With all the newer polymer pistols now available on the California Roster from Sig, Walther, M&P, H&K, Springfield, and others, I keep asking myself if any of them are actually worth switching to. For me, so far, the answer is no. Not because I’m a hardcore Glock fanboy - I’m not. I own and have shot CZs, H&Ks, Walthers, Springfields, Sigs, and others. But in California, Glock made the most sense when I started: affordable, available, reliable, and well-supported. Over time, I built heavily into that ecosystem with mags, holsters, optics, spare parts, support gear, training, practice, and competition time. At this point, Glocks just feel natural and seamless for me.
That’s where I have trouble justifying a switch. Most newer service pistols do not give me a significant performance advantage, and with California’s magazine disconnects, extra 11% tax, and the added cost of mags, holsters, optics setups, parts, and time needed to get equally comfortable, the value just isn’t there. I also prefer keeping my pistols mostly OEM, aside from grip tape, slide milling, and optics, so buying something new just to start messing with internals to disable the disconnect does not appeal to me. I have not bought a new handgun in years, not because there is nothing good out there, but because nothing has offered enough of a real advantage to justify buying into another platform.
At this point, instead of another polymer pistol that does more or less the same thing, I’m starting to think I should just save up for a 2011 and get something that actually feels like a different category altogether.
Thoughts?