive pistol, right out of the factory box.  Reliable, accurate, and safe.

If ever there was a firearms company based around the concept of, K.I.S.S., it is almost certainly the polymer pistol kings, GLOCK.

GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols

Proudly claiming new or upgraded 35 parts, the Gen 5 is almost everything that consumers have asked for. Between the Gen 4 and Gen 5, there are twenty changes in the design of the firearm. I had the opportunity to shoot the newest G17 generation, first at the GLOCK facility in Smyrna, GA and then a whole bunch after. I will tell you all now: out of the box, from the factory, this is hands down the best GLOCK Generation I have had the chance to shoot.

If you think this is comparable to an iPhone release, or a Gen 4.75, I would advise you to think again.  I am not a GLOCK fanboy. In fact, this is the GLOCK that changed my mind. Before the Gen 5, I was in love with my SIG P320. Now after shooting the G17 Gen 5, I feel a change in my heart and my head. If you think it has to do with the lack of finger grooves your right, it does, but it is also because of how undeniably smooth shooting GLOCKS are. If you were hoping for the GLOCK Carbine so was I. Instead, we got the best GLOCK Safe Action Pistols yet to exist. Here are my thoughts on the ins and outs of G17 Gen 5.

Outside of the Glock 17 Gen 5 Handgun

GLOCK 17 Gen 5 Handgun
GLOCK 17 Gen 5 Handgun

When you look at this newest Generation of GLOCK pistols you will obviously be drawn to the immediate aesthetic differences from previous models.

The first change you will see is that there are no longer finger grooves on the GLOCK Gen 5. For me, this is all the difference in the world when picking up a GLOCK. Removing the grooves, was a big step toward GLOCK making a pistol that I can get on the gas and quick-draw from a holster, without sliding my fingers into the right spaces.

You might also notice the flared magwell. This is not a competition-style magwell that you can fit your entire hand in, but it is ideal for faster reloads, without being in the way. In reality, this shows the core of GLOCK's design, an accurate, defensive pistol. This is just one upgrade that shows that ethos in implementation.

Next, you will undoubtedly shift to the muzzle, where you may be slightly disappointed at the lack of front slide serrations. I must admit I was hoping for them, but this is part of the K.I.S.S. strategy. Functional as they might be, it still works without them. Keeping it simple, stupid.

What GLOCK did do to the slide, was bevel the muzzle, similar to the shape of the G34 Gen 4s. This reshaping will catch less material as you draw from a holster, it also removes the boxy look that other GLOCKs fall victim too. This slide, from outward appearances, is pretty sleek and gives the Gen 5 a more modern look.

Taking a view down the slide you have to be pleased with the updated sight picture that you will see. Although the polymer sights are still available, Gen 5 GLOCKs will now leave the factory with new styles of night sights, including the Ameriglo GLOCK Spartan Operator sets shown here. At night these sights are extremely visible, and ideal for providing for accurate shots in all lighting scenarios.

Further inspection of the slide will reveal ambidextrous slide stops. Lefties will be very happy with this GLOCK, at least left handed shooters will be, not so much the political ones. With my offhand (left-hand) I am easily able to release the slide stop using my thumb, the same way I would with my dominate hand.

Overall, from outward appearances, you may be saying this looks like every other GLOCK, minus the finger grooves and some new sights. Wait until you see the internals, and then the gun shooting, to really understand why this Generation Five is such an update and improvement to the G17.

Glock Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols
GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols
Glock Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols
GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols

Inside the GLOCK 17 Gen 5

 Above is a view of the Glock 17 Gen 5 next to a Glock 34 Gen 4. The order in the picture is a bit mixed up, but this is how it goes: 17 frame, 34 slide, 17 slide, and 34 frame.
Above is a view of the  G17 Gen 5 next to a G34 Gen 4 (right). The order in the picture is a bit mixed up, but this is how it goes: 17 frame, 34 slide, 17 slide, and 34 frame.

Side by side you can see some differences between the Gen 4(left) and Gen 5(right). First among them is a reshaping of the firing pin safety. Instead of the circular metal pin, GLOCK has reshaped the firing pin safety into a squared ledge with ramping on either side.  This ramping will assist in the trigger bar moving more smoothly against the firing pin safety.  Less noticeable in this picture, yet still another improvement is the GLOCK Marksman Barrel. This barrel features a smaller crown, providing a tighter fit for projectiles. At 50 yards I had zero issues putting dings on a 6” steel plate.

As a quick side note, those of you already flush with Gen 3 and 4 magazines, will be happy to find out they will all work with the new Gen 5 models. Holsters that accommodate previous Generations, should also function with the Gen 5.

The trigger mechanism in the Gen 4 (top) and the Gen 5 (bottom) have some differences. The trigger bar no longer attaches to a spring that sits on the connector. In the Gen 5, the trigger bar slides into a space on the trigger mechanism housing. The trigger return spring in the Gen 5 has been replaced and moved inside the mechanism housing.

The trigger mechanism in the Gen 4 (top) and the Gen 5 (bottom) have some differences.
The trigger mechanism in the Gen 4 (top) and the Gen 5 (bottom) have some differences.

Finally, GLOCK added a new ion-bonded coating to all Gen 5 handguns. The new nDLC finish is more resistant and offers better protection than previous generations. Also, GLOCK has returned to a two pin system and eliminated the Locking Block Pin. In my opinion, fewer parts is always a good thing.

Technical Data for Glock 17 and 19 Gen 5
Technical Data for G17 and G19 Gen 5

Shooting the G17 GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistol

Out of the box, I have never been one to fall in love with a GLOCK, until the Gen 5. In all honesty, I shot a P320, until I started shooting the Gen 5. Now it has become my go to pistol. I might not even change anything about it, I like it that much. People’s heads are probably spinning with comments, but I am telling you to go find someone with a Gen 5 and shoot it. This is a GLOCK above the rest.

If you want to know why I am going to make the switch, for one the science of a lower bore axis really cannot be disputed.  Follow up shots and reacquiring a sight picture are much easier with a GLOCK, especially while moving and shooting. Second would be the removal of the finger grips, which was huge for me, now I can comfortably get my hand on the gun. Third, during the media event at GLOCK headquarters, 10 writers fired a minimum of 700+ rounds each without a single mechanical issue. I also ran some 147 gr, polymer coated hand-loads that worked flawlessly in the G17 Gen 5. Again, as I said above, hits to 50 yards proved no challenge with this firearm.  Overall, I really could not ask for more out of this or any other handgun. Reliable, accurate, and safe.

Now, I am proud to say I have been converted.  My SIG P320 will be taking a rest, and enjoy some vacation time while it goes in for a “voluntary upgrade”. Meanwhile, my new best friend will be hitting the range with me.

The G17 Gen 5, keeping it simple and still achieving GLOCK perfection.

About Duncan Johnson:

Duncan Johnson is a graduate of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. His focus of studies were on History and Government. Duncan is a regular contributor to AmmoLand and assists in the everyday gun-news publishing as an assistant editor.

  • 112 thoughts on “GLOCK Gen 5 Safe Action Pistols , First Look at New GLOCK 17 & 19

    1. I have read the Heller v. D.C. and the McDonald v. Chicago opinions and I think the dissenting opinions have the better side of the arguments. However, I agree with Scalia that if the Second Amendment means anything it covers the right to have a firearm in your home to defend yourself and your family.

      1. Oh, and you lose the right to defend yourself once you step outside your front door? How nice of you to take that view. I’ll bet the criminal element agrees wholeheartedly with you. As a matter of fact, as a retired LEO I can categorically state that they do.

        1. No, I didn’t say that. The Second Amendment says “keep and bear” arms and the “bear” part implies outside the home.

          I just don’t think that the right is as absolute and unfettered as the strident Second Amendment advocates state. Neither did Scalia.

          1. Pray tell what restrictions you believe should be placed on the 2nd Am and why? Many of us (I am sure!) are waiting for your reply with bated breath so we can respond in a forthright and and civil manner.

          2. What Scalia or SCOTUS thinks or thought is irrelevant. The right to self defense is an inherent Right, neither granted by Govt. nor allowed to be taken away by Govt. (though they certainly do their best to convince us that they have this authority). The Second Amendment merely reaffirms that inherent Right that we are granted as human beings.

            22,000 + gun laws in this country and they don’t work simply because they only impact the law-abiding. You’d think we would have learned. It’s way past time to repeal all gun laws including the NFA and GCA ’68. Start enforcing the laws we have on the books for assault, rape, robbery & murder with ANY weapon.

          3. @Viscount, If a “Right” is not complete, absolute, and uninfringable, then elites can chisel away a little at a time until “the state” has all the power to force people to do whatever “the state” wants done. Remember this quote, “The state, the state, nothing but the state.” It was thrust on formerly free people.
            Our founders knew and intended that a civil Right would be a complete and impenetrable defense, that a person could step behind, and be shielded from all governmental action.
            The concept of limited Rights, was introduced by elitist judges to deprive free people of their power to stop government. There is no profit in the population remaining free.

          4. @Viscount: We’re all still waiting to hear exactly what restrictions you consider “reasonable” (always the word Liberals use) and your justification for it.

            1. I think the late Justice Scalia mentioned a series of restrictions that he thought would pass constitutional muster. I think you can prohibit open and concealed carrying of arms in court and other government buildings; in the vincinity of a political campaign event; within a reasonable radius of a polling station on a voting day and around a public school or university during the school year; in an airport or train station; and on the subway. I think that private landowners, lessors and lessees can restrict persons carrying arms from entry onto the premises if they so choose.

              By the way, I live in New York City and am looking forward to the federal courts’ invalidation of large parts of our handgun permit and ownership process. The cost; the foot faults that preclude ownership; the windows during which you can buy another gun.

          5. Viscount: You obviously missed the point regarding Courts and Governments not being able to restrict inherent Rights. Either that or you believe they can. In any event you are wrong on either or both. While private businesses and private land owners can restrict whomever they choose Governments cannot. Why would they want to prohibit law abiding citizens from having the means to defend themselves? To what end? Please explain.

          6. Well, would it surprise you that we don’t get our rights from The Constitution, we get them from God. The Bill of Rights were extra special protections requested by the States.

            What does this say to you textually(which I am against) “The People’s RIGHT to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?

            1. @BB, No, it does not surprise me, and it is very astute of you to mention it. Some people don’t believe in God, so for them the pre-political rights (rights predating the Constitution) rights come from nature.
              George Mason is known as the father of the Bill of Rights because he was the first to believe that our rights (that most everyone knew and understood in those days) should be written into the Constitution, just in case future generations forgot what those rights were.

            2. You guys are great and I am enjoying this.
              First, the 2nd Amendment says, ignoring the preamble, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” shall not be infringed. Not “the People’s right.”
              Second, the courts say what the law is, and on Constitutional questions, the US Supreme Court has the last say. The Court will delineate the contours of that right, as they have done with the rest of the Constitution.
              Third, for those of you who believe that our rights exist separate from any government or society, you’re not alone in the academic world. This comment section isn’t the place for a debate between fundamentalists and positivists.
              Fourth, who’s going to help me get NYC’s handgun laws invalidated?

            3. @Vis, No one is ignoring the beginning nonessential clause of the Second Amendment. There is no difference between the right of the people and the people’s right. Just because you would have said it the other way does not change or invalidate the founders’ intentions. The Supreme Court does not get the last say. They comprise only one of three co-equal branches. Your third is academically wrong. Historically, everyone from kings (Devine Right of Kings right to rule) to philosophers believed that Rights, ideas, mathematics, and every good thing came from God, until some stopped believing in God. Fourth, having written what you have written, who would ever believe that you are interested in invalidating any gun law?

          7. “…..This comment section isn’t the place for a debate between fundamentalists and positivists…..”. Unless you are the keeper of what is and is not allowed on this forum…?

            As for NY, you’re not going to get back your Right to self defense unless you move out of State or Congress passes National Reciprocity. Congress, the NRA & POTUS all lied when they said they’d make it a top priority. No one seems to want to hold them accountable.

    2. I just love a “comment” section when it becomes a super high end world class forum espousing the truths that perpetuate the universe as we know it. Gone, WAY gone, are the days of just buying what you like and letting others buy what they like with everybody just going about their business. Now days everybody is a critic, moralist, economics guru, general jack if all trades and top shelf publicist. Sad, I remember a time when someone in our little group of tin can abusers got a new gun. We all shot it, mastered it regardless of it faults and declared it the best gun ever. Ergonomics wasn’t even a word then and 50 cents bought a lot of .22 shooting. We were all happy and pleased and dreamed of the next gun and it’s fine features. That, and at that age, still trying to keep the girls out of our lives … boy that didn’t last long. Oh well.

    3. Wow! What started off as nice polite pro-gun comment board evolved into (pardon the old military term) a pissing contest with slings and arrows going out in all directions… not a good thing if the anti-gun crowd is monitoring our comments. We all have opinions and we all have emotions, but at the front end I would hope that we can keep our barbs in check when dealing with each other because lord knows the other side is taking notes.

      PS: I’m an old and very experienced competition pistol shooter (retired LAPD) with roots in bullseye, PPC, Action Pistol, Bianchi Cup, etc., and I did one of the first Glock reviews for a national gun magazine back in the day. I tried every way possible to hate the gun (it was funny looking, not enough metal and no positive safety) but in the end I accepted the fact that I liked it… it was simple to operate, dependable and surprisingly accurate. Eventually I acquired an early Glock of my own (Model 21), and I still have it as one of my “go to war” guns with ball ammo because it never jams and it hits the mark surprisingly well. I find review comments from you young ‘uns extremely interesting and I applaud your passion for both shooting and the 2nd Amendment, it gives me hope for the future of our great country. Keep up the good work, and hold your sights on target for each and every shot!

      1. Ah the days of Bullseye, before IPSC & IDPA! The “golden” years, now what we call the “bald” years ’cause that’s what most of us who participated are! 🙂

      2. Like you Chill, i have been around the block a couple of times. As a former LEO, I started with a revolver in .38 and then to .357. I too have a Glock 21 that is in retirement status in the safe. It shoots great, very accurate, never had a malfunction but I can’t get used to the grip. I feel like I’m squeezing a loaf of bread when I pick it up. Maybe the gen 5’s will be better.

        1. Oh45 I feel (literally) your discontent with the Glock grip, a loaf of bread indeed. Here’s a simple workaround that makes a big difference: Talon grip wraps. I bought a set of both the sandpaper and the rubber, and the sandpaper worked so well I still have it in my gun. When you place your order you get a sheet that is custom cut to your specific gun (with adhesive on one side), and then you place the wrap over the factory grip, tack it down with heat from a hair dryer and voila, it changes the “loaf of bread” feel like night and day. It’s been a year or more since I had the sandpaper grips on my gun and they are still holding up, but I’ll bet the rubber grips are just as good in their own way. Give Talon grips a try, you have nothing to lose.

          1. Only one problem with the sandpaper grips, don’t use them if you wear a dress shirt for work! They rub the fabric of the shirt like crazy. The rubber ones work fine OR, you could just do as we have done for decades, use rubber bands!

            1. Yep, you are correct on sandpaper doing damage to clothing. Short response: I use sandpaper grips on my “duty” gun, a Glock 21 that I carry for security work, and realistically I think a G-21 is just too damn big to be carrying out to dinner or a movie… unless you live in a very bad neighborhood/city. On those occasions when I have to go over the hill and venture into the “hood” (L.A.) I generally carry a S&W snubby with factory rubber grips, it offers five “pops” to get me out of trouble and it conceals nicely without damage to clothing. As for abrasions to my duty shirt with sandpaper grips, I went to a sewing/hobby store and bought a patch of sturdy iron-on material that takes the full brunt of the sandpaper grips. Easy peasy.

          2. Yeah, when I said “dress” shirt I meant blue, button down with a blazer over it. I did executive protection for a long time and had more blue button down shirts and blue blazers than I could count. :). Sandpaper grips ruined shirt and lining of the jacket but not for long as I quickly gave it up.

    4. I purchased a Glock 19 Gen 5 today.
      I went to the range tonight and shoot 300 rounds.
      I can tell you that this gun will change the gun industry as we know it.

      You need not to say a word about the Glock 19 Gen 5 until you shoot the gun.

      The Recoil and Accuracy is incredible.

    5. Wow! I thought this was a review of a gun. You men just went batty and I saw very little review over the gun that I wanted to see as a possible future purchase for my husband. Let it be said that I do understand your argument but also let it be said that the next time you make fun of women sounding like hens in a hen house you consider yourself on this site. No offense to any of you sincerely. I found it educational, entertaining and amusing to see you act like hens. Congratulations for reaching into your feminine side…hahahaha. Good luck girls! “My hands are square.” “It doesn’t match my shoes.” hahahahaha

      1. @Amused Girl: Hah, in the vernacular, you ain’t seen nothing yet! Anytime you start talking Glock, Sig or anything else people go nuts and the conversation usually gets highjacked. This time, as is the case lately, it got hijacked by what appear to be a couple of anti-gunners who like to unobtrusively slide in and then really ratchet up the furor. There are a couple of us that try to intercept and call them out early on but they get pretty sneaky.

        I say shoot what you like and what’s comfortable for you. I’ve taught for more than 35 years and while I really like Glocks I have found that a lot of women say that Glocks feel large for their hands. For the beginners class I used a Walther P22 which got a much better reception.

        Join in, it’s fun, be courteous and don’t be afraid to call out those who aren’t. We need more women commenting on these forums just as we need more women shooting.

        1. Walther P22 does look like it has a nice hand grip. I think I would like that. I have never been to an “official” class. My dad always had guns. He had different Colt 22 Revolvers that I loved the looks of for sure. I have always had a little fear of them for some reason but also enjoy shooting them once I get over that initial fear. I can’t stand to even have a toy gun aimed at me. I don’t know what that is about. My dad would have really small guns in his pocket but I don’t remember what they were. He isn’t with us any longer so I can’t ask. They would fit in the palm of his hand. He would say, “This is in case someone sneaked up on me.” As if he was ever in that situation..haha. But I loved the small things. They wouldn’t do much to protect you so if someone “sneaked up on you” they had better be really close..haha. We do have several in our home but I can’t tell you that I am a connoisseur of guns (Hey look Richard, I know big words too…heehee..had to sneak that in). My husband loves it when I shoot with him and I love to see that reaction as well. I don’t own my own gun personally, maybe some day. My hands are small. The Glock is for sure to large and square for my own personal ownership. I am my father’s little girl and do like the old Revolvers. 🙂

          1. Husbands and boyfriends, generally, make poor instructors. Why? Because they pass on the bad traits that they’ve picked up without even realizing it. If you have a chance take the NRA’s Pistol Course, it’ll teach you from soup to nuts, at your own pace. Also remember, 100% of felt recoil is transmitted from a revolver to the shooter, not so with a semi-auto, due to design.

            Once you learn all the parts of guns and how they operate fear dissipates for most people. Knowledge is, truly, power.

            1. @Vanns40: Michael said if you are near us-make us a deal and we will gladly take your course! 🙂 You would have your hands full with me. One day I would be anxious to go and the next day I would simply be anxious. I might not be the student you would want in your course.

      2. Clearly you are unable to grasp the difference between non-functional atheistic change and a functional atheistic change. I pity the man who wakes up to such a stupid woman every morning.. .

        1. I am the man who wakes up to this woman – and am very lucky for it.
          She has a sense of humor and if that gets under your skin … sounds like a personal problem.
          She understands the differences in this generation – as I own a gen3 and we have talked about the gen5.
          She was just amused at some of the comments and was messing with you all.

          1. Thank you my dear! So there Richard (tongue out). Seriously Richard. It was just fun. No need to be disrespectful about it. I would like to have “learned” from you but now I don’t think I would trust in your opinion and that is sad. Plus the only input you gave in the whole conversation on guns was to bash a woman so what trust would even a man have in this gun conversation. It doesn’t portray you as much of a man. Perhaps once you grow up instead of spouting disrespect, you can elaborate on this almighty great knowledge you seem to have on guns. Because I am not seeing your great knowledge in any other post but to attack me. Please, explain to this less educated female of your great knowledge all intelligent one…hahahaha. Have a great day Richard…really.

          2. @MW and AG, My apologies for a poor reception on your first visits here. You, both, sound like a terrific couple, and I hope to see your contributions, here, in the future.

            1. @ Wild Bill: I posted on OldVet and meant to post to you as well about Richard and his comment. Thank you for the welcome and as I commented to OldVet, no need to apologize for Richard. Little people and small things do not get under my skin like that. I simply pray for them as I do the big things.

          3. @AG… Add my chagrin concerning Richard boor , and welcome. Have a daddy’s girl my self , she called me one day last fall. Dad I’ve got this deer down and Johnny’s still at work.
            I talked her thru field dressing it on the phone. She had it hanging in the garage when her husband got home. Oh welcome to you to Mike.

            1. @Oldvet: No one needs to apologize for Richard. My daddy always said men like him are attempting to make up for other insecurities when they need to pick on women. He doesn’t concern me. It was all in fun. I hope he finds it was and joins back in the fun. As for deer…my dad’s wife (stepmom) tricked me into eating it once. I used to sneak in the food while she was cooking and got into pot roast once. It was delicious. Then he told me it was deer. I had sworn I would never eat Bambi or her family. My husband tells me that if the end of the world were coming I would shoot an animal. I suppose if that time comes, I will but for now, I can’t do that. I don’t fault people who do. Don’t have a problem with hunting at all. I just don’t have the heart to do it. It is a necessity and a game. Now give me fishing and I’m all in for that. Michael (Mike as he calls himself) doesn’t do either so I haven’t fished in a very long time but I do love it. We have lots of deer that travel across our land along with rabbits and other animals. I suppose if the time had to happen I would use them for food but for now, Kroger sells me what I need.
              Thank you for sharing your story about your daughter. I love to hear Daddy and their daughter’s tales. It makes my heart happy.
              Thank you for your service as well. 🙂

          4. Maybe a little late to the party, but all amusing. Especially when all you Sally’s got called out by Nancy! Thanks to all for entertaining me for a little bit! As a current gen3 Glocker, The article wasn’t bad either.

        2. Vanns40: Thank you for taking my comment for what it was, being humorous. I’m sure the people you are around enjoy you being around, especially having the knowledge of firearms. The comment was only made in fun, nothing more. My husband, who has posted a response to Richard’s unworthy comment and is waiting for the moderator to approve it, keeps me quite informed enough guns. I would never allow a cry baby like Richard to teach me anything. I would; however, gladly come back for knowledge from you for any surprise gifts for him. Thank you!

          Richard: My response to you-WAH WAH WAH!! It is obvious you have nothing to teach me but an attempt at big words and an additional attempt at degrading women. Good try but, as the saying goes, ‘YOU’RE NOT WORTHY’…AHAHAHAHA. As Vanns40 stated, grow up dude.

          1. @SLV, Sharp eyes brother, I read it as aesthetic change. Glossed right over it! Yeah, I’m sticking with ParaOrdinance, I hear that they go to church every Sunday. Welcome to the site!

    6. I have got to go try the 19 gen 5 ,,,, soon ! I still think the US government made a big mistake choosing sig 320 over the glock !!
      I have 4 Glocks now 19,36,42, 43 being my favorite ccw. But I got to try the new 19 out ….

      1. @Saugeyeman, Often times these contracts are a payback, and have nothing to do with quality of any kind. H&K got a big DHS pistol contract, a few years back, as a payback for the Germans sending a contingent to Desert Storm. That way the U.S. could call themselves “the Allies”. This helped to popularize the war.

    7. When will they be out for us to buy? I will let everyone else get one and find out the bad stuff. Then 2 years from now I will get one, like I did the Gen4

    8. Why the 17 over the 19? Did the cut out in the mag Well on the 19 drive you crazy. It looks like it might be annoying.

    9. I’m still waiting for them to use metal for the sights. That is my biggest complaint about a Glock. Cheap plastic sights.

    10. Until they come out with one that fits my hand like my M&P, it will still be a “BLOCK” to me. You can’t consistently aim a gun that fits your hand like a 2×4!

      1. I can shoot the “block” perfectly, maybe even better than a M&P. Why do you suck at what I am great at doing? Maybe it’s just you.

      1. fanboy? he said he’s never even liked glocks until now. how does really liking a gun, or being enthusiastic about the gun/review make one a “fanboy”?

    11. I have a 22 with a 9 conversion barrel. Don’t shoot it much. I think the Gen 5 will be my next buy though. I like the grip without the grooves. I was considering the Poly 80 thing for the 19, but I have diminished depth perception and believe I would mess up trying to finish it out.

    12. To Dylan, please dude, lighten up, why so thin skinned? Maybe because left thinking people would prefer us to own Glock gen ZERO’s. ?? Excellent article and this gen may be the model that puts a Glock in my holster

    13. Just a note: a friend and I both picked up our Glock 19’s in the early 90’s. He has 295,600 rounds through his and has replaced the trigger spring once and the firing pin spring twice, that’s it. I have approximately 225,000 rounds through mine and decided to replace all the springs and trigger bar at 220,000 rounds just as preventative maintenance. Are they perfect, no, but I did decide to sell all my Sigs and replace them with Glocks because they fit me better and I was more comfortable shooting them. Personal decision, what ever you like shoot it.

      1. I bought a used police turn-in Glock 17 back in the mid-90’s the I put 250K+ rounds through. Hard telling what ‘mileage’ it had on it before it was turned in. I traded it in before I had to replace anything.

        1. Exactly what I did except I bought a 19 & a 23. Put over 220,000 through each, replaced all springs &trigger bar on the 19 and kept on going. Still shooting and carrying them to this day.

    14. I like the changes that Glock has made to the Generation 5, but I think I’ll sit back a bit before I buy one and see if there are any bugs to be worked out.

    15. Great review! I was planning to buy a G19 Gen 4 next week but now everything has changed. I know the backplate is different and so is the guide rod. Is there anything that is interchangeable with the gen 4 besides the mags? Will the grip plug for the gen 4 0r 3 fit?

    16. Last time I tossed a Gen 4 for the latest, greatest thing, I ended up with a gun that can go off if dropped correctly when it was marketed as anything but that.

      I’m just going to wait until they work the kinds out here, assuming there are any.

      1. buy a SIC, and drop it, it cost twice as much, but its not twice as good. may not even be better at all. I own lots of guns, But I carry a glock. when the SHTF a glock will go bang when the trigger is pulled.

    17. Not a single failure? Then failure to feed @ 0:34 on the video. Glocks are good, but don’t drink the Kool Aid. Owned Glock since 1989, I trust my life to them, but perfect they are not.

      1. I couldn’t tell if that was a legit failure or a dummy round drill. I noticed he did flinch a little; he’s got to work on that! 🙂

    18. Thanks for taking that shot at Democrats, really classy. And no, I haven’t heard any complaints from the left about an upgrade to a semi-automatic pistol, other than my own frustration over having just purchased 2 Gen 4s at the beginning of this month. This is not the kind of thing with which people who want better gun laws (a majority of the country, by the way) are concerned; nice straw man argument.

      1. Better gun laws could mean less restrictive as in the ridiculous magazine bans. I haven’t heard much from Democrats about the ban on guns in Venezuela making the citizens easy targets for a Marxist government backed by the Cuban military.

        1. Okay Mel_Anosis, let me ask you a very simple, two part, question and, based on your answer I may have a followup question. Do you believe in the Second Amendment and the right of the individual to defend themselves? A simple yes or no will suffice.

            1. Not necessarily but I’ll ask you the same question I’ve asked others. If you say you believe in the inherent Right of the individual law abiding citizen to defend himself then would you support the repeal of the NFA and GCA ’68?

        2. Mel, half of my family lives in Venezuela, I grew up partially there, and I’ve spent lots of time going back to see family until recently. That is a load bro, is all I can tell you. Everybody is strapped, all the time because violent crime has been a staple for the last thirty years; when I say violent, super violent- like “I guess you saw my face stealing your car, sorry now I have to kill your whole family”- violent. As far as who supports who, Venezuela supports Cuba with free oil, and Cuba doesn’t make arms (so I struggle to see how you got to that conclusion). Russia supports both Venezuelan military, and Cuban military with arms- all Venezuelan military arms are AK variants. Just to set the record straight, Venezuela doesn’t have a lack of guns problem, it has a violent crime/ oppressive (if impotent) regime problem. Came to compare glock gen 5 to the sig p320, couldn’t let your comment stand, nothing personal.

      2. People may want Govt. to supply them with phones too but that doesn’t make it right, it just shows the ignorance of the people involved. This would also apply to people who want to curb “hate speech” , whatever that is, rather than supporting it under the First Amendment.

        The Right to self defense and the means to defend oneself is not a Right granted by Govt. It is an inherent Right that cannot be denied or restricted. I’m surprised you, as a gun owner, don’t understand that.

          1. @Dylan, Almost correct. No government inside the US has any rights, none! Governments inside the US only have powers and authorities. Our Civil Rights limit the government’s powers and authorities.

          2. Dylan: You never answered my very simple question which I’ll repeat for you; If you say you believe in the inherent Right of the individual law abiding citizen to defend himself then would you support the repeal of the NFA and GCA ’68? After all, we are presumed innocent until proven guilty of a crime and why should the law abiding citizen have to prove himself innocent of anything before he can purchase something?

      3. @Dylan, The only better gun law is a repealed gun law. I don’t believe that a majority of the nation (not country) want more infringements on their Second Amendment Civil Rights. Even if true, a Civil Right is a legal shield that a minority can step behind and not be run over by a majority.

        1. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

          Do you see the first 4 words: “A well regulated Militia”? More restrictive gun laws would be enforcing the 2nd amendment, not infringing upon it.

          1. What in hell do you mean by that? Thats just the most stupid statements Ive heard. Please articulate an explanation of that crap.
            You people are infected with something.
            Again I say you dont deserve to even see a firearm let alone own one. You just dont. Youre just sad and would bend over for anything.

          2. Language was more precise in the 1780’s. Our founders had no intention of having a standing army, therefore, the militia was the power of the government. “Well regulated” meant controlled, as in “controlling the power of the militia”. The unchecked, or unregulated power, of the militia was a danger to the security of a free state. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” is the means of regulating that militia. The founders said “people” when they meant “people”, and “state” when they meant “state”.

            1. Exactly, what was the militia is now the army and the police, so then why does it apply to civilians?

            2. @Dylan, the militia was and continues to be all the people. Suspicious of large standing armies, the founders intended that the militia be the decentralized federal government’s main main force. There were, however, problems with that. Realizing that some form of standing army was necessary, the founders came to tolerate a small standing armed forces. Even today, the armed forces of the U.S. are small in number.
              Entire departments of police had not been invented yet, and were not contemplated by the founders. My understanding the history of the original Congressional debates and the Federalist Papers leads me to believe that what we commonly call the police department is the standing army of each particular city. The founders would never have approved of this.
              Towns and cities used to have a city marshall and constables. Modern police departments were invented by Sir Robert Peel of England. American politicians saw emulation of British police forces as an opportunity to “do favors” as part of political machines, and thus get re-elected.

            3. Umm wrong! Well regulated in that context meant each individual should be well trained in the use of the arms they owned. The milita was not a “guard”, national or otherwise. It was made up of “the people” protecting themselves, families, communities and so on up the social order, not down as it seems you would prefer.
              Back on topic, lack of finger grooves is the biggest plus for me in the gen 5!

          3. Dylan: I strongly suggest you read the meaning of those words, as applied in the day. Like most who choose your path (Liberal – Govt. can set limits etc) you have no understanding of the Founders meaning.
            David Hardy would be place to start reading.

          4. As a PS to my previous comments I believe we now know where you stand on the Second Amendment and citizen’s unfettered right to defend themselves, you’re not in favor of it. Thanks for the clarification.

          5. @Dylan, only someone with no knowledge of how to put an English language sentence together would read it your way. The first four words form a clause attached to the main sentence. The first four words are not the subject of the sentence nor the verb of the sentence nor the indirect object of the sentence. The first four words are only an introduction.
            The subject of the sentence is “the right of the people to keep and bear arms”. The verb is “shall not be infringed”. The word “shall” in the law is obligatory. The word “infringed” means to encroach on.

            1. Then what is the purpose of putting “a well regulated militia” in? They started the sentence with it, so it must be important.

            2. @Dylan, Being of great import, George Mason was telling people what was on his mind. See what I did with that sentence? I used a nonessential clause to introduce the sentence that answered your question. Put your finger over the first four words: “Being of great import”. See how the intent of my sentence is not changed?
              Varied sentence structure being necessary to interesting writing, skilled writers strive to entertain their readers. See?

          6. Besides ignoring the punctuation, you ignore actual scholarly research on how the amendment was constructed. Democrats do that, as they hope repeating the incorrect interpretation will somehow become true after repeated thousands of times . Goebbels was one of the first to espouse the theory. It just doesn’t work as well here int he US, to the frustration of progressives everywhere.

            Besides stating in words our natural right to self defense, the 2nd amendment offers a major bonus. It drives Marxist/Socialist progressives absolutely bat-guano crazy. Because of this, it is a source of great fun to watch them repeat such false drivel as “but what about the militia word?”. Pathetic.

          7. Ah, that old straw man. Right up there with, “If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes”?

            Title 10, USC, Ch 13, Sec 311 regulates the Militia. Possibly not the way you’d like it regulated, but that’s your problem, not America’s.

            So, it was perfectly reasonable to take pot shots at you.

            1. @M.Z.W. actually, 10 U.S. Code § 311 is the authority to exchange defense personnel between United States and foreign countries. Title 10, generally, controls the active US military forces. Title 32 controls the National Guard, until the National Guard is “activated”, by authority of Title 10 and order of the president, and the National Guard becomes subject to Title 10. I do not know what governs the unorganized militia.

      4. What pray tell are you talking about? No the left hasnt complained about any upgrades to any semiautomatic pistols, they are outraged that we are even allowed to own them. Have you been living under some rock? Youre saying they did however complain about you buying TWO gen4s at the beginning of the month? Well, shame on you.
        Now, you honestly believe that the Left, along with the majority of the country, wants better gunlaws?? Define better. Better for who? Since no gun law works and actually effects results within the groups who are the problem, criminals, do you see the Left ever being satisfied? Ever saying that they have achieved their goal? Ever achieving gun laws that do actually keep criminals from getting our guns? You, sir, are as big a fool ad you make the writer out to be and you do not deserve to have a gun in my opinion because you are willing to accept the yoke of tyranny in the name of safety.
        Can you prove to anyone that it is the majority of the country who wants better gun laws, other than the thousands of laws on the books currently that are not enforced except against otherwise law abiding? Since I believe that I can sefely assume that you count yourself among that more enlightened majority please trll us what you vonsider “better gun laws” and tell us how you know they will produce the desired end result without infringing on the rights of the non-criminals.
        Dont forget when you leave your house with your 2 new gen 4 glocks to also carry your KY jelly in one of your mag pouches for quick removal, it sounds to me like youre the type who is always willing and ready to accept a good screwing at any time. You have been practicing your mag changes havent you? Just substitute the ky for a mag so your rectum doesnt get torn.
        Good luck, maybe one day when its too late youll wake up to enjoy the torturous end.

        1. Did you just get mad at people for restricting gun rights and then tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have a gun? Contradict yourself much? Who is mad that people are allowed to own pistols? Do you have a source for that?

          Evidence that gun laws worked in Australia: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/23/australias-gun-laws-stopped-mass-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds

          “Better gun laws” means not allowing people with mental issues, a history of violence, or ties to radical groups to own guns and expanding background checks to encompass these.

          Here is a source for the polls: http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

          I don’t think the writer of this article is a fool, just could use a little more class. I was trying to keep this conversation civil, but you obviously aren’t interested in that; that’s fine. Don’t worry; I won’t infringe on your 1st amendment rights like you’ve tried to infringe on my 2nd amendment rights.

          1. @Dylan, You wrote, “…I won’t infringe on your 1st amendment rights…” You are unable to infringe on anyone’s rights because you are not the government. As to Australia, in Aus. sovereignty resides in the government. In the US, sovereign resides in the people. Therefore Aus. can never be a proper comparison to the US. And neither can Canada nor any other former British colony that did not successfully rebel against “the crown”. Stick with the old LTC, kid, and you will learn the basics.

          2. Ah, “Radical groups.”
            Like, say, a political party we deem “racist” based on its history?
            So, by your logic, Democrats shouldn’t own guns?
            Possibly you should keep your mouth shut.
            The Australian claim is crap. You either know that and are being dishonest and trolling, or you’re ignorant of the subject and should stop wasting your time with people who aren’t. Actually, you should do that in either case.

          3. As I stated before, if a person with criminal intent wants to get a gun – they will. There isn’t a law on God’s green earth that will stop them. Do you know why? Its because they are willing to disregard everything that non – criminal people hold sacred (the law, and life). So you keep your common sense gun laws and put them where the sun don’t shine. I’ll keep my gun!

            “For those that will fight for it…FREEDOM …has a flavor the protected shall never know.”

            Semper Fi!

            — L/Cpl Edwin L. “Tim” Craft, B Co 3rd AT’s, Khe Sanh Combat Base, February, 1968

            This is from a brother in arms – I am not Tim Craft!

          4. @Dylan-““Better gun laws” means not allowing people with mental issues, a history of violence, or ties to radical groups to own guns and expanding background checks to encompass these.”
            Where are these folks legally allowed to own guns now? How do you define “radical”?

      5. No, most people do not want better gun laws. Because “better” would be “Fewer” by any objective, rational standard.

        What you mean is “stricter” in order to meet your own phobias.

        That straw man makes nice tinder, but it doesn’t burn for long.

      6. Okay one and all: Ever notice how folks like @Mel_Anosis, @Tracy, @Dylon etc always refuse to answer the one simple question I’ve posed to all of them, namely: If you believe that law abiding citizens have the inherent Right to self defense and the means to defend themselves, and that we are presumed innocent until proven guilty, do you believe that the NFA and GCA ’68 should be repealed?

        Let’s stop all engagement with any people over the meaning of “militia”, the Second Amendment or anything else until they first answer this simple question. If they refuse they’re an anti-gun troll and don’t deserve our time.

    19. I see no reason to give up my five Gen 3s. Someone starting out may have a reason to go with the Gen 5. But then I’m old and set in my ways.

      1. Amen brother. Mine do everything I want them to do and they do it when I want them to! Oh, and they’re more than 25 yrs old 🙂

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *