Continuing the discussion from Glock or Sig Sauer:
Not a fan of modular firearms, doesn’t matter who makes them. I only see problems down the road with that type of design. I have SIGARMs, my first .45 is a P220
2 Likes
What problems do you see with the design?
3 Likes
In my opinion modularity was a great idea.
I’m also wondering what kind of problems do you see with this design?
2 Likes
Welcome to the family Kevin you are in a good place.
2 Likes
There should be no real issues with modular models like Glock, given their proven reliability. But I would be careful with a carry gun if you’re going to be swapping out the trigger, changing caliber barrels or using after market magazines made by companies without a track record of reliability. I’m also not sure if there are legal ramifications for changing to after market parts on a carry pistol. I had a CCW when I lived in California previously and it was illegal to change barrels to another caliber on your carry pistol like you can on some models of glock (like changing Glock 27 to a 9mm barrel.) Just depends on the laws in your state.
2 Likes
Ok.
But you are mentioning aftermarket parts.
This is not a modularity issue.
I’m using aftermarket parts for my range handguns. If you know what you are doing, there is no problem at all.
But once again, handgun’s modularity brought pros only.
I cannot find any cons.
Also, changing barrel or trigger has nothing to modular design.
4 Likes
Welcome @Kevin_M. I’m curious to what downsides you see to the modular design? Obviously, these would be your opinions, which doesn’t make them right or wrong. I’m just curious to what you see as a potential problem in the design.
1 Like
A downside that I see is that it’s prohibitively expensive to convert between frame sizes/calibers. With the P320, I’d rather spend a little more and have another gun instead of buying a new frame/slide/barrel. The Beretta APX is worse as there aren’t any conversion kits available. The only cheap swap is between the APX Carry/Centurion since the only difference is the size of the grip.
1 Like
I have both products. Glock is the old stand by and has enjoyed a large aftermarket support etc. Sig on the other hand along with other have caught up Glock. If you asked me to pick one I’d pick Glock. It was my patrol weapon for 27yrs, tested under fire and I trust my life to it.
1 Like
OK. We don’t want to start another SIG vs. Glock discussion. 
Has anyone use Glock’s modular feature?
I’m familiar with SIG and love its design. One single trigger/action module and variety of options (caliber, barrel, frame, slide) with still the same feel and trigger pull.
How does it work in Glock?
1 Like
Welcome Kevin. Your Sig is a fine pistol.
1 Like
Being able to remove the guts or cassis of a Gun to change calibers I feel, In the long term and of course depending on how much ammo you run through the gun and the environment your in will cause fit problems where things won’t fit as secure as they did from the factory. Just not real comfortable with that concept. I’m certainly not an expert on this but when sig came out with that option I cringed.
2 Likes
That was the whole idea of MHS - to have factory perfect and secure fit of every component changed in the handgun.
Changing parts in MHS handgun is not the same as changing parts in regular one.
I feel more comfortable changing barrel in MHS model that any aftermarket barrel in non MHS model.
(I can speak about SIG model only, never have had a chance to check it on Glock)
2 Likes