Upcoming “Gadget” for Glock Handguns

g17-4-open2

I agree with ToddG from Pistol Forum that holstering a hammered firearm is indeed safer than holstering a common striker-fired handgun. This is principally because a shooter can “ride the hammer” to ensure it cannot fall during the holstering movement.

Striker-fired guns like Glock, M&P’s, and others on the other hand can easily discharge when they are holstered improperly, either with something catching the trigger or a booger-picker not quite out of the way.

The “Gadget” adds the “hammer-riding” capability to a striker-fired pistol to make it easy for the shooter to holster the weapon and physically tell the striker is being pulled prior to a discharge. (That said, it is much easier to pull a trigger in a downward motion than it is for one to hold the striker in. It may be possible to have the gun go off and a shooter injure their thumb during the discharge).

Color me curious to see how this one will work out.

gotgadget-580x169

The Gadget will be available on IndieGoGo for crowdfunding on July 10th, according to ToddG himself. Pricing is expected at $50.  GunNuts.net also has an first-peek into the system and how it works on a Glock platform.

Description from Pistol-Forum, where the “Gadget” was announced:

As many of you know, one big advantage of a hammer fired gun is that it allows you to ride the hammer with your thumb as you holster, dramatically reducing the danger of suffering an accidental discharge whether it’s your index finger, some piece of clothing, or part of your kit that gets inside the trigger guard. Downward pressure on the hammer counteracts upward pressure on the trigger, and more importantly any movement of the trigger is immediately felt by your thumb as the hammer starts to move.

Soon, a similar capability will be coming to striker fired (SFA) guns:

(all intellectual property rights reserved to Tom Jones & Todd Louis Green)

The as-yet-unnamed gadget prevents the striker (and therefore the trigger) from moving when adequate force is applied to the hinged slide plate. Even if excessive force is put on the trigger, the operator gets a tactile “warning” through the slide plate when it begins to press into his thumb.

Another major design consideration was dealing with potential wear or even breakage. The “gadget” actually consists of two slide plates, one static and one hinged. The static plate remains in place even if the hinged part breaks or falls off, retaining the striker just like a standard stock Glock slide plate. All you lose is the added safety while holstering… the pistol continues to function 100% reliably.

While the patent process is in full swing and we’ve begun field testing, we cannot answer too many questions about it yet. We also can’t predict when the gadget will be available commercially. But because Tom and I are both shooting guns with this installed and other field testers will be getting theirs before too long, it seemed appropriate to announce its existence now rather than wait until people started asking about the mysterious moving slide cover plate on our Glocks.



Nathan S.

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

Nathan can be reached at Nathan.S@TheFirearmBlog.com

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • Nicholas Chen

    Interesting. But why not take extra caution when holstering? There is no reason to holster a loaded pistol fast.

    • Sianmink

      It’s always nice to have a way to easily know if something is starting to catch your trigger while you’re carefully reholstering. I don’t see a downside to this.

    • TheNotoriousIUD

      What about when a cop is holstering his gun to hand cuff somebody?

      • Nicks87

        Still, you don’t hand-cuff until you have control of the subject and back up is on scene so there is plenty of time to do it carefully. If the subject de-escalates and the cop needs to transition from his pistol to a less than lethal option then a quick holstering might be needed but police officers practice these transitions to the point where it becomes a non issue. This product is not needed at all.

        • Thylacinus

          Back up is luxury thst many do not have.

      • Bob

        Pistol whip, then holster.

        • Frankie D

          Most excellent!

    • Canadian Vet

      You’re mostly right. There is no reason for the average gun owner to holster up fast. As a rule of thumb. But as The NotoriousIUD said, a police officer could need to holster up quickly to cuff a suspect, or a hundred different scenarios might yet arise.

      Or, as I said, when the person operating that weapon isn’t thinking 100% straight as a result of post-incident stress and/or has the shakes from the adrenalin crash and/or is exhausted and/or just has an old-fashioned brain fart to which even gun owners and professional users aren’t immune.

      And what about NEW shooters who are inexperienced with holsters and/or got a really cheap or floppy one?

      Or competitors, especially new ones or those using new gear?

      It is a safety device. It can’t replace training, no safety can. But it can help when those with the training have a mental lapse for any reason and with those who have yet to acquire sufficient proficiency.

      • BR549

        Your second paragraph hit it right. I’m sorry, but I’ve always believed that if someone isn’t disciplined and practiced enough to turn off a safety as an occasion presents itself, what ELSE are they going to forget to do during their response? The same thing with holstering. I never was a fan of Glocks and this ILLUSION that Glock operators are somehow more disciplined is a bunch of crap.

  • jeff k

    Seems pointless to me . glocks already have 3 safeties lol . rule number 1 in marketing is to know the size of the market . how many people shoot themselves with a glock pistol while holstering it a year? not a very big market if you ask me

    • Henry W

      There may not be a large number of people who actually do shoot themselves, but then again the proportion of people who need to use their carry guns is pretty small, too. The actual market will be those who *are worried* about shooting themselves, not the people who actually do.

      • Muchas Mujeres

        Is a Glock with an external manual safety still a Glock ??. I have 3, Dont know what the big fear is, if it works for you great if it dont rock on. Their are many modern succesful gtw pistol platforms with safetys I dont think anyone would call them a pos, think of all the pistols with a safety you would trust with your life if Glock did not exist… just saying.

    • Sianmink

      Dunno about you but I always have a bit of a clench when I holster, even though I just checked and cleared the area half a second ago. I can’t exactly look there, I have to work it all out by touch.
      It seems a nice thing to have.

      • Grindstone50k

        Maybe a Glock isn’t right for you if you’re scared to holster it?

        • Sianmink

          Maybe I don’t have a problem with having an extra layer of protection with no discernible downside.

  • Zapp Brannigan

    All the workarounds because of the lack of a manual safety.

  • DIR911911 .

    20+ years of shooting, almost the same carrying concealed , never even knew this was a problem

  • stephen

    Neat idea but in my decades of firearms use, I don’t see this as an equipment problem but a training issue.

    Train people to holster correctly and you don’t have to spend any money.

    Just saying.

    • J.J

      Well all safeties can be made redundant with training. However even the most experienced operators have experienced negligent or accidental discharges and this product is for people who want an extra fail safe. Especially on a gun with so few.

    • guest

      Exactly my thoughts. Any gun related accident can always be traced (with very few rare exceptions) to improper handling. Lots and lots of those situations arise from pure stupidity, over-confidence and lack of proficiency or neglect of basic safety rules that no gadget can compensate for. The best safety feature was, is and always will be the one between the ears.

    • Budogunner

      Well, to law enforcement, training costs money. That is why they have batons and tasers. Proper hand to hand training should make those unnecessary, but it is cheaper to teach them to swing a club or push a button.

      I still remember the Rodney King trial. I committed a faux pas when I saw the video for the first time. Others around me were horrified by the brutality, and rightly so. Me, I spoke my first reaction out loud without thinking: “They’re using those wrong….” Oops.

      So yeah, as a martial artist I have a chip on my shoulder about under trained LEOs. It isn’t their fault, the State just finds it cheaper to give them buttons to push so this product is viable in that market.

  • RickH

    I’m looking forward to this. Cuz when I’m holstering a handgun, if I encounter any resistance I just keep shoving as hard as I can until it’s secure………………maybe some people shouldn’t own semi-auto’s.

  • Canadian Vet

    At the risk of getting crucified here, I think it’s a great idea. I do not doubt that most people here have absolutely no problems holstering a Glock. But what if you had to do it faster for any number of reasons or your coordination and/or ability to pay attention to what you’re doing was compromised? We’ve had 2 videos of cops involved in shootings in the last few weeks, the second showing a guy who gave me a strong impression of being close to freaking out.

    In my opinion a service weapon needs to be safely operable, including drawing or holstering, even when its operator isn’t all there (within limits) when one is flushed with adrenalin or in shock at the events that just transpired and either isn’t thinking straight or has a nasty case of the post-incident shakes, he might not notice something might pull the trigger.

    Even for competitors or shooters learning to use a holster it is an added safety layer.

    So overall, I think it would be a nice addition to service weapons across the board and a good option to have available for ‘civilian’ applications.

    • J.J

      It doesn’t detract from the gun. It only adds another layer of safety. No responsible gun owner should scoff at safety.

      • USMC03Vet

        Except you hear all the time from glock owners that grip safeties which do the same thing only better are worse than cancer.

        • Ben

          The difference is that a grip safety must be depressed for the gun to fire. It requires an action on your part to fire the gun. This gadget, on the other hand, requires absolutely no manipulation to fire the gun. Absent having the back of your Glock pressed up against a wall, there appears to be no way that the Gadget will prevent your gun from firing.

          • USMC03Vet

            Who knew positive control of the firearm in your hand being a requirement to depress the trigger was a bad thing.

            Glock owners, I swear to God……..

          • BR549

            Glock owners remind me of car owners with an incessant need to to buy a muscle car to support their weak self image.

          • Joseph Smith

            How do I subscribe to your newsletter?

        • Nicks87

          Much worse than cancer and you cant get rid of them with doses of radiation either.

  • john huscio

    The first useful aftermarket add-on (excluding the run of the mill stuff like night sights, ect) I’ve seen for glocks……..if it weren’t for the horrid gripangle, this might bring me back to glock…..

  • john huscio

    I could see this being standard equipment (or at least an option) on all striker fired pistols in the future……the p99 has had it for 20 years…

  • Michael Wilson

    this is STUPID, why dont they make a barrel/silencer or something.

    • Joey JoJo Jr.

      OMG, I know, right? And they’re literally forcing you to buy it. Even though you don’t like it. How stupid.

    • Llewellyn Franks

      Well they already do make a barrel, it comes in the gun when you buy it.

      • Michael Wilson

        I said a barrel/silencer. You know the concept of combining the 2 together in such a way they are one unit
        You can call it a ba~lencer or something like that

        • Llewellyn Franks

          Integral suppressors don’t actually have any advantages over traditional muzzle thread mounted suppressors unless the firearm itself is designed around that feature. They’re harder to clean and present some mechanical issues as well.

          Besides god forbid someone make a clever product instead of putting out a new magazine or suppressor like everyone and their grandma does,

        • Ben

          Uhh, that wouldn’t work. Having a permanently attached silencer on the end of a Glock barrel would prevent you from separating the barrel from the slide; the muzzle couldn’t pass through the barrel hole in the slide. So you could never really field strip your gun.

          • phauxtoe

            Seeing as the product isn’t even invented yet, there is no way that you can know how it will affect the cleaning of the gun!

          • Michael Wilson

            I’m not talking about a permanently attached silencer on the end of a glock barrel. I’m talking about a barrel that suppresses the sound of the round going off. The barrel, and slide and silencer would be one unit. It would take some re-engineering, calibrating, and testing. It would not be easy. I see how it can be done and I don’t expect you to.It would still be a glock that can be field strip but the parts involved would increase. Making a barrel with baffles that allow the gases to escape into the slide without…well it would have to be single shot, I’m thinking. Maybe it is easier to build a weapon with an internal silencer.

  • Sianmink

    Consider me to be in line.

  • Nathan Means

    Good idea. Next up is a glock with a decocker and an external hammer. Not going to happen? Oh well back to my CZ P07.

    • Joe Ker

      I’m in the CZ camp as well. After owning and shooting basically everything, extensively – the P07 (and P09) is my preferred handgun.

  • Jay Bee

    I think I will stick to my grip safety.

    Slightly alter your holster style not to depress it while holstering and I don’t have to worry about accidental discharges.

    Sorry Glock guys.

    • Joe Ker

      Definitely the advantage of XDM platform (and the trigger and grip are better too, IMO). Polished feed ramp, match grade barrel… what’s not to like? Having said all that, I still prefer my P07. Something about hammer fired that I feel more comfortable with. But all down to individual preference at that point.

      • Jay Bee

        I feel you on the hammered vs hammer less.

        The idea of a few thousands of metal being the only thing that keeps from being religious(holy) really boggles my mind. But hey everybody else is jumping off the bridge. I just wait my turn.

        • Budogunner

          The same is true of hammered pistols, too. Consider the hammer/sear engagement. The amount of material in contact is pretty much the same.

    • Budogunner

      Agreed. I know lots of people think the XDM grip safety is terrible, but I like it for this reason. I’ve never failed to engage it when going on the gun and if you place your thumb on the rear of the slide while holstering you not only ensure there will be no accidental discharge but the slide stays locked so you don’t risk pushing the slide out of battery.

      Still, Glocks are fundamentally great guns. I’m happy to see some innovation to add more modern safety features to them.

      • Tim

        Um…no. Placing your thumb on the rear of your slide may inhibit proper cycling, but if there is a round in the chamber and something catches the trigger the weapon will still discharge.

        • Josh Baker

          On an XDM the slide stays locked until the grip safety is depressed.

        • Budogunner

          Not on an XDM.

    • USMC03Vet

      Its one of the main reasons I went with an XD for conceal. I’m surprised more conceal carry sub compacts don’t have it.

    • Nicks87

      You can keep that awful grip safety.
      -Glock guy

      • Steven Parker

        Thank you I will.

  • Rabitt212

    Ehh I can already do this with my Walther PPS and I’m almost sure my buddy can do the same with his Ruger SR9. They both have those little loaded chamber indicators on the back that you can put your thumb on and won’t allow you to pull the trigger. Never could figure out why all striker fired pistols don’t have that feature.

    • mig1nc

      We also had it on the P99, and Walther took it away on the PPQ. I don’t know why. You can put a P99 striker and back plate on a PPQ though.

  • phauxtoe

    well that will make an already crappy trigger even Worse!

    • Ben

      Seeing as the product isn’t even released for beta testing, there is no way that you can know how it will affect trigger pull.

      • phauxtoe

        Adding more rocks to a pile Never makes it lighter.

      • walsh

        From the Indiegogo campaign, “The Gadget has been in development and testing for almost six years. Dozens of Gadgets on Glocks of almost all models and calibers have been tested to a total of more than 300,000 rounds in a variety of shooting & environmental conditions. There have been no breakages, failures, or malfunctions. Some of the prototype Gadgets have seen in excess of 50,000 rounds each.”

        • Ben

          Internal testing is alpha testing, not beta. And while that speaks well for the gadget’s reliability, it says nothing about trigger pull.

          • walsh

            It’s been discussed extensively on other sites. It has no perceptible impact on trigger pull. Additionally, the testing was almost entirely done by people outside the company.

  • nifty but I wonder if the extra complexity will introduce reliability problems to the guns they are installed on.

  • sliversimpson

    Great, innovative idea.

  • Iblis

    A solution in search of a problem. Keep your finger off the trigger when you reholster. How hard is that? Finger OUTSIDE the trigger guard. Just another gadget to spend money on and spend hours training people to use it.

  • Rob J

    I remember this product when Todd was testing it during his Glock review. If you guys have not seen his reviews find your way over to his website. They are the best and most thorough reviews period. I have been waiting for the gadget to resurface since. I expect anything that Todd is involved in to be 100%.

    As for the concept, I believe it has a lot of merit. Particularly for those of us that prefer aiwb carry. Many industry pros have policies in place to prevent accidents with holstering in classes and this product is a further safety precaution to minimize risk. People should not be quick to dismiss it. In conjunction with training it offers increased operator safety. It reminds me when the Marine Corps added manual safeties to the m2 around 2008/2009. Despite the fact that we would use a fired casing wedged behind the trigger as a make shift safety, you would have they thought that someone had just beaten their mothers from the reactions to its addition. Gun people are weird like that, particularly machine gunners and those that pray to the church of browning or glock. Could you imagine where we would be if other industries scoffed at innovation in the same way that the gun industry does.

    • screwtape2713

      This must be why The Holy Browning invented the grip safety for striker-fired pistols over a century ago — on the 1900, in fact. And then was one of the early pioneers of manual safeties too…

  • Leigh Rich

    Canik

  • Jarhead0369

    No number of gadgets will make up for stupidity or poor training. Keep your finger off the damn trigger and get your gear right so nothing CAN “get in the trigger”. 100% safe does not exist.

    • screwtape2713

      A grip safety and/or a manual safety is a big help too, especially on a striker-fired pistol with no external hammer. Gee, I wonder if that “might” be the reason that Browning invented the grip safety and put it on the very first striker-fired pocket pistol back in 1900? And then put manual safeties on all his other pistols?

  • Anon. E Maus

    Discharge of a striker fired pistol when holstering them is operator error.
    Glock has a trigger-safety.
    M&P has a trigger-safety.
    Etc.

    Don’t have your finger on the trigger and you’re not going to shoot your leg.

    • petru sova

      You are not very mechanically inclined. The trigger safety is an obscene joke. It does not work and it will snag on just about anything and deactivate. Try unloading the Glock sometime and then carry it without a holster for a day and at the end of the day check the gun and you will find the trigger safety did not prevent the striker from running forward. The normal movement of your body and clothes will snag the trigger and deactivate the safety. Last year a famous black athlete found this out the hard way when he sat down at a New York restaurant and his Glock went off in his pants. Great trigger safety wasn’t it.

  • Daniel Hamilton

    It may look swell to some here, but I know that anything added to something else often will result in problems down the line. I’ll stick to the tried and true method, and know my holster and how it works with the gun it was intended, before I start using it with a loaded weapon.

  • Peter Kinkead

    FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER! FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER! If you feel the holster on your finger as you insert your gun, AND KEEP PUSHING, lesson learned. If you can’t remember this one simple step, what else are you gonna forget? You revert to your training.

  • CanineCo

    Smooth is Fast… And keep your booger hook off the bang switch.

  • Frankie D

    The definitive answer to a non-existent problem.

  • Johnny Nightrider

    Just take care holstering your striker fired pistol,Glock,and don’t holster it super fast like a mad man.

  • petru sova

    Although I applaud this device assuming it works as intended what the Glock has always needed is a manual safety and a better loaded chamber indicator. Some Police departments had so many Glock accidental discharges they gave up and went to more safely designed pistols with hard traditional double action only pulls.

    The totally unsafe take down levers should also be redesigned as well as they are an accident waiting to happen. If you forget just one time in your life to unload the chamber this unsafe system insures you will shoot yourself or someone else. Contrast this with the Beretta which requires you to lock back the slide which means a loaded round would be ejected out of the gun. Also the Beretta takedown lever does not make you likely to get your hands out in front of the gun like the dual lever of the Glock does. A real engineering Moron designed the Glock unsafe system.
    When I hear people say “just do this or just do that” their arrogance is invoking the “Darwin System” which means their arrogance insures that they will not survive as long as people who understand that anyone can and eventually will make a tragic mistake with unsafely designed systems whether they be guns or some other machine. Its the ability to recognize such unsafe systems that insures the survival of the more advanced human.