What is all the hype with H&K USP's

[Lorcux]

This is directed towards Glock and H&K owners.

I was introduced to my wife's uncle the other day. He is a firearms trainer for the local police academy. We started talking about guns and I told him the pistols I have. His eyebrow raised when I mentioned "Glock". He started bashing Glocks and said I should have purchased a 'real' gun and bought a HK USP. He talked about their "non-exposed" safeties. And that the safe-action is not so safe. Well, I am an open-minded person, and , I love handguns, so I asked to see his H&K. Nice gun, YES, totally amazed with it, NOT REALLY. He began by giving me all the selling tips he could think of about his USP. Granted, it is a nice gun. Then he said, "And you can throw it in the sand, mud, or snow and pick it up and shoot it fine." That is when I said "Well, you can do the same with a Glock." He kinda didn't believe me. For the sake of a family feud, I let it go.

I have no experience with H&K's. His seemed to be a nice gun, until he told me the price. I love my little 23. I think Glocks are nice, accurate, affordable guns for all sorts of use. I just don't understand the hype on the H&K's.

So, are there any Glock owners on here that also own a USP? What do you think about the two? Thanks for any input.

[Rule10b5]

Heck if I know...

I've shot both, extensively. I guess it's just a matter of preference, but the USP never did a thing for me. They're decent guns, I just don't get all hot and bothered for them.

I'm not willing to pay those prices for a heavier gun that isn't any more accurate or reliable -- unless HK shoots some sort of magic death ray these days.

That said, I'd buy an HK P9S in a second.

[toocool]

I had an H-K USP in .40. It was big, heavy, and shot great. It just didn't feel right to me. I solt it and bought a Sig P220.

[Lorcux]

Well, I think the same way. Nothing on the gun really impressed me much. He showed me how quick and easy it was to take it apart. I can field strip my Glock 23 in a matter of seconds. Actually, the barrel on the USP looked much like my Glock.

[TacticalShot]

I have both HKs and Glocks. The HKs are more expensive, but either will get the job done. I like them both.

I saw a video of HK torture test once. I was impressed. But I stay away from the hype.

[Jeff S.]

Both are great weapons and anybody who bashes either is naive. The are both very functional weapons, but they are very different and they each have their own characteristics that appeal to different people.

I do find it funny, however, that the question is asked, "What is all the hype with HK USPs?"

Hype: hype n
1. greatly exaggerated publicity intended to excite public interest in something such as a movie or theatrical production
2. somebody who or something that is extensively publicized
3. a deception or dishonest scheme
vt
1. to promote somebody or something with intense publicity
2. to boost sales of a pop recording artificially by employing people to buy quantities of it at numerous outlets


The very question shows how people are going to take what they don't find spectacular, or what they are not impressed with and label it as hype. I mean no flame to the poster; I'm simply pointing out that just because he was not greatly impressed with the HK he has labeled it as "hype," while the person who he was angry with for bashing Glocks would probably say Glocks are hype.

In other words, there is no hype about HKs. They are great pistols, and many professionals use them. However, they are no better than Glocks, and glocks are no better than HKs. It's up to the buyer to decide which firearm is best for them-self, and how much they are willing to spend. There is enough of a support for HK to undoubtedly say they are far from hype.

[LiveFire2]

I have a bunch-o-glocks, including a G22 and an HK USP Variant 3 in .40. All are reliable and well made. Would have no problem trusting my life to either. However, for me at least, the Glocks have a more natural point. The feel and angle of the grip just fits me better. The USP I have has no external safety, just a de-cocker (v3- There are like 9 variants of the USP that one can order IIRC all having different safety/decocker/trigger combinations, etc). The HK USPv3 is also DA/SA which means two trigger pulls to get used to. Both the glocks and the HK are more accurate than I am. I guess it's a personal preference. Just glad my grip has cheaper tastes ;)


LF

[RAH]

The HK USP is a fine choice. I don't think that the DA/SA is all that smooth and the backstrap checkering starts to get uncomfortable after a few mags. Mags are also pricey. If you like them and they fit you could do a lot worse than a USP.

[epsylum]

I have shot only one HK in my life and it was my friends HK USP-C 9mm. I thought it was a great gun (very little recoil, accurate, and well made), but I didn't think it was any better overall than my Glock. I originally wanted a USP .45, but I decided it was just way too expensive for my budget. That was when I found Glock. I have never regretted my decision, even after shooting a USP. I like the USP and think it is a good gun, but there is no way I am going to pay that much, when I could just buy another glock and put about 50% down on another for the same amount of money. Around my area almost everybody I know that knows a lot about guns, are always carrying Glocks. They like Sigs, HKs, berettas, etc. But they trust thier lives only with Glocks.

As far as your inlaw goes, just say "I have a real gun, and so do you". In the end it is alot like a Chevy/Ford thing. Some people just love one or the other. And it takes a true open mind to appreciate the positives of each. Maybe if you go to the range together and try each others guns out, both of you will understand what the other is talking about.

[Tim84K10]

"In a world of compromises, some men don't." ;a

That said, I have a USP, and no Glocks yet. I'm looking for a G23, but I think both are good. It's probably difficult for anyone that owns only Glocks to understand why I paid $720 for one pistol where the fullsize mags won't fit in the compact though.

IMO, Glocks and HKs really shouldn't be compared. They're two totally different types of weapons.

[FATSEXY]

The USP is every bit as durable as a Glock. It may even be more durable. It really comes down to which gun fits your hand better in determining which one you like more. I have biggish hands, so the USP feels great to me (I see a lot of people say they're too big). The USP 45 that my uncle has that I've shot is wonderful. Recoil is very well managed by it.

The only negative on the HK is that for the price of one, you could almost get two Glocks.

They're both great guns though, and people talking smack on Glocks like they aren't "real" guns... whatever. My local gunsmith hates Glocks with a passion. He's sold me two of 'em, though. ;)

[FATSEXY]

PS - You should have called him out to a shooting contest, to show him how good your Glock was. Unless he's some kind of world class shooter, it would be fun and you could pick at each other about who had the better gun (even if he beats you, it'd lighten things up and get you a shootin' partner).

[fnfalman]

Comparing the Glock 17 and the HK USPC45 (since that I have both), the USP seems to be better built. Now, I have yet to drive tanks over them, nor have I baked them in the oven, or shoot fifty thousand rounds in one sitting with either, so I don't know for sure. But subjectively speaking, just from eyeball calibration, the USP seems to be built stouter. It is more accurate, that's for sure. And before anybody start yapping about how I don't know how to manipulate the Glock trigger, I've owned mine since 1988.

I think that the HK is about $200 more than it needs to be though.

[epsylum]

I think HKs are like Ferraris. By that I mean, you get a world class top of the line product, but you are paying even more for the name. I really doubt that HKs are really that expensive to produce. It's just they (and other people) feel thier gun is such a quality product that people will pay a bit more just to have it.

[J.P.]

Personally I think the HK is the superior weapon but I've never shot or handled one that didn't need a dire trigger job.
I do not own a USP but I probably will get a compact model eventually.

[grecco]

i have a glock 23c and a hk usp 45 tac....
guess it would be unfair to compare the 2,

my glock is 100% reliable,
has a 3.5 connector.
it conceals well,and is fairly accurate.
and is well made.

the hk is 100% reliable,
it has a match trigger,
it is very accurate.

the workmanship on
the hk is just superior to the glock.
this is reflected in the price.
the hk tac is a large gun, but feels better in my hands.

if you are not worried about price ,get the hk.

i am happy with both handguns.....but i give the edge to the hk.
just try and imagine....hk's are rolls royces and the glocks are ford f-150 trucks....both vechicles do thier jobs well,but different styles .

[sy2k]

I've never shot a HK USP, but in handling them I think the ergonomics are poor. The mag release is hard to reach for me, as is the slide release. I simply like Glocks, better. And, I think Glocks are as safe as any other gun. It kinda annoys me to hear people say they're unsafe - keep yer damn finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot!

To each his own...

[Justin1584]

I've fired several HK's and Glocks and I have to honestly say, though I'm no Glocker (total 100% Beretta man), that the Glock has the edge for me. Glocks are like striker-fired, cheaper (price-wise and workmanship (no offense, you can feel it when racking the slide)) lighter version of the USP.

The USP is like a hammer fried, ultra-expensive, external safety, 'higher quality' DA/SA version of the Glock.

So it comes down purely to preference, which one you think looks better, weather you like DA/SA, safe-action, whatever. I say between the two, even if I were a billionare, I'd get the Glock.

Just bring that USP guy a Beretta and shame him ;f

;)

[Lorcux]

Thanks for the input fella's


Originally posted by Jeff S.

I do find it funny, however, that the question is asked, "What is all the hype with HK USPs?"

Hype: hype n
1. greatly exaggerated publicity intended to excite public interest in something such as a movie or theatrical production
2. somebody who or something that is extensively publicized
3. a deception or dishonest scheme
vt
1. to promote somebody or something with intense publicity
2. to boost sales of a pop recording artificially by employing people to buy quantities of it at numerous outlets


The very question shows how people are going to take what they don't find spectacular, or what they are not impressed with and label it as hype. I mean no flame to the poster; I'm simply pointing out that just because he was not greatly impressed with the HK he has labeled it as "hype," while the person who he was angry with for bashing Glocks would probably say Glocks are hype.


Everyone seems to have honest opinions on my question. It is evident that many people will trust their lives to a Glock or the H&K. I hope all trust their life to whatever the are comfortable with, may it be a sawed-off 870. But, the subject of the thread was not meant to be so technical and grammactical that I needed a complete breakdown of what the word hype meant pertaining to Webster (Jeff S.) And, YES, I do think that H&K USP's and Glock's can be compared. Throw in the Springfield XD series pistols in there for that matter also 'cause these are all polymer frame pistols. Maybe you shouldn't compare a Colt Government 1911 with a Glock 17, I would understand that.

I say hype 'cause I have heard from many people about how great these guns are. And, I honestly didn't see all the bells and whistles that were supposed to be eye-catching.

I meant no "flame" to H&K's in that matter. You say you meant no flame to the poster (me) BUT you went ahead and said what you need to say anyway.

Maybe I should have replaced the word "hype" with "big deal". You (Jeff S.) probably would have skipped over my thread then. But, you had to stop in and drive home the point of the deterioration of the acclaimed USP by the novitiate who has not had experience with them. That wasn't my point at all. It is evident that people are going to find something in another gun that they don't like. OR, they can't seem to come to the same conclusions as others about a specfic gun. I used the word hype. Seems other replyers overlooked the choice of grammar and stuck with the question at hand. Seems all the "hype" can boil down to nothing really, only that you are going to pay more, get a bigger heavier gun, get uncomfortable backstrap checkering, get a trigger that needs work, pricey mags, but you will get an accurate gun that is manufactured with tight tolerances and craftsmanship and years of service. I am a Glock owner, I was just wanting input on H&K USP's from other Glock owners and H&K ownners.

[SIGSAREBETTER]

As others have noted, it isn't hype. Though I think Glock makes a terrific gun, for subjective reasons I think HK makes a better gun with their USP line (and SIG makes even BETTER guns;)).

My USPf has the lightest recoil of any similar weapon I've fired, has a great feel to the grip, great balance, a wonderful sight picture, a great finish, and the versatility of allowing the weapon to be carried "cocked and locked". I prefer it to Glock.

Note again though I said subjective.....

[CZ-75]

Bottom line, is that both are fine guns.

Major differences:

Grip angle - Glock is too extreme for me, but better for others

Safeties and levers - Glock has a "Safe" trigger, while the USP has a 1911 type safety and can be carried in condition 1.

Second strike capability - HK Yes, Glock No

Wide assortment of offerings - Glock Yes, HK not really

Personally, I like the USP better for 2 reasons. I like the grip angle better, and I like the safety/decocking capabilities.

[OUSooner]

You guys are missing some of the assets that make H&K what they are...

1.Lifetime warranty
2.Polygonal rifling
3.7 variants
4.patented recoil reduction system
5.safety and decocker
6.steel sights
7.steel mags

It's hard to find all of this in another package!

[liliysdad]

Id have to agrree with those who state that while the Glockis a Good gun, it simply isnt in the same class as the HKs and Sigs. They definitely cost more, but I feel you get what you pay for.

[Glockman1000]

I just bought my first USP, a 45 Tactical and I only have 100 rounds through it so I don’t know if I qualify yet but I will say it is more accurate then all 3 of my Glock’s as it should be for a $1000 pistol, The DA/SA trigger is better than most of the other DA/SA firearms that I own and over all I see it as a very well made firearm that is easy to shoot well. I love it but I love my Glocks too.

The bottom line is both are well made and get the job done as do most any of the top brands and I really don't think the bad guy is going to notice if the group on his forehead measures 1" or 1.3".

[blasto]

CZ FOREVER!!!

*waves cz's in the air like I just don't care*

[RJD]

Among others, I have a G27 and an HK USPc .45.

Depending on my dress I carry these two interchangeably.

I think the HK is neater to look at but that little chunky Glock is awfully nice too.

They are both extremely reliable.

If you can swing both, get both.

Other than that, either one will do nicely.

John

[Tim84K10]

Originally posted by sy2k
I've never shot a HK USP, but in handling them I think the ergonomics are poor. The mag release is hard to reach for me, as is the slide release.

The mag release is easily manipulated by using your middle finger on the right side instead of trying to use your thumb.

The slide release to me feels as if it's in the exact same location as a 1911....don't know how that can be unacceptable.

Me personally, I think the slide release on a glock is an absolute joke, and the I can't release the mag without removing my hand from the shooting position at all.

That said they're both fine weapons, but neither is perfect IMO.

The reason I said that they should not be compared is because while Glocks are, or so it seems, designed to be compact in size, and do the job as "duty pistols," and the more compact models are designed for concealed carry, or so it seems. H&K's USP is designed as a tactical pistol, thus why it's larger, with what seems to be a design that concentrates more on accuracy than concealablilty.

The Glock is a true workhorse, which is what is needed by the guy that is a cop, having it rub against the car seat all day, and having it hang from his belt more than it is in his hand......thus, the F150 as stated earlier.

The USP is designed to do one thing and do it well. It's designed for the guy that is going to have it in its hand more than it's in a holster. It really needs to be brutally accurate--or at least, much more so than the Glock to complete its duty. Durability is important but nowhere near as much as accuracy in this environment. (Ferarri, mentioned earlier)

That said, I'll be glad to own both. :)

[Jeff S.]

Originally posted by Lorcux
Thanks for the input fella's




Everyone seems to have honest opinions on my question. It is evident that many people will trust their lives to a Glock or the H&K. I hope all trust their life to whatever the are comfortable with, may it be a sawed-off 870. But, the subject of the thread was not meant to be so technical and grammactical that I needed a complete breakdown of what the word hype meant pertaining to Webster (Jeff S.) And, YES, I do think that H&K USP's and Glock's can be compared. Throw in the Springfield XD series pistols in there for that matter also 'cause these are all polymer frame pistols. Maybe you shouldn't compare a Colt Government 1911 with a Glock 17, I would understand that.

I say hype 'cause I have heard from many people about how great these guns are. And, I honestly didn't see all the bells and whistles that were supposed to be eye-catching.

I meant no "flame" to H&K's in that matter. You say you meant no flame to the poster (me) BUT you went ahead and said what you need to say anyway.

Maybe I should have replaced the word "hype" with "big deal". You (Jeff S.) probably would have skipped over my thread then. But, you had to stop in and drive home the point of the deterioration of the acclaimed USP by the novitiate who has not had experience with them. That wasn't my point at all. It is evident that people are going to find something in another gun that they don't like. OR, they can't seem to come to the same conclusions as others about a specfic gun. I used the word hype. Seems other replyers overlooked the choice of grammar and stuck with the question at hand. Seems all the "hype" can boil down to nothing really, only that you are going to pay more, get a bigger heavier gun, get uncomfortable backstrap checkering, get a trigger that needs work, pricey mags, but you will get an accurate gun that is manufactured with tight tolerances and craftsmanship and years of service. I am a Glock owner, I was just wanting input on H&K USP's from other Glock owners and H&K ownners.

Slow down there turbo. Indeed, I don't get to spend all day on GT, but when I see a post about something I either know about, or something I am interested in then I check it out. Think about this, I never personally insult you; I merely stated why I thought the word "hype" didn't go along with HKs, which is just my personal opinion. You, on the other hand, have gone further off topic to claim I wouldn't have looked into this thread if it hadn't been for the title (which can't be further from the truth). First off, the word "hype" had nothing to do with why I came in hear to answer. You asked for opinions from Glock and HK owners. I own both. Love both pistols. My opinion was completely honest. The point I was making is this: you asked, "what is the hype about HK USPs" and I said that there is no hype. That's my opinion. Another person might see an HK as being nothing but an overpriced, uncomfortable, large, awkward pistol, and therefor to that person it would indeed be hype.

You say that other people looked past your word choice and answered the question at hand. Your question was, "What is all the hype with HK USPs." My legitimate answer is that there is no hype. I answered your question directly. When I brought out the old webster, I wasn't doing that as my point, but rather to clarify what I mean when I say HK is not hype, at least not to me. I go on to say in my reply that both pistols are great, yet they are very different and will attract different users. I, as well, think that all handguns ought to be compared because they are all just that: handguns. However, the fact that both glock and HK both use polymer doesn't make them similar. As a matter of fact, the HK USP series of handguns much more resemble 1911 type weapons then they do Glocks.

You end your above quote by saying you want input from Glock and HK owners. Once again, I am both. I was giving you my thoughts, my opinions, and what I think. Sorry if I sounded way too anal-relative with the whole dictionary thing. That wasn't my point. It's just that a lot can be taken from a question just by how the question is asked.

[rayjay]

I have a G17 that I use strictly for competition and I carry a H&K USP 40. The H&K is a well built weapon which is reliable and accurate. It is also known as the SUV of handguns for good reason, not a good summer gun. I carry either a G23 or Sig P220 for summer. Both Glocks and H&K's are fine weapons. I think the "big deal" concerning the H&K's are because they ARE good weapons and alot of people like them. Right now the H&K people are saying the same thing about Glocks........."whats the big deal with glocks?" It's the FORD vs. Chevy debate. To me it's like this, carry/shoot which ever feels the most comfortable and works best for you.
Both are great weapons and can take a heap of SH@@ and still work fine. Both are battle proven winners, along with Sig's, so you won't go wrong with either one.

[quantico]

I own several of both... I prefer the HK's because of the following...

HK / ability to use single or double action

HK / ability to use with no safety double action... or cocked and locked with crisp single action trigger...

HK has metal sights stock

HK has better finish

HK lifetime warranty... glock 1 year

HK has a nice slide stop that works to release slide

HK usp-45 has a smaller grip than glock 21...

HK is more accurate

HK can be converted to left handed use by moving controls

HK has an excellent lighter trigger module available

Hk can be operated with gloves on for winter use

HK barrel can shoot lead

HK fully supported chamber in barrel

HK has second strike ability

HK has a steel guide rod stock

The HK costs about 150 dollars more than a glock in my area, however the glock needs metal sights , and a metal captured guide rod and heavier slide springs to start with... so the value of the HK is excellent . The HK will also hold it's value better than the glock will .

[recycled plastic]

Glocks aren't perfect and buying a Heckler und Koch is a compromise...BUT<p>

Glocks are the best striker-fire combat handguns, USPs are the best combat handguns with a manual safety/decocking lever in my opinion. Both are reliable and passed all the torture tests. In my area, Glocks are cheaper than USPs. (490 EUR vs. 605 EUR).<p>I like the Glock more, because I can shoot it faster.

[Lorcux]

Jeff S., I apologize. I guess you actually did answer my question technically. Guess I took the defense mode when I was kindergardened with a dictionary. I went to the gun store yesterday to look at a USP. There was a used .45 for $599. It looked in great shape. I guess I brought up the topic to see if they were worth buying. Hindsight makes me want one just because I don't own one. $600-$700 is just a lot to pay, but, I bought the $800 Kimber and I love it. I will keep them for consideration. Just need more research and input. Thanks all.

[fnfalman]

The reason I said that they should not be compared is because while Glocks are, or so it seems, designed to be compact in size, and do the job as "duty pistols," and the more compact models are designed for concealed carry, or so it seems. H&K's USP is designed as a tactical pistol, thus why it's larger, with what seems to be a design that concentrates more on accuracy than concealablilty.
--------------------------------------------

"Duty" weapons? "Tactical" weapons? While I agree mostly with what you post, but please, please, leave those fancy words for Tom Clancy novels and gung-ho guns magazines.

FYI, the Glock 17 - the Granddaddy of them all, was designed to be a military handgun.

Damn if I know why the USP needs to be so bulky. Maybe if we can talk to the HK engineers as to their train of thought when they designed the package, we can find out. But it has nothing to do with being cop guns or military guns.

[Tim84K10]

Originally posted by fnfalman
The reason I said that they should not be compared is because while Glocks are, or so it seems, designed to be compact in size, and do the job as "duty pistols," and the more compact models are designed for concealed carry, or so it seems. H&K's USP is designed as a tactical pistol, thus why it's larger, with what seems to be a design that concentrates more on accuracy than concealablilty.
--------------------------------------------


Damn if I know why the USP needs to be so bulky. Maybe if we can talk to the HK engineers as to their train of thought when they designed the package, we can find out. But it has nothing to do with being cop guns or military guns.

You're putting words in my mouth. "Tactial," and "Military" do not mean the same thing.

[Ian111]

I love it when people throw around labels like "military", "tactical", and "duty weapon" around so freely.;z Yes, please save those labels for video games, Hollywood, and Tom Clancy novels. We're adults and we shoot real guns around here.


And many of the criticisms about H&K USP's and Glocks are disingenuous at best. Anyone who's owned both can see that.

[fnfalman]

You're putting words in my mouth. "Tactial," and "Military" do not mean the same thing.
------------------------------------------

I suppose that you will enlighten me? I guess the "Military" doesn't do anything "Tactical" with their guns then?

[RenegadeGlocker]

I have both. What I like the most about HK is it is more Left-Handed friendly, and I can get threaded barrels from the factory. What I like more about Glock, is it is easier to get parts,do the work yourself and everything costs less.

[Tim84K10]

Originally posted by fnfalman
You're putting words in my mouth. "Tactial," and "Military" do not mean the same thing.
------------------------------------------

I suppose that you will enlighten me? I guess the "Military" doesn't do anything "Tactical" with their guns then?

No problem....

A medic carries a pistol to protect himself, much like a police officer. The Geneva Convention even protects him from being shot at--until it is drawn from his holster. In this instance, his weapon is reasonably thought to be used as a last resort. In other words, his mission is either defensive in nature--or his main mission is other than front line combat engagement with the enemy. An infantryman isn't going to be carrying a pistol and ONLY a pistol in most instances.

I'm not sure if you've ever been in the military or not, but NEARLY every person in the military that is issued a pistol is unlikely to use it, or, they're already carrying another weapon and it is a backup. Everyone knows that a pistol is just not the ideal fighting tool for a soldier...and as a result, in a military engagement, the majority of soldiers expected to use their weapon against the enemy offensively are going to be issued an M16, M4, M249, or something along those lines.

Me personally, as a Soldier, if I'm going to carry a handgun, it must be durable. No matter what happens to it while I'm crawling, running, etc., it still needs to be in good shape when I need it, and I draw it from the holster to protect my life. It should also be somewhat light weight, easy to carry day in and day out--because it's going to spend a lot of time in that capacity. It needs to be accurate--but not brutally accurate at 50 meters either. I'm not in special warfare or anything like that--I'm an Air Defender. My main mission is to carry a 40 pound missile and shoot down aircraft. I am not supposed to become engaged with the enemy on the ground if at all possible--because that is not my mission. My needs are much different from a soldier who is on the offense, all the time.

A special ops soldier, Navy SEAL, a SWAT team member, etc., is going to be expected to use whatever weapon they're carrying. Their missions are certainly, "Offensive" in nature. It doesn't matter how big or bulky that pistol is, because it doesn't need to be concealed, easy to carry, or even light weight. It DOES need to be accurate, dependable, have a reasonable mag capacity, etc. If it's heavier it will allow for faster follow-up shots which can potentially be to that person's benefit. The missions this person is going to go on are once again, offensive, and likely short in duration.

Labels are just words. Now that you guys see the thought process I had when I made that statement...it should make perfect sense.

Strangely enough....what do most cops carry? Glocks!! Because that's what they're perfect for. :)

What is the military using for special ops soldiers? Not Glocks, and not often Berettas either. ;)

[Hantra]

I used to think HK's were hype as well.

Until I traded for one NIB. It's a USP Compact 9mm. And I'll tell you why I think it's superior.

Yes they are bigger, and less concealable, but the fact is that I can shoot tighter groups ONE-HANDED with the HK, than I can shoot with any other pistol I own using any method.

It is absolutely amazing.

[fnfalman]

A medic carries a pistol to protect himself, much like a police officer.
----------------------------------------

First of all, I don't know which military you've served in but in MY military - the US Army, medics are armed with M16s and machine guns and M203 grenade launchers.

The Norwegian Jaegers (commandos, if you will) use Glock 17s. If that's not tactical enough, then I don't know what is.

The Bundeswehr (German Army) just recently adopted one of the variations of the USP to be their standard issued pistols. So, did they do it because of "Tactical" consideration or "Duty" consideration?

You can come up with all kinds of reasons for your "Military", "Duty", or "Tactical" handguns all you want. But expect to be ridiculed for saying such nonsense.

Granted that there are pistols designed specifically to target the civilian/police market (SW pistols for example), and there are pistols designed specifically to target the military market and with the commercial/police market in mind.

There is officially by name only one "Offensive" handgun and that's the HK Mk23 SOCOM Offensive Handgun. The USP is an offshoot of it, but to say that the USP was designed to be a "Tactical" handgun and the Glock was designed to be a "Duty" handgun is rather ridiculous.

[RLDS45S]

I have two USP's fullsize and compact in 45. I have shot glocks in 9 40 45. Never a 10mm. I think for pure target use the 1911 platform is the ticket. For pure spraying and praying the glock works. But, if you want target grade accuracy without paying for a reliability package from a gunsmith, the only answer is USP!

[Cicero]

Originally posted by Lorcux
[I] So, are there any Glock owners on here that also own a USP? What do you think about the two? Thanks for any input.

Mrs.Cicero and I tend to buy new platforms in pairs. We started with a Beretta 92 and 96, disliked the trigger and the risk that the locking block would shear off. Then we bought an HK USPc 9mm and USPc .45 ACP. Then we bought glock 26's. The HK's were nice, but the trigger was nowhere near as nice as a tuned glock trigger with a 3.5lb connector. The bore axis now feels like it's as tall as a house. The manual safety has complicated things for both of us - accidentally flipping it up on recoil, missing the depress on draw under pressure, etc. Very rare (like 4-5 times over 3 years of regular shooting), but disturbing when it happens. Glock fixed all those problems and at about 65% of the price of an HK. Plus the grip angle is better for managing recoil. Plus it's a substantially lighter package.

[7.62mmFMJ]

I have a G21C and a USP45TAC. Both are fine weapons. Both will get the job done. I give the edge to the HK because it has the best parts of the 1911 (SA, C&L), Glock (polymer, light, durable finish), and Beretta (safety/decock) all in one package. It is significantly more accurate than the 21C but it also must be stated that the USP has steel sights which are raised and has a bit more barrel. However, the felt recoil is much less in the USP even though the spring is lighter. Although I would never believe the fit and finish of the glock could be improved (so silky), the USP does seem to be better.

The Glock 21C is ~$550. The USP45TAC is $1000. The USP45 is $750. The TAC has the threaded barrel, better trigger group, adjustable sights, and nice case for the extra money.

[FatBob]

I have multiple glocks, and multiple H&K's (only one USP though, a full sized .45). I don't think I've ever tried to compare them. I collect firearms, so that is why I chose to buy both.

They are both top quality firearms. The H&K USP fits me beter than all my Glocks. I was very suprised at how well I shot it right out of the box. Also it has a more natural point, for me. I don't think that one is better than the other, I just PERSONALY like my H&K USPf 45 better. Glocks are awesome too, so I own both.
______________________________________
Off topic-

First of all, I don't know which military you've served in but in MY military - the US Army, medics are armed with M16s and machine guns and M203 grenade launchers.[/B]
I was on active duty in the US Army for 7 years, until last fall when I ETS'd. I was in the Military Police Corps, and my "duty weapon" was a Berreta M9 (92F), and a Sig 228 on a few assignments. Two of my best friends were medics (one of which I worked side by side with, in a combat zone, until he stepped on a land mine and blew half his foot off). Both of these full time medics (from different units I might add) qualified with M16's once a year, and other than that they never touched them. Their issued weapon was a Berreta M9 (92F).

[FIREFOX]

Wow!!! I can not believe some of the garbage I am reading on this thread ;g . I own both and can talk from experiance, from ccw carry to duty carry.
Both guns are outstanding weapons and I love both makes. Both are accurate durable and reliable. Its just a matter of personal preferance of which gun shoots better, points better, or just feels better in the hand for the individual.
If the glock shoots better for the person, then great they can save the $150 bucks :) and buy some extras. If not then be a smart person and spend the little extra cash to get the gun that is better for you.
O and play nice children;a .

[Cicero]

Originally posted by epsylum
I think HKs are like Ferraris. By that I mean, you get a world class top of the line product, but you are paying even more for the name. I really doubt that HKs are really that expensive to produce. It's just they (and other people) feel thier gun is such a quality product that people will pay a bit more just to have it.

The factory rep at an HK shoot candidly told me that the $100 price increase over a 2 year period occurred "just because that's how much people are willing to pay for them."

I like shooting HKs, and they're good pieces of machinery, but the glock is easily strippable, modifiable, shoots (like the HK) more accurately than I'm capable of taking advantage of, and points on target faster with faster follow up shots. I don't understand the posters who liken the HK to a ferrari - the fit and finish on all the HKs that Mrs.Cicero and I own is very comparable to what we get from glock.

I guess the HK is like a ferrari in the same way a VW chassis with a fiberglass ferrari kit slapped on top of it is like a ferrari. Some very nice looks and marketing, but no significant advantages.

And the HK mags are fat, develop very sharp edges with use, cost $45 for standard caps, and wear out.

[fnfalman]

Unless you're with the LEA detachment, your "duty" weapons would be sidearms PLUS an M16 or an M203, or a SAW or an M60/M240. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The medics from the 326th Medical Battalion with the 101st Airborne all carry M16s and other assorted smallarms. The only ones that carried handguns were the doctors.

The combat medics assigned to individual infantry units also were armed with M16s.

Here's a picture of the 626 FSB (renamed 326th Medical Bn). Note the slung rifles.


http://www.angelfire.com/wizard/apollo0/rep2-4.html

Here's more pictures of non-Airborne/Air Assault medics with slung rifles.
http://www4.army.mil/armyimages/armyimage.php?photo=793

[Andrew Colglazier]

my take is that, if you could buy a Ruger centerfire semi-auto with the option to be carried cocked-and-locked, you'd have an affordable H&K.

The USP models are huge, clunky and over-engineered. Sure, they are accurate, but so is a rifle. If you want an accurate handgun for bullseye, get a 1911 or the like.

The USP is an expensive service weapon. It's made to be durable and reliable. It is overpriced and not as versatile as other models of handgun.

Andy C.

[fnfalman]

It is overpriced and not as versatile as other models of handgun.
-----------------------------------------

I agree that it is overpriced, but how is it not as versatile as other models of handguns?

As far as shooting bullseye, one is better served with a true match pistol such as a fancy competition .22LR autopistol and not a frankenstein M1911A1, of which an USP will easily match the accuracy.

[quantico]

I think that glock makes an excellent pistol, I think that the HK is superior in build and design although the HK's are not tiny. Remember that the glock 21 grip is larger than the HK , so Glocks are not always tiny guns either. I feel that the quality of the HK speaks for itself, and the gun presents well. These are a couple of my HK's ....

[quantico]

Those of you that like glocks should at least consider the HK... as part of your defensive pistol collection...

[quantico]

My glocks all look well worn.... Can you tell which HK has been holster carried ten years... and which one is almost new ???

[Fingolfin]

Don't feel bad i've gotten the same "i need to justify the extra $200 by bashing your gun" rant at the local gun store as well. I think USPs have overall better quality than Glocks, but they aren't worth the extra price IMO. Both guns have advantages and disadvantages over each other.

The thing that bothers me is the elitist attitude by some people who own guns like that, and the constant desire to bash other guns to demonstrate they have a bigger ***** than you.

[ExiledViking]

I have both. I wouldn't feel any less
secure with the Glock. A lot of it is
in how it fits your hand.

And as far the HK USP .45F not being as
accurate as a 1911..;z ;z ;z !
It comes down to the shooter every time.

[zuby]

I have both. Love them both. HK's are a bit pricey, but I got my LEM for less than what my Glock cost and it came with mepros and 6 hi-caps. (agency contract purchase-duty weapon). I like the tighter construction of the HK and the slide release. It has gone through a beating and still holding strong. I am also pretty impressed with my G22. I would not trade one for the other. All personal prefrence from there. HK gets alot of hype from their name because the USP is just a tiny fraction of the weaponry they manufacture. They produce everything from belt-fed machineguns to the infamous mp-5/ump-40, SEVERAL other feild proven combat, civilian and law enforcement rifles, sniper rifles and so on. They are also working on the production of a caseless ammo military combat weapon. I would believe this would have a great deal to do with the higher prices. Anyway, if you prefer glock, whatever the reason, roll with it. I like mine just as much. If you ever get the chance, try out the HK line. You just may buy one. A new addition to the arsenal never hurts.
;I

[trick pony]

I had 2 HK pistols! A usp compact in 9 and the same in .40. I used to be the Glock hater! I was a big 1911 guy and an HK guy. I have been known to say i will never own a glock! I hated glocks to say the least. Why one might ask...well they are ugly, and they get the rep from movies and what not to be a gang banger gun. But...i could not conceal my usp compacts well at all. I needed to find a concealable gun. Being very picky about my firearms, i went through my list of choices including a p7M8 and came up with nothing. I bought a walther, but it was a jam-o-matic evan after four trips back to the factory. I got my money back from my range (best customer service in the world) but was all out of ideas. One of the employees mentioned glocks. I didnt think a whole lot about it because he was a glock guy to the bone. After a hard sell, he got me to take one out on the range. After the first mag, i was sold. I came in and ordered a G19 and havnt looked back. It is simply put, the best gun i have ever fired. It is 100% relialbe, much more concealable than the HK, more acurate in my hands, and much more comfortable to shoot. Looking at the design of the firearm, i also beleive it to be better built and designed. Its the perfect gun for me, and brought me over from the dark side. Ive since converted four of my glock hater buddys over. Moral of the story...shoot a glock, shoot an HK, ignore the price, and get what you like more. I love glocks, IMHO they are the best handgun ever devised. I still like HK and 1911's but what can i say, GLOCK PERFECTION at least for me. And next time somone calls what your shooting junk, remind them that if there was a BEST gun for everyone, every other gun company would be out of buisiness. Oh yea, dont mind the spelling errors, im the victim of public schools haha.

[litework]

My first gun was a Glock 23 and I've always owned a Glock pistol since April 1993. However,I do prefer the HK USP 45 to the Glock 21 and have no qualms about paying the extra 200 bucks to get the USP. I don't think 200 dollars is a lot to pay for the added features on the USP...with something like 9 different variants, you can get a USP in any configuration you desire and you can also change your mind and switch variants after you buy the pistol. I prefer the controls on the HK with its true slide release and ambidextrous mag release that isn't in the way. I feel more comfortable with a hammer fired system instead of a striker fired system, as well. If these features don't float your boat, then you probably won't be able to justify the additional cost. I was a little reluctant to buy an HK at first, but I'm happy that I finally broke down, bought one, and decided (on my own) that HK isn't hype. I admire the Glock for its simplicity, but I also like the features found on the HK. I learned not to pay attention to the rants of gun shop employees; your own personal experiences are much more important.

[Justin1584]

Originally posted by quantico
My glocks all look well worn.... Can you tell which HK has been holster carried ten years... and which one is almost new ???

;P Errr..just out of curiosity what finish does HK put on those USPs?

[sdfhpson]

Preface: I do own both a Glock and a USP... and a P7M8.

I'll quote another GTer (name I can't remember), "I believe H&K's put sole(sp) into their guns."

One uncomparable gun (or two) is the P7, both the M8 and the M13. Beautiful gun.

[OUSooner]

Originally posted by Justin1584
;P Errr..just out of curiosity what finish does HK put on those USPs?

H&K makes stainless but their black is called hostile environment. It is the best finsih I have seen on a hand gun.

[Justin1584]

Originally posted by OUSooner
H&K makes stainless but their black is called hostile environment. It is the best finsih I have seen on a hand gun.

Does any refinishing company offer it for other handguns?

[cole]

Own HKUSP40c and G17. Owned G23 and G27.

The USP is a better built gun. Higher quality overall.

The USP is a more intuitive "point" shooter. So, for me the HK is a much better defensive shooter while the G17 easily has the advantage in accuray as a range/target gun.

Our HK performs much better overall than our G23 did - this is the most direct comparison (i.e. compact .40s). Both were 100% reliable with any ammunition and were comparably accurate.

More of my thoughts here: HKUSP40c (http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=292834)

That being said, the HK price is "hyped-up". They're good, but not $150-$200 extra good IMHO. That's why my I bought ours used for about $50 more than a used Glock. Like most overpriced items when new, as a used item it's retail comes closer to the norm.

With the HK, you do get what you (over) pay for. The Glock is a great gun for what it is; an affordable, reliable handgun.

[Brasso]

Had an HK compact. The trigger sucked. I mean really sucked. Other than that I like them, I'm just not going to spend that much on a gun that still needs a trigger job.

[sdfhpson]

HKs do have a heavy trigger...

[7.62mmFMJ]

Originally posted by sdfhpson
HKs do have a heavy trigger...

The compacts and plain jane may, but the Tactical/Expert/MK23 are much better

[sdfhpson]

Really?! hummm... I wish the gun store was open now! - I want to go play with a differnt HK than my USP, see if the trigger is nicer!

[sdfhpson]

Originally posted by quantico
My glocks all look well worn.... Can you tell which HK has been holster carried ten years... and which one is almost new ???

I may be able to guess by the date code!

[RealLiberal]

There is nothing wrong with Glocks. Shoot factory jacked ammo and take care of it and it is a fine gun. USP is superior in strength and machining, it has tighter tolerances. I don't care for USP 'compacts' or .45s, I would say Glocks are superior in those fields. But my USP 9mm is a better weapon than the Glock 17. It doesn't make a lot of practical difference, most of the nice features are just good for people who are used to 1911s, or who like to shoot hot loads, or who are qausi-military weirdos with laser sights and flaslights mounted on their handguns. #2 and #3 apply to me, thus I chose the USP9 over the G17. Although the magazine capacity is killer in those things.

[racine]

I find this topic very controversial on both the HK and Glock website/forums. I personally have owned, shot, competed and cleaned both of these fine weapons. In the end they are just tools. I shoot the USP Expert 45 as with my Glock 35 in USPSA and Action Pistol competition. Back when HK's sold for $510 they were a good deal. Somehow the "tactical" hype that came with the HK logo( boosted by such well known and combat proven platforms like the G3, Benelli M1S90, MP5, & P7 series)justified the price jump of over $200 for the same weapon. I bought the HK USP 45 when I wanted a good reliable 45acp besides my Para O P13 and I chose it over the G21 and a Sig 220(based on grip size and magazine capacity and the light option then). In retrospect I consider my tuned Expert a real sharpshooter and competitor in USPSA although it's high bore axis and recoil assembly have to be learned and controlled. The trigger was tuned and reworked by Bruce Gray to take out the long over travel and long reset, something Glock surpasses out of the box. I only shoot my hk in good weather- I guarantee that if it gets rained on it will need to be detail stripped and lubed or you will see rust. That Hostile Environment finish is basically useless. If I ever need to get back into a hostile environment guess what I'm taking with me-Glock 35 hands down. Don't ever get mud, muck or sand in your hk, it wasn't engineered to take it. Don't get me wrong as I love shooting the USP as it makes you look good. But with all the aftermarket additions you can add to the Glock, it just nears perfection so much easier and so much cheaper. So when you see that phrase "...in a world of compromise..." just remember, I did (with my HK).
racine

[MichaelVain]

This tired old debate never gets settled and probably doesnt have a definitive "right" answer. Just alot of opinions, experiences, and views from both sides of the issue.

I would have to think that any real comparison is not HK vs Glock, but rather model vs model. USPC vs. compact Glock, USP vs. Glock fullsize, P2KSK vs Subcomp. Glock.

I prefer the USP series over the Glock series. I've shot a Glock before and I really didnt like it that much, I prefer the USP and SIG 226/9 over their respective Glock counterparts. While Glock is definitely a good value, if that is not the most important issue, that may not be your defining selling point.

Racine makes good points about the shortcomings of the USP series in competition shooting. I don't think a stock USP is going to win you many races if you're shooting against guys who use 1911's or anything of that ilk.

However, the HK weapon platforms are great imo. The Mark23/Mk23, the MP5 in it's variations, the USC/UMP platform, the 53, 93/33, 91/G3 etc. I prefer all of them over other models, either AR's, or Uzi's, etc.

I love how all of those shoot and function. The beauty of them can be really appreciated when you SHOOT them. For those who have never shot an MP5, you have no idea what you are missing, I highly recommend if you get the opportunity to shoot one.

M

[sdfhpson]

Originally posted by MichaelVain

I love how all of those shoot and function. The beauty of them can be really appreciated when you SHOOT them. For those who have never shot an MP5, you have no idea what you are missing, I highly recommend if you get the opportunity to shoot one.



Oh, it would be a dream come true to shoot an MP5, let alone, own one.

[VonFatman]

It's a sweet shoot'n gun...
When I got the gun I right away had H&K add factory night sights and an ambidextrous control lever (I'm "wrong handed").
Then after meeting and visiting with one of their 'smiths at an NRA Convention some years ago, I sent the beast back to that particular 'smith for "special" care... a match trigger spring set and an H&K trigger/polish job. Later I added a CCI flash suppressor (just for grins).

It's without a doubt the sweetest shooting semi-auto I own. Everyone who shoots it grins because it is the most on-the-money point of aim gun...don't put the bottom of the target at the top of the sights UNLESS you want the bullets to hit the bottom of the target! Oh yeah!

That being said, I would NEVER trade off my G-21. I can shoot (almost) as good with it (inside 25 yards) and it's stock (other than the Heinie Slant-8 night sights).

I know some folks whine about Glock or H&K triggers, but I think it's simply a mater of thinking about what you are doing and doing what you should always do when you squeeze a trigger.

I have no regrets over having paid $850 (pre-tweaks) for my Tactical...AND I love having only paid $525 (pre-Heinie sights) for my G-21.

Take one for a test drive!

http://www.gunsnet.net/album/data//500/5378H_K_Tac_right_CCA3a.JPG

Bob

[fivestar]

I own and have carried both. I like each of them for their differences. Although, I will say that until a year or so ago, I preferred the USP's. Since then I have been shooting my Glocks a little more, so consequently I enjoy them about the same now.


Just my $0.02

[GSRwBOOST]

I have to chime in since I'm just back from shooting my new HK USP9....



All I have to say after shooting it tonight.....



WOW!




If you call the way it the gun feels/handles/shoots as "hype"... heck, sign me up for another one... perhaps in a .45 this time.

[pck50]

H&K, undeniably make some very high tech firearms mostly for law enforcement, & Military alike. There Pistols are also very fine some do have some flaws that without those flaws they would undeniably be the very finest in the world for sure.
For example there is a Pistol that they manufacture called the P7 PSP, & P7M8 Botyh I had owned they were very good and very impressively designed but most unfortunately they have had many dangerous flaws in them, One was that they bot immensely over heated too quickly too a point that the firearm was un holdable at all unless you wore goretex gloves, the other bad flaw was that the Slide take down button was too close to the slide in the rear so in a hurry when you would rack the slide rearward and didnt release it straight your finger can accidentally press in the slide release button by doing that and holding the slide at same moment can accidentall7y lift the slide a bit upwards causing it fly right out of the frame, at shooting speeds quicker then the projectile, once I had experienced that with a friend of mine In Blue Trails Shooting Range In Wallingford, CT. Well the hype and pleasure of owning them pistols went right out the window,a dn ended up in trading in for a Walther P5c, that in my opinion is a far superior weapon. And also doent need a gas retardation system cleaned such as the P7 Series at all.

As for the USP's well in all honesty they are decent guns and would have too say that they would be a bit more accurate and better put together then the Glocks, but are they worth the difference in money, well thats something that every body needs too settle in there own minds.

Personally If I choose too go a bit on the crazy Side my personal preference would have too be either a Korth. or A Sig Sauer P-210-5,
Or a Sphinx 3000 Titanium those in my book would surely be the finer tools in my life.

You All Have A Very Great day and Happy Holidays!

Pete

[sdfhpson]

Originally posted by pck50
...but most unfortunately they have had many dangerous flaws in them, One was that they bot immensely over heated too quickly too a point that the firearm was un holdable at all unless you wore goretex gloves, the other bad flaw was that the Slide take down button was too close to the slide in the rear so in a hurry when you would rack the slide rearward and didnt release it straight your finger can accidentally press in the slide release button by doing that and holding the slide at same moment can accidentall7y lift the slide a bit upwards causing it fly right out of the frame, at shooting speeds quicker then the projectile, once I had experienced that

Pete

Weird...

First off - you don't need to be shooting that freakin' quick for it to get that hot... never in a real life situation would you ever need to shoot that quick where it would get that hot - nor in any type of a shooting match.

Secondly, if you have had a problem with where the button is located, I think that's your problem. I have never had any such problem.

I would not consider either of these "dangerous flaws."

[GSRwBOOST]

I agree with ^... unless your robbin a North Hollywood bank there's no reason a gun should get that hot. As for the slide release/takedown lever.... ( i mean this in a positive way)... I think your just no suited to operating a semi-auto and should stick to revolvers. For someone to mess up releasing the slide and have the slide come off shows loads of ignorance.

Please turn in all of your semi-autos to glocktalk to be raffled off for charity.

[pck50]

very nice , thank you you have your fetish I have mine! LOL




Originally posted by sdfhpson
Weird...

First off - you don't need to be shooting that freakin' quick for it to get that hot... never in a real life situation would you ever need to shoot that quick where it would get that hot - nor in any type of a shooting match.

Secondly, if you have had a problem with where the button is located, I think that's your problem. I have never had any such problem.

I would not consider either of these "dangerous flaws."

[pck50]

Nice, again thank you



Originally posted by GSRwBOOST
I agree with ^... unless your robbin a North Hollywood bank there's no reason a gun should get that hot. As for the slide release/takedown lever.... ( i mean this in a positive way)... I think your just no suited to operating a semi-auto and should stick to revolvers. For someone to mess up releasing the slide and have the slide come off shows loads of ignorance.

Please turn in all of your semi-autos to glocktalk to be raffled off for charity.

[Grandfather Glock]

I enjoy the following features of the Glock over the USP:
-low bore axis
-consistent trigger pull from start to finish
-lighter
-lower parts count
-easier concealability
-I can easily create a nice 3# trigger
-no safety/decocker to fumble with in an emergency situation
-faster (don't see too many USPs in competition)
-accessories out the wazoo

The USP:
-much cooler
-better aesthetics
-more instinctive grip angle
-easier mag release
-different variants

The cost is not an issue for me.

[pck50]

Well Thank You,
& Have a Very Nice Holiday!

Pete



Originally posted by pck50
Nice, again thank you

[Andris]

I own both H&K and Glock. When I first bought my USP I had problems right out of the box with the case not extracting out of the chamber for about the first 120 rounds. After polishing the factory finished chamber my problems went away. I also bent my connector on the same USP... I did this when I tested the safety and tried pressing down (not very hard but with moderate pressure) on the trigger to see how good the safety was. Well, the hammer dropped with the safety on. I brought it to the shop were I bought it and the gunsmith told me the the connector was bent and it was my fault that it bent. I asked him to find out if H&K would fix it? He sent it out and it came back fixed free of charge. But it still worries me that the hammer dropped even with the safety on.

My glocks have had no break in problems and no breakages of parts from use/abuse. I like the fact that glock has a lower sight axis compared to the USP

From my observations the H&K has too many little parts that I wouldn't dream of trying to take apart and working on the pistol. My glock I can take apart just about everything with a pen or similar without any worries.

I own them both but I shoot the Glock 10 times more often than the H&K.

[Glockdude1]

Originally posted by Lorcux

[I]"And you can throw it in the sand, mud, or snow and pick it up and shoot it fine."

When ever I hear that, I say Hand me YOUR $700 HK and I will be glad to throw it in the mud to see how it well it does.

;N

[GSRwBOOST]

Originally posted by Glockdude1
When ever I hear that, I say Hand me YOUR $700 HK and I will be glad to throw it in the mud to see how it well it does.

;N


I guess HK never took that into consideration when they designed the gun... assumeing that their pistols would never be abused by the military during tests and in the field. ;Q

Don't get me wrong I like Glocks but i'm not ignorant enough to believe that it's the BEST gun out there above all others.

When I field strip my HK and my Glock 30, i have a frame, magazine, barrel, spring, slide and (for the HK) a slide stop lever. Leaving the HK with one extra part in the field strip process. Oh my bad, everyone here dissassembles their guns down to the last screw every time...

HK didn't get to be all "hyped" up by being a crappy pistol/rifle maker and I'm pretty sure the USP didn't get a lot of hype by being a failure. Just like I'm sure "Glock" didn't get all it's hype by makeing crappy products...

to each his own...

[RAH]

I used to think it was all hype until I broke down a full size USP. It's a rugged but simple design. The dual captured spring guide rod is awesome, the simplicity of the slide that allows for function even under the worst conditions and the three position safety (Variant 1) is nothing short of genuis. There's also the mild recoil and the accuracy that you can get out of a USP. USPs are a first class tool. Are they worth paying more for than a Glock? Only you can decide that.

[sdfhpson]

So... to sum up what we have come to conclude in the four pages of thread so far, is that HKs ARE better, just that some may argue whether they're worth $200 more than a Glock. Am I correct?

Sometimes I think that Glocks themselves may be a little overpriced also. If Glocks would go down in price, I think HKs may also.

[Glockdude1]

Originally posted by sdfhpson
If Glocks would go down in price, I think HKs may also.

Supply and demand controls the price. High quality pistols are always in demand. I don't see the demand going away any time soon.......

;N

[sdfhpson]

Originally posted by Glockdude1
Supply and demand controls the price. High quality pistols are always in demand. I don't see the demand going away any time soon.......

;N

True. You got a point.

I think I would always buy a high quality (HK) pistol if it was priced right, no matter if I needed one at the time or not.

[Zulu Alpha]

I have both a HK USP Tac in .45ACP and a G21. I love both of them, but I find that the USP, with the ambi safety is a very left handed friendly weapon. The HK is a really well made handgun, but for the $$$ the Glock will do you just as good except in the accuracy (USP has match trigger and o ring bushing barrel) and the Glock comes in a close enough second for my use. Just get both and be happy :) LOL

[schapman43]

WOW, I almost hate to bring this thread back into play.


I've owned a HK USP40, HK USP45, HK USP40c, and a G23. I've also fired a G27 and G22. I would say the HK is better quality but not better built. You can see it on the milling of the slide and the exterior finish of the slide. But that said, the Glock will do everything a HK will do but for a couple hundred less. For my money the Glock cant be beat. For a carry gun the Glock cant be beat. For inexpensive high capacity magazines cant be beat. For interchangeability of parts between a large number of different models the Glock cant be beat.

I also see allot of people rave about the finish on HK. Yes the HK finish is one of the best out there. But show me a Glock that has rust on it. Lets not forget that the Glock finish isnt whats on the outside but rather the inside. The black part is only a metal coating. The real protector is the process done to the steel itself.

[Jeff S.]

Originally posted by sdfhpson
So... to sum up what we have come to conclude in the four pages of thread so far, is that HKs ARE better, just that some may argue whether they're worth $200 more than a Glock. Am I correct?


I think that from what I've learned from this thread is that the questions "which is the best handgun," or "is handgun X better than handgun Y" are both silly questions. There is no best, and no one pistol is better than any other pistol. It's all about the user: what the individual user needs and likes about handguns. Price doesn't play into how a pistol functions. Price plays into who can buy what pistol.

People who believe in "what's best" are blinded by their own necessities or afflictions.

HK's are unquestionably great pistols. Are they hype? Absolutely not. Are they better than Glocks? Well, that's a personal question as each and every one of us will answer that differently.

~Just for the joy of it, here is a pic of a Surefire Alpha and an HK USPc40.~

[7.62mmFMJ]

Jeff S.

How do you like that knife?

[turrican]

Ok I'll just say it. I think the USP's look cool. Period.
I like my Glocks. They never let me down and I can shoot well with them.
I like my HK's and I shoot well with them too. (Just got them)
But they are both just fine. I dont think it's that big og a deal.

[Jeff S.]

Originally posted by 7.62mmFMJ
Jeff S.

How do you like that knife?

http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=328898

The more I use it the more I like it.

[fnfalman]

We can argue about durability and reliability all day long between the Glocks and the USPs. What aren't arguable are two things: finish quality and accuracy. USPs reign supreme over Glocks. No ifs ands or buts.

Now, whether or not these two things would make it worth the $200-250 USP premium over the Glock, that's an individual issue.

If I were to be strapped for cash, then it would be an issue to me and I would go with the Glock. But if I can afford the extra cash, I'd go with the USP.

I have four SIG Sauers, two USPs and one Glock. I was strapped for cash when I bought the Glock.

[turrican]

Get both
http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/11/web/659000-659999/659075_31_full.jpg

[RojasTKD]

Both good reliable, tough guns. Personally I'd perfer a HK because I don't like the grip angle of the Glock.

[epsylum]

Originally posted by turrican
Get both
http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/11/web/659000-659999/659075_31_full.jpg

I couldn't agree more. I got both and I love both. I would never think about selling either of them.

The Glock is definately a work horse gun. The USP is everything a Glock is, just a little more (thus the increase in price). I would feel perfectly safe carrying either.

Think of the glock as a good work truck. Reliable, can do whatever you want it to do work wise, but lacks a little in the options department. But, still does an A1 job.
The USP is a that same truck but fully loaded. It can do everything the work truck can and is the same truck overall, but it is just a bit nicer.

I said it before and I'll say it again, Glocks are one of the best gun for the dollar choices. But USPs are extremely nice and I feel are worth the extra money if you can afford it.

[Clockwork]

Originally posted by pck50

For example there is a Pistol that they manufacture called the P7 PSP, & P7M8 Botyh I had owned they were very good and very impressively designed but most unfortunately they have had many dangerous flaws in them, One was that they bot immensely over heated too quickly too a point that the firearm was un holdable at all unless you wore goretex gloves, the other bad flaw was that the Slide take down button was too close to the slide in the rear so in a hurry when you would rack the slide rearward and didnt release it straight your finger can accidentally press in the slide release button by doing that and holding the slide at same moment can accidentall7y lift the slide a bit upwards causing it fly right out of the frame, at shooting speeds quicker then the projectile...

I find it very hard to believe that the P7 series design has been manufactured for nearly 30 years with many dangerous flaws.

[turrican]

Originally posted by epsylum


I said it before and I'll say it again, Glocks are one of the best gun for the dollar choices. But USPs are extremely nice and I feel are worth the extra money if you can afford it.

Yep, that about sums it up right there.

[M1KEY]

all the hype? dont know dont care cuz i pick up my full size usp 40 tomorrow morning:-D

[Glockdude1]

M1KEY,

Make sure you get plenty of 13rd mags to go with it. I have had my USP 40 since 97.

;N

[M1KEY]

it came with two!:) i will be sure to get more after i spring for another holster. cant wait to get to the range and let some go.

[M1KEY]

pictures of the newest member of the family
<img src='http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/902592/hk1.jpg' width=640 height=480 >
<img src='http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/902592/hknameonslide.jpg' width=640 height=480 >
<img src='http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/902592/hkonnose.jpg' width=640 height=480 >

[FoxMustang]

Nice piece ^c

I have a 9mm version of the same gun on order, I can't wait to get it.

[M1KEY]

unless rain is coming down in buckets then i will get to fire it tomorrow. im so siked

[Glockdude1]

M1KEY,

Here is a Pic of my USP.

;N

[Glockdude1]

One more time......

[Glockdude1]

Another View.....

[kels]

One agency I worked for replaced thier
revolvers with USP40s Model 1&2

Some of the glaring quirks

When they first came out, there was no level 3 duty holster for them.
The molded checkering on the backstrap is VERY sharp.
The magazine release will work if your seatbelt rides on it.
Feel like taking a call with one round in your gun?
Unlike Glocks, they need to be CLEANED REGULARLY.
With the black hills ammo, we would start having failure to
go into battery at about 200-300 rounds IF THE GUNS WERE NOT CLEAN.
Not Blacks Hills fault. Lazy OFFICERS who need to clean guns.
IT is possible to twist off the safety lever. It was a problem
when they first came out.
(supervisors response was, WHY DO YOU HAVE IT ON SAFE?)DUH!

Having said all of the above, I would carry one again with no
reservations. The price is a joke however. I think SOMEONE told
us that H&K designed it to compete with glock. (got to love reps)
This was about 1995.

[Alexii]

I had a an HK USP .45 in their HE finish. Sold it when it developed rust on the slide stop, barrel, and rear sight dovetail slot. This because it accompanied me every morning in my bathroom (gun placed on the commode covered by a towel while I shower).

My G19 never had this problem. Heck, even my 6-year old Beretta never had a rust problem despite being subjected to the same treatment.

[Glockdude1]

My USP must be a "wednesday built" pistol. I have had mine going on 8 years, and it has never given me any problems at all, even when very very dirty. I have put a good 1700rds thru it of all kinds of ball & hollowpoint.

;N

[M1KEY]

Originally posted by Glockdude1
My USP must be a "wednesday built" pistol. I have had mine going on 8 years, and it has never given me any problems at all, even when very very dirty. I have put a good 1700rds thru it of all kinds of ball & hollowpoint.

;N

nice pistol glockdude1. well i gotta go. im off to go fire the newest member of the family.

[FoxMustang]

Hey Glockdude1, where did you get the magazine extension (I'm assuming that's the +2 round)?

[jgamble]

To me, it's all what you practice with. I've put far more rounds through a Glock than I have my HK, so I'm used to that. If I had to pick one up and depend on it, it would be the Glock... but if I had put more through the HK, it would be the HK I'm sure. With the Glock, I know exactly where the trigger is going to break and I know exactly how it is going to behave. The only downside I see about Glocks is that people tend to be more nervous learning with a Glock than with something like a HK or Beretta with a postive safety and decocking lever and, to an extent, I find it easier to teach new people basic gun safety on those handguns.

[Glockdude1]

Originally posted by FoxMustang
Hey Glockdude1, where did you get the magazine extension (I'm assuming that's the +2 round)?

Yes, that is a +2 extention on the mag. I bought the pair of ext's at a gun shop several years ago for about $15(ish). I still have the original package, but there is no info on that package as to who made them. I have never seen them for sale since. I am sure with the AWB dead, HK might be making them. These ext's are not factory. If I find any more I will post the info.

;N

[sheriffglock]

Hello-

I think there are many differences between the Glock and HK USP that really makes the HK better and therefore justifies the cost.
1. When you fire the HK until slide lock occurs and do a mag change, when you seat the new mag, the slide automatically comes forward into battery. You don't need to have the slide release easily within reach like the Glock has.
2. The recoil spring is a double captured spring that makes for softer recoil. I'm not even sure this option is available for the Glock.
3. There is a mag release that can be operated for both Left handers and Right handers. I actually prefer to release the mag using my strong hand index or middle finder rather than my strong hand thumb. Using the thumb, I have to change my shooting grip to reach the release. Also, if you don't operate the Glock release correctly and firmly, an empty mag won't release easily. This problem simply doesn't exist with the HK.
4. The grip is stippled on the HK. I think that there is more grip cohesion with the HK than with the Glock, though the sandpaper type grip enhancers for Glock are nice.
5. Because the HK has a hammer mechanism and is available in a DA/SA configuration you have multple advantages:
a. You can carry the firearm without the safety engaged but
still have the heavy trigger to act as a safety. In action,
this has a similar effect as the Glock SAO trigger. This is
tactically good because you may not have time to charge the
firearm by cocking or pulling the slide back but only
pulling the trigger.
b. In a conflict, if you have time, you can pull the hammer
back and have the advantages of a SA trigger. And then, you
are able to decock the hammer safely.
c. If you pull the trigger and the round doesn't go off, you
can immediately pull the trigger again to to see if the
round will go off with a second strike. With the Glock,
you're only option is to rack the slide and bring a new
round in the chanber. I suppose there is some argument what
the better way of handling this situation is tactically, but
with the HK, you at least have the option of a second stike.
6. Sight changes are easier with the HK. They use the front sight dovetail instead of a stud.

Some HK Negatives:
1. Cost
2. Becareful going back and forth between a Glock and an HK. Because of the different grip angle, your ability to snap the firearm up to sight will be effected ever so slightly. It makes a difference though.
3. HK seems to have an attitude toward civilian use. High caps and 30+ round magazines are difficult or impossible to find. Glocks are everywhere. I have a problem with a company that doesn't wholly support the civilian right to own and use firearms.
4. Mags can't be interchanged between the fullsize USP and the compact. Glock minis and fullsize are great combinations.
5. Can't use all the various firearm mounted lights available. The HK can only accept one type of light. Though the light is outstanding, I still prefer choices.

Some Glock Positives:
1. Cost
2. Mag choices
3. Size
4. Payload- More rounds is always good.
5. Less complicated mechanism, less parts, less chance for problems.
6. Loose tolerances. It's tough to get a Glock to malfunction though in all honesty, I haven't heard of too many problems with HK.

These are my thoughts.

[Glockdude1]

Originally posted by sheriffglock
1. When you fire the HK until slide lock occurs and do a mag change, when you seat the new mag, the slide automatically comes forward into battery.

The only HK pistols I know of that comes close to that, is the P7M8/M13 squeeze cocker pistols. When you change mags, all you do is squeeze the grip and the slide will go forward. My USP .40's slide will not go foward until I use the slide release with my thumb, or grab the slide with my weak hand release it into battery. It is only "automatic" in the sense of ejecting the spent rd, and putting a fresh rd into the chamber.

;N

[fnfalman]

Originally posted by sheriffglock
1. When you fire the HK until slide lock occurs and do a mag change, when you seat the new mag, the slide automatically comes forward into battery.
-------------------------------------------

This happens sporadically with my USPF9. I'm sure that it's not by design. As far as the P7 goes, the slide doesn't go forward automatically either. You have to squeeze the squeezecocker.

[RealLiberal]

Originally posted by Glockdude1
The only HK pistols I know of that comes close to that, is the P7M8/M13 squeeze cocker pistols. When you change mags, all you do is squeeze the grip and the slide will go forward. My USP .40's slide will not go foward until I use the slide release with my thumb, or grab the slide with my weak hand release it into battery. It is only "automatic" in the sense of ejecting the spent rd, and putting a fresh rd into the chamber.

;N
It will do it automatically if you push the magazine home fast enough. You have to practice but you can get it to do it or not depending on how you seat it.

[Glockdude1]

Originally posted by RealLiberal
It will do it automatically if you push the magazine home fast enough. You have to practice but you can get it to do it or not depending on how you seat it.

So far with my USP .40 having fired a good 1700rds thru mine, it has never done that, even with rapid mag changes while moving. I am not saying it is not possible, just that my weapon does not do it.

;N

[SIGSAREBETTER]

Originally posted by RealLiberal
It will do it automatically if you push the magazine home fast enough. You have to practice but you can get it to do it or not depending on how you seat it.

Only certain early models did this. This was not intentional and HK "designed" it out of the gun awhile back.

I like this feature.

[toocool]

Originally posted by FATSEXY
The USP is every bit as durable as a Glock. It may even be more durable. It really comes down to which gun fits your hand better in determining which one you like more. I have biggish hands, so the USP feels great to me (I see a lot of people say they're too big). The USP 45 that my uncle has that I've shot is wonderful. Recoil is very well managed by it.

The only negative on the HK is that for the price of one, you could almost get two Glocks.

They're both great guns though, and people talking smack on Glocks like they aren't "real" guns... whatever. My local gunsmith hates Glocks with a passion. He's sold me two of 'em, though. ;)

Since this thread started, I've sold the Sig P220 I had and gotten an HK USPc .45. I agree that Glocks, HKs and Sigs are all fine guns, and it's just finding what fits you best. I love my Glocks, but didn't care for the G21 that I had; the HK .45 fits me much better, and for my uses, it is ideal. I have a couple of Sigs, a few Glocks, and my HK. I won't be getting rid of any of them any time soon.

[Glockdude1]

Originally posted by FoxMustang
Hey Glockdude1, where did you get the magazine extension (I'm assuming that's the +2 round)?

I found more +2 ext's (+3 in 9mm) for $24.99 + shipping here:
Pic of ext's: http://www.entreprise.com/Catalog.htm

http://www.entreprise.com/Catalog/Sights/hkuspo.htm

;N

[FoxMustang]

You rock, thanks man :)

[Kinny]

Own 2 USPs .45s and 1 Glock 30. Both nice guns, I shot the hell out of one USP and the G30. I broke the G30, but it's a quick fix. Both mighty fine pistols in my opinion, and I love them both dearly.

[Kinny]

Here are some pics for your viewing pleasure. Don't have pics of my G30. lol..

http://img119.exs.cx/img119/4702/usp04rw.jpg
http://img119.exs.cx/img119/9525/usp33rx.jpg
http://img119.exs.cx/img119/4586/ammo13ho.jpg
http://img119.exs.cx/img119/1777/ammo27jz.jpg
http://img50.exs.cx/img50/5938/45s2hq.jpg

[shadowhunter]

OK there seems to be lots of opinion about the USP verses Glock, here it is from an engineers point of view. But first I would like to that both are fine guns.

Metallurgy The Glock is good but the USP is superior in hardness and even machine work. The Glock is no slouch, very good quality but here you get what you pay for.

Function is another critical issue here, compare the two to something else and it becomes easier. Lets say a car, how about a car you get into that is very well made, but there are no instruments, speedometer, gauges, or shifter. Just a steering wheel and a big red button on the floor that says GO. You push to go and let up to stop. And this very made little car runs great, it is a hell of a little machine. But all that being said this car as wonderful as it is would just be to lame for some, especially those with a few more bucks who were accustomed to gauges, and switches, so that they can adjust things the way they want them. The ability to have access to all of the controls makes one who is accustomed to them, and more importantly knows how to use them, better at operating the car.

Glocks also gained popularity with PDs as a gun that could be used that were operationally idiot proof. I have handled guns my whole life, and I am very familiar with safety’s, hammers, decockers, and all the other little gadgets that make a gun, a gun. I personally do not need a well made idiot proof gun. I do not personally know anyone who wants to carry or use a gun that can not be positively placed on safe. I don’t mean a little flipper on the trigger that will disengage as soon as it is touched. I am talking about a positive click off, click on, where it takes some force to move the lever. The hammer that you can not touch or even decock is not normal to me. Full function one lever does it all, seems rather neutered, and lame to me. I want total control of any firearm that I use, it is apparent that many do not want this. Now I am going to go out back and shoot at some coyotes with my Hk, will it be the 91 or the USP decisions decisions.

[R850R]

I think that the usp is a very well made pistola. I owned one in the .45 FS stainless variety. I shot it well, but it just didn't do anything for me. I hated the trigger...long double action and the reset in single was long. It's a great gun if you practice, have decent sized palms and if it warms up to you. I'm leaning towards glocks more and more because I have grown accustomed to their trigger pull and reset, although training and practice must go hand in hand with any weapon system. I'm sure your mileage may vary.

[epsylum]

Ok, since my last post, I purchased a used USPf 9mm. I was looking to get a SIG but the price on the HK was way too good.

Before I wasn't very thrilled with it. Now that I own one and have shot it more, I have gotten used to the differences between a Glock and an HK. Now I think I like my HK just a smidge more than my Glock. The only thing I do not like, is the seeming lack of accessories for it (at least at reasonable prices). Oh, well.. I guess it's like trying to get parts for a Porsche instead of a Ford.

In all, I do not see any reason for me to sell any time soon, or ever. It is very nice.\

But, I still only carry my Glock CCW.

[Redef]

Nice guns there Kinny
^c ^c ^c

[sdfhpson]

Originally posted by epsylum
Ok, since my last post, I purchased a used USPf 9mm. I was looking to get a SIG but the price on the HK was way too good.

Before I wasn't very thrilled with it. Now that I own one and have shot it more, I have gotten used to the differences between a Glock and an HK. Now I think I like my HK just a smidge more than my Glock. The only thing I do not like, is the seeming lack of accessories for it (at least at reasonable prices). Oh, well.. I guess it's like trying to get parts for a Porsche instead of a Ford.

In all, I do not see any reason for me to sell any time soon, or ever. It is very nice.\

But, I still only carry my Glock CCW.

Like what kind of accessories? HKs seem to be good without them!

[epsylum]

Originally posted by sdfhpson
Like what kind of accessories? HKs seem to be good without them!

I'm not a huge doo-dad guy. But, when new (not pre-ban used, or LEO marked) hi-capacity unmarked magazines are hard, make that almost impossible to find, I consider that a problem.

BTW that is the only HK brand accessory I am looking for.

However, 3rd party accessories are quite plentiful, just not mags (especially for a fullsize 9mm).

[sdfhpson]

Originally posted by epsylum
I'm not a huge doo-dad guy. But, when new (not pre-ban used, or LEO marked) hi-capacity unmarked magazines are hard, make that almost impossible to find, I consider that a problem.

BTW that is the only HK brand accessory I am looking for.

However, 3rd party accessories are quite plentiful, just not mags (especially for a fullsize 9mm).

Oh, I got ya. Yeah, that is a problem! (- and when you do find them they'll cost you the price of a new gun!) I thought you meant modifications...

I'm not the type of guy that's into 3'rd party things that I may trust my life with.

[oboeman]

I agree with Quantico's list of differences. Both are fine pistols (and like Quantico, own several of both). I have shot both in competition, and know that both perform well, but my H&K Expert always goes "bang". It does have a slight accuracy edge IMHO, but that could be solely because it fits my hand well.

[cole]

One more thing to add as this topic grows in replies is how tight (slide/frame fit) a gun remains after high round counts. I think this is also a reflection of overall quality in materials and manufacture.

I suspect both our Glock 17 and HK USPc to be running at 20k rounds. However, with each at around 5k, the Glock has become noticably "loose" compared to when it had fewer rounds, whereas the HK is just at tight.

Both still work perfectly. Both are great guns.

[RottnJP]

O.K., in the spirit of data-based decision making, here's a question:

Has anyone done a good "apples-apples" comparison of the inherent accuracy potential of these firearms? I mean, eliminating ergonomic/shooter issues by locking 'em into a rest, etc.? I've heard that "the H&K's are 'way more accurate'" and I've heard that the G's are "just about as good." Can anyone quantify that in real terms?

Thanks!!

-JP

[sdfhpson]

If we look at it this way...

If Glocks and HK's cost the exact same amount, I would pick an HK (as I think many people here would). So, yes, HKs are better.

-------------------------
Glocks are better priced.

[Glockdude1]

;d ;d ;d ;d

[7.62mmFMJ]

OK, in the final analysis, since I got the USP45, the Glock has been in the safe. Not even range time ;P However, I am not going to throw it out :cool:

[cmb2874]

My two CCW weapons are a Glock 19 abd a HK USP .40 in stainless. I love both of the guns, and I really enjoy shooting both of them. What the HK has over the Glock is a decocker, external safety , and recoil reduction system.
Like I said, I love bother of the guns, they both shoot very well and are both very well made and durable. Just my 2 cents.

-cmb

[RENEA]

I own 2 USP 45's and love them:)

Absolutely the finest non M1911 .45 pistols made today ;c

[towershot]

quote by racine:

"That Hostile Environment finish is basically useless. If I ever need to get back into a hostile environment guess what I'm taking with me-Glock 35 hands down. Don't ever get mud, muck or sand in your hk, it wasn't engineered to take it."


That seems like a foolish thing to say because i guess when the Navy was trying to choose a gun, finally going with the Mark 23, they choose it on looks alone, I mean I guess they wouldn't test it out first possibly in an enviroment with mud, muck, or god forbid sand, but the SEALS probably never see much sand so that wouldn't be an issue really. In fact they probably picked the HK because most SEALS never get their hand dirty so why would they worry about adopting a gun that needs to function when it's a bit dirty. come on racine, use your head.

TS

[cole]

Originally posted by sdfhpson
If we look at it this way...

If Glocks and HK's cost the exact same amount, I would pick an HK (as I think many people here would). So, yes, HKs are better.

-------------------------
Glocks are better priced.

Well put. I agree.

This would resolve ANY is Brand X "better" than Brand Y question: "If the cost were EXACTLY the same, which would you get?".

Then the only question that would remain is, "Is the "better" brand worth the additional money?". That I think is the harder question to answer most of the time.

[turrican]

Earlier in this post I said get both and I had a pic of my glocks and my HK's together. well one by one I have sold my HK and all of their overpriced rip off mags with them. The HK is a nice gun and it is definately more pleasing to the eye but does it work better? No
Does it feel better? No. Can I afford both? Yes. I just like the Glock better. I dont know why. Sometimes it just comes down to feel. Which one feels better in you hand with your eyes closed. Which one you shoot better with. I have changed my position. I feel the Glock is better for me. And I emphasize for me. In fact I am on the path to having all of my hadguns be glocks. I have had Sigs, Berettas, HK's, 1911's all within this year and I have always come back to the Glock. No matter which Glock I feel like I know it. I know that trigger that some hate but I like. I know that grip angle that some hate but fits me perfect. I just like Glocks. I sold my USP 45 full size with 4 HK hi cap mags and got a brand new green frame G21 with 6 mags and night sites and a Glockmeister trigger and it is soooo sweet. I think it is my favorite pistol. (This week):cool:

[newgunner]

Originally posted by shadowhunter
OK there seems to be lots of opinion about the USP verses Glock, here it is from an engineers point of view. But first I would like to that both are fine guns.

Metallurgy The Glock is good but the USP is superior in hardness and even machine work. The Glock is no slouch, very good quality but here you get what you pay for.

Function is another critical issue here, compare the two to something else and it becomes easier. Lets say a car, how about a car you get into that is very well made, but there are no instruments, speedometer, gauges, or shifter. Just a steering wheel and a big red button on the floor that says GO. You push to go and let up to stop. And this very made little car runs great, it is a hell of a little machine. But all that being said this car as wonderful as it is would just be to lame for some, especially those with a few more bucks who were accustomed to gauges, and switches, so that they can adjust things the way they want them. The ability to have access to all of the controls makes one who is accustomed to them, and more importantly knows how to use them, better at operating the car.

Glocks also gained popularity with PDs as a gun that could be used that were operationally idiot proof. I have handled guns my whole life, and I am very familiar with safety’s, hammers, decockers, and all the other little gadgets that make a gun, a gun. I personally do not need a well made idiot proof gun. I do not personally know anyone who wants to carry or use a gun that can not be positively placed on safe. I don’t mean a little flipper on the trigger that will disengage as soon as it is touched. I am talking about a positive click off, click on, where it takes some force to move the lever. The hammer that you can not touch or even decock is not normal to me. Full function one lever does it all, seems rather neutered, and lame to me. I want total control of any firearm that I use, it is apparent that many do not want this. Now I am going to go out back and shoot at some coyotes with my Hk, will it be the 91 or the USP decisions decisions.

I am not an engineer, but I do not belive it is the most accurate comparison when say a car with a button that says go would be a good comparsion with glock.

USPs...are like sports cars, Glocks are also like sports cars. The difference is a USP is a manuel and a Glock is an auto. With the uncomfortable stick shift you have you use, it doubles with performance. Just like how with a USP you have to click off a safety and have the ability to be fired straight from crisp SA trigger. As opposed to glock... no.

Other wise back to the X > Y

USP= high axis more muzzle flip.
Ergonamics of a USP ARE TERRIBLE!!! Anyone that uses a thumbs forward IPSC grip should understand what I'm saying.

Glock= low axis less muzzle flip.
IPSC grip= nothing blocks your hand

But this is all peferance.

[ant20]

I got tired of the contradicting stories from people you ask people about the Hk and you can tell whether they are glock sig or an HK guy like my family member who is LEO I told him I was getting an HK he went ballistic (glock fanatic) glock is better. I am an open minded individual I own 2 glocks the g33 and g31c and I love both guns but I also was eyeing the HK USP Tactical because I wanted a different caliber so I finally picked one up today and shot it for the first time my opinon best gun I have shot ever I have shot glocks 17,22, 26,30,31c,32c,33 and I have also shot beretta 92fs and 92FS brigadier but what do you expect from a $1000 dollar hand gun. I am tired of hearing conflicting stories so I made up my mind to just get it all Sig, HK , Glock and 1911 model pistol

Which one is better? the one that stressfull circumstances that will not fail you and shoot the most accurate with

[Duke of Lawnchair]

The HK USP40 is a great handgun, it's just not great for me.
HK's USP grip doesn't fill my hand like the Glocks do.

For a .40, I'll take none other than a Glock. Any Glock.

I'm planning to get rid of my USP40F in favor of another G22 or G35 or maybe even a G23 (which I don't already have).

-Jim

[betyourlife]

Both guns have their advantages over each other.

Glocks are:

Inexpensive

Easy to disassemble (completely)

No external safeties for those who don't like to mess with them (I don't consider the little fin on the trigger to be much of a safety, although it is a safety against accidentaly engaging the trigger while stuffing it into your pants, it is not a safety against pulling the trigger on purpose like a 1911 thumb and grip safety are)

No hammer for you to cock (for liability reasons).

DAO trigger that is consistent and able to fire VERY fast due to short trigger reset.

These are features that to my knowledge can not be found on most if any H&K's.

It all comes down to this: They are both worth trusting your life to and when it comes down to choosing one it comes down to a matter of personnal preference; just as some glock owners choose the compacts over the standard size Glock's and vice versa. It just depends on what your needs are.

By the way, The correct english pronunciation for H&K is Heckler & Coke. I went to Germany to discover that Koch is actually pronounced Coke in Deutschland. HA! Who would have guessed!

And also, H&K was actually ther first gun manufacturer to produce a polymer framed pistol, though it was not very successful. This was long before Glock came along.

[betyourlife]

[i] Posted by, Shadow Hunter:
I personally do not need a well made idiot proof gun. I do not personally know anyone who wants to carry or use a gun that can not be positively placed on safe. I don’t mean a little flipper on the trigger that will disengage as soon as it is touched. I am talking about a positive click off, click on, where it takes some force to move the lever. The hammer that you can not touch or even decock is not normal to me. Full function one lever does it all, seems rather neutered, and lame to me. I want total control of any firearm that I use, it is apparent that many do not want this. Now I am going to go out back and shoot at some coyotes with my Hk, will it be the 91 or the USP decisions decisions. [/B]


I wouldn't take ANY gun with a loaded clip inserted in it and one in the pipe, point it at my head and attempt to pull the trigger, even with a safety. Would you?

Noooo...

Your finger and common sense are your safety. Glocks safety is actually convenient because it prevents the gun from discharging when stuffing it into your bag or clothing and the trigger snags on something, yet you don't have to think about disengaging a safety when you draw in self defense like you would on the H&K.

Of course if you are worried about gun retention then the safety on the H&K is superior. My worry however is that in the stress of fighting for my life...I will forget to disengage a saftey...

Like I said. It all matters on your personal preference and both failing to disengage the safety and gun retention are valid tactical issues to deal with. Choose the gun that applies best to your situation.

P.S. The only way to positively place a gun on safe is to completely unload it.

[BrokenArrow]

Skipped all the above...

I've shot both quite a bit. Both are more than good enough to bet your life on.

The Glock is less expensive and has an easier armorer's training course.

The Glock is simpler to operate than the various USP options, but the LEM pretty much evens the score there.

Both have done well in extensive testing done by various LE and military organizations.

The FBI/DEA decided to issue Glocks after testing Glocks and HKs... the HKs did better than the Glocks in 40/357 when tested by the DHS/ICE guys in 04. Get what ya like, or flip a coin and like what ya get.

I like the look and feel of the USP/P2000 better, especially the compacts, and prefer variant 1/3 or LEM to Safe Action. The USP/P2000s are more reliable in my hands when fired from odd positions and/or w my "weak" hand, or when my wrists go limp (hey, stuff happens). YMMV.

I know a guy who worked for the FBI/FTU. He has worked for Glock and SIG. He can make either sound better than the other (I have the old emails to prove it). Can't wait for him to work for HK... ;b

[Todesengel]

I prefer my P2000 LEM .40S&W over any glock. It fits my hand perfectl