jesus christYeah, this Glock 44 is "Legendary" all right.
"Most reliable .22lr ever. Neva been done befo'"
In all seriousness, I probably will pick one up in a year or so once they get more kinks worked out. But this if for all the fanboys trying to justify the "legendary" marketing:
*These are two different G44s
View attachment 327437
View attachment 327438
-
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
- Thread starter Brewer
- Start date
![[pot]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/037.gif "Stir the pot [pot]")
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2017
- Messages
- 731
- Likes
- 1,201
What a time to be alive. Taurus put out a fantastic 22lr pistol in the TX22 - 16 round factory mags (under $20), threaded barrel adapter included, a terrific trigger Glock owners would pay hundreds to match, side ejection port instead of side/top - makes for a nicer suppressed shooting experience, and it's been the most reliable 22 pistol I've ever shot.
Vs. Glock's Taurus-like effort on the G44. It's bizarro world.
Vs. Glock's Taurus-like effort on the G44. It's bizarro world.
Got mine this weekend no exploding slide lol..
This one so far, is actually a winner. It works how it's supposed to.... I say that as someone who absolutely hates .22 LR pistols. This one actually doesn't piss me off. Only ran 300 minimags through it, probably will try some SV and shitty federal bulk ammo this week....
This one so far, is actually a winner. It works how it's supposed to.... I say that as someone who absolutely hates .22 LR pistols. This one actually doesn't piss me off. Only ran 300 minimags through it, probably will try some SV and shitty federal bulk ammo this week....
Meh, Taurus could release a belt fed 22 pistol that worked perfectly but nobody will trust it, and nobody will ever blame them for not trusting it, either.
No, you wouldn't, even though it's almost a verbatim g19 gen5 lower, it's 2 pin and the locking block area is different. Plus the insert is plastic.
22 Plinkster had a not so favorable review of the G44, then this? yikes
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/B71JEZTAQF5/?igshid=1oxva4ln77thw
View: https://www.instagram.com/p/B71JEZTAQF5/?igshid=1oxva4ln77thw
JRT
NES Member
I put 400 suppressed rounds (dirty subs) through mine over the weekend. After 150 rounds I had a few stove pipes. The last 50 was probably one per mag. I didn’t clean it from the factory just went out and started plinking. I cleaned it good and will probs shoot this weekend. My only complaint is the trigger break is a bit more pull than I hoped for. I have no idea if existing trigger kits would work in the 44 but it needs trigger work.
the "yikes" comment was in reaction to the OOB discharge in the video.
Yep. And he was sent the pistol by them to review, so it’s more of a paid advertisement then a genuine review.
Overpriced. No threaded barrel. 10 round magazines.
It’s sole purpose is as a .22 trainer for glock owners. It doesn’t do anything else better or cheaper than other .22’s out there.
Overpriced. No threaded barrel. 10 round magazines.
It’s sole purpose is as a .22 trainer for glock owners. It doesn’t do anything else better or cheaper than other .22’s out there.
Well, so far, It's better at not being a piece of shit, which provided mine doesn't explode, it should reach that goal nicely.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
Most .22 LR handguns are f***ing terrible, for a whole variety of reasons. This is the first one that wasn't a revolver that I looked at that I didn't find something huge to hate about immediately. At least it seems like Glock, Ruger, maybe others are finally starting to "get it"- EG, that there's a market for "normal like" .22 LR handguns that aren't either a piece of shit or something heavy on the fudd side of the market. This is one of several guns in the past year or so that actually fits in that wheelhouse. I agree they need to roll out a SKU that comes with a threaded
barrel. Nobody cares about the 10 round mags, it's a 22,
-Mike
TX22. M&P22, M&P22c. SR22. P22. M9_22.
If by nobody you mean you, or people who live in capacity restricted states, okay. But in fact lots of people do care.
You are right, Glock is finally starting to get it. Almost everyone else already has. Glocks the last to catch on. And are doing so with an overpriced and under featured version.
Walther P22? Not sure if serious, one of the worst guns on the planet. (on average)
I'll concede most of the others, although the Taurus is too new to tell. But, because taurus, god only knows. I could have easily bought
one of those, too.
Why? are they actually doing something dumb like carrying it for self defense? I guess if they're hunting toasters it's more
fun. Otherwise nobody cares that much, to the point where there aren't that many guns that hold more than 10 or 12 rounds of 22 or
so. If I need to saw laptops in half I can use a 10/22 for that.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
-Mike
I wouldn't say "plenty" I'd say more like a handful. a few of which are in Bonesy's post, although the CZ Kadet seems to be pretty cool too, in a land where most
conversions are shit, that one works pretty well.
In addition to the G44, Ruger also has that little LCP II .22 thats out too, that seems to be "mostly normal" compared to the old poop standard.
-Mike
There are a lot of .22s out there that will function, but realistically not that many designed for the kind of shooting most people are doing these days. Grandpas Ruger MKxxx, Buckmark, and single six dont really help people practice and arent in line with modern pistols. If a new .22 is really going to pique my interest it had better fit a wide range of holsters so i can practice my draw and it should have a trigger like a modern pistol so the practice i get is worth something. I dont want bullseye pistols since im not into that sort of shooting.
I do with there were more small, lightweight, DA/SA revolvers out there though, that were closer in price to the semiauto options. If any manufacturer is listening, bring em back please.
Actually i almost forgot..... i actually have a P22 in my custody that was only partly a piece of shit. [Rofl] however, that being said, every person i know that bought one, usually gave up on theirs... most of them were far worse than my friend's gun... i should get pics of it and post it. It has at least 25000 rounds through it, although the gun blew up around the 22k mark and the slide failed.... smith put a whole new upper on it...
smith put a whole new upper on it...
You are certainly free to buy on brand name alone but it’s not a valid point on whether a gun is or isn’t good. The Glock 44 just came out and already there are numerous examples of rather severe issues. Meanwhile the Taurus has been out for a year and while it too has had some issues (some bad barrels), it’s otherwise had great reviews.
Why? are they actually doing something dumb like carrying it for self defense? I guess if they're hunting toasters it's more
fun. Otherwise nobody cares that much, to the point where there aren't that many guns that hold more than 10 or 12 rounds of 22 or
so. If I need to saw laptops in half I can use a 10/22 for that.
-Mike
Earlier you referred to presumably target 22’s as fudd guns and now you’re saying nobody cares about greater than 10 rounds in magazines, lol. If that doesn’t make you sound like a fudd...
I get it. You’re a Glock fanboy. That’s fine. I’m sure it’s a fine pistol. But the FACT is it lacks features others have and costs more.
beaker
NES Member
I know, but my response was to your comment about 22plinkster.
I do know one thing with the G44, Glock will do whatever they have to technically to solve any issues with the G44 as is, and then they will take care of everybody if it was a design issue.
beaker
NES Member
I am sure your negative opinion of Glocks isnt affecting your judgement at all. Bias is a two way street after all. I have seen video of the Taurus blowing up from a squib maybe, that is what the dude told us but i wasnt there. I am not going to judge the Taurus or the Glock based on an N of 1 or 5 for that matter. If I had to bet I would say that I would put my money on Glock vs Taurus because Taurus has a very long and sketchy reputation about quality and designs.You are certainly free to buy on brand name alone but it’s not a valid point on whether a gun is or isn’t good. The Glock 44 just came out and already there are numerous examples of rather severe issues. Meanwhile the Taurus has been out for a year and while it too has had some issues (some bad barrels), it’s otherwise had great reviews.
Earlier you referred to presumably target 22’s as fudd guns and now you’re saying nobody cares about greater than 10 rounds in magazines, lol. If that doesn’t make you sound like a fudd...
I get it. You’re a Glock fanboy. That’s fine. I’m sure it’s a fine pistol. But the FACT is it lacks features others have and costs more.
It’s not because I don’t have a negative opinion of Glocks.
I’m sure it’s a fine pistol. If it had a threaded barrel and was at the same price point as the others in the same category it’d be a great option. It still probably is a good option. But it’s not an opinion, but a fact, that it has less features at a higher price point.
It's still a Taurus, though.
Let's face facts most Glock, Smith and even Ruger buyers are not touching a Taurus product. Yes, there could be a debacle at hand, or it could be a sampling of f***ed up guns. I guess I'll find out when mine blows up or not.
Lol, maybe, maybe not. How many have they actually sold? Also a lot of these people (taurus buyers) suffer in silence because they're too busy fapping about how much
cash they saved. The last guy I talked to that was very proud of his Taurus .40 purchase was this dude up in presque isle who was all proud about all the money he saved although he did tell me that he had to smash the rear sight over as far as it would go on his taurus to get the gun to shoot straight....
I just kinda bit my tongue, smiled and nodded..... Kel Tec has a cool gun with a 33 round mag on it. I have seen precisely ZERO people that own one of those things yet..... either they're not making enough, or they're secretly
trash and the dealers aren't stocking them. I hope its the former because the magazine design on that thing is actually pretty innovative.
Earlier you referred to presumably target 22’s as fudd guns and now you’re saying nobody cares about greater than 10 rounds in magazines, lol. If that doesn’t make you sound like a fudd...
I should have been more tactful, those aren't necessarily fudd guns but they're target driven, for sure. That said, they're a pain in the ass for anyone that just wants a basic gun that works.
Would it be great if every 22 had a huge double stack mag? Sure, but that's not reality, and it's hardly even a common feature even at this point. Most people are not going to make that
a linchpin in whether or not they're buying the gun or not. Not even within miles. Not when most of the market is still on a 10 round mag on a 22.
ZOMG you caught me red handed!
I do own more of them than everything else combined. but I'm not afraid to tell you when they f***ed something up, too. Glock has f***ed up a number of product rollouts over the years as well as just some plain stupid products. Two things stick out at me with this rollout, aside from the possible exploding guns/bad guns.... they were retarded to not roll out a threaded barrel gun, right out of the gate... as well as only including 2 mags with the gun is a bit ghetto. It should have been at least 3, like a lot of their other guns.
Yes, its a whopping 50-75 bucks more, its just going to BREAK THE BANK!!!!!
if anything I think once the initial demand dies off theprice will probably fall further, as its pretty obvious it doesn't cost them much to make it. The Smith M&P, its nearest peer, is about $300ish
on gunbroker low average.
The only thing I'm willing to concede on cost/features goes back to the threaded barrel. If the buyer needs to run a can, yes, the Glock is not a great value
prop up front because the way they sold the gun, that buyer is going to end up with a barrel they'll never use etc. I think eventually they'll release more SKUs of this
thing though, if they don't, that's just stupid on their part. They should have rolled out two out of the gate.
-Mike
D
Deleted member 12999
I'm still salty that Glock comes out with dumb shit.... but I got to fondle one at the Gun Parlor.
It is VERY appealing to me to have a gun that fits all of my gear, and allows me to train skills that aren't recoil dependent for dirt cheap. I'll hold off for a bit to see if growing pains work out, but I will go 'omnomnomnomnom' on pretty much everything that Glock makes. Except the G42. That thing is hella ghey
It is VERY appealing to me to have a gun that fits all of my gear, and allows me to train skills that aren't recoil dependent for dirt cheap. I'll hold off for a bit to see if growing pains work out, but I will go 'omnomnomnomnom' on pretty much everything that Glock makes. Except the G42. That thing is hella ghey
That's the only thing that surprised/disappointed me. I don't know why they didn't thread the barrel and then stick a barrel cap on the end like...well, like everybody else does. (All M&P 22Compacts come threaded, for example.) Want a can? Screw off the cap, but an adapter for $30, and have at it. Don't want a can? Don't unscrew the cap. Seems to be the standard these days; I wonder why Glock went the other way.
It's hard to bitch about the price at this early point; many people are still paying (willingly) the "ZOMG! It's a new GLOCK!!" premium. That will go away soon, and we'll figure out where the market price ends up.
Similar threads
