Glock 23 or 23C?


PDA






mach1.3
August 25, 2010, 01:16 PM
I have owned and traded several glocks in my life. 17, 26 and 30 have all been great guns. I am in the .40sw mode at the moment and am wondering about getting a compensated gun. Anyone with experience with 23 or 23c glocks. Does the compensated barrel offer that much help with muzzle flip or does it allow quicker target reacquistion? Are there any problems associated with the compensated glocks that I should know about? Is it worth the extra$ to go with the "c"?:confused: This would be my new CCW.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 23 or 23C?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
maddy345
August 25, 2010, 02:12 PM
the compensated pistols will ruin your night vision. You won't be able to see anythign put purple spots after the first round goes off. Not good for a CCW gun if carried at night.

Sgt_R
August 25, 2010, 02:25 PM
Get the standard version, shoot it a few times, then install a tungsten guide rod if the muzzle flip proves unmanagable for you. That'll take the edge off without ruining your night vision, and will stil be cheaper overall than the compensated model.

R

Kingofthehill
August 25, 2010, 03:17 PM
I personally really like the Compensated version. I have 2 barrels for it, a regular barrel and the factory compensated. Sometimes the Flash is a lot of fun! hehehehe

When my 23c is in my bathroom (yes, bathroom gun) it sports the non compensated barrel becaues of the potential flash in low light... but when i take it to the range, the compensated barrel goes in.

I am pretty tuned into my Glock 19 and IMO the 23c has almost identical recoil to the 9mm glock 19. I would assume it depends on how tuned into the pistol you are. If you rarely shoot you may not notice, if you shoot a lot you WILL notice. You get a lot less flip.

Little tip on cleaning he slide where the notches are, old shoelace... floss it inbetween to get the carbon off.

In my honest opinion, the 23c is one of the baddest guns glock makes. .40 power with what 2 less rounds but bigger than a 9mm with the same recoil. Its a bad mam-o-jama

JOe

1KPerDay
August 25, 2010, 05:25 PM
I have shot the 23 and 23C back to back and the C does make a noticeable difference. I'm not a big fan of the .40 anymore; the concussion bothers me (particularly in the cold), and the C makes it worse. I'm looking for a non C 23 barrel to drop in mine. Or I'm thinking of just getting a 9mm conversion barrel for it.

YMMV. Both are great guns.

Here's a short vid of my un-scientific recoil eval if you're interested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-1CW6vIMpk

1KPerDay
August 25, 2010, 05:31 PM
Another issue with "compensated" guns, since you asked, is debris/hot gas/etc. being forced upward at high velocities. They're not ideal for close-in "retention" firing for that reason. If that's something you want to consider.

Kingofthehill
August 25, 2010, 05:47 PM
1kperday- great video. You can actually see a sort of 2 step recoil when he shoots the non compensated and then 1 single motion of recoil when he shoots the 23c.

Very cool

REAPER4206969
August 25, 2010, 05:58 PM
23.

Zerodefect
August 25, 2010, 06:44 PM
23.

No way I'm shooting a C model from the retention position. Probally the most important position concerning CCW use.

CZ223
August 25, 2010, 07:02 PM
I am not a big fan of compensated barrels for all of the reasons mentioned. If I want more noise I will shoot my G32 in 357Sig.:evil:

Kingofthehill
August 25, 2010, 08:23 PM
If I want more noise I will shoot my G32 in 357Sig

Sure that .357Sig sure has a good CRACK to it huh!... i love that round now.

JOe

Rokman
August 25, 2010, 10:42 PM
I love my G23 non-compensated also. I would not buy a compensated pistol for CC.

Manco
August 26, 2010, 01:31 AM
It depends on what bothers you more, recoil or the blast/concussion. There are also issues regarding certain close-quarters shooting situations that others have pointed out already. Personally, I'd go with non-compensated, but that's just me.

Full Metal Jacket
August 26, 2010, 03:26 AM
23.

why do you feel the need for compensation? it's a 40cal, not a 500 magnum.

TDR911
August 26, 2010, 07:00 AM
I have both 23 and 23c models. For competition and target shooting only I do perfer the recoil management of the c model. The dirtying of the front site, reduction in night vision, firing under retension, etc would never let me carry a compensated gun.
There is another option. If you carry a Glock 23 and you want a compensated one for target shooting you can buy a number of different barrels. Lonewolf makes a extended barrel with a thread on compensator or extended compensated barrels as well. Both will pretty much eliminate the dirty sight problem as it extends way past the front site unlike the factory Glock style compensation. If you do not want the compensator on jjust loosen the set screw and unthread it. It comes with a thread protector to cover the exposed threads. You can also shoot with a suppressor .

Here is a link to the barrels: Extended 2 port:http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=979&CAT=236

Thread on Compensator:http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=1093&CAT=313

Extended threaded :http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=980&CAT=237

The Lone Haranguer
August 26, 2010, 10:10 AM
For playing shooting games (in those that even allow comps), sure. For gunfighting, no.

sarduy
August 26, 2010, 10:17 AM
i was thinking the same thing about a 19c or a 19.... and i own the 19c... the "flash" is not that bad....

sarduy
August 26, 2010, 10:18 AM
does this really look that bad to you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2pQciDqCZY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhGXBcOuSas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcuWKJPDre8

jdmb03
September 25, 2010, 08:35 AM
I have a 23C and have no issues. The flash is not blinding and it does not destroy night sight. :rolleyes:

Zerodefect
September 25, 2010, 10:04 AM
does this really look that bad to you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2pQciDqCZY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhGXBcOuSas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcuWKJPDre8

That looks terrible! Fine for a range toy maybe. But shooting that from retention is going to blow my right nipple clean off!

bruzer
February 18, 2011, 02:43 AM
I just responded to another post about having a compensated gun but this covers the exact gun I was wondering about. Thanks,
Mike

NG VI
February 18, 2011, 11:50 AM
will stil be cheaper overall than the compensated model.


They cost the same amount chief.

rscalzo
February 18, 2011, 12:50 PM
Another issue with "compensated" guns, since you asked, is debris/hot gas/etc. being forced upward at high velocities. They're not ideal for close-in "retention" firing for that reason. If that's something you want to consider.

I have shoot mine many times from that position as it's required by our standards. There has been no problem at all. Neither has there been an issue with reduced/low light shooting which is also required. The flash isn't that much difference than many of the new loads on the market. While I've shot a few thousand of my reloads using a stiff charge of Unique, duty loads are the standard Ranger T 165 grain JHP. Muzzle flash is not objectionable at all. Shoot fifty rounds in a very low light vision might be compromised but most likely not to a significantly greater degree than the standard model. Actually, I've never seen a study on the subject. Probably need a vision specialist to conduct one with results that are valid.

I proper handgun retention position has the compensation opening far enough forward to avoid any injury. Quite frankly holding a standard handgun too far to the rear near the belt line would cause an injury just as easy.

The difference in models in noticeable. We carry the 23 as a duty handgun. As a rule, we use the standard model though.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 23 or 23C?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!