• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Glock announces G44 in .22LR

FiremanBob said:
The problem with a long-slide version of the .22LR is that the slide has to be lightened further in order to time the action properly. Not insurmountable.

So when the Glock PCC debuts at SHOT next month, will it be "heroic" or "apocalyptic"?
Click to expand...

Idk how they will describe it, but I'd bet they do have something for shot. They did this a few years ago with the 43 or the 43x or the 19x, I don't really remember. They release something, people have this reaction, release something else at shot, people have this reaction, they make millions off of the sales of the product everyone shit all over. They are smarter then us.
 
edmorseiii said:
Idk how they will describe it, but I'd bet they do have something for shot. They did this a few years ago with the 43 or the 43x or the 19x, I don't really remember. They release something, people have this reaction, release something else at shot, people have this reaction, they make millions off of the sales of the product everyone shit all over. They are smarter then us.
Click to expand...

I am betting more Gen5's for SHOT. There are still no .45/10mm Gen5s out... yet.... but it wouldn't take much for them to do that.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
Once you start stacking rounds though awkwardly (in a cartridge ill suited for it) it tends to invite problems. Why do you think Ruger BX mags and Butler Creek 25s and such are stacked in a straight line with a curve? Because the feeding is more reliable under duress, particularly given the wonky physics of varying .22 LR loads. Otherwise they would have just come up with a doublestack design and saved a lot space and BS. Same with .22 LR AR mags. Plus a single stack design for this shitty cartridge is probably a lot less dirt sensitive, too, which is important for 22 LR because 99% of the ammo on the market for it consists of some kind of dirt with priming compound behind it, firing a bullet made out of lead that burns up and adds even more dirt....

-Mike
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, with you, but calling it "legendary" is laughable at best. You disagree with the usage of that word yourself in post #261. But I understand the marketing (even though it's way overstated in my book), I'm sure their fan base is happy with it. Hell, I own 2 Glocks myself, but I would not call this "legendary." That's all I was commenting about.
 
9mm is so cheap now I'm not sure there's much point in a Glock 19 trainer gun. But it's cool that it's very reliable and breaks down like a G19.

I read an article saying they developed this gun for non-lethal training ammunition and transitioned it to 22LR.
 
jpk said:
At the same time though your average newby also isnt purchasing a 22lr for a LOT of reasons.....many/most of which are ego related

Most buyers of 22lr are folks that have owned firearms for years and are experienced enough to realize that you can have a lot of fun/can do same training/practice in most cases with rimfire as you can with centerfire
Click to expand...

Uhh- not sure if serious- everyone and their brothers uncle tells new shooters to "buy a 22" (and many do) and the skinflint attraction for a 22 to Johnny 1-4 box types is undeniable. Yeah, the idiot that buys his one .40 S&W gun shop commando gun ain't buying them, but if I asked new shooters, that owned more than one gun, but had less than 5 years experience what the first 6 guns they bought were, I would bet that a huge part of the time there's at least one .22 LR on the list. Hell even I sucked for that bullshit years ago, I think I had bought my Ruger MKII within like 4 months of getting my LTC.

Also to further reinforce my point- we didn't hit a serious hard core .22 LR drought until Sandy Hook and the attendant explosion of new gun owners that came along
after it. These were the people gobbling up the 22 LR, not so much established gun owners, less likely to overpay for that shit. The rest of us were still trying to
get over the fact that the stuff wasn't $8 for 550 rounds anymore.

I've lost track of the number of newb types I've seen at the range with M&P 15-22s, that kind of thing, as well as Walther P22, and others. And the number of newbs buying 22LR at gun shows, etc.

-Mike
 
jpk said:
Mike, I think you may have misunderstood my post

I agree that the advice that shooters provide newbies is to buy a 22

Unfortunately almost every newby I've ever known/run into ignores that advice and goes right to centerfire for their first and sometimes only gun
Click to expand...

I agree they don't buy .22 LR first, but I think it's silly to assume that most stop at one gun, although that's probably more common in free states where the barriers to entry are lower, vs a shithole like MA, by the time your LTC comes in you've already thought of 6 guns to buy. I think in my first week I bought 3 x 9mm handguns, then no more than a month or two later I got another, then a .380, then the Ruger MKIII...

On the other hand even my friend from PA (who lived in NH for awhile) who had never owned a handgun in his life bought a MKIII right after he bought his Steyr M357...

-Mike
 
jpk said:
LOL

Would that 50 bux actually stop you from buying it?

I doubt it......you'll find yourself at shooters one day and it will magically go home with you regardless of price
Click to expand...
The problem is that I am hearing these are going to be $450 for the plain Jane.
Add $75+ for a threaded barrel.
Add $100+ for sights
Add $250 or something for milling and then add the cost of an RMR on top of it.

So it's not "man, $400 or $450" it's "$450 or $600-$725"
To make the G44 suppressor ready (unless Glock just hasn't announced more details yet), you're looking at another $125-$250 for at least a new barrel and some form of sight you can use with a suppressor.

When you can get a suppressor ready M&P 22C for under $300 or some other competitor ready to go out of the box for less than $450, the G44 loses its luster unless your heart is set on a Glock.
 
jpk said:
ROFLMAO.......you forgot the gold plating and full faux chrome slide job

I hope you know I am just teasing in good fun......I think it would be a fun gun as is......let me know when one walks home with you
Click to expand...
The gun itself is fine but as I stated I recently acquired a 22lr suppressor and I am looking for a host. The G44 will be fine as-is but not for me at the current price if I have to dump another $250+ into it to make it suit my use case.

If a person is looking for a trainer or just a "fun gun" then it will be more than adequate. I, like many here, have a plain old 22lr pistol with nothing fancy, no threaded barrel, etc. I am specifically looking with a suppressor use case in mind and for that, the currently released specs on the G44 do not make it competitive to me.
 
daekken said:
When you can get a suppressor ready M&P 22C for under $300 or some other competitor ready, the G44 loses its luster unless your heart is set on a Glock.
Click to expand...

The barrel is the main thing, IMHO, the rest is just being flinty. [laugh]

If this gun works well, they would be stupid to not make one with a threaded barrel and can sights stock.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
The barrel is the main thing, IMHO, the rest is just being flinty. [laugh]

If this gun works well, they would be stupid to not make one with a threaded barrel and can sights stock.

-Mike
Click to expand...
If they do that, I'd likely give it strong consideration. Someone reportedly said rear sight is adjustable, maybe that would be sufficient.
I know a few 22s now come with threaded barrels by default with a thread protector. I'd pay a little extra for that.
 
daekken said:
Right, M&P 22 Compact. Nice pistol, or so I hear. Debating getting one as a suppressor host, if not a Mk IV or PPKS, etc.
Click to expand...

do it! it runs 100% suppressed with std velocity ammo. even with some of the upper speed sub stuff.
 
drgrant said:
The barrel is the main thing, IMHO, the rest is just being flinty. [laugh]

If this gun works well, they would be stupid to not make one with a threaded barrel and can sights stock.

-Mike
Click to expand...
With a molded slide, making one that's optic ready is a breeze. I'd be surprised if they don't announce that at SHOT.

Hell, I'm surprised that wasn't today's announcement. The extra dev. cost is basically nil. In fact, they could use the same mold, with an insert, to make the two slides, and be done already.
 
If the optic is slide mounted, wont the added weight screw up the reliability especially with sv ammo? Most red dot 22 rigs eg the 22/45, mod 41, victory etc have the optic mounted on non moving locations.
Dissapointed in the .22 reveal. Was really hoping for a G1911
 
Mesatchornug said:
With a molded slide, making one that's optic ready is a breeze. I'd be surprised if they don't announce that at SHOT.

Hell, I'm surprised that wasn't today's announcement. The extra dev. cost is basically nil. In fact, they could use the same mold, with an insert, to make the two slides, and be done already.
Click to expand...

I think with a .22 adding any weight to the slide could cause cycling problems.
 
Varmint said:
I think with a .22 adding any weight to the slide could cause cycling problems.
Click to expand...
Likely true. Maybe they accounted for this in making the slide plastic? Maybe they'll add threaded inserts on ther frame for a mount? Either could be a relatively easy change if they planned for it. The frame mount is way harder to add after purchase...
 
The slide is plastic so it'll cycle. They received a patent in 2013 for a part metal/part plastic slide specifically for cycling with less energetic cartridges like sims or .22.

By my quick napkin math, the RMR is 10% of the weight of an unmilled 19 slide. The RMR is like 30% of the weight of an unmilled 44 slide, so I'm guessing it's going to be dicey.
 
uwaeve said:
The slide is plastic so it'll cycle. They received a patent in 2013 for a part metal/part plastic slide specifically for cycling with less energetic cartridges like sims or .22.

By my quick napkin math, the RMR is 10% of the weight of an unmilled 19 slide. The RMR is like 30% of the weight of an unmilled 44 slide, so I'm guessing it's going to be dicey.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm... The slide on my 22 conversion Sig P229 is aluminum and the 22LR rounds cycle it just fine. Could it be that Glock is just trying to chinz-out on their manufacturing costs. Plastic slide is way cheaper than milling aluminum.
 

Similar threads

‘Unconstitutional’: DOJ Announces Red Flag Center For Gun-Grab Operation Against Americans
Replies
16
Views
616
Nick Fury
Nick Fury
Gun Owners of America announces ‘premiere’ Second Amendment convention
Replies
5
Views
231
MGnoob
MGnoob
Ruger announces a .45 ACP carbine
2 3
Replies
71
Views
3K
nm1
N
1911 .22LR
Replies
2
Views
276
PappyM3
PappyM3
Wayne LaPierre announces resignation as NRA chief
5 6 7
Replies
208
Views
6K
KBCraig
KBCraig
Back
Top Bottom