The CZ P10 C: A Look At The New Glock Killer

The CZ P10 C is poised to take a large chunk of the market from Glock, Sig, and other prominent striker fired guns. In this episode of TFBTV, Patrick takes a pre-production prototype P10 C that was supposed to be used for factory testing. Somehow this gun made it through without even being fired and we managed to get our hands on it for evaluation. The new P10 C has a lot going for it as well as a couple of areas that could use some slight improvement. Even though it isn’t perfect right out of the box, it is pretty darned close.

We are looking forward to what CZ is going to do with the production model, with a few small changes it will be a serious contender. CZ tells us that the P10 C will be shipping sometime in April with an MSRP of $499.

Thanks to our sponsors:

Proxibid – Track Down Your Perfect Striker Fired Pistol On

 Ventura Munitions – Retailer of quality ammunition.


Please subscribe!!! Click here.

Please subscribe!!! Click here.


Transcript ….
[coming soon]


  • Vitsaus

    Every polymer frame pistol that comes out is hailed as the “glock killer” until a year later when it turns out that its not.

    • Anonymoose

      You can’t dethrone the ubiquitous polymer marketing king, even as flawed as it is, until something truly, truly revolutionary comes around. A century ago everyone copied Browning’s FN and Colt pistols, and before that it was single-action and double-action revolvers with loading gates. Glock won’t be killed until laser pistols become a thing.

      • john huscio

        Who says glock won’t make one of those?

        • Those of us who are generally just interested in Glock being dethroned so the fanboys will shut up about them.

          • Juggernaut

            Yeah, really- it’s just a dmned pistol

          • guest

            You don’t dethrone anyone or anything by making a blatant copy. That just illustrates how deprived of any creativity and innovation most manufacturers in the market are.

          • To be fair, even Glock’s technology isn’t new, the Striker concept has been around for a long time, and neither is polymer, HK was first with that. Glock basically won out by making a gun that was reliable and cheap, which at the time were two words not often uttered in the same sentence.

          • Ninoslav Trifunovic

            Actually, Makarov was very first pistol with polymer frame, not HK.

          • Sean

            That Makarov never left the prototype stage because those brilliant Russians couldn’t make it work properly.


            German/Austrian engineering > Russian engineering

          • The Brigadier

            That is indeed the reason. Also having commercials where 18 wheelers rolled over the plastic gun and then was picked up and fired a number of shots sealed the deal for law enforcement. Once LE embraced it, John Q. Public did also.

          • Kurt Ingalls

            LOL….I’m a personal fanboy and know exactly what you mean!!!!! 🙂

        • Nashvone

          I will. Glock hasn’t done anything revolutionary in a long time. The changes they’ve made have been mostly cosmetic. Glocks are good pistols and the company is unwilling to change anything major about them.

        • Anonymoose

          They won’t, because they don’t actually innovate. By the time laser pistols are around Glock and their fanboys will still be pushing Gen3 17s as da bess pistole evar!!!!1

          • Rick O’Shay

            Just like how the 1911 fanboys still push it as the best ever.

          • Anonymoose

            And the S&W fanboys, who after 50 years haven’t really done anything differently besides cost-cutting measures and introducing stainless stuff and that painful scandium phase.

          • George Smythson

            If it tain’t no 19 11, it tain’t no shoot’in arn, no how…

          • The 1911 has some things that it does well. The Glock likewise. I don’t think any smart gun person picks a single gun and says “this is the perfect tool for everything”.

          • Nashvone

            It makes a damned good hammer to bash peoples brains in after you run out of ammo, which is handy in a world of seven round magazines.

            Disclosure: Yes, I own Glocks and 1911s.

      • anonymous

        “the ubiquitous polymer marketing king”

        …who sits upon the Plastic Throne.

      • Don Ward

        I read your post and all I want is a Glock clone with a loading gate.

    • anonymous

      The true “Glock killer” will be made of Valyrian plastic.

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    “The __________ is poised to take a large chunk of the market from Glock”

    Insert any polymer framed gun produced since 1989.

    • Nicks87

      The S&W M&P was supposed to do that years ago, and was marketed directly to the police and military, but fell short as well.

      • TheNotoriousIUD


      • Rick O’Shay

        That said, I do prefer M&P over Glock. The ergonomics suit my shooting style better. But nothing against Glock whatsoever.

        • TheNotoriousIUD

          If I had to pick one pistol to depend on for the rest of my life it would be a G but their ergo is like something a kid built with Legos.

          • Madcap_Magician

            I bet the prototyping was actually done with Legos.

      • Sean

        I love how S&W named the M&P Military&Police, yet not one respectable military force ever adopted it.

        People praise the M&P’s ergonomics, but hate talking about its sub-standard trigger, accuracy problems, and other defects.

        One reason police dept chose it was that it was the only “respectable” polymer-framed, striker-fired gun made in the USA that could somewhat compete with Glock. They also chose it because even though it was striker-fired, it has one of the worst out of the box triggers with a heavy pull and mile long take-up.

        Dealer cost on the new M&P 2.0 have dropped into the $300 range, which shows how poorly they are selling. On the other hand, they do make great handcuffs and good revolvers.

        I love the new P10C and would love to have one. Funny how European companies dominate the American defense-pistol market. And please don’t bring up the 1911.

    • Hoplopfheil

      Poise isn’t everything!

  • john huscio

    “Glock killer”…………yet its taller, wider, and heavier than a G19…….”BBBBUUUT it’s only 0,25 wider, 0.37 taller, ect” yea, all those little measurements add up when it’s inside your waistband……..that And CZ seems to have no idea how to market their pistols to law enforcement in this country.

    • CommonSense23

      I feel like CZ has no idea how to market to the masses in general. I don’t think I ever met a casual gun owner who had a CZ.

      • Kurt Ingalls

        Very true!!!! 🙂

      • Sulaco5

        I don’t think CZ really wants the masses to have guns…

        • Nicks87

          No, that’s H&K but that’s an inflammatory debate for a different article.

        • Nathan Means

          Nope they are too well made and to well priced for the average pistol thrower.

      • Sean

        My sister in law owns 1 gun. A CZ 75 PCR.

      • iksnilol

        Because CZs are too good for milk drinkers, that’s why. They are popular in Europe though.

        • roguetechie

          I’m a milk drinker and own a crap ton of cz’s, vz’s, and clones thereof!

          Czechnology FTW

        • Just say’n

          Good ‘nuf for mouth breathers?

      • DW

        When someone owns CZ he is no longer a casual peasant

    • n0truscotsman

      I’ve been hearing ‘glock killer’ since Caracal and M&P, yet it hasn’t happened yet.

      • Caracal lollerskates roflcopters! Caracal is no bueno

      • Sean

        The Glock killer has happened already.

        Select one: Walther PPQ, H&K VP, Sig P320, and others.

        If none of these can be considered a Glock killer, then either the Glock is 100% perfect and cannot be possibly improved in any way or Americans want a dream gun that doesn’t (can’t) exist.

        • n0truscotsman

          All of those designs have tradeoffs in size/dimensions, reliability, ergonomics, etc that make them alternatives to Glock, but hardly a ‘checkmate’ solution to Glocks offerings.

          Read what John Huscio posted 2 weeks ago, just above.

  • guest

    “Glock killer” that is a blatant copy of Glock?
    Give me a break.
    But then again I didn’t expect anything less from a company that made its “own” gun before that is essentially a Hi Power with some minor tweaks, only to… copy another manufacturer later on. I mean seriously – are all those copyers… I mean manufacturers, do they not employ engineers with at least SOME imagination? Why not use the few braincells they have, and create something original?

    That’s IMHO the problem with about 95% of all gun manufacturers today: absolutely zero innovation. Just take something (Anything! 1911, Glock, AR, AK, mags or other accesories to either etc), add some minor tweaks and design changes and presto! A “new” gun!
    Ultimately it all boils down to: Browning, AK, AR, Glock and Mauser… and whatever else “new” that comes along is most likely a copy of these four in some way, more often than not a direct copy, at least as far as civilian arms are concerned.

    • Kurt Ingalls

      LMAO!!!!!! you said what i lacked the words to say!!!!! Thank You!!!!!! 🙂

    • Well, the flipside is that the buying public generally does not reward revolutionary designs, and the American shooting public typically takes a few decades to warm up to any “new products that aren’t PROVEN.”

      Hell, 9mm was the dominant caliber in Europe since WW1, and we had Hi Cap 9mm since 1935 with the Hi-Power. The “wonder nine” didn’t really start to gain traction in the US till the mid 1980’s, and it’s only in the last 2 years that it has finally come to be fully accepted in the US as the most practical general purpose pistol round.

      Likewise, the AR15 has been on the commercial market since the mid-1960’s, didn’t catch on with US shooters until after 2004…

      In terms of revolutionary new pistols, we’ve had one since 2004 – the FN Five seveN – substantially lighter then a Glock, holds 20 rounds, ammo weighs 1/2 as much as 9mm, recoil is 30% less, rifle velocity in a handgun, uses a completely new method of operation, new method of slide construction, new style of safety, is a single action internal hammer….

      In short, it’s the closest we have to a laser pistol, and is a completely revolutionary design. Yet drop into any thread about it online, and it’s a few fans battling a deluge of plebs talking about ‘what does it do that a glock doesn’t, it isn’t PROVEN, some guy tested it in 1990 and its worse then a .22 mag…”

      The US firearms market is one of the only ones where a broad segment of consumers actively disdains new technology in favor of older designs – something that would be unthinkable to the automotive, fashion, tech, electronics industry.

      • guest

        You have some points I agree with, at least as far as “market catching up” in concerned when something new is introduced.
        But let’s clarify that selling point, which is just as valid for guns as it is for ANY product: firstly, it has to be original and useful/practical. Secondly, the manufacturer has to GUESS – and pretty damn precisely at that – what the market needs. This is where I am 100% in agreement with the way Apple defined several market categories by not making something shockingly new and innovative – but by using just the right technologies to make just the right product in just the right way, as in “reading the market’s mind”.
        Same exact thing happened with Glock, though I doubt there was employed any kind of advanced market analysis behind it, but the end result is exactly comparable: a product to fill a specific niche – a lighter and simpler gun which has nothing fancy and just gets the job done.

        Also bear in mind that my criticism is mainly aimed at civilian arms market. Where the Five-seveN may have found some traction (abeit not much at that) in the military/LE fields, it found almost none in the civilian market. Chiefly because civilians don’t really need expensive rounds designed as AP vs level III/IIIA or whatever it can pierce. Innovative – yes, appealing or filling a specific niche – not really. Russians even outperformed it in some way by using +p+ 9×19 rounds with very, very similar performance. And the world has yet to see my wet dream come to fruition – a +p+ .357SIG round with AP ammo, or better yet neck it down to 8mm or something similar, but I digress.

        But I do agree that the market is conservative. But also it is that way because nobody has really coughed up anything new and game-changing.
        When Glock came around it probably faced even more of a s***storm from the “old timer” for just being made of “the same thing Barbie dolls are made of”. But low and behold something quite new took a big juicy bite out of the market share, without as much as any serious advertisement or marketing campaign. So it’s also true that even a conservative market will bend over backwards if something REALLY good and however radical comes along.

        • iksnilol

          No, you don’t get to complain about a lack of innovation when nobody wants innovation. A Ruger GP100 is similarily priced to a Chiappa Rhino, yet the Rhino is far less common simply because it is “strange” (IE innovative). Same applies to the FN 5.7.

          Whenever somebody makes anything new (that might be useful if I might add), people just ignore them out of panic.

          • Or for rifles, check out the fate of the FS2000.

            FN designs the world’s most state of the art bullpup, and get’s the drop on the entire US market, at a time where they were the only current production bullpup on the market. Superior, game changing rifle + a monopoly + a well established brand = total dominance right?

            Yeah, thing flops because “looks like a yacht” and “bullpups suck.” Rifle does so poorly they stop bothering to even import it.

            Meanwhile, FN releases overpriced, unimaginative AR15’s into an already oversaturated market. Sells like hotcakes.

          • john huscio

            Steyr set the benchmark for bullpup with the AUG. Having handled one and put a mag through it, The FS2000 is (was) a huge feeling, awkward handling fatty of a rifle.

          • Sean

            Americans are not really fans of bullpups unless you are an AUG fan.

            Since the AR15 market is completely saturated with models of every price, color, variant, caliber,… from at lease 30 different brands, there is a market for everyone since the AR is America’s rifle but at least FN is making very good quality ARs relative to their price.

        • I would love to see a .357 Sig necked down to .30 become a thing; the new 7.5 FK is the closest available, really neat, essentially a 10mm necked to .30, shooting pointy monolithic bullets.

          As per your 5.7 comments, that really illustrates the issue perfectly – with out adopting new, expensive cartridges, there’s really little room for “game changing.” The 5.7 is actually really versatile when you start to look into the expanding and fragmenting offerings designed for SD, making it a superb, low recoil defensive round (but that’s a whole other subject!)

          Getting down to it, the reason Glock was revolutionary was the Popularization of a Plastic (among other features obvi, but that being #1.)

          But the thing is, Plastic, aluminum, and steel are the materials of modern consumer goods. To my knowledge, there is no other material they could use for weapons (well, until the porcelain Glock 7 is released.) The Five Seven introduced the use of a Polymer overmolded slide, but that requires embracing a new, low recoil cartridge to take advantage of a reduced weight slide.

          So, if you’re stuck with a 100 year old cartridge and 50 year old materials, what’s left for the “revolution?”

          The only things that come to mind, in order of importance, are:
          -Improved aiming systems
          -Integral recoil reduction systems
          -Improved trigger (hard with electronics being verboten)
          -Improved locking system (hard to sell, as most don’t know the difference)
          -Stronger pistol allowing 50kpsi 9mm loads (likely useless due to SAAMI.)
          -Improved ergonomics (hard to beat the current P30/PPQ)

          What else is there?

          • john huscio

            There is no “revolution” until directed energy weapons are feasible. Pistol technology has come as far as its gonna go.

          • Rick O’Shay

            Nah. I predict a new pistol revolution once they figure out caseless ammo.

      • NukeItFromOrbit

        I fail to see how something has changed with 9mm in the last 2 years here in the US. It still has its fair share of detractors (or more accurately those who prefer a different caliber) and they have valid reasons.

        IIRC the FBI went back to 9mm after going to .40 S&W after the wasted potential of 10mm but that just proves the FBI has no idea what the hell it wants and is probably putting ergonomic concerns before all else again.

        • In the last two years we’ve seen the caliber wars largely cede to 9mm; there was the 9mm contract by the FBI, SOCOM/SEALS/ACRONYM going to the G19, and every single instructor now advocating 9mm.

          Correspondingly, we’ve seen a near collapse in the sale of .40 SW pistols, the superb .357 Sig is essentially DOA, and even .45’s beyond the 1911 are in steep decline, although hanging in there for awhile.

          Ironically though, 10mm has never been more popular.

          But yeah, hop into any caliber war thread on a major forum today, and compare it to a caliber war thread from 3-4 years ago, and you’ll see what I’m talking about.

          • Marcus D.

            The .357 Sig was DOA the moment it was announced, just like the Glock GAP. Specialty ammo produced in small quantities will never gain traction in an ammo market awash with plenty of ammo between .20 and .30 per round. It is just too expensive and there are not enough guns that shoot it other than those from the original manufacturer. In my neck of the woods, .40 was the one round that was always available throughout the last two droughts. The performance increase was apparently not enough to justify the increased ammo cost, particularly when the perception of “sharp” recoil and more difficult recoil management was added. Shooting is an expensive past time, and most shooters are cheap.

          • I think what also really undercut the .357 sig was the the factory quickly began to underload it to 1350fps, which is within the range of 9mm +p+. However, it’s a 40kpsi cartridge per SAAMI, and 44kpsi is Europe.

            Loaded to full spec, .357 Sig is cracking 1450-1500fps from a 4″ barrel. And since this is a modern cartridge that has only been offered in premium pistols (no Lorcins and Vintage Lugers to worry about) there was no reason not to go all out with it.

            .357 Sig was available for around $0.30-$0.36 per shot, which is more then 9mm, but was comparable to the price of .45 ACP ball at the time.

          • john huscio

            357sig was and still is in use with several large state LE agencies and a federal agency (secret service) it’s far from dead, though it might be headed that way.

          • Marcus D.

            I am not suggesting that there is anything inherently wrong with the Sig round, only that the life cycle of the average boutique round is rather short. And so far, it has not had a wide enough acceptance to qualify as anything but, not helped by the fact that, afaik, only one manufacturer makes guns that chamber it.

    • ShootingFromTheHip

      Three letters, one EXCELLENT rifle: AUG!

    • Bradley

      How is a cz75 a direct copy of a hi power? I suppose the short recoil locking system is pretty much the same, but that’s true of about 90% of pistols made since.

  • Captain Obvious

    Meh, if you like CZ pistols you might buy it just to have one. I don’t see law enforcement or military dropping their Glocks in big numbers to get another Glock like clone.

    • Sulaco5

      Not with the cost per unit contracts they get from Glock not to mention the repair and replacement contracts that follow.

  • John

    The Glock killer is the Sig P320.

    With a manual safety.

    You’re welcome, America.

    • A manual safety lever is a waste of time, and counter-productive to the design concepts of a striker-fired pistol with internal (and often trigger) safeties.

      • iksnilol

        I never understood why Glock and co bothered with trigger safeties, those are just stupid.

        • guest

          I never understood why your small hands translate into Glock having “wrong shaped grip”, but that also will remain in the world of unknown.

        • billyoblivion

          One word:

        • Drop safety (that most pistols of the time did not have), and a great reference point for trigger engagement. I know when the safety bar is fully inside the trigger, the breaking point is not too far behind. Some double action triggers (especially when Glock arrived in the 80’s) were so painfully long they in and of themselves induced jerking.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, but why not just have a crisp, smooth trigger without that additional “safety” muddling things.

            Ain’t hard to make a gun drop safe without resorting to contraptions stickign out of the trigger.

          • I’m with you on a crisp, smooth trigger. I’d have no problem giving up the trigger safety lever for a good trigger by itself.

      • Hoth

        The trigger is the go pedal. “Trigger safety” is an oxymoron.

        • I like your analogy Hoth. However, when you consider the trigger safety bar functions as a drop safety, and not something to prevent firing the pistol, it makes better sense. The trigger safety bar does not interfere with trigger pull, and I would argue provides the shooter a great reference point for trigger engagement. Some double action triggers are so long it leaves a big question of when the boom is going to happen during draw. The trigger safety bar lets the shooter know when the trigger is fully engaged (bar inside trigger) and the break to shoot is not too far behind.

          • The Brigadier

            yeah Taurus double action triggers need to pulled halfway between El Paso and Dallas before they will fire. The next shot can be made by a gnat landing on the trigger.

    • guest

      There is no such thing as “manual safety” in either good firearms handling or in the world of law. Because of there was then people would never need to unload and show clear at the range, and in the courtrooms the argument “but the safety was on” would actually be acceptable.
      So in that sense “manual safety” is just like GDA recommendations on food labels: yes, it serves some vague purpose, but no – if you are a gluttonous hog then it makes no sense at all and is of no practical use.

      • Marcus D.

        Manual safeties do not prevent negligent discharges, I will give you that. As California’s handgun Roster, has proved, you just can’t fix stupid. Stupid is why we have mag lockouts–because stupid people think that dropping the mag means the gun is unloaded. And manual safeties for people who can’t keep their fingers off the trigger before they are ready to fire–or try to grab their Glock when their Mexican Carry sends their gat sliding down their leg. But there are a small number of actual accidental discharges that manual safeties preclude.

        • guest

          You don’t solve something that requires due diligence, proper training and literally enough trigger time with things like “manual safeties”. I’d even go as far as saying that having or using a “manual safety” is directly dangerous – because it will give a LOT of gun users, including experienced ones, a reason to recline onto a feature that gives a false sense of security.

          Safe and effective gun use starts with proper training and use of the gray stuff between the ears.

          • Marcus D.

            Yeah yeah yeah, let’s hear it for “proper training.” Let me ask you this, out of the tens of millions of gun owners in the US, how many of them have had any training at all, much less “proper” training (whatever that is)? There are a vast number of owners who buy guns and never even shoot them. I’ve read, and I assume you have as well, of DGUs where the victim declares that it was the first time they’ve fired the gun that they’ve had for many years. No state (that I know of, although NJ may have a requirement) requires training before having the right to purchase a handgun (as opposed to getting a CCW, and some states don’t require training for that either).
            As an aside, I live in California, and there is no training requirement here; all one needs is to pass a 30 question multiple choice test for a “Firearms Safety Certificate” that covers some basic gun laws on transfers and the four rules for pistols, revolvers and rifles. Although I have read extensively, I have never had a formal “gun safety” class

            “Proper” training is expensive and time consuming, and there are many people, myself included, who do not have thousands of dollars of disposable income to spend a weekend at some training facility several states away. So instead what some states require is that guns be made “safe” to the lowest common denominator–an untrained individual. For California, that means drop safety (and Glocks have three of those even without the California law, and which are nearly impossible to argue against, Series 70 Colt owners excepted for reasons I cannot fathom), external manual safeties, loaded chamber indicators, and mag disconnects. LCI s are useless; no one pays any attention to them. Manual safeties are what they are. My Kahr doesn’t have one, nor a trigger safety, but it has a DAO trigger that achieves the same result. I am a fan of grip safeties such as used by Springfield and 1911s–they are simple, nearly fool proof, and efficient. My first pistol purchase was a Springfield XD, for ergonimic reasons and the fact that it had a grip safety.

            Some people, like you, hate all safeties, while I do not. EAch to his own, as this is a dipute that is not capable of compromise.

        • Mike

          Referring to anything from the state of kalifornia is the definition of stupid.

    • n0truscotsman

      Glock makes guns with manual safeties already. Them are old news.

      • iksnilol

        Try buying one though, difference between making and selling.

        • john huscio

          They’d mass produce them if there was enough demand…..

          • iksnilol

            Well, HK would mass produce G11s if there was “enough” demand. You can’t really have demand if you ain’t offering the product.

    • m-dasher

      manual safeties……also great for people who wear velcro shoes…..

    • Sean

      Yes, the SIG P320, as well as H&K VP, Walther PPQ, and so on.

      It will be interesting to see how the P10C sells considering its MSRP $499 is best in class compared to the quality brands (Glock, H&K, Sig, Walther)

  • Edeco

    I like CZ’s in general and I’m usually not someone who wants big, aggressive gripping areas. But those slide cuts look ineffective, like the skin wil ride up over the ledge at the bottom and pull other skin out of the cuts with it. Seems like a case of companies wanting unique cuts, like the Smith fish-scales, gone too far.

  • Kurt Ingalls

    LOL….one can’t “exceed” a Glock…..only match it…….Just sayin’ 🙂

    • guest

      Glock is love, Glock is life. And no plebs like CZ will ever match that which is so fundamentally good.

    • iksnilol

      Sure I can, I just need to bash my head with a rock to become stupid enough to want one with better options available for less money.

      • Stephan Koopmans

        Steyr M9/M40 pistols were qualitatively improved Glocks in a number of ways, and were less expensive to boot.

        Didn’t get the Austrian military contract back, and not more than a tiny sliver of market share, either.

        • Sean

          Most American do not like to adapt and do not like foreign things so I think that the Steyr’s trapezoidal sights and grip angle didn’t help for its sales in the US.

      • Kurt Ingalls

        LMAO……you bashed your head with a rock before you ever started posting on this subject…….troll……..

        • iksnilol

          What, no, not at all. Bridge rentals are through the roof now, can’t afford to be a troll no more.

          • Kurt Ingalls

            Your a good guy, you make me laugh in a good way!!!!! “Brevity is the soul of wit” 🙂

  • Richard

    It seems to be marketed to first time handgun buyers who want something like a glock 19 but not necessarily a glock.

    • anonymous


  • Porty1119
  • Zachary marrs

    Its never going to be close to a glock killer untill CZ starts their own version of GSSF.

    Releasing a gun, however good it may be, is only 1/3rd of the equation

  • Marcus D.

    There are several CZs I want, but all of them are Browning Hi Power clones or developments. This is a nice enough looking pistol, certainly more attractive than a Glock, but it is too big for many of us as a carry piece.


    CZ P10 will be in my hands and pants as much as Liz Hurley has. At least I’m a fan of lass~

  • John Edward Nicholson III

    CZ made Glock killer? i didn’t know the were getting into hard cast ammunition! hohoho

  • MrBrassporkchop

    Actually it would be pretty easy to make a Glock killer by copying it, make it a lot cheaper.

    And it’s been done and nobody cares.

    Just need to hype the hell out of it for the normies that only buy one gun. Maybe make a TV series around it. Kinda like that tv series Viper with the dodge viper.

    • Or, what the film “US Marshals” did for the Glock .40. I know that’s what introduced me to the brand.

  • AZgunner

    One of the biggest problems facing all of these new polymer striker fired pistols is that they might (marginally) beat Glock in a number of ways, but not enough to sway the average consumer, let alone large departments.

    Personally, I already have Glocks. I have mags for them, parts for them, years of experience with them, and professional training with them. Some of these new pistols (the Sig in particular) are very enticing, but they don’t offer enough to make me add a whole new platform to my arsenal. If I had cash just burning a hole in my pocket, sure.

    I’m sure departments (the holy grail of targets for these companies) have the same attitude but multiplied by ten. They have years of experience, Armorer support, a whole inventory, and officers who generally aren’t complaining about Glock.

    All told, while the myriad of polymer pistol manufacturers might be subtly improving on Glock, they face an uphill battle for pretty logical reasons.

    • Sean

      I agree but in my gun store, SIG has become our #1 seller, Glock fell to #2, and H&K is a close #3 thanks to their VP with handgun sales.

      I am a GL armorer and love them for their reliability, serviceability at the user level, and overall quality. But at the same time, I am not hooked to them and accept that other companies are doing things better with their new offerings because no matter what new model there is out their from the top manufacturers, they do at least 1 thing better than the Glock.

      With the SIG P320, it is their chassis system and interchangeability, With the VP, it is with their ingenious back-strap system, and With the PPQ, it is their oh so fantastic trigger.

      But at the same time, these 3 guns are all prices on avarage at $50-$100 more than your comparable Glock. So you take that and factor in Glock’s excellent marketing and proven track record, Glocks will always be in demand.

      And at the end of the day the average Glock buyer will invest more into a Glock (sights, trigger, slide stops, magazine extensions) that they could of bought either the P320, VP, or PPQ since they come out of the box way more complete than a Glock.

  • mazkact

    Ya well almost all with regard to operating system have been nearly direct copies of JMB’s Short recoil locked breech system. The new Maxim may be something else but we will have to wait and see.

  • Minuteman

    I’m more impressed by the Stryk B. CZ is an ‘only so and so’-brand to me. Anyway, the 1911 has been fine for over 115 years now. The deadliest weapon on earth is the Marine and his 1911. I love my Protector 45 and my next purchase will be the EDC X9.

  • USMC03Vet

    That +P ammo was savage. Looked like the gun was going to eventually fall apart.

  • Gerbs

    Glock *ock

    • roguetechie


  • scaatylobo

    FACT = if you have to compare it to the Glock ,the Glock already won.
    And since its ‘clunckier’ than a G,why would I bother ?.
    I am sure many love this guys video’s = I am not one.
    For one thing ,he suffers from the “Vickers” syndrome = TMFT [ too much face time ].
    You can highlight a gun WITHOUT putting your face in most frames.
    Rather see a CLOSE UP OF THE GUN functioning.

  • DanGoodShot

    Hay Patrick, I think the object here is to hit the plates not shoot in between em’. 😉

  • Madcap_Magician

    I’d really like to see a single-stack version. Does that make me weird?

  • Ron B

    They are ALL good….Glock, S&W, this CZ, the HK, SIG, etc etc…… Just a personal choice. Saying one is way better than another is somewhat childish really. It’s really the old Ford, Chevy and Dodge pickup debate that pits knucklehead against knucklehead. My personal choice is a Glock 19. But any person who chooses one of the others has chosen a different high quality product that will work just as well. The main difference between them all is not the weapon that they picked….it is the training that the operator has that uses it that will make all the difference.

    • Sean

      Yes, but please don’t compare S&W to the other brands you mentioned