G26 vs g27 vs g33


PDA






jwalker497
February 11, 2010, 12:32 AM
G26 vs g27 vs g33
Need to make a decision for a subcompact Glock. I just cannot make decision on which model to go for and I am desperatley hoping someone can make some sense of it all.
My hangup for making a decision is concerning the trade-off as it relates to Recoil vs followup shots/accuracy. One one hand, I agree with all the 9mm fans that shot placement is king and that quicker more accurate shots is what counts. If you're going to shoot once, you might as well shoot several times! On the other hand, I also agree compeltely with those who favor the increased stopping power of the 40sw in a self defense situation, why not opt for as much punch as possible especially considering you need the ones that hit to count.

This is a debate is a perpetual see-saw as I seem to go back and forth as each of these arguments make total sense!! Please dont say get both, that's not an option for and I do not have the ability to test any of these at a range, so I need to make this decision with logic and other's firsthand experience. Also, I am not interested in the caliber conversion options as well. I would love to hear form those who have first hand experience with these models and can provide a real comparison.

So - Which would you prefer from a Recoil and Followup shot perspective??

Again, Removing all the typical factors that people bring-up in these comparisons, like ammo cost, availability, capacity - which model would you prefer and why from a power vs recoil perspective?

If you enjoyed reading about "G26 vs g27 vs g33" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
LeontheProfessional
February 11, 2010, 12:42 AM
Glock 27 because ammo is still relatively inexpensive and easy to find. Also, all you need is a quick barrel change and you got yourself a Glock 33.

rockhound758
February 11, 2010, 12:57 AM
The .40 is a more barky round but I like it, and I'd rather have that than the 9mm (and both are more viable choices for several reasons, IMO, than the G33). If you're looking for a subcompact, I'm assuming it's for CC, and at self-defense distances I certainly believe that with practice you'd be plenty accurate with either one, with no real appreciable difference in follow-up shot times. If it were me, I'd get the .40. But there are plenty of folks who will say just the opposite, and there are two basic truths here: 1) You can't go wrong with either gun, and 2) You should pick the one that YOU will like the best and feel best about. Which caliber resonates the most with you?

Oldnoob
February 11, 2010, 01:14 AM
Go with the popular choice of 40. Than get a 9mm conversion barrel from Lone Wolf (need G26 mag when shoot 9mm) and a stock Glock 33 barrel (G33 use the same mag as G27). Now you have a gun that can shoot all three caliber.

Ken Rainey
February 11, 2010, 02:32 AM
Based on my experience, I recommend the G26. Oldnoob's idea isn't a bad one but I'd rather have a dedicated 9mm and then later on, if desired, get a G27 with a G33 barrel for the optional cartridge if you just have to have those calibers in a subcompact pistol.

The snappier recoil is my major complaint with the other calibers, followed by reduced service life of the parts and/or pistol and the undesireable (for me, anyway) higher risk of pressure problems with bullet setback or maybe a weak brass, etc. with the .40 caliber cartridge. Yep, your right, I'm not a fan of the .40 S&W cartridge! :eek:

If you desired the very same same size pistol with a bigger bullet, then there is the G39 in 45GAP that is easier to shoot, only bad thing about it is the cost and/or availability of ammo for it ... so practically speaking, next in the Glock line would be the G30SF in .45 ACP. That would be the one I'd get if needing a Glock in .45 caliber for concealed carry if I hadn't already settled into 1911's for my .45 launchers and have a Kimber Ultra Eclipse for use when needing an easier to conceal "short stroker" .45 ... which is far and few between these days since I've been spoiled by the G26 with it's ease of carry and maintenance with it's superb reliability and surprising accuracy..:cool:

REAPER4206969
February 11, 2010, 02:34 AM
27...

Full Metal Jacket
February 11, 2010, 06:23 AM
g26 :)

harmon rabb
February 11, 2010, 06:26 AM
if you buy a 27 (or 33 for that matter), you can have all 3 in the same gun with the purchase of additional barrels (and mags for 9mm). if you buy a 26, you can not.

i think that settles it right there.

the 27 and 33 are actually the same gun. the only difference is that the 27 comes with the .40 barrel, and the 33 comes with the .357sig barrel.

Full Metal Jacket
February 11, 2010, 06:27 AM
:eek::eek:

jwalker497
February 11, 2010, 10:16 AM
The conversion argument doesnt make any sense to me.

If you buy a 40/357 and then practice with it in 9mm but carry it in 40/357, aren't you putting yourself at a disadvantage by not carrying what you practice with???

Also, what happens when you realize your are more accurate with the 9mm and therefore want to carry it converted - now you are left with the reality of carrying a conversion barrel which would potentially lead to reliability issues when you need it most.

96projectz24
February 11, 2010, 10:28 AM
Hmm, my conversion barrel is and has been flawless and as reliable, if not even more so than stock. That argument holds no water, as long as the parts you put in the gun are QUALITY parts, should perform like it would from the factory. That being said, I shot 500 rds through my 9mm conversion barrel/mags before I carried it, just like I did when the gun was new as a 40 S&W. Gotta take the same precautions as you would with any other new firearm.

jwalker497
February 11, 2010, 10:35 AM
so 96, are you saying that you carry a converted 9mm?? I'm curious becuase there seemed to be an overwhelming consensus that it's not a good idea due to the fact that it's not OEM parts and could fail when you need it most.

Did you change the extractor/ejector as well or do you just use the barrel and 9mm mags?

easyg
February 11, 2010, 10:42 AM
The 9mm has the advantage of quicker follow-up shots (at least for myself).
But since it's an auto, there is always the possibility of a jam of some type (yes, even Glocks have been known to choke).
So, keeping in mind that I might only get off one shot before a malfunction, I would prefer than one shot to be a more effective caliber than the 9mm.
So it's either the .40S&W or the .357Sig.
Both have a little harder recoil than the 9mm in standard pressure, but they really aren't any worse than the recoil from 9mm in +P pressure.

Both the .40 and the .357 will work, but I prefer the .357Sig.

And, as mentioned above, if you get a .357 you can later get an aftermarket drop-in .40 barrel and have the advantage of ammo variety.

bds
February 11, 2010, 10:49 AM
The conversion argument doesnt make any sense to me.

If you buy a 40/357 and then practice with it in 9mm but carry it in 40/357, aren't you putting yourself at a disadvantage by not carrying what you practice with???

Also, what happens when you realize your are more accurate with the 9mm, now you are left with the reality of carrying a conversion barrel which would potentially lead to reliability issues when you need it most.

It all comes down to trigger time - really helps you shoot better. Because 40/9mm availability/price is better, it will allow you to shoot more for the same money.

If you reload, 40-9 Lone Wolf conversion barrel has one more benefit. Many say 40 recoil is more snappy/barky - True. I used to work up lighter 40 loads for shooters new to shooting/G27 for practice and 40-9 conversion barrel did a great job of filling this role with MUCH cheaper 9mm reloads ($6/50 rnds). Also, you won't get bulged Glocked cases from the tight match grade LW barrels for safer reloading.

9mm loaded near max will give you a very good practice for 40S&W in G27. I have done match shooting with 9mm/40S&W and accuracy is very good for both rounds. I found with those I taught to shoot, they feel more comfortable with the lighter 9mm recoil, but end up shooting 40S&W just as well with more trigger time.

BTW, I use 9mm (G17) magazines for my G22 due to feeding issues, but found factory G27 magazines work well for shooting 9mm (of course, you can still use 9mm magazines). So, if you have G27 and use 40-9 conversion barrel, you may not need to buy additional magazine for practice.

YMMV

jwalker497
February 11, 2010, 10:59 AM
Easy, that's a really good point and had not considered that. In fact, becuase I was talking about glocks I kind of took for granted the fact that they can jam

Part of me thinks that in a SD situation, it would be very close ranges and I don't see how a few 1/10s of a second would make a difference or how the recoil could throw me off that bad at such close ranges so might as well go with the 40 or 357. And your point of you might only get one round off.

On the other hand, I think shot placement and if we have to shoot we are going to shoot more than once and provided it doesnt jam, you should have every advantage you can when it comes to making quick accurate shots so 9mm gets the nod.

The Lone Haranguer
February 11, 2010, 12:09 PM
I had a G27, found its bark and bite to be unpleasant and sold it. The .357 SIG in the same size gun would no doubt give more of the same. The lower recoiling 9mm, IMO, would make up for its perceived lesser power with controllability, enabling one to place shots more rapidly and precisely, which is what wins gunfights.

grimjaw
February 11, 2010, 12:37 PM
I had a G26 for awhile. If I was going to go with a subcompact Glock again, it'd be a G27 or G33 with conversion barrels. Few guns give you as many available accessory choices as the subcompact Glocks. A G27 with the right combination of barrels can shoot up to three different calibers, and use magazines from any of the larger series of Glocks.

jm

Warhawk83
February 11, 2010, 12:57 PM
G27,I bought one two days ago and took it to the range yesterday. Excellent gun,go with the 27 because of the ammo availability, and recoil really isn't that bad.

harmon rabb
February 11, 2010, 01:37 PM
G27,I bought one two days ago and took it to the range yesterday. Excellent gun,go with the 27 because of the ammo availability, and recoil really isn't that bad.

i'm with you. i don't find the recoil to be bad at all. yeah, it's not like 9mm out of a full size, but it's nowhere near as bad as a 380 mouse gun. i could comfortably shoot a couple hundred rounds out of it in a range outing.

denfoote
February 11, 2010, 02:33 PM
Oh I dunno.
I'm probably going to be not much help in this.
I received a G26 as a gift in '98 or '99 and never had any inclination to consider the other two, except for the forgotten red headed stepchild, the G36, which I also have a copy. I will say this, I did have a chance to shoot the G27 at some point and remember disliking the recoil. Based on that, I'd get the 26.

Full Metal Jacket
February 11, 2010, 05:26 PM
The conversion argument doesnt make any sense to me.

If you buy a 40/357 and then practice with it in 9mm but carry it in 40/357, aren't you putting yourself at a disadvantage by not carrying what you practice with???

Also, what happens when you realize your are more accurate with the 9mm and therefore want to carry it converted - now you are left with the reality of carrying a conversion barrel which would potentially lead to reliability issues when you need it most.

+1 not to mention the fact that even if you change the barrel, extractor, mags, and ejector--the breech face of the 9mm and 40cal are machined differently. conversions are reliable enough for the range, but i certainly wouldn't use one for defense.

NG VI
February 11, 2010, 05:48 PM
I love my 27, but it is very easy to overthink the differences, when you could just buy whichever one you can find the best deal on and get to the range.

Just buy one and be done with it, 9mm is not in a different class than .40, .357, or .45, not to any realistic degree anyway, no matter how much you may hear otherwise. Yes the 27 throws a wider, heavier chunk of lead at the same speeds as 9mm bullets, and the .357 throws the same bullets a bit faster, and the .45 throws the widest and heaviest bits somewhat slower, but they really are all close enough.

I do really like the 27 though.

bds
February 12, 2010, 03:08 AM
One issue I believe we need to remind ourselves with compacts/subcompacts is the shorter barrels that result in reduced muzzle velocity/energy compared to full size versions. I for one recommend the G27 because the reduced velocity/energy of 40S&W is greater than the 9mm. I am not knocking 357 Sig, but 40S&W ammunition is not only more readily available and cheaper than 357 Sig, but easier/cheaper to reload.

+1 not to mention the fact that even if you change the barrel, extractor, mags, and ejector--the breech face of the 9mm and 40cal are machined differently. conversions are reliable enough for the range, but i certainly wouldn't use one for defense.

For G27 Lone Wolf 40-9 conversion, you only need to exchange the barrel (for me, the G27 mag works for 9mm too). I can't speak for other conversion barrels, but the LW barrel works fine with the stock G27 extractor. Diameter of 9mm case bottom is smaller than 40, but the G27 extractor has enough grip to reliably extract the 9mm cases.

The primary function of the conversion barrel is allowing you to practice with the cheaper 9mm ammunition. Besides, why would you carry the 9mm barrel when you can carry the 40S&W that has greater terminal energy (remember the reduction in velocity/energy due to shorter barrel)?

As to one being able to shoot 9mm more accurately than 40S&W, many here will argue that they can shoot the larger 1911 45ACP more accurately than any other caliber. :D

I believe with good training and practice (a lot of trigger time), one can learn to shoot better.

Nasty
February 12, 2010, 06:54 AM
G27 with a Wolf 9m/m for me. I will add a .22 kit next, and eventually, a 33 barrel.

It only makes sense...same grip and trigger and 3 of them even the same sights.

I'll shoot whatever ammo I can get at the time.

Quiet
February 12, 2010, 09:54 AM
Glock 39 :evil:

fastbolt
February 12, 2010, 12:15 PM
I own both a G26 and a G27.

I hadn't originally intended to own both, though.

After having handled and fired a number of G26's & G27's, when I finally decided I was going to add a subcompact Glock to my off-duty/working gun collection I chose the g26.

I only later ended up with a G27 because I was offered a LNIB G27 w/night sights for an absurdly low price.

I've fired more than 10,000 rounds through each of my subcompact Glocks.

If I were again going to choose from between them, my decision would again be to buy the G26.

That said as a firearms instructor I've often been asked the same question by our folks when it comes to those who want to buy a subcompact Glock for an off-duty weapon. Instead of recommending one or the other I've typically recommended anyone interested in choosing one try examples of them at the range, usually offering to let them shoot mine.

After shooting both models with typical training/duty ammunition, more folks have chosen to pick the G26 over the G27. Why? The most common reason offered is reduced felt recoil and enhanced controllability of the G26, even when shooting +P & +P+ loads.

The .357SIG isn't all that popular among a lot of the LE I've known since it's introduction. I believe I only know a couple of guys who own guns chambered in it, and only one of those is a Glock. Last time I knew, neither of them were presently carrying them, but instead carried a selection of personally-owned pistols and revolvers chambered in other common calibers.

I know of a fellow who used to work for an agency which issued the .357SIG (and issued Sig's), but the Sig he bought for his own off-duty usage was chambered in .40 S&W. I wasn't interested enough to ask why, though. (I'm more interested in someone's mind & skill sets than their reasons for choosing one or another particular caliber, unless it's causing a problem when it comes to them safely, accurately and effectively using it.)

Felt recoil is a subjective issue. What's very noticeably for one person may not be noticeable for another. Muzzle rise/whip, 'snap' or torque effect, the pressure and 'dwell time' of the recoil impulse delivered into the palm of the hand and muzzle blast may be perceived quite a bit differently among different folks.

Try them at a local range if possible, preferably using a representative selection of whatever ammunition you might consider using in your own gun and see what you think of each of them.

Me?

I enjoy shooting the G26 more than the G27. I tend to shoot the G27 well, but I generally have to work a bit more at it than with the G26, even when I'm using +P+ loads in the G26.

Shooting the G27 seems to make me shoot the G26 better, since it makes shooting the G26 seem relatively 'easier'. This difference isn't as easily noticeable to me when just standing comfortably still and slowly shooting the G27 at a leisurely, slow-fire pace using an unsupported 2-handed hold.

However, once the shooting drills become fast-paced and more strenuous, and involve shooting-while-moving, shooting from strong & off-side barricade situations and shooting 1-handed (both strong & off-side), the controllability advantages of the G26 become pretty apparent to me.

But that's me ...

Try all 3 of them for yourself and decide for yourself.

swampboy
February 12, 2010, 12:30 PM
I'll weigh in, although I own neither. I'm a Glock 19 fan. I like the capacity, and the size isn't THAT much bigger than the 26 or 27. If you like 40 S&W, the 23 is the same size as the 19.

The 26 and 27 are just as "fat" as the 19/23 and not a WHOLE lot shorter. My point is, the thickness would make pocket carry difficult, so why not just get a good hi-ride or IWB holster and carry a 19 or 23?

As for caliber, I'm a 9MM guy and I reload. I also am not rich and I like to SHOOT my guns a lot. Being a reloader, I can get the 9MM to do all I need a handgun to do. The less expensive ammunition/components lets me afford being able to shoot more.

With all that rambling over with, if I WERE to consider a sub-compact Glock, I'd get the 26, hands down. I've shot the 23 in 40 S&W and the recoil is noticeably more "robust" than the 19, even in the slightly larger gun. I imagine a 27 would be worse. Like has been said before, the difference in recoil may not be much when casually punching holes in paper but on the move or in a panicked situation, I think the difference would be more profound.

bds
February 12, 2010, 12:55 PM
G27 with a Wolf 9mm for me. I will add a .22 kit next

Hmmm, may consider the G22 22 LR kit for my daughter ... she'll practice with the same grip/trigger/sight picture to graduate to the 9mm conversion barrel (sweet!) :D

So you can now shoot 4 calibers out of G22? (40/357Sig/9/22).

m2steven
February 12, 2010, 01:14 PM
In a stressful situation you'd really want control over a bit more power, at least I would. The 40 is a wonderful round, and I can't say anything bad about it. I love my Glock 32 - it's a super hard hitter and the recoil is really pretty low and controllable. If I were in real trouble, I'd want the G26 due to my ability to get my second round targeted and fired if necessary. Each person should know his or her limitations and purchase a pistol accordingly. Even though i'm comfortable with much bigger ammo at a range, I'd prefer and do carry a 9mm for emergency use. I practice a lot of one-handed stuff too, and I believe it's a really useful drill to do. You never know how well set you'll get in a really bad situation and recoil will be a factor after your first shot.

Full Metal Jacket
February 12, 2010, 01:44 PM
For G27 Lone Wolf 40-9 conversion, you only need to exchange the barrel (for me, the G27 mag works for 9mm too). I can't speak for other conversion barrels, but the LW barrel works fine with the stock G27 extractor. Diameter of 9mm case bottom is smaller than 40, but the G27 extractor has enough grip to reliably extract the 9mm cases.

not so, my friend. glock inadvertently sent me a 40cal extractor to replace the bad one in my g19, it caused failure to return to battery issues. that's what made me realize they sent the wrong extractor.

bds
February 12, 2010, 02:09 PM
Diameter of 9mm case bottom is smaller than 40, but the G27 extractor has enough grip to reliably extract the 9mm cases

Full Metal Jacket: not so, my friend. glock inadvertently sent me a 40cal extractor to replace the bad one in my g19, it caused failure to return to battery issues. that's what made me realize they sent the wrong extractor.

I think your issue is different than using G27 with Lone Wolf 40-9 conversion barrel. Have you tried using a Glock dealer/shop to inspect your Glock and have it shipped to Glock for proper repair?

I experience no problem with the factory G27 extractor using LW 40-9 conversion barrel. If you look at the extracted spent 9mm casings, you can clearly see how much the G27 extractor gripped the bottom of 9mm casing.

I inspect the case bottoms of 9mm cases that I reload for LW 40-9 conversion barrels for extractor wear along with my other quality checks. If I have any concern over excessive wear or damage to the case, the case gets tossed to the scrap bin.

theotherwaldo
February 12, 2010, 02:24 PM
I went with the G27 'cause I found one for $300, like new in tupperware. It doesn't seem especially snappy to me, since I usually send a box of .44mag downrange before practicing with the Glock.

I always figure that the first shot is the important one. Make it worthwhile.

kymarkh
February 12, 2010, 02:25 PM
I don't like the idea of a caliber conversion in my carry pistol - not sure how the courts would view it and I don't care to be the one to find out. So for me the 26 is much cheaper to shoot, period. If you shoot regularly (like you should) the money you save by shooting cheaper 9mm ammunition could probably be enough to buy another gun in a year or so. Go to any online ammunition vendor and price out 1000 rounds of FMJ and 500 rounds of HP ammo for these 3 calibers and it becomes readily apparent. 9mm is always going to be cheaper and it puts 30 caliber or better holes in things quite well.

Gordon
February 12, 2010, 02:50 PM
Ditto Fastbolt in praise of the G26 for exactly what he said. Amen Bro. I get a Witness!

jwalker497
February 12, 2010, 03:08 PM
I am not interested in the conversion options becuase I will not carry a converted pistol and practicing with a round that I wont carry, even though any practice is good, inst something I'm interested in for this.

Fastbolt and Otherwaldo - thanks very good and convincing points. I was starting to lean 9 due to the controlability points made until otherwaldo made a lot of sense with getting the most out of the first and an increase in power w/o increase in size. Arrgghh!!!

It's interesting though - I remember similiar discussions in the past for exactly the same sized guns but different calibers like the Keltec P32 (32acp) vs P3AT (380acp) and the majority at least to me seemed to favor the more powerful round as opposed to the lesser powerful easier to control caliber. Another example is the Seecamp .32 vs .380. The 380 seemed to be favored over the 32.

But here, it's the opposite, the lesser caliber 9mm seems to be the favorite and I wonder why. I would rather have a P3AT than a P32 so why wouldnt I want the 40sw over the 9mm if they are the same size. The recoil of the P3AT is a lot more than the P32, right.

swampboy
February 12, 2010, 03:20 PM
But here, it's the opposite, the lesser caliber 9mm seems to be the favorite and I wonder why. I would rather have a P3AT than a P32 so why wouldnt I want the 40sw over the 9mm if they are the same size. The recoil of the P3AT is a lot more than the P32, right.

Well, for one thing, the 9MM is not that much less of a round than the 40. At all.

Another thing to keep in mind is that when you're comparing the 9 with the 40, you're not as close to the edge of being "marginal" for a defense round. When looking at the 380 vs the 32, that's not the case.

jwalker497
February 12, 2010, 03:22 PM
I'm sure there were/are people who argued the same logic that the difference between the 32/380 was minimal.

KBintheSLC
February 12, 2010, 03:36 PM
Of the sub-compact Glock's, I decided on the G26 for my own needs. I also tested the G27 and the G29 which were both great guns as well. I picked the G26 mainly because I was already well invested in 9mm with my other guns, I felt that the 9mm was a good compromise for a small handgun, and if the need ever arose, I could toss a 15/17/33 round mag in there and turn it into a half way decent zombie gun.
The G27 and G29 were fun to shoot as well, but they certainly had more bark than the G26. After getting the 9mm, I have never felt the need for a bigger caliber for daily carry in urban environments.

I would rather have a P3AT than a P32 so why wouldnt I want the 40sw over the 9mm if they are the same size.

I'm not sure I agree with your logic. I mean sure, you could pack a .50 AE into a Derringer with the proper engineering, but the ballance of the weapon is way off. In a less extreme example, the KelTec was initially designed for the .32 acp... and the Baby Glock was born as a 9mm. I believe that there was a reason the engineers chose these calibers to build the gun around. Not to say that the guns are incapable of firing a more potent cartridge, just that doing so alters the balance of the firearm. I always try to consider the cartridge a particular platform was designed around when choosing a gun.


...

Autolycus
February 12, 2010, 04:37 PM
I own a Glock 26 and a Glock 17 as well. I like Glocks in 9mm because that is when they are the most reliable.

I also like 9mm because it is a good round and it works just fine. The .40 S&W as well as .357 Sig are not that much more impressive than the 9mm in my opinion. The 9mm is also cheaper and is becoming easier to find as the whole ammo scare seems to wear off.

Autolycus
February 12, 2010, 04:41 PM
A thread about .32 versus .380. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=504941)

Either way I would like to reiterate that the difference is marginal between 9mm and .40 S&W as these are both larger or service caliber rounds.

NG VI
February 12, 2010, 05:42 PM
you are so drastically overthinking this, just buy the first one you find, and get it to the range. .357 is not as scarce or expensive as its critics make it out to be, the .40 isn't as dramatically harder recoiling or prone to exploding or whatever as its critics make it out to be, and the 9mm isn't nearly as weak as its critics make it out to be.

Nasty
February 13, 2010, 07:18 AM
BDS - Yes, I chose the 27 specifically due to being able to go multi caliber. To go to 9m/m, a Lone Wolf barrel and a Glock 26 magazine is all that's needed. To go to .357 Sig, only a stock Glock barrel is needed. The .22 l/r of course replaces both the magazine and entire slide group.

I *carry* the stock .40, but in time of ammo shortages, I have options to use or practice with multiple rounds. I've been shooting (as an instructor and in several disciplines of competition) for over 30 years and the differences between calibers is negligible to me (excepting the .22 of course). I have the advantage of training with the exact grip, trigger, sights, etc across calibers and should never lack for at least one of them being available.

I know what works for me, at my experience and skill level. Those who choose to limit themselves by selecting a 26 are certainly free to do so.

carbineguy
February 16, 2010, 12:24 PM
if ur wanting one that u can shoot rapidly and still be accurate the best bet is the 26 i own a 26 and 27 and the 26 places shots in a tighter pattern and really a 9mm and .40 or 10mm is not going to make a differance when u can put like 3-12 shots accuratly in someone

Choclabman
February 16, 2010, 01:21 PM
I have tried the .40S&W and the .357Sig, in sub-compact Glocks, HK'S and Sig's. I am not a fan of either caliber. I carry a G26 day in and day out. It has been reliable, accurate, and very easy to carry. I could not be happier.

hawk45
February 16, 2010, 02:22 PM
I have a G26 and love it. Shot placement is key so my philisophy is more hits on target (even with a smaller round) are better than missing or poor hits on target. My G26 is as accurate and easy to shoot as my G19.. and I have big hands and don't use a grip extension. Good luck!

joe_security
February 16, 2010, 02:27 PM
I am going to vote for the G26 because they hit "dead on" to the sights. If the G39 is anywhere near as good as the G26, that would get my vote too. I see .45 GAP ammo everywhere I go, most of the 9mm/.40 is sold out at this point in time. I would love to purchase a G39.

group17
February 16, 2010, 03:30 PM
Glock 27 because I found one used and in great shape for $150 less then a new one.
It came with the mag extensions on both mags = more money saved.
With the difference I will get a 9mm conversion barrel ($100) so If i find it hard or to costly to fire 40, I can use my Sigs 9mm ammo which i have lots of.

So for less then the price of a new G26 I can have a gun that works as a G26 or G27
without having to own both.

$100 is a bargain compared to the cost of a SIg barrel conversion.

If you enjoyed reading about "G26 vs g27 vs g33" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!