Glock 26/27 Recoil


March 5, 2007, 02:55 PM
How is the recoil on either of these pistols in comparison to the full sized or even compact models? Thanks, see ya later

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 26/27 Recoil" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 5, 2007, 03:34 PM
I had both a G19 9mm and G26 9mm. I recently sold the G19, because I was so comfortable shooting the G26. Although it kicks slightly more, the smaller frame seems to fit better in my hand so it is still very controllable, especially with the extension on the mag.

The increase in recoil in minimal to the point where some people might not even realize it. jhmo

March 5, 2007, 03:45 PM
I agree. The G26 is a very comfortable shoot. The only reason I got rid of mine was the Glock trigger - never came to terms with it.

Ken Rainey
March 5, 2007, 03:57 PM
The hump on the backstrap of the G26/27 sits in your (my) hand so well that it is amazing how comfortable they are to shoot....I don't add a pinky extender on my mags, just curl my little finger under the mag. I do prefer the 26 over the 27 due to the .40 caliber "flip" though....ok, ok, I prefer any of the 9mms over the .40s but thats another story. Go with the G26, you'll be glad you did.;)

March 5, 2007, 04:05 PM
I have never shot the G26, but I did have a G27. I just traded it a couple of weeks ago for a S&W M&P .40 compact. The G27 has a pretty brisk recoil. It is manageable, but it makes follow up shots harder. The M&P .40 compact is much tamer in comparison. It has less felt recoil and IMHO is a much easier gun to shoot. The M&P compact is a bit larger than the G27 but is also smaller than the G23. I love mine!!


March 5, 2007, 07:25 PM
Recoil on the G26 is very manageable. Follow-up shots are easy. Probably the double-recoil spring design.

I don't own a G27 but I hear it's way "snappy" in comparison.

March 5, 2007, 07:40 PM
How is the recoil on either of these pistols in comparison to the full sized or even compact models?

It depends if you have a magazine extension. If you have one then you might as well have a full sized feel. If you don't, your strong hand's pinky will be resting on the bottom of the reciever.

Personally, 9mm are plinkers...while the .40S&W are bad guy stoppers.
Some feel the .40 recoil is snappy, that's because their arm isn't firm nor have a steady grip on the gun.

March 5, 2007, 08:50 PM
Really - I don't care what you hear from people saying that the 27 is hard to manage.

Yes, there is some recoil - but honestly I don't feel all that much more recoil on the 27 as compared to say the 23, or even the 22.

It has a little more - sure, but nothing that I would say is unpleasant. Really just a little more.

Honestly, I go the range with my 27 only and can go through how ever much ammo I brought (usually 300 rounds) without a problem. I don't get any discomfort really.

I love my 27. I'm sure the 26 is wonderful too, but I just like my 27. In fact, I'd venture to say that it's my favorite pistol. I carry it everyday. I only recently got the extensions, but I only did that to add the mag capacity. I shot it plenty without anything other than stock parts for a long time.

Bear in mind - I learned how to shoot on a Smith 340PD using .357 mag loads. I don't flinch, or anything. I love its accuracy and I thoroughly enjoy shooting it at the range.

Whichever you choose you'll be happy, but if you want the .40, don't let the stories of "mondo recoil" scare you away. Personally I think it's rubbish. I've shot it in rapid-fire many times, and the time back to target didn't seem to be any more than with any other gun I own - and believe me, I'm no superstar shooter. Just your average guy.

March 5, 2007, 08:55 PM
The G26 is easy to shoot; in my CCW class they had them out for new shooters to try, and no one complained (at least those that could get a comfortable hold). It's still "on my list" to grab one of these days... I just wish it was a little thinner for easier concealment.

As compared to the G17, I noticed more muzzle rise, but it still fell back very quickly like most 9's.

I'm not a .40 S&W fan, so I haven't shot the G27 and can't comment on that.

March 5, 2007, 09:03 PM
TheEconomist, MikePGS asked for opinions. That is what he is getting. It sounds to me though that you feel that only your opinion is what matters. I don't think so. I had the G27 for 3 years, it is a great little gun, period. But it does have more recoil than the G26. That is fact. The .40S&W round simply causes more recoil in any 2 identical guns, one being 9mm and the other being .40S&W (G19/G23; G26/G27). I had no problem managing the recoil, but it is more.
It's OK for you to defend your gun. I do too:) .


March 5, 2007, 10:36 PM
I have the G19 and G26. The 19 is the newly purchased pistol. Already it has replaced my G26 as my primary carry weapon. It shoots so smooth, and I'm a tad bit more accurate with it. I now see why so many are hooked on the 19. Everything I heard was true.

March 6, 2007, 12:02 AM
I have found the recoil in the 26 very manageable

March 6, 2007, 07:49 AM
I hated my G19...loved my G27...felt the G27 kicked less (with 180 or 165 standard pressure HP ammo)

Pappy John
March 6, 2007, 08:54 AM
After first buying a G17 as a range/plinking gun and discovering that it worked well for me, I bought a G26 for carry purposes. I expected a great difference in recoil, but to my surprise there really wasn't that much more. Now, I realise that this might be a subjective thing but, as I said, I was expecting much more and just didn't feel it. I'm attributing this to the very low barrel height to grip dimension, which translates the recoil into a straight back push that isn't effected that much by differences in slide mass, as opposed to a feeling of flip you get from a higher barrel, which I think would be more effected as you change the slide/barrel length and weight.

But then again, I could just be full of cack!:D

March 6, 2007, 09:11 AM
I shoot my G26 better than my G17. The wife, quite petite, has no problems with the 26 either.

Father Knows Best
March 6, 2007, 09:47 AM
I have a G26 and shoot it very well. My brother and father have G27's that I've shot, and I don't like them. I find them to be much harder to control, and I am much slower on follow-ups with them, so I've stayed with the 26 as my BUG (my primary is a Colt CCO .45ACP).

March 7, 2007, 08:14 AM
ront - not at all. Sorry if I came off that way.

All I was saying is that I feel the reports of the 27 being incredibly difficult to shoot are exaggerated.

I just hate it when I hear in gun stores the salesperson trying to tell somebody not to go with the 27 because "they won't be able to handle it". It's an insult to the customer, and I just never felt it was a big deal.

Notice I did mention I learned how to shoot on a 340PD with .357 mag - so I was basically saying that I may be more used to harder recoil than some and therefore not as sensitive to it.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion. I just didn't want the reader to interpret what people say as the 27 being a very difficult gun to manage, which is the kind of stuff I hear in gun-stores all the time.

Whether the OP goes for a 26 or 27 is fine. They're both great guns. I just wanted to point out that at least with practice, the difference in recoil becomes marginal if even noticed (at least for me).

This is a forum - the whole point is for people to voice their opinions.

For future reference, don't ever interpret what I say as me saying I know what's best or anything like that. I most certainly don't know what's best - or I would be G-d. Guns are all about personal comfort. You have to be confident and comfortable with what you shoot, and especially if you carry it.

So long as the OP doesn't just automatically rule out the 27 because of reports of it being a tough gun to manage - my work is done. :) - and if he/she goes with the 26 just to be totally comfortable with shooting it - he/she is still in good hands. The difference in firepower between the two is marginal really. The bottom line is that the best gun is the one that stops the fight. What make/model/or caliber is otherwise irrelevant and just a matter of personal preference.

I think the OP's best bet is to find a friend that has a 26 and a friend with a 27 (or just go to a range that rents them) - try them both, and then find out what his or her sensitivity to recoil is. He/she may find like me that it's not noticeable - or he/she may be of the impression as some others that there is a big difference. It's all a matter of personal preference, wrist-strength, internal muscular/skeletal etc.

ETA: Oh yeah, also Ront - of course there is technically more recoil. I'm talking perceived recoil though. I'm not doubting that to some extent .40 kicks more..... I'm just saying I don't feel it as being enough to be a deal-breaker..... Also, bear in mind when I shoot, I'm concentrating on the target, and am kind of in some sort of meditation mode (if you want to call it that).... my adrenaline is up, and that also may cause me to feel less of whatever is there in terms of recoil. With enough adrenaline, you could probably shoot a cannon out of your hand and make it feel like a .22.

March 7, 2007, 11:21 AM
Great post TheEconomist!! I agree with you 110%:) .


If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 26/27 Recoil" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!