I don't even own a P10C, but I wouldn't wish that on any gun. Glock may have some (debatable) virtues, but looks certainly isn't one of them.
What virtues are debatable on a Glock.
I am genuinely interested in your opinion.
This thread is squarely about the aesthetics of Glocks, and that's what my comment was aimed at - the "looks" of a Glock.
I'm not interested in derailing this into a "one brand vs another" debate. But since you're genuinely interested in my opinion, here's the short version: I give Glocks due credit for one thing - they are very
reliable. And reliable is good. It's a very basic thing that you want a gun to be. But beyond that, I have never been impressed by their triggers, their sights or their ergonomics (nor their looks, for that matter). And yeah, in general, once we get beyond the basic, low bar of "reliability," there are other things I want my pistols to have as well - namely, a nice trigger, good (if not great) sights and ergonomics that work for me. And in fairness, I've definitely criticized CZ in the past for mediocre out-of-the-box triggers and sights as well, though I've never criticized the ergos of a CZ.
And yeah, I think Glocks are fugly. I also realize that's an entirely subjective, personal opinion that has nothing to do with their usefulness as a tool.
