Difference in Weight: Fully Loaded Glock 19 vs. 1911?


PDA






tackleberi
April 8, 2008, 10:49 AM
Since I don't have a postal-type scale, I figured I'd ask and see if someone else had answered this inquiry for themselves....

How much does a fully-loaded Glock compact weigh (Glock 19, 23, or 32), and how much does a fully-loaded (7+1) carbon-steel (not stainless) 1911 government model weigh?

While I might need to go out and buy a scale, I'm hoping someone out there had a Glock, a 1911, a scale, and some time to kill.

If you enjoyed reading about "Difference in Weight: Fully Loaded Glock 19 vs. 1911?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
schadenfreude
April 8, 2008, 11:26 AM
Found a page that says the glock 19 is 29.98 ounces and a full size 1911 is around 44....

Spartacus451
April 8, 2008, 11:49 AM
A carbon steel Govt. model with a polymer mainspring housing and GI guide rod is about 38 ounces.

Someone went and actually measured this in a thread on this forum not so long ago.

He found that the Glock 17 with ammo was lighter then a 1911 but a Glock 17 with two spare mags was about the same weight as a 1911 with two spare mags. Still apples to oranges but interesting to think about.

Shooters Plus
April 8, 2008, 12:34 PM
I actually had a Glock 19, Kimber Custom II and a scale right beside me when I read this, so here you go. :)

Glock 19 (stock) w/16 rounds of 124gn - 30.8 oz.
Kimber Custom II w/8 rounds of 230gn - 44.7 oz.

And for comparison,
Glock 21 (stock) w/14 rounds of 230gn - 40.1 oz.

Zack Phillips
Shooters Plus

tackleberi
April 8, 2008, 12:35 PM
Exactly what I was looking for; although the Glock is lighter, the twice as many rounds of 9mm add up quick, shrinking the difference in weight between the two from significant to not so much.

Thanks.

Gordon Fink
April 8, 2008, 01:30 PM
A good belt will neutralize much of the weight problem.

~G. Fink

alaskagunner
April 8, 2008, 01:41 PM
The 1911 does weigh a little more , but it is a better gun in every other way. No one would ever or has ever disputed that. ;)

Steve C
April 8, 2008, 01:42 PM
A good belt will neutralize much of the weight problem.

True but every extra oz seems to turn into a lb as the day wears on.

Mad Magyar
April 8, 2008, 02:18 PM
True but every extra oz seems to turn into a lb as the day wears on.
+1 :)

Black Majik
April 8, 2008, 02:42 PM
Interesting results. Anyone able to compare a HK P2000 to a fullsize 1911 with 8+1?

easyg
April 8, 2008, 03:00 PM
The 1911 does weigh a little more , but it is a better gun in every other way. No one would ever or has ever disputed that.
I'll dispute it.
As much as I like the old 1911, it is not without its faults....

Less magazine capacity, needlessly redundant safeties (a manual safety and a grip-safety), not as easy to field-strip or detail strip, requires more lubrication to function reliably, and the stock govenment issued 1911 sights are not that great either.

The best thing going for the 1911 is its single-action trigger.

MTS840
April 8, 2008, 03:17 PM
The 1911 does weigh a little more , but it is a better gun in every other way. No one would ever or has ever disputed that.

Yeah, I dispute it too. I'm not a fan. After owning two 1911s, I'll take a good modern design for concealed carry anyday. They are generally lighter in weight, have higher magazine capacity, better out-of-the-box reliability, rugged dependability and better than adequate accuracy. For practicality, you can't beat the good modern designs. And to me, that's all that matters in self defense weapons.

Ske1etor
April 8, 2008, 03:45 PM
The redundant safeties comment is kinda strange to me. The grip safety is already disengaged when you get a grip on the firearm. Redundant would be if you had to drop a thumb safety on the firearm and then disengage a cross block style safety.

Also, the thumb safety and grip safety accomplish two separate tasks. The Grip safety (When disengaged) has a bar that rests on the rear of the trigger bar stopping any rearward movement.

The thumb safety (When engaged) blocks sear movement and keeps the slide in battery.

It could be considered redundant if both safeties stopped the operation of the same part but they don't. It is simply two separate safeties, each one blocking the movement of one of the two most important ignition parts.

alaskagunner
April 8, 2008, 06:40 PM
Sorry, my sarcasm and a wink in my first post could be construed as highjacking this thread. Looking back I really didn't add anything to the original question. I can't even edit the bold print on the top of this post. I'll try to more high road next time.

Take care.

Cliff123
April 8, 2008, 07:14 PM
14 oz . . . almost one pound!

Put is this way . . . the Kimber weighs 50% more.

Some folks don't have a problem with this. Others not so. My brother traded his XD 45 compact because it was to heavy. He now carries a G26.

TheLastBoyScout
April 8, 2008, 08:37 PM
I have an XD-45 and a 1911. With full mags in each, there's basically no difference in weight.

If you enjoyed reading about "Difference in Weight: Fully Loaded Glock 19 vs. 1911?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!