those don't make sense. so manufacturer A is ranked highest in terms of quality and reliability but manufacturer c is ranked highest for recommendation to a first time buyer?
Also how is Glock so low in the semi-auto manufacturers? lol
Glock has some major shortcomings.
First off, the price. At one time Glock got their fame for being an utterly durable and reliable firearm for a fair price. That last part is no longer true. At around $550+ on average for any Glock, they aren't in the fair price range anymore. Heck, they aren't in the competitive range either with S&W, Springfields, Rugers, and other firearms of the same design in the $400 range.
Second, the grip angle that Glock guns have, isn't the most natural pointing angle for many people. Not that a person can't get used to the angle, but it is not the most ergonomic either.
Third, many glocks have 1 problem in there inherent design. Limp wristing. Due to their combination of grip angle, very heavy overbuilt slides, and extremely lightweight grip frames, they are prone to limp wrist malfunctions. In fact, a shooter can intentionally cause a limp wrist malfunction 100% all the time with certain Glocks. Any all metal gun design, and many of the other polymer guns from other manufacturers do not suffer the same design flaw of limp wrist malfunctions as Glocks do. Why is this a big deal? It isn't if all you plan to do is shoot the gun at a range. So long as you never limp wrist, the Glock will never malfunction. But in a self defense situation the likelyhood of limp wristing a shot goes up. Being forced to shoot with only 1 hand, or shooting from a prone/pinned position all increase the likelihood of the shooter having to fire "limp wristed" with their gun in a defensive situation. Imagine this situation. You are driving along the highway and switch lanes while forgetting to use your blinker. The driver behind you gets absolutely infuriated and busts a road rage vein in their forward. They are so pissed they are now literally OUT TO KILL YOU. They ram your vehicle from behind forcing your car into a spin. As your car hits the guardrail they ram into the exposed driver side of the car narrowly missed in killing you outright with their car. Seeking to finish it hands on, the road rage driver gets out of their car and comes at you. Your condition is one of someone stuck in their seatbelt, pinned into position, broken arms and collarbones, and barely able to reach your gun to defend yourself. Have fun shooting to defend your life in that situation with a Glock.
One of the main reasons people buy a gun is the contingent need that they will have to defend their life or the life of another. The vast majority of people in America will never need to use their gun for that reason. Especially those not living/working in major metropolitan cities with high crime rates. However, if you are going to buy a firearm for a low statistical rate of a contingent scenario, why limit yourself to only being able to fire the gun reliably when you are in a position to not limp wrist the shot? Personally speaking, I'd rather own a gun that fits more self defense scenarios, even the extreme ones, than not.
Oh well, that's my spiel on Glocks. I might buy one if they were cheaper for the hell of it. But why buy one when I can get something better for cheaper?