Trigger guard design
- Thread starter BlackStar
- Start date
There was a trend in the '90's that, when gripping your handgun, you would wrap the index finger of your support hand around the front of the trigger guard. Never did find out what it was supposed to do but I found it uncomfortable when I tried it. Evidently, a lot of people used that grip because all the major manufacturers jumped on the recurved/checkered/grooved trigger guard bandwagon. That was the purpose, to give your support index finger something to hold onto when gripping the gun like that.
Bub
Bub
BlackStar, Welcome to the forum! As bub pointed out, it was a better design for a two hand hold mostly for defensive tactics being taught at the police and defense accademies. Also, it was a big marketing ploy to grab a piece of the action! Notice when Glock came out with their plastic "junk" to boost their profit margin! Now, your hard pressed to find a "steel" gun anymore at "any" price. Everybody else jumped on the "plastic bandwagon" when they saw the suckers, ah public, buying this stuff. I was told once by a Glock insider, true or not, that the first Model 17 cost them $26 to produce! They were selling them for $400+. Pretty nice profit margin if you ask me! I personally will not own that plastic "junk" no matter who makes it. It's simply not worth the money their selling it for, no matter how you cut it. Since, I'm never going to drop a handgun from 5000 feet, I don't need one to stay together when it "bounces" anyway! I have first hand personal knowledge of moulded products and it's incredible how little cost there is in making these products and how "much" profit there is in this business! As you can see, I'm not fond of plastic guns. I gave up playing with plastic guns when I was 8 years old!........................Dick :wink:
Let's say it was PERCEIVED as a better idea at the time. I'm not certain all the big dawgs in the training field will agree that it's an improvement. It was for sure an immediate "success" in the marketplace, as the guys above have pointed out. It's a personal thing, like rubber grips versus wood grips.
Personally, the only gun with such an arrangement that I have found "comfortable" is my Glock Model 26. I cannot tell you why it seems to work for me, but it does. It apparently isn't favored by everybody, as guns without it sell quite nicely, thank you, and I get along with those versions just fine myself.
I will differ from the Pinecone man in that I won't classify Glocks as "junk". Granted, they are different. They have changed how we think about guns and the manufacture thereof. Technological advances are always going to have critics, and that's OK, too. The fact that the "plastic" guns are somewhat less expensive to manufacture is a good thing as far as business is concerned. I cannot blame the manufacturers for cost-cutting their efforts, and in the long run it's the customers who determine the "value" of a gun. The market has driven the other manufacturers to pursue plastics as a viable material, even to the extent of plastic-framed revolvers, which would have been totally unthinkable only twenty years ago.
And you certainly cannot say the Glocks are less than dependable. They are the Timexes of the gun world.
JMHO
Personally, the only gun with such an arrangement that I have found "comfortable" is my Glock Model 26. I cannot tell you why it seems to work for me, but it does. It apparently isn't favored by everybody, as guns without it sell quite nicely, thank you, and I get along with those versions just fine myself.
I will differ from the Pinecone man in that I won't classify Glocks as "junk". Granted, they are different. They have changed how we think about guns and the manufacture thereof. Technological advances are always going to have critics, and that's OK, too. The fact that the "plastic" guns are somewhat less expensive to manufacture is a good thing as far as business is concerned. I cannot blame the manufacturers for cost-cutting their efforts, and in the long run it's the customers who determine the "value" of a gun. The market has driven the other manufacturers to pursue plastics as a viable material, even to the extent of plastic-framed revolvers, which would have been totally unthinkable only twenty years ago.
And you certainly cannot say the Glocks are less than dependable. They are the Timexes of the gun world.
JMHO
Nevada
Single-Sixer
It was also supposed to help with getting the pistol back on target quicker by reducing muzzle rise. The offhand pointy finger on the front of the trigger guard (supposedly) applied some downward force. I don't use that hand position, and don't like the style, but it doesn't effect how the gun works.
I have pretty big hands, so even on a full-frame gun, if I don't wrap my off-hand pointer around the trigger guard, then my pinky is almost always left hanging off the grip. I feel it helps me keep the gun more level on initial draw and aim, as well.
But, lots of people disagree with the hold. Lots of people aren't comfortable using it. Weaver vs. Isosceles type of thing imo... all comes down to what you feel comfortable with using.
But, lots of people disagree with the hold. Lots of people aren't comfortable using it. Weaver vs. Isosceles type of thing imo... all comes down to what you feel comfortable with using.
Cheesewhiz
Hunter
In the beginning; (I love to sound like the voice of God)
There were trigger guards of small area and opening and the people said "let us have more room, not for fat fingers but for gloved hands".
...and there was these larger trigger guards and those of the gloved hand rejoiced and said "thanks O listening ones that we normally blame for everything"
...but some foolish and un-lordly felt this new large trigger guard was in fact too large and chopped it down in the front portion. Others saw some sort of tactical advantage to this and invented a poor and worthless firing/holding grip form to justify it all.
Then the Devil himself came up with the light raill
...but that is for future chapters.
In the end, I have guns with squared off trigger guards and light rails that I don't use at all but they are there and I know who is at fault, the buying public.
Yeh, they mayith not be the prettyith but they shootith fairly well.
There were trigger guards of small area and opening and the people said "let us have more room, not for fat fingers but for gloved hands".
...and there was these larger trigger guards and those of the gloved hand rejoiced and said "thanks O listening ones that we normally blame for everything"
...but some foolish and un-lordly felt this new large trigger guard was in fact too large and chopped it down in the front portion. Others saw some sort of tactical advantage to this and invented a poor and worthless firing/holding grip form to justify it all.
Then the Devil himself came up with the light raill
...but that is for future chapters.
In the end, I have guns with squared off trigger guards and light rails that I don't use at all but they are there and I know who is at fault, the buying public.
Yeh, they mayith not be the prettyith but they shootith fairly well.
Great information everyone. Thanks!
Even the topic change to the Glock, et al was entertaining.
Speaking of, even Ruger is into the composite material game.
I ride a steel framed bicycle. It's a 1989 Peugeot that I purchased new. It is solid and smooth on the road. It has original gearing and the only upgrades are the brake/shifters and a carbon fiber fork. It works like it did when new.
I'm about to purchase my 2nd bike. It's going to be a full carbon frame. "Plastic" as it were. It’s going to be as smooth and solid as the steel frame and it’s going to weigh about 10 lbs less (a good thing, if you’re a bike rider)
I have a Ruger P89DC. It is almost as old ad the bike. It is a stainless slide on an aluminum frame. (Lighter than a steel frame) It works like it did when new.
The LC9 is currently leading the race in my choice for next purchase. It’s “plastic” framed. From what I have read, it’s still Ruger quality and reliability. It’s lighter than the steel versions of similar sized guns. (a good thing if you are a concealed carry weapon) I trust Ruger that it will work like it did when new in 20 years.
What’s the point?
Sometimes, things can get better even though they aren't "solid steel".
My 2 cents.
Even the topic change to the Glock, et al was entertaining.
Speaking of, even Ruger is into the composite material game.
I ride a steel framed bicycle. It's a 1989 Peugeot that I purchased new. It is solid and smooth on the road. It has original gearing and the only upgrades are the brake/shifters and a carbon fiber fork. It works like it did when new.
I'm about to purchase my 2nd bike. It's going to be a full carbon frame. "Plastic" as it were. It’s going to be as smooth and solid as the steel frame and it’s going to weigh about 10 lbs less (a good thing, if you’re a bike rider)
I have a Ruger P89DC. It is almost as old ad the bike. It is a stainless slide on an aluminum frame. (Lighter than a steel frame) It works like it did when new.
The LC9 is currently leading the race in my choice for next purchase. It’s “plastic” framed. From what I have read, it’s still Ruger quality and reliability. It’s lighter than the steel versions of similar sized guns. (a good thing if you are a concealed carry weapon) I trust Ruger that it will work like it did when new in 20 years.
What’s the point?
Sometimes, things can get better even though they aren't "solid steel".
My 2 cents.
