After the success of the Glock 17 in Austrian military trials, the company chose two specific markets to target for expansion. One was competition shooters, for whom the Glock 17L was released. The other was the international law enforcement and military market, for whom they decided to make a machine pistol – the Glock 18. The 18 was released in 1986, a model identical to the 17 except for the addition of a rotary selector switch on the slide.
In response to complaints about the controllability of the Glock 18, the 18C (Compensated) was released in 1996. This was a new model which added four barrel ports and a lightened slide to the 18. Neither has ever been really successful simply because machine pistols are by their very nature now very practical.
The question we are going to look at today is how the Glock 18 system works. As one would expect from Glock, it is a quite simply mechanical change to the semiauto lockwork.
“(…)machine pistols are by their very nature now very practical.(…)”
Should I understand this as machine pistols are by their very nature very practical in March 2025? If yes why it is so? If not what year month day now denotes in sentence above?
I think “now” was a typo for “not”.
A fully-automatic weapon in the pistol format is an answer to a question that nobody in their right mind is going to be asking.
There may be some 95th percentile types out there who can make such a mechanical affectation work for them, but the vast majority of the “average user” will present rather more of a threat to their fellow military/police personnel and innocent bystanders than they will to any potential threats.
Given the physics of it all, and our current technologies, I cannot see any value in one of these confections. Maybe if someone were to try the idea out in something controllable in that format, like .22LR? I don’t know… Personally, I think the whole idea is just stupidity on skates. It’s very vaguely useful when there’s a stock involved, but the raw fact is that if you’re going to do that, why not do a real, honest-to-God SMG? It’s the same envelope…
If you’re going to do “pistol”, it has to be controllable. 9mm out of a pistol format, in fully automatic? Not ever going to be controllable for the average “likely user” they’re going to be handing one of these to.
Every time I see a Glock 18 or Beretta 93R, I just default back to my experience training my medics and senior field grades on the M9, and try to imagine what that would have entailed if there’d been a fully-auto option on those pistols.
Other than turning our pistol qualification ranges into impromptu sorting mechanisms for the really unlucky, and weeding out nine-tenths of the people involved through attrition and “range accidents”, I can’t see it working out. At. All.
I honestly can’t see the use-case for any of these weapons. Maybe if you were at Kursk, and trying to clear the deck on one of your tanks, firing out a pistol-port…? Dunno; I’m not sure how the hell you’d control something like this in that situation, and then you’d have the minor issue of the port interfering with the slide operation, soooo… Yeah. No. Just… No.
“(…)someone were to try the idea out in something controllable in that format, like .22LR?(…)”
If you need pistol shaped pistol-shaped full automatic weapon using .22 rim-fire cartridge then use TREJO https://guns.fandom.com/wiki/Trejo_pistol
If you desire higher capacity of magazine and are okay with using 6,35 mm Browning cartridge then use LERCKER https://guns.fandom.com/wiki/Lercker_machine_pistol
Lercker wanted to sell his SMGs (very similar to scaled-down Beretta PM12) to wealty people seeking for protection against the risk of abduction (pretty high in Italy in the ’60s ’70s). The idea had been doomed by the ban of fully automatic weapons for civilians in Italy in 1975.
If you were not a military, but an insurgency or gang, the cost of a submachine gun through local channels might be thousands per copy. If you already possessed a bunch of Glocks, then what you do is order a bunch of legal Glock carbine chassis and maybe some of those extra-long Glock barrels. Port the barrel, put the gun in the chassis, and you now have something as heavy as a submachine gun, but it’s here now and in volume.
I think what Ian was trying to say was `not` very practical, the full auto Beretta 93r was probably the best attempt with the compensated barrel foregrip and shoulder stock I think he has a video about it.
The 93R is three round burst only as well so it’s remarkably controllable for what it is.
I wonder, how do the Wish Glock Switches do it on a standard Glock? That would be interesting.
Much like laying out how to create improvised explosives, I think that anyone like Ian laying out a “how to”, which is effectively what that would amount to… It’d be a really, really bad idea.
Frankly, were it not for the almost certain collateral damage, I’d be all for handing the damn things out to gang bangers, but… Given the actual likely effect on my continued right to keep and bear arms for my own self-defense, I’d just as soon not have everyone and their cousin discussing this crap on the internet. There’s already one lawsuit against Glock over the issue, and the more attention we draw to it, the worse the likely effects, once the morons get aroused.
This is one of those sad cases where common sense should outweigh what is the idealized “perfect state”.
You can thank Hollywood for that. The action-movie makers had their armorers come up with that “plug and play” gadget to convert regular Glocks for full-auto fire with blanks for filming purposes. Way cheaper than going through the legal requirements for buying Glock 18s- let alone the problem of finding the latter to begin with.
Predictably, it escaped onto the Net because neither fanbois or SFX techs are capable of keeping their lips zipped- or their CAD/CAM files on stand-alone systems.
Add in rapid prototyping and 3D printing- and here we are.
clear ether
eon
I had no idea that was the provenance…
I’m a big believer in civil liberties and all that, but… You could make the case to me that Glock ought to sue the snot out of all concerned, for the damage they’ve done to Glock’s reputation and for having created that liability for Glock.
And, yeah… I think the restrictions on “machine guns” are ‘effing ridiculous, but so long as we’re going to play by these rules, they ought to be carried out to their logical conclusions. Glock did not deliberately design for easy conversion to full auto, and those parties that made that happen to Glock’s IP ought to be held accountable for the damage done.
Although, on the other hand… Maybe this is going to point out the essential intractable issue with trying to lock down technology, instead of behavior. The fact that so many so-called “gun crime” enhancements go unused, when dealing with criminal actions? That’s pretty much an indicator what the real agenda is, and how ineffective the whole effort has been.
I’d like to run an experiment on it all… Open season on purchasing whatever hardware you want, but draconian enforcement of all “crime of violence” offenses, to include summary execution for those caught in the act. The real problem here isn’t with the tools, but with what’s in between the ears of the offenders. Start culling them with efficiency? Watch the crime rates go down.
See El Salvador for illuminating evidence. It ain’t the guns; it’s the ineffective enforcement of the law. How many crimes of violence like rape and murder are committed by first-time offenders? Compared to the number that are committed by people who’ve been caught for similar crimes earlier on in their careers?
We’ve been confiscating 3D printed Glocks for years now. Think ceramic barrels, sintered metal slides and action parts, cheap polymer frames and springs largely taken from auto-parts stores.
Yes, we’re well into what the cyberpunk SF writers were calling the “polymer one-shot” age back in the Nineties.
They even “print” them and/or paint them in bright colors- yellow, orange, red, sky blue- so that they look like toys.
At some point, some six-year-old, emulating his older “mega-cool” brother, is going to point one at a patrol officer. And depending on whether it launches rubber 8mm balls or solid 9 x 19mm slugs…well, I’m sure you can figure out the likely results.
One way or the other.
clear ether
eon
@eon,
It has always been my opinion that if you portray a credible threat, then you should absolutely be treated as though you are one. Teenager with a credible replica, that’s non-compliant? Justified shooting.
At the same time, some of that crap needs to be toned down on the police side of things, as well. You do not have the right, as an officer, to treat every citizen with a firearm as though they were automatically a criminal.
Play with the big-boy toys, pay the big-boy penalties. Likewise, if you’re uncomfortable with an armed citizen, well… You need a new career.
I think that there’s a potential solution in mandating that everyone do some time maintaining public order… Draft cops. The whole thing ought to be treated like jury duty; you get summoned, go through some training, and you’re the man or woman for maintaining public order.
I think one of the most educational things I did while I was a senior NCO in the Army was what they called “Courtesy Patrol” in Korea. You were on a duty roster, and you were tasked with keeping order, down in the ‘ville. Prior to doing that, and being forced to deal with the epic dumbassery? I’d often felt like the Military Police were abusing their authority and my troops… One payday weekend tour down there with them? I was more of the opinion that the MP detachment ought to be given even more free rein than they were. Some of those drunken idiots needed to have their faces pushed in, good and hard, for what they were doing. I’d had no idea what the usual idiocy was, until I was forced to try and police it…
your right for most offenses. But mass shooters are typically first timers and would be enabled by machine guns. I still want one…
My patrol time was mostly as an auxiliary sheriff’s deputy. Put simply, everybody was that short-handed.
The things I saw there made me think that the major problem was that there were too many people “on the street” who needed to be in mental health facilities.
I also concluded that the training of the majority of law enforcement officers was woefully inadequate. And what there was mainly consisted of “police community relations” i.e. PR.
Yes, the purpose was to make “management” look good no matter what bad decisions they kept making.
Since we were a federally-funded laboratory, we were essentially outside of the chain of command of the agencies we assisted. You could tell how competently run (or not) those agencies were by how resentful of us their higher-ups were.
Generally, we had little trouble with sheriffs. Prosecutors, chiefs of police, mayors, and county commissioners were another story entirely.
Most of them were mainly interested in making sure no offal splashed on them when somebody buggered something up. And proper training to avoid such things was far down their list of budget items.
Another example of “you only get what you pay for”.
cheers
eon
eon said:
“The things I saw there made me think that the major problem was that there were too many people “on the street” who needed to be in mental health facilities.”
Oh, absolutely. You can work things in one of two ways: Either you have total liberty, and let nature take it’s course, or you have everything locked down like a mofo’…
Right now, we’re trying to square the circle by having everything everywhere in free play; there are no rules, really. Problem with that? We refuse to accept the reciprocal, that there will be an equal and opposite reaction in the other direction from people who’re reacting to having their rights trodden upon by the unwashed minority who won’t follow the rules. As such, things aren’t working.
The way “they”, who I’d suggest are the liberal dumbasses running most major cities, want to have things is total, untrammeled “liberty” for the unwashed insane to do their thing. Without the natural reciprocal, meaning the normies responding with brute violence whenever the unwashed go off the reservation… They think that will work, but it’s about as sensible as saying that we ought to outlaw predators in nature, and let the grass-eaters overrun the biome, destroying everything in the process. Either you want what amounts to a carefully curated environment where the wrongdoers are gently culled from circulation, or you want nature, red in tooth and claw. You can’t have both at the same time, which is apparently what they’re striving for.
“Oh, the poor boy, he’s just misunderstood…” is absolutely incompatible with “Let them do as they will… Let nature take its course…”
Nature’s an ugly bitch. If you don’t want to put people in jail for transgressing on the rights of others, well… You’re basically signing on for that “red in tooth and claw” thing, whether you know it or not. People aren’t going to put up with three-time losers and recidivists killing their kids; they will react, and that reaction will consist of some very ugly things becoming the norm and totally accepted in “polite society”. Like “private vengeance” and outright atrocity in the name of personal retribution…
You can’t have both principles work, in the same society. Not for more than a generation or two, at least… They’re forcing a transition between “civilized” and “utterly barbaric”, without really understanding what they are doing.
That barrel venting in that location must make 9x19mm more .380 or 9x17mm; it must lose gas pressure behind the bullet from the barrel. Wonder if you could mount 2 glock 17’s on top of each other, mags stuck out to the side; on an AR lower… And Gast gun the mofo’s with one pull of a trigger. Might be a lark “Legal” and otherwise to work out; probably sell mind if you could – Folks have said pistols and lowers, a drop in thing. Modern Glocks I think have those mounting rail things underneath… That 9mm cal used the .223 spring and was snappy, might be a way. Sounds a laugh 2 barrels, and potentially high rate of fire. Two litre shooters, target market. I went Gast gun on two lever action Winchesters once, used a big wheel thing… (I changed that to Huges chain gun type arrangement) out of interest. Might be possible. BANG!!! Gun 1 back… Hits gun 2’s trigger BANG!!! Along those lines clearly; needs a bit more work like, as that is as far as I have got since watching this video.
That 9mm bearing arms conversion thing, .223 spring; snappy… Hmmm…
The Winchester idea was essentially a Gast gun conversion, this might be more “proto bump fire” quite; if at all, not sure. Still 2 barrels of glock, big mags, Ar; if legal, in the U.S that must sell.
Sounds lethal that doesn’t it, still; 2 litre shooters, need 2 litre shooters…
Dynamiters, need dynamite.
“(…)dynamite”
Does not you find 9 mm bullet to be to small to implement useful load of explosive filler?
“(…)2 litre shooters(…)”
What is this?
Pop, Coke bottles 2 litres metric they shoot them in America as targets seemingly.
https://youtu.be/J-QeTbmchvQ?si=JEPJp8nSKgd24Poj
“(…)mount 2 glock 17(…)”
Unless intentional show of disdain: Glock.
If you need 2-barrel full-auto pistol-cartridge originating from Austria then use Doppelpistole, see 3rd image from top http://firearms.96.lt/pages/m12p16
Oh I love that, but nobody has them anymore; couldn’t make them no skilled workers/machines etc. Drop in Glock, AR platform Gast gun… Have to think more about the mechanism, rather than why. If that wouldn’t sell in the U.S I will eat a small portion of a tweed hat. Mechanism/integrate into platform. Good against body armour also probably; as @ 1,800 rnds a min from 66 you’d probably hit some in the ball’s/head. Meh.
do you speak English?
if so, please start any time.
It all comes down to “what is the mission”?
The earliest semi-practical machine pistol, the Astra 903, was intended to appeal to Chinese warlords who wanted a fancy, exotic gun to arm their bodyguards. In short, it was a “boutique” item.
The Mauser 1932/712, which came later, was intended for the same market. It ended up in military service with the German Army as the pistol issued to motorcycle despatch riders. The later Czech Vz.61 and Polish PM Wz. 63 were designed for similar duties. As W.H.B. smith said of the ’63, since it was likely to be the sole defense of a lone man, it had to have the best possible performance.
What is overlooked in all these cases is that pinpoint accuracy, even up close, was neither required or particularly desired. The gun’s job was to create a “wall of lead” at near point-blank range to give the operator time to make his escape. In the case of the Chinese warlord, his bodyguards were to use their machine pistols to create a storm of lead to give him time to escape with his booty- and his booty calls.
The machine pistol is the tactical equivalent of a shotgun. And as we discussed here the other day, a shotgun is largely useless on a battlefield.
The purpose of the machine pistol today is mainly intimidation. Again, much like the shotgun.
The late L. Neil Smith advocated three-shot burst control on a machine pistol, to make it at least somewhat more useful. This might have made something useful out of the Spectre…whatever it was. Ditto the Jovina International/AMAC Delta 786…whatisit.
Probably the most sensibly-designed “machine pistol” ever was the French MAT 1949 in 9mm. It had most of the virtues of a “Folding SMG” without many of its drawbacks. And thanks to that handy folding magazine well with its nicely-ergonomic foregrip, even without a stock and firing from the hip by the Jerry Usher method, the ’49 was in fact actually possible to hit something with.
clear ether
eon
I do think the Ppsh may have a use against body armour, though… I honestly do; the fire rate, don’t aim at the body armour. I mean the effect, vastly different; is it? NO BALLS. They are down. Yes I know it is rude. But it is a war.
Shooting someone in the belly etc isn’t nice, 32 in the nuts; blood… Might be kinder. Anyway, meh. Best idea is peace.
And robots don’t have balls, per se.
Our robots will shoot us in the nuts; why? Below the body armour. Magnetic pricks.
“(…)most sensibly-designed “machine pistol” ever was the French MAT 1949(…)”
Keep in mind said weapon is relatively heavy at 3,6 kg sans magazine and seems to be intended to be carried at sling like other sub-machine guns of that era, example
https://www.reddit.com/r/Military_equipment/comments/14f5chn/a_french_soldier_with_his_mat49_submachine_gun
On the other already mentioned Cancer, much lighter at 1,6 kg empty, was carried in oversized pistol-like holster, see 2nd image from top https://www.forgottenweapons.com/pm-63-polands-first-pdw/
“(…)Chinese(…)”
According to https://gundigest.com/more/classic-guns/why-the-mauser-c96-broomhandle-still-looms-large
…In China, this [C/96] pistol was adopted by military and police alike, and became hugely popular when the 1919 Arms Embargo Agreement stopped the import of battle rifles into that country. A loophole left shoulder-stocked pistols exempt, and Chinese warlords bought them in vast numbers…
So mentioned weapon (and variants thereof) were result of manœuvre to avoid legal restrictions w.r.t long arms propagation.
I find myself nodding along in agreement. Essentially.
It would be my take that if you’re a bodyguard whose principal keeps putting you into positions where you need something like that Astra 903, well… You need to find another principal before this one gets you killed.
It’s the same issue as the whole idiotic PDW concept: If such a thing is to be useful, you’ve put yourself in the shoes of that woman’s husband in Los Angeles, per the fire department leadership: You’re somewhere you shouldn’t be.
The use-case for a pistol predicates that spray-and-pray full auto fire is inappropriate; you’d be way better off with a frag grenade and a semi-auto pistol or revolver. Same-same with most of the PDW-class weapons out there; you’d be way better off with an actual carbine-class weapon that’s not going to be taking up that much extra room, and will be lethal out to the outer edge or further of the individual-weapon appropriate range fan.
The trick to winning fights is to know what is and what isn’t appropriate for that fight. I can’t think of any engagements where the full-auto pistol or the PDW are at all appropriate. I mean, if you’re in a situation where the quarters are close, and you want to effectively let off a Claymore in a confined space? Why bother with the pistol… Use a frag, take everyone with you.
Hardcore… Eon as a Policeman might be trying to save hostages or something; anyway thats between you two. Robots though, the mofos shooting us in the nuts.
Shoot them in nuts, pricks.
I’m pretty much on the same page. I really can’t think of any situation for using a machine pistol that a full-grown SMG wouldn’t be better. MAT 49 seems to neatly straddle the gap between the two types.
Compare and contrast; Mauser 712 and standard Uzi. The Uzi pretty much wins hands down, except maybe on relative concealability.
The invention of the overhung bolt design concept for SMGs pretty much rendered the machine pistol a null set.
I think machine pistols fall into the same technological subset as “transitional” percussion revolvers (i.e., ones based on pepperbox designs). In each case, somebody was trying to use an existing technology path to go in a direction that path just is not suited for.
I now find myself wondering when some supposedly bright individual will decide that the old “Prowler Fouler” aka “Short Stop” bean-bag launcher technology is “just the thing” for making a cheap grenade launcher in about 30mm bore.
cheers
eon
https://forum.cartridgecollectors.org/t/does-anyone-know-what-this-is-mba-prowler-fouler/52544 A prowler fouler…
Ring Zelinsky. Anyway I blame Boris; offensive.
Twat face cnut muffin, oh yes. Got everyone killed for nothing.
Yep. The first time I saw the police version (all-aluminum, anodized black, big and tough enough to use as a riot baton), I thought of the WW2 Japanese Type 89 grenade discharger aka the “knee mortar”.
In fact, except for being powered by CO2 instead of a blank powder cartridge, it pretty much works the same way.
As I said, some clever dick is likely to come up with a GL based on it. Another useless bit of tacticool frippery to hang on an M4, tagged as the Ultimate Answer To Police Problems.
There’s only one Ultimate Answer; respect for the law. On both sides.
Of course, for that, the law has to be…respectable.
The trouble is, politicians write the laws.
clear ether
eon
eon said:
“There’s only one Ultimate Answer; respect for the law. On both sides.
Of course, for that, the law has to be…respectable.
The trouble is, politicians write the laws.”
In an idea world, full of spherical cows and such, you’d be correct. In the real world, ain’t none of that working… Which then leads to asking and answering the question “What does work?”
The model of “Ideal Law and Justice” blows up when it gets applied to people. People are not ideal spheroids acting in vacuums. People are messy; hard written law is meant for the spherical cow situation, which does not exist.
You have to step back and consider what the end goal of all this “law and justice” would be. It is arguable, but I believe that thinking of it as a behavioral modification tool meant to enable lots of people to live and work together in relative peace and harmony is a more realistic way to look at it all. If “Law n’ Justice” do not work to create that peace and harmony, then they’re functionally not fulfilling the role they’re supposed to, and the question then becomes “Yeah, why are we paying for all this and participating in the farce?”
Which is precisely where “private justice” and vigilantism comes into play, in order to provide the missing behavioral modification action that is actually effectual.
If you deliberately break the imperfect workings of “Law n’ Justice” in order to make things conform to your ideological fantasies, well… Don’t be real surprised when something else pops up to actually perform that behavioral modification function. People will stop calling 911, and begin calling Fredo, who will then do the heavy lifting. The function will be performed, no matter what you may fantasize about providing some ideal perfect “Justice”.
You’re already starting to see the beginnings of what I’d term “The Great Routing-Around”. I’ve heard rumors, locally, that one of the local well-off types grew a little peeved at the fact that the four-time loser whose most recent DUI killed his daughter’s best friend and left her a physical and mental wreck…? Well, said habitual DUI is now dead in some sort of prison “encounter” (which was reputedly quite ugly), and the local who made it happen got a hell of a sweetheart deal for his small business…
Behavior… Modified. If the formal system of laws and courts won’t do the job, something else will.
“(…)old “Prowler Fouler” aka “Short Stop” bean-bag launcher technology is “just the thing” for making a cheap grenade launcher in about 30mm bore.(…)”
If you need grenade launcher throwing projectile pneumatically rather than adverb(pyrotechnic) then use Eclipse https://eclipsedefense.com/products/
18th c wars were better, sort it out accidental shots, in the nuts “Sorry” not nice, but folk move on. Bar the dead chaps. None of this moon base shit, to laser you. Well we’ll laser you etc. Farce.
“18th c wars were better(…)”
Please provide reliable source supporting said claim.
https://youtu.be/qzWeuC1czRc?si=sPosrPVWRqwCUAkR
Aye!