BREAKING: New Glock 19 MHS 9mm & Glock 23 MHS .40 S&W Photos

Glocks' MHS submission, a variant of the G19.

As we all know the competition between Glock and SIG for the military contract has created a great deal of coverage in recent months. While it may seem the story is over with the award given to SIG there is another side of this story that has not been addressed. I’ve obtained a good deal of information in the past week which will be published later this week. We have a brief overview of Glock’s protest here.

In the meantime I wanted to share these photos of the pistols Glock entered into the Modular Handgun System (MHS) competition.  The pistol are named the 9mm Glock 19 MHS and the .40 S&W Glock 23 MHS.

While the contract was for 9mm Glock also produced a Glock 23 MHS model in 40 S&W. Unlike other participants in the competition Glock only submitted one pistol rather than a full size and then a compact. The Glock 19 MHS has a Glock 17 frame with lanyard hole on the base of the grip as well as a flared magwell. The slide is from a Glock 19. Of course, the frame was shortened to accommodate the model 19 slide.

The MHS also has a manual thumb safety. The first Glock pistol with manual safety was developed at the request of the Austrian Army in 1982.  This iteration of the safety is ambidextrous and marked S and F. As you can see the rest of the pistol is pure classic Glock.


The magazine photos are also in the desert tan type color. They come in standard Glock 17 capacity as well as extended magazines. From what I’ve been able to find out there has been no discussion on these being available to the public as yet. Time will tell. (UPDATE: Glock confirmed this pistol will not be offered to the public). Glock USA says they are definitely not offering manual safeties to law enforcement or military contracts in the future, this was a once off design and will not be offered again.

The full article I mentioned in the beginning will be posted by Friday at the latest. Enjoy the photos!

Phil White

Retired police officer with 30 years of service. Firearms instructor and SRU team member. I still instruct with local agencies. My daily carry pistol is the tried and true 1911. I’m the Associate Editor and moderator at TFB. I really enjoy answering readers questions and comments. We can all learn from each other about our favorite hobby!


  • Anonymoose
    • Major Tom

      It is HERESY to want one of those Glocks.

      • Nicks87

        I’m both disgusted and disappointed after seeing these photos. Now I can never un-see a glock with a ridiculous thumb safety. The pointlessness of the lanyard loop is just too much. Thanks TFB.

        • Kivaari

          I add lanyard loops to as many guns as I can. They are great when you spend time in the woods.

          • Wow!

            Lanyards are terrible for the woods. They can snag and slap against stuff when you move making noise. If you don’t lay your gun down and keep it in the holster until use you don’t need a lanyard.

          • Mack Greer

            The Army has used lanyards since there was an Army. I found no issue with it.

          • Just shows you don’t know how to use a lanyard correctly. I’ve rarely had one hang up on a holstered pistol — I was more likely to get my WEB GEAR hung up than a lanyard, actually…

          • Wow!

            As your own comment says, you rarely had your lanyard snag, while the rest of us without lanyards never had to deal with even the occasional snag of a lanyard. A proper holster should eliminate the need for a lanyard except in very niche situations.

        • Yep you are very welcome Nick:-)

        • albaby2

          Why the big hate on safetys. You don’t have to use them, you know. Maybe safetys should be removed from AR’s too?

          • Diana John Butera

            Thank you, I have hesitated to carry my Glock 19 because of no safety and just a 5 lbs trigger pull, STRESS causes accidents and many who decry safeties probably never drew a gun in defense of life. A lot can happen with adrenaline flowing and every muscle twitching. Adrenaline is for Fighting or Running not controlled dexterity and focused aiming!

          • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

            then you have to but and even shitier heavy trigger on them.

          • albaby2

            I’m not convinced. That would be true only if the safety was also a decocker. 1911’s have safetys and are do not have heavy triggers.

          • Wow!

            It is because a Glock already has internal safeties that prevent the possibility of an AD. A safety on a glock is a needless point of operator failure. An AR is hammer fired and is cocked when condition 1 making the possibility of AD still possible.

            Remember, safeties do not make the user safer, it makes the loaded gun safer when holstered or slung. Safeties help avoid AD, not ND.

          • The “safeties” on a Glock are just there to keep it from going off if you drop it.

            Since that’s not how most AD/NDs happen, and almost all modern guns are already “drop safe” (and have been, for at least a century), this isn’t a realistic boast for Glock. “Look, because we managed to do what people have been doing since shouting ‘Get a horse!’ at a Model A Ford stuck in the mud was the height of wit, we don’t need to actually provide a safety against the sorts of things that ACTUALLY cause accidental discharges!!!”

          • Wow!

            I don’t think you understand what an accidental discharge is. A gun firing from a mechanical error is an AD. A gun firing from user error is an ND. A glock can only fire when the trigger is pulled, making any unintentional discharge an ND, not an AD. A safety on a Glock is an unnecessary redundancy because if a user would fail to keep his finger off the trigger, he is probably going to fail to engage his safety. Again, safeties don’t make people safer, it makes guns safer. Glock is already safe as is, and a safety doesn’t make it safer than safe.

      • coachscott134

        I want both!

  • Twilight sparkle

    This took the worst of everything about each glock and put it all together making it even worse by adding a safety… no wonder it wasn’t selected

    • Anonymoose

      >no front serrations
      >no MOS
      >single pin like the auto-disassembly M models
      I wonder if they used a polygonal barrel or their new cheapy conventional barrel?

      • Twilight sparkle

        Probably the cheap conventional barrel, we will have to wait and see on that. The only thing I actually like is the addition of a lanyard loop

        • andrey kireev

          who the hell uses the lanyard loop these days ?

          • Twilight sparkle

            Nobody, but I like how it looks, plus it means that glock probably filled in that empty cavity

          • andrey kireev

            Personally, I think it would get on the way of smacking the magazine, Like I’m used to doing with all of my handguns….

          • pun&gun

            Yeah, looks pointy and easily broken to me.

          • Phillip Cooper

            You’ve watched too many Die Hard and Lethal Weapon movies.

          • andrey kireev

            Huh ? In several of my handguns magazine spring gets tight when fully loaded. Notable example is my Sig P938. Smacking the magazine ensures that it goes home all the way and gets seated, otherwise you can induce malfunctions. But whatever floats your goat….

          • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

            When your gun malfunctions sometimes you have no other choice but to put on your glove…

          • You have not been shooting long have you?

          • andrey kireev

            only about 15 years or so…

          • After the military trials of the 1980s, a lot of handgun companies put lanyard holes on their handguns. So, it was pretty common to see handguns in the 1980s and 1990s with lanyard holes.

          • richard kluesek

            yeah, the old custom 1911 gunsmiths used to remove these for that reason.

          • Ron

            Every pistol in the Marine Corps infantry has a lanyard on it. Some people carry these guns in places more hazardous than a strip mall. Do not assume to know what they demand in a pistol.

          • Hoplopfheil

            They should buy some old Ruger P89s then. Those had a lanyard loop!

          • Rob

            There is absolutely no train of logic that could possibly support that claim.

            This pistol was not something that Glock created in a vacuum. It is the direct result of Army requirements and wants. Considering it was one of the finalists, is say they did an okay job of it. It is not something that Glock designed for the consumer market so it makes sense that you do not value some of the changes. What doesn’t make sense is your inability to understand that this was not something Glock haphazardly put together and submitted.

          • Hoplopfheil

            I think you replied to the wrong person.

          • Twilight sparkle

            You do realise that I’m the one who liked the lanyard loop right??

          • Wow!

            Lanyards are actually very poor for dangerous situations since they tend to tangle and provide an unprotected point for an adversary to grab easily. For a brief time LEAs issued lanyards and quickly quit it when they realized they caused more problems than they solved. Lanyards are for retention for those who are prone to dropping their weapon or forgetting it, or in special cases such as a helicopter where you really don’t want any loose projectiles dropping off.

          • richard kluesek

            I remember years ago in the revolver age seeing NYPD motorcycle and mounted cops using lanyards. Today, maybe a paratrooper making a jump might find one useful.

          • Wow!

            I don’t think it would be good for paratroopers at all. Granted, I have no experience doing such thing, only working with ropes, but I imagine that free falling, you would have the free end of the lanyard whipping around possibly tangling up or at least creating an annoyance. Not to mention it does nothing since the handgun should already be retained securely in the holster. The lanyard is a really niche item as there are very few situations where it actually adds retention worth it’s hindrance. Handguns do not have the bulk to stay put when slung, making it flop around, or drag on the ground if people attach the lanyard to their belt rather than shoulder. Lanyards are supposed to be used like one point slings where the handgun will hang within reach just below the belt line if dropped. This also removes a great deal of the slack in the lanyard when carrying. Additionally handguns already have a retainer better than any sling in the form of a holster. We only use slings for rifles because there is no convenient holster that is fast enough for it like there is with the small handgun, although those weapon clips to help stow a slung rifle behind your back is becoming more popular, and they are sort of like a holster for rifles.

          • Hector Rivera Jr

            As someone who spent a whole night looking for a SEAL’s pistol that he lost on a parachute jump on an airfield, I would say that a lanyard still has uses in today’s military.

            Before anybody jumps in, no, I was not a SEAL, I was CCT and was working that drop during an exercise.

          • Wow!

            Out of curiosity did you find out how it got lost? Was it a failure of the holster or something, and if so was it one of those canvas Alice style setups?

          • I am a jumper, and lanyards with break aways have saved me from losing crap more than once. Not just guns. But the key is, you don’t want something that doesn’t break at less than 80lbs, because that’s the strength of the break tape you have to break to deploy your parachute (military static line).

          • The solution is simple. Use a lanyard that breaks away when snatched, but doesn’t break from the weight of the pistol. Matter of fact, the USGI lanyard does that naturally, because the metal clip hook will fail long before you get jerked around.

            I’ve spent plenty of time with lanyarded pistols in the field. Never had a problem, and every lanyard I ever used had a simple mechanism to break away (even if, like the hook on the GI ones, it wasn’t specifically designed to do so).

            Now, the old style British lanyards, where it was clove hitched around a steel lanyard ring like a static line on a USL hook, and then looped around your neck? Friggin’ suicide cords….

          • The Brigadier

            It might be a good idea for people who open carry in states that allow this. I have always had the concern that someone could come up behind me and simply lift my revolver out while my hands were full. That is why I don’t open carry.

          • Flounder

            They knew. The army would shove that hole full of pork. And the marines would fill it full of crayons…

            The brass figured a lanyard loop would be more professional.

          • DChrls

            I read that the empty cavity allows powder residue to drop out of the frame.

          • LGonDISQUS

            Teutonic heritage weiner measuring tape is installed there.

          • Phillip Cooper

            I do, when I hunt, fish, or am on a boat. So do all my shooty friends.

          • People who use their handguns besides at a shooting range.

          • Kivaari

            The military and me.

          • andrey kireev

            weird, I’ve never used one XD (out of about 200 M9s we stored in the armory, only one had a lanyard)

          • Kivaari

            someone did not do their job. Each should have had one attached, or the lanyard already attached to the LBE.

          • andrey kireev

            Army / AF Armory here

      • rockinaglockin

        you know there is a thriving aftermarket for people who shoot lead and take the factory glock barrel and toss it in a drawer in favor of conventional rifling. I personally avoid polygon guns for that very reason. So I’m all for a new conventional rifled glock barrel.

        that said, what is it with brown plastic guns, eew, eew, eew.

        • Anonymoose

          Shooting soft lead in automatics is just weird. I can understand using heavy hardcast trail loads (which still function fine in polygonal barrels because they’re hard), but FMJs are just too cheap usually.

          • Nicks87

            I cant remember the last time I shot soft lead. FMJs are cheap, plentiful and cleaner.

          • The Brigadier

            The new spray cleaners from Hoppe’s and others make cleaning firearms a pleasure. Lead and copper are instantly dissolved and simple flow out of the barrel. The material sciences are still doubling their knowledge ever four months and the miracles keep coming.

          • Wow!

            Cast bullets can be a quarter of the price of FMJ. I do powder coating and you can fire them at the same velocity as FMJ and it actually is cleaner shooting than FMJ bullets. Powder coated bullets work fine in factory glock barrels with the “unsupported chamber” but I have a lone wolf barrel because it is threaded.

        • HSR47

          I’ve put thousands of cast lead bullets down my polygonally-rifled Glock barrels without any issues.

          The problem isn’t cast bullets, it’s cast bullets that are too soft.

          • Sunshine_Shooter

            You may have put thousands of cast bullets through your Glock, but I doubt there have been more even a thousand who’ve put one cast bullet through a Glock.

          • HSR47

            There are a lot more of us than you think. Also, I didn’t say my Glock, I said my Glock barrels. Plural. I have many Glock pistols, and every single one in 9mm that I have actually put rounds through has seen a steady diet of cast bullets.

            I know people who have put more cast bullets downrange through Glock barrels than most people will ever shoot.

          • Sunshine_Shooter

            Your last paragraph proves my point. There may be quite a few of you guys casting your own bullets and shooting them through stock Glock barrels, but you aren’t the majority. The vast, vast majority of Glock shooters won’t handload, and the majority of them won’t cast their own bullets.

            I’m glad you do, so keep doing it.

          • cisco kid

            Its a total myth that polygonal barrels are unsafe to shoot lead bullets in and also that they are inaccurate. I have been doing it for 37 years and have fired thousands upon thousands of lead bullet reloads out of such barrels. If sized properly they are often more accurate than jacketed bullets and any type of barrel will blow a gun up if the barrel never gets cleaned and clogs up with lead. Gun factories do frown on anyone shooting reloads because some people are very careless when hand-loading and if you do not follow safe procedures then yes you can even blow guns up with jacketed bullets as well.

        • cisco kid

          Its a total myth that polygonal barrels are unsafe to shoot lead bullets in and also that they are inaccurate. I have been doing it for 37 years and have fired thousands upon thousands of lead bullet reloads out of such barrels. If sized properly they are often more accurate than jacketed bullets and any type of barrel will blow a gun up if the barrel never gets cleaned and clogs up with lead.

          • Colonel K

            CK, I’m glad you’ve had no issues with lead bullets in Glock barrels, but I would caution other shooters who do not know how to effectively remove lead buildup from a bore that there are two potential issues they should be aware of, the first of which is significant accuracy loss. This loss may not be as pronounced in a polygon bore as it is in more traditional rifling, which means the shooter may not even realize he has a lead buildup problem. However, as lead continues to build up, pressures begin to rise, and this is the more serious issue. How serious is it? All I can offer is my own anecdotal experience. When I went through Glock’s armorer certification course many moons ago, their instructor did specifically warn us that the polygon rifling will collect lead to the point that over-pressure can become a problem. He cited the example of one Glock rental range pistol that had some ungodly amount of lead 9mm ammo fired through it (over 100K as I recall) without proper cleaning, before it failed. That’s when Glock got to examine it and discovered the lead buildup had reduce the bore size to about 30 caliber! This is both an extreme example of abuse and a testament to durability, but it doesn’t resolve the lead bullet debate. Based on this lone example I would say there is a risk in shooting lead, but that risk contains a huge margin for error, and even that can be negated by applying proper lead removal techniques. But Glock, being the manufacturer, and therefore subject to litigation, cannot afford to ignore any potential problem, hence the warning about lead bullets.

      • Flounder

        elaborate on the single pin please. This is the first I am hearing about it.

        • Phillip Cooper

          Same here. Also, “Auto disassembly”? I think I smell a troll.

          • Nicks87

            Go read the articles about the issues with the new 17M/19M series guns. Apparently a PD that was testing them had some slides flying off at the range.

          • BLASPHEMER!!!

            Due to the assembler(s) at the factory installing the slide plate backwards…was probably one guy who was really sleep-deprived or something.

        • Anonymoose

          Most Glocks in Gen3 and 4 have two pins in the front and one pin in the back (3-pin). The Gen 1 and 2, 42 and 43, and the M models have only one pin in the front and one pin in the back (2-pin). Some say this is because they are trying to consolidate parts with the 42, 43, and M models, but it may also have something to do with the G17M falling apart. The 3-pin setup was originally introduced in Gen2 on the .40 models. They switched to the 3-pin setup across all calibers sometime early in Gen3.

      • HSR47

        Not being MOS is a desirable feature in my book; MOS is garbage. If you want an optic in your slide, buy and optic and then send it along with your slide to Doug at ATEi.

        Slide-mounted optics are something that should not be done in a half-assed manner like the MOS.

    • Raptor Fred

      I just find it Neat that Glock now makes a 22rnd factory G22 .40 cal mag. There has to be a reason. Mag pouch .mil games.

      • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

        Same reason they make a 17rd G17 mag.

        Im waiting on the 43rd G43 mag.

        • Anonymoose

          Don’t forget the 19-round G19 mags!

      • Echo5Charlie

        If by “now” you mean 7 years ago….

        • Raptor Fred

          DAAAANG!! 7 years !!!! DAAAAANNNG!! BOYEEE!

      • Disarmed in CA

        Just to tick off Californians 😛

    • DonDrapersAcidTrip

      The reason I never bothered with anyone elses striker fired guns is because they almost all come in glock 17 sized grips with short 19 sized slides, when if anything I’d rather have a 17 sized slide and 19 frame, or just the 19 as is at least. this is the most pointless glock to ever exist for me.

      I don’t get it, wasn’t the sig gun that won the one with the compact frame and it just had extended magazines that fit with the grip? I don’t know why that isn’t more typical anyway. get a sub-compact or compact frame and build the rest of the grip out to the size you want by magazine. throw whatever length slide you want on top of it.

  • No one

    Please stop putting thumb safeties on striker fired designs for the love of god.

    • Petto

      You know Army’s requirement was to HAVE a thumb safety right? it’s not like Glock or any other company decided to just add that out of nowhere

    • Get over it Fanbois

      That’s because the military is still backwards on firearms. Pistols are not that useful. If they actually wanted to do more than spend tax payer money. They would have a requested a PDW or a select fire Machine Pistol instead.

      • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

        Pistols definitely arent as useful as rifles (or SMGs) as a standalone fighting tool, but I can see the reasons for having a pistol as a backup instead of something larger and more useful. My understanding is that 99% of the rounds fired in combat by troops are out of their main weapon and not their backup weapon. The ONLY purpose a pistol serves is to be there if the main weapon goes down for whatever reason and the bad guy is too close for you to get to cover to get your main weapon operable again. In this situation I would want something that 1. doesnt weight much and stays out of the way, and 2. is very fast to get into action. You dont get any smaller and out of the way than a pistol and you cant get a gun from its stowed postition into action faster than you can from a pistol holster. It makes perfect sense to me.

      • Phillip Cooper

        You’re speaking, of course, as someone with extensive Combat Arms experience?

      • john huscio

        There are still people who use machine pistols?

    • No. Some of us prefer them.

      • Major Tom

        And manual safeties add a layer of confidence that we won’t suffer snags or hiccups or whatnot and end up with “Glock leg” and an ND on our records.

    • pun&gun

      I like the idea of manual safeties, but I’ve had mixed experience with them on striker pistols. My Shield’s is pretty good; nice strong detent, and low-profile enough to not snag while still being easy to disengage when needed. My old M&P full-frame had the junkiest safety I believe I’ve ever seen, though. Might as well flip a coin as to whether it’s on or off when you draw the pistol, and it was entirely plastic, so it was too wiggly to even serve as a thumb rest. This safety, especially on the offhand side, looks like it would have much more in common with the M&P.
      Plus, long grip on a short slide is terrible for concealment and possibly the ugliest way to design a handgun. >_<

  • Toxoplasma

    It doesn’t seem very modular.

    • Anonymoose

      b-b-but we put backstraps on it! And used the short slide on the long grip-frame! What more could you possibly want?

      • Phillip Cooper

        Obviously, Glock should talk to Sig… There’s no good reason the slides shouldn’t be interchangeable over a given caliber.

        • DonDrapersAcidTrip

          If it’s the same as the fbi ones there’s no reason you can’t

    • Bobby McKellar

      Glock doesn’t do “modular”…. You either accept it like it is and be a sycophant or be sneered at (…then throw a fit, file a grievance because your “best” didn’t make the cut and get a few writers to make fun of the manufacturer who LISTENED and gave the Army what they wanted).

      • The Brigadier

        That is indeed the main point the Glock was rejected. The howling is coming from fanboys.

    • Wow!

      Glock is a lot more modular than sig, but what sig did that was really smart was price it for the Army’s needs. Glock can have all the bells and whistles but if they can’t beat the price point, they won’t be chosen.

  • AZgunner

    “Can you take the perfect sized handgun and put an awkwardly large grip on it? Please throw a superfluous safety on as well”

    • That was what the government asked for—-

      • Giolli Joker

        They actually asked for modularity as well.
        AFAIK only Sig (winner) and Beretta complied.

        • The Army has specifically stated that MHS did not require a chassis frame. It only referenced the ability to adapt to different hand sizes and accept various accessories.

          • Rob

            Don’t waste your breath. The internet’s definition of modularity is more important when discussing these pistols merits IRT the army’s choice. /s

        • Glocks refusal to comply is why they are not winning US military contracts. They did the same thing in the 1980s.

    • Raptor Fred

      It’s actually not such a bad thing in .40 and it makes a lot of sense.

    • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

      For my uses I would prefer a 17 slide and 19 frame, but Im not in the military and I dont know what they like.

      That being said, IF a suppressor is attached then a 4″ barrel is nice to keep the package shorter, but the pictured guns dont have threaded barrels…

      • Phillip Cooper

        Another reason they lost. Wasn’t a threaded barrel called out in the Scope?

        • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

          I would certainly hope that Glock submitted a drop in threaded barrel with their system, but stranger things have happened.

          • andrey kireev

            Like Beretta submitting a mildly updated design Army was trying to replace in the first place ? lol

          • Giolli Joker

            That wasn’t their submission (which actually is the Beretta APX), but an attempt to kill the MHS selection before it started…

    • Hoplopfheil

      That’s why the FN 509 is such a misshapen catastrophe.

  • Rabies

    Hahahaha! I mean seriously, it’s laughable.

  • Raptor Fred

    Jacked AF Cominolli safety. And a single pin on a G23…….. Neat post tho thank you Phil White!!

  • Yeah that’s just full crazy train right there- the ballistics and recoil of a Compact with the bulk of a fullsize.

    What would have made way more sense from both a carry and modularity standpoint would have been a 19L – G19 frame with a 17 length slide, using 15+2 mags. Then for those needing a ‘compact’ model, just use the 19 slide on the 19 frame with flush fit 15rd mags.

    • Flounder

      I think the compact was favored because there might be plans to suppress and more importantly pistols are very rarely used but always carried.

      The minor weight savings was probably deemed ideal, especially if you retained the capacity of a full size.

    • ARCNA442

      4″ barrels are the future. A 5″ barrel gives you almost nothing in terms of ballistics but makes the gun longer and heavier.

      • Longer sight picture—

      • Mark Horning

        And yet, FN custom built long slide versions of FNS-40 for Arizona DPS because they insisted on a 5″ barrel. (looks muzzle heavy, but I guess they wanted the longer sight radius)

        • ARCNA442

          I’m not sure I would be relying on the judgment of an agency that bought a new .40 in 2015.

          • AZgunner

            I’m not a huge fan of .40 by any means. But a full power. 40 round coming out of a 5″ longslide is pretty mean.

      • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

        almost nothing they give you less muzzle flash

  • Reazione Catena

    I look forward to reading more about the MHS, thanks for the primer…

  • Cover it in chocolate and it’s a gun-shaped Three Musketeers bar.

    • Friend

      MMM, Three Glocketeers.


    Man, it looks like they really phoned in that ambi safety.

    I also wonder why they didn’t go full pic rail on the underside mounting area

  • Gregory

    I don’t want one!

  • FredXDerf

    we can put a man on the moon but we cant match FDE slide and frame colors on Glocks or SCARs – wow…

    • ARCNA442

      What actual benefit is there to taking the extra time and money to make the color a perfect match?

  • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

    And this whole time Ive been giving Glock the benefit of the doubt in my pointless internet bickering that they actually made a modular handgun.

  • Phillip Cooper

    I’d buy that in a heartbeat, if it wasn’t priced into the Bejesus belt.

  • Richard Chelvan

    This color can be described as shit-brown by moonlight!

  • Madcap_Magician

    Why did they go 17 frame / 19 slide/barrel, I wonder.

    • In order to comply with the Army request. They do this and submit one gun rather than two.

      • Madcap_Magician

        Was that their ‘modular’ gun?

  • Alahahahah

    Handguns remain important in the military for several reasons, humping a giant ruck up a mountain makes it difficult to deploy a long arm in a hurry the same is true for crew served weapon personnel and lets not forget that having a side arm is important behind the wire thanks to the Blue Hajis

  • Dan

    Somehow there’s this mass hypnosis of everyone on the gun community thinking that manual safeties are bad. It’s like global warming. Maybe they are great and maybe they aren’t. But this level of certainty about ANYTHING ought to make one nervous. Even the suggestion that global warming/no external safety has some problems brings down the wrath of the groupthink masses.

    Mark my words: we’ve reached peak no-safety and the pendulum is about to swing back. In fifteen years everyone will have manual safeties and look back judgementally at the quaint time when everyone thought they were too good for them. And then all you super-tactical one-hole-shooting Mitch Rapp types with your smooth strikers and I’m-too-smart-for-a-negligent-discharge will talk about the old days when Real Men carried real polymer Glocks with no wussified safety.

    Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

    • Nicks87

      No. Probably not… and who the f*ck is Mitch Rapp?

    • Tag team back again..

      Yeah I agree with Nicks87, manual safeties are going out for good reason…

  • Renov8

    Much to do about nothing…snooze.

  • Brick

    Should we color it FDE?

    Nah, let’s just go with Buttersglock.

  • Big Daddy

    I wouldn’t mind having some of those mags since I do have some Lipsey’s full FDE Glocks.

  • john huscio

    Looks like I missed most of the antiglock derp……

  • Shutup and take my money!!!!

  • Bigbigpoopi
  • Raptor Fred

    I wanna make a roland special out of one of these. And chop the grip to a 19 length hahahahahha.

  • Ark

    .40 cal? What? Why did Glock waste any time on .40?

  • Disarmed in CA

    “Ladies and Gentlemen, ‘The Homer'”

  • William Elliott

    Drop in a threaded barrel, suppressor sights, and an RMR cut [not the MOS plate, a true RMR cut] and I am sold

  • Kivaari

    It should be a conventional sized 17/22 or 19/23, none of the long frame on a short slide business. I love the lanyard ring. Who needs that safety.

  • John

    >Glock USA says they are definitely not offering manual safeties to law
    enforcement or military contracts, this was a once off design and will
    not be offered again


    This was yours to lose, Glock. This was yours to lose. Springfield managed to put a grip safety on their Glock-clone, after all.

    Back to checking out the Sig.

  • Holland1953

    Although many have the wool pulled over their eyes by the magic expression, “Milspec” as the Holy Grail of military manufacturing ethos, it IS – as many have said before – merely decided by the cheapest price offered at the time. It does NOT pertain the the best materials used in the manufacturing of that or more products.

  • Norm

    i’d still buy one because i think its pretty near configuration.

    I think Glock lost purely on price, Sig seriously under bid them. yea less modular by comparison but track record speaks volumes.

  • SteveK

    Not than anyone cares what I think, but I think that is a seriously ugly color.

  • Don

    Glocks are literally junk …get a real gun , not a piece of plastic

  • supergun

    Blocks are nice guns. But the Walther is much better. The Sig and H&K are too.

  • supergun

    I prefer a pistol without a safety. But if a pistol has a safety, what is the deal? If you don’t like safeties, can you not just use them?

  • Bobby McKellar

    Just another Glock….so crappy even the Army didn’t want it. (Waits for Glock fanboys to lose their minds)

  • Todd A Carstens

    94% of gun owners don’t want the thumb safety on their gun.
    But all of us left handed people would love the ambidextrous slide controls (as long as they work on both sides)

  • cisco kid

    Other manufacturers of striker fired pistols have put safeties on auto loading pistols since they were first invented in the late 19th century, early 20th century. Fast forward to todays pre-loaded striker fired pistols and some modern manufactures also put safeties on their striker fired pistols. Glock as usual is very arrogant and does not realize they lose a lot of business because there are many people who avoid buying a Glock just because they do not have a model with a manual safety on it. There is also a brisk aftermarket business that installs the Cominolli manual safety on Glocks and Glock even warranties the gun if it is installed by an approved gun smith. I had one put on my Glock 19 and would not own it or carry it if I did not have a manual safety on it. I can also leave the safety on when I unload or load the pistol, another great safety feature that has saved countless lives as many people accidentally shoot themselves when trying to load or unload their pistols. To say an accident will never happen to yourself because you have never made a mistake and never will is too shout to the world that you need some serious counseling.

  • mavricxx

    WOW, EXACTLY what I’ve been wanting Glock to build! I’ve been wanting a fully ambi Glock but without the safety. Hopefully they release it to the public even though they say they won’t.

  • cisco kid

    Since I could not get a factory installed manual safety on my Glock 19 I had a Comonolli safety installed on my gun. The safety can be left in the “on” position when loading and unloading the gun and if he trigger is accidentally snagged the gun will not fire. I would not carry my Glock without one on it. The Comonolli safety does not void the warranty of the gun either as verified by Glock if the safety is installed by a qualified gun smith. 10 ring precision will do the job and quickly for you.

  • RickOAA .

    As expected…total lame sauce.

  • Richard Lutz

    Offering a safety catch and a grip without finger grooves would be a good move. I like the lanyard loop. Ideally on the Gen3 variant. Would have been good to ditch the plastic mags in favour of thinner steel mags to get the grip narrower and fix the grip angle.

  • Brian Mumford

    I hope Glock makes the safeties available for the consumer market (like S&W). I carry Glocks every day, and I wouldn’t use it full time. I would just holster the pistol with the safety on to avoid Glock leg, and then I’d click it off to carry. Moreover, I hope they keep the finger grooves for the subcompacts (26, 27, 33 [I don’t care what they do with the G43, I sold mine]). I like the idea of removing them for compacts and full size that you put your pinky on, but it mitigates recoil in my opinion when you only have two fingers on the grip.

  • Hector Rivera Jr

    Just proves Glock’s arrogance did them in. If Glock had produced a pistol with a manual safety and a grip angle resembling a flat mainspring housing on a 1911 for civilians, they would probably convert more of us 1911 users.

    I tried the Glocks (had 4 in 9mm and .40 S&W) but sold them all. Just not a comfortable grip for me compared to my HK P30S, 1911’s or Browning HIPOWER.

    I don’t like the Sig P320 grip either.