Glock 26 vs. Glock 27 reliability?


PDA






TheProf
December 20, 2010, 02:26 PM
Anyone else observed this...

From my experience...my Glock 26 is 99.999% reliable whereas my Glock 27 is 99.5% reliable.

I'm assuming its human error on my part...due to the G27's greater recoil.

But I'm wondering....from an engineering standpoint.... does the G26 tolerate human error more so than the G27 (if we take the human error due to greater recoil)?

1. Has anyone else seen this from PERSONAL experience?

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 26 vs. Glock 27 reliability?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
docnyt
December 20, 2010, 02:31 PM
Reliable as in go bang every time?

I'm not sure 0.49% is even noticeable?

TheProf
December 20, 2010, 02:37 PM
Reliable = meaning, no FTF, FTE, etc.

joe_security
December 20, 2010, 02:44 PM
A family member has the G26. Ive never seen or heard of it malfunctioning, ever. Its one of the most accurate you will find anywhere.

M1key
December 20, 2010, 03:17 PM
My wife can make the G26 malfunction. :uhoh:

Then I remind her, "Honey, remember to lock your wrist."

"Oh, okay."

Problem solved. :cool:

(She normally shoots the 19)


M

G27RR
December 20, 2010, 03:21 PM
I don't have a 26 for comparison, but I've had no failures to date with my 27. Maybe you need a firmer grip on the 27 vs the 26? The 27 is snappy, so I could see that causing some malfunctions if your grip is off every so often.

M1key
December 20, 2010, 03:28 PM
The stiffer felt recoil of the 40 might have a greater tendency to induce a "limp-wrist" malfunction, at least with the aforementioned wife.

She pulled the trigger twice on my G27 loaded with 155 Gold Dots, and said, "Okay, that's enough."

:rolleyes:

M

Warhawk83
December 20, 2010, 03:33 PM
I've fired about 350 rounds out of my G27 and zero malfunctions so far.

fastbolt
December 20, 2010, 04:37 PM
I've observed something similar involving the G26/27's that I own. I've fired more than 10,000 rounds through the G27 and I'm approaching 11,000 rounds with my first G26, so I've had some time to experience and observe their functioning in my hands.

I've experienced upwards of maybe a dozen feeding & functioning issues with my G27. These have ranged from a couple of obvious ammunition issues, some magazine issues and the rest are what I'd categorize as shooter-induced. This last category includes using the G27 for fast & demanding training & practice drills which can introduce the opportunity for some unintended flex in my strong or weak hand grip, as well as my wrist not remaining locked.

I'd think it reasonable to consider that the increased felt recoil of the .40 might have an influence in this regard.

The only issue I've experienced and observed involving my G26 has been with the ejection pattern.

If I relax my grip ever so slightly, or allow my wrist lock to soften, I can get empty cases in my face, chest or even over my left shoulder (and I'm right-handed).

This condition can occur more frequently when using lower power loads and when it involves the last round. In the case of the former situation I'd think it has something to do with slide velocity and the strong recoil spring ... and in the case of the latter I'd think it likely also influenced by not having another live round in the magazine to help keep the empty case being extracted from slipping a bit lower before impacting the ejector. Neither of these things are exactly unknown to occur in other pistol designs and platforms.

I see a fair number of folks shoot both for qualifications. Discounting some parts breakage I've observed (which can happen with any mechanical device, including firearms ;) ), I've seen some feeding issues arise when folks have been using G27's and G23 magazines. The slide velocity generated in the .40 can sometimes have an effect on such things when weakening or reduced recoil & mag spring tension is occurring.

In the wearable parts replacement schedule I received from Glock regarding .40's being used by LE, it's recommended that the recoil spring assembly is replaced every 3,000 rounds in the G27 and the magazine springs every 5,000 rounds. However, it's also listed as being recommended that the recoil spring is checked and tested using the Glock recoil spring field test at each range session or qualification, and the recoil spring replaced more often as may be needed.

The locking block pin & slide lock are a couple of other wearable parts recommended for replacement at 5,000 rounds, BTW. When I replaced the ones in my own G27, at 10,000 rounds, I noticed the locking block pin exhibited some noticeable wear and burred spots where it had been contacting the locking block. I saw another one I removed from another instructor's G23, which had supposedly only been fired upwards of 2,000 - 2,500 rounds, and it looked like it had been peened, burred and subjected to road rash, as well. I was told in my last Glock armorer class that Glock had changed the heat treating of the locking block pins more than a couple of years prior to that class (and that's coming up on 3 years ago).

I can't give you a definitive answer to your question about the G26 being more tolerant of human error (shooter influence), but I'd suspect the lighter recoiling G26 might experience less recoil-induced effects due to the G26 using the same recoil spring assembly (and other parts) as the harder recoiling G27. I can notice more felt recoil in my G27 when using 180gr loads than when I'm shooting 115gr +P+ & 127gr +P+ loads in my G26 ... (and standard pressure 147gr & 124gr +P loads seem rather mild by comparison, although it must be remembered that not all +P loads are the same) ... but it should also be remembered that how felt recoil is perceived by each individual can vary and is a somewhat subjective matter. ;)

Something else to possibly consider is that shooting a pistol while standing comfortably on a firing line, taking plenty of time between shoots and making sure grip technique remains constant, resting when necessary, can be somewhat different than when shooting the same gun/ammo in a fast-paced, demanding and difficult training/qual situation which tasks the shooter to not only shoot the gun at an intended target, but do so while resolving tactical problems and making judgment calls about shoot/no-shoot conditions.

Adding movement (meaning shooting both during and between movement) , the use of 1 & 2-handed shooting (using the non-dominant hand for both) and effectively utilizing cover/barricade and perhaps while using a hand held light ... can all create potential conditions and introduce stresses which might distract a shooter from being able to calmly use their "optimal" grip & shooting techniques unless a lot of training & practice is frequently done. Even then a momentary distraction or physical influence can still occur and affect the shooter's ability to effectively use their skillset.

Now, think about what happens when the body is subjected to the physical and mental stresses induced by the hormonal fear response and how it might have an adverse effect upon gross & fine motor skills. It's been discussed by some authoritative sources that frequent & proper training can help mitigate this sort of problem, allowing ingrained training (reinforced by proper practice) to subconsciously be available under stress.

Hmmm, sorry if I got side-tracked. Hope some of my rambling might be relevant to your questions ...

I can also offer that I work rather hard with my various .40's, which includes my G27, to be better able to handle the increased recoil forces often felt over similar models chambered in 9mm. I've found that the more I work hard with my .40's, the better I seem to do when it comes to my 9's, too. Sort of a win-win for me, I think.

SIGLBER
December 20, 2010, 04:47 PM
I've had both. I got caught up in the .40 craze for awhile. Both guns were totally reliable and I have trusted my life to both. The only problen with the 27 is if you shoot alot (and I do) and use the higher velocity rounds the 27 after awhile takes one hell of a beating. Mine eventually broke the locking block and cracked the frame.
I've seen the ame thing with buddies shooting both the baby .357 and .40. They are really hard on the little guns. I think they are equal in reliability until the .357 or .40 beats the little gun to death. The 9mm unless all you use is +P+ will be around for ever. So in the long term I think you will have more durability thus reliability with the 26. Of course you may not put as many rounds through your gun as I did mine. And it took many years. I'd still go with the G26 after my experience.

M1key
December 20, 2010, 05:19 PM
BTW, my G27 and G33 both have the Wolf 20# spring sets.



M

fmcdave
December 20, 2010, 06:17 PM
Where can one get a copy of the "wearable parts replacement schedule". I have a few Glocks including a 23C which I have shot a LOT. The only think I have replaced is the firing pin spring.

jmr40
December 20, 2010, 07:08 PM
I think that trend is typical of any 40 vs 9mm debate. While the 40's tend to be far more than acceptably reliable, the 9 is always just a touch more reliable. Gun designers have had nearly 100 years more experience to perfect the 9.

fastbolt
December 20, 2010, 08:04 PM
Where can one get a copy of the "wearable parts replacement schedule".

It was provided to armorers.

It covers the 3rd gen and older .40 models in common use by LE customers, meaning G22/22RTF, G23/23RTF, G27 & G35.

For the G23's the list shows recommended replacement as follows:
Recoil spring assembly - 2,000 rounds
Magazine spring - 2,000 rounds
Firing Pin safety - 5,000 rounds
Firing pin safety spring - 5,000 rounds
Firing pin spring - 5,000 rounds
Slide lock - 5,000 rounds
Trigger spring (coil) - 5,000 rounds
Locking block pin - 5,000 rounds

It further states that for best results, magazine springs should be replaced at least every other time the recoil spring assembly is replaced.

I believe the list was made in '08, and I was later told by Glock that the current production trigger coil spring (light gray color) is now considered to be a lifetime part (unless they decide otherwise at some point).

During my last Glock class the instructor kept mentioning that if we're seeing broken locking blocks, locking block pins & trigger pins that we're not replacing the recoil springs often enough. ;)

I've not seen or received a similar list for other models/calibers of Glocks, but that might be because the .40's are the most common models/caliber being used by Glock's LE customers, and the .40 is hard on guns (but so is the .357SIG when it comes to recoil forces).

The latest armorer manual doesn't list a round-count replacement recommendation, but it does recommend periodic inspection and evaluation of a number of parts considered to be wearable parts. It defines wearable parts as those parts which by their very nature will not maintain absolute factory specifications forever and will need to be monitored periodically for satisfactory function. The parts listed are all springs, extractors, firing pins, firing pin safeties and magazine followers and mag bodies. It reminds armorers that any spring can become damaged, weakened, worn or broken and should be evaluated often.

The last time I asked about the Gen4 recoil spring assemblies in the larger guns, I was told that it's expected they ought to be good for approx 5,000 - 7,000 rounds. Since Glock has some new lighter sprung assemblies for the G17/19, though, I don't know how that will affect things.

KBintheSLC
December 20, 2010, 09:14 PM
A reliable gun should work 100% of the time, not 99.99999%... My G26-GenIII has about 4000 rounds of various make ammo through it, and it has digested them all without a single miss. I can't vouch for the G27 as I have never owned one. If you experience any failures with quality ammo, there is something wrong that needs to be addressed.

GLOOB
December 21, 2010, 02:04 AM
There are some older .40 mags out there that contribute to Glock .40 jams - especially the G27. With the updated 11 coil springs, I haven't had any problems with mine.

A reliable gun should work 100% of the time, not 99.99999%
I'd be pretty thrilled with 99.99999%. That's one malfunction per 10 million rounds. Once you get that far with your G26, come back and tell us if it met your standards. :) Also, take some notes as to how many ammo-related malfunctions you get out of that 10 million. :)

easyg
December 21, 2010, 08:47 AM
I've never had any failures with my Glock 27 or my Glock 23.

I don't buy the notion that the .40 is more prone to failure than the 9mm.
I think some folks are just more recoil sensitive than others.

jmr40
December 21, 2010, 01:19 PM
It is easier to get long thin cartridges to feed more reliably than shorter fatter cartridges. The 9mm is also slightly thinner at the front than the back which helps. The cartridge case is not straight walled like the 40 and 45

This difference alone would not prevent me from buying another cartridge, the gun design/quality and ammo quality are more important anyway. But traditionally 9mm rounds have proven to be more reliable.

fastbolt
December 21, 2010, 01:31 PM
I don't buy the notion that the .40 is more prone to failure than the 9mm.

I'm not sure anyone is saying the .40 is "more prone to failure".

I've attended a number of armorer classes for some different firearm manufacturers who provide firearms to LE customers. It's common to hear it mentioned in such classes that the .40 S&W and .357SIG are harder on guns than 9mm and .45 ACP.

Sure, they may be "harder" on some shooters when it comes to how some folks perceive felt recoil, as well, but they're still hard on the actual guns, too.

The use of some of the lighter bullet weight ammunition, meaning below 180gr loads, can also exacerbate this issue for both shooters and guns. The 155gr loads were found to be harder on the Beretta 96's used in fed LE service than the 9mm was on the 92's, for example.

KBintheSLC
December 21, 2010, 03:10 PM
I'd be pretty thrilled with 99.99999%. That's one malfunction per 10 million rounds. Once you get that far with your G26, come back and tell us if it met your standards. Also, take some notes as to how many ammo-related malfunctions you get out of that 10 million.

Take things too literally, and miss the point entirely.


...

GLOOB
December 21, 2010, 06:52 PM
Good grief! I guess I should have included a smiley face.

Here: :neener::neener:

GLOOB
December 21, 2010, 08:37 PM
Sure, they may be "harder" on some shooters when it comes to how some folks perceive felt recoil, as well, but they're still hard on the actual guns, too.
This is a given. Just like shooting +P+ ammo through a 9mm, it'll wear out faster. Shooting factory .40 is like shooting +P+ ammo all the time. If you want to practice with soft plinking ammo, you can always start reloading. But even if your gun wears out after 25,000 rounds, that's over the course of over $6,000 worth of ammo. At this point, the gun could be considered an ancillary cost. Besides that, many of these guns will never be asked to shoot more than a few thousand rounds.

KBintheSLC
December 21, 2010, 09:05 PM
Shooting factory .40 is like shooting +P+ ammo all the time.

Just curious... where did you get this idea? I keep hearing it thrown around, and just can't seem to understand it's validity. You see, standard pressure 9x19 and .40 S&W both have the same SAAMI pressure specs... that is 35,000 PSI. Actually, 9mm +P is higher pressure than any .40 S&W load, and even surpasses 10mm pressures at 38,500 psi. So, what makes you believe that the .40 equates shooting +P+ all of the time?

fmcdave
December 21, 2010, 11:31 PM
Fastbolt, thanks a lot for the information. That was very helpful.

After shooting for 35 years I have come to the conclusion that every gun fails from time to time. For me, this means to add failure clearing to my standard practice shooting. I'm an engineer, and while I spend my career developing aircraft systems I can honestly say that regardless of the reliability...we spent a LOT of time documenting failure recovery processes.

The standard for critical avionics failures (like those that do auto-land) is 10E-9 per hour of usage. This is one failure every 100,000,000 hours of use. Mathematically, it means it should never happen. That said, we analyze all of the potential failures and assume they will happen and where possible, develop operational procedures to deal with the failure (where possible is a big deal, if a wing falls off; the operational procedure is to pray).

Typical reliability is more on the order of 10E-3. In that case, we develop training procedures and drills to mitigate the failure. These become part of the flight crew initial and recurrent training.

So, that means that when you are practicing, you need to consider adding drills to cover:
- Stovepipe ejection failures
- Failure to feed (like the round jams against the feed ramp.
- Failure to go bang

Just my thoughts.

Deaf Smith
December 21, 2010, 11:32 PM
It was provided to armorers.

It covers the 3rd gen and older .40 models in common use by LE customers, meaning G22/22RTF, G23/23RTF, G27 & G35.

For the G23's the list shows recommended replacement as follows:
Recoil spring assembly - 2,000 rounds
Magazine spring - 2,000 rounds
Firing Pin safety - 5,000 rounds
Firing pin safety spring - 5,000 rounds
Firing pin spring - 5,000 rounds
Slide lock - 5,000 rounds
Trigger spring (coil) - 5,000 rounds
Locking block pin - 5,000 rounds

It further states that for best results, magazine springs should be replaced at least every other time the recoil spring assembly is replaced.


Dang FB, my Glock 17 I used in competition has over 100,000 rounds and I've never replaced ANYTHING except the recoil spring and the slide lock spring (it broke once.)

But I have no doubt my Glock 27 takes a beating everytime I shoot it. Much more than the 17.

I suspect we should look at the Subcompact Glocks like the K frame .357s. Shoot milder ammo in practice and keep it loaded with full power loads.

Deaf

DBR
December 21, 2010, 11:46 PM
What beats the gun up is the momentum the slide/frame has to absorb. One measure of relative momentum the the "power factor" of the ammo. Typical 9mm is 135PF, 9mm +P gets up to 150PF, 180gr 40SW is about 180PF.

40SW has about 1.3X more momentum than 9MM thus it is harder on the gun.

fastbolt
December 22, 2010, 12:03 AM
Yeah Deaf, I think the 9mm models are subjected to a lot less wear and tear ... but that's because that's what I've been told by various folks from various manufacturers. ;)

I think replacing the recoil spring assembly can do a lot to help mitigate some potential issues that might result from increased battering as a recoil spring weakens over time and usage.

Also, over the years that I've been a Glock armorer and spoken with various folks from the company, the expected service life estimates related to some of the springs and other parts seems to have continually decreased. Maybe that's because as time's passed they've received increasingly more feedback from their LE users. ;)

You don't think the Gen4 G22 was something they just decided to fiddle with developing one day when they were bored, do you?

I still prefer Glocks chambered in 9mm, myself, although my G27 has been a decent little gun for the last 10 years, all things considered.

When I recently decided to pick up a spare Glock subcompact, however, I didn't for a second think of getting another G27, but went right for another G26. :)

KBintheSLC, don't get too caught up in the measurement of chamber pressure. It doesn't tell the whole story by itself just as being a "limit" that's reached. How quickly the pressure spikes and reaches its peak pressure can tell us other things.

For example, in the Sig pistol armorer class the instructor happened to mention not to be surprised if we found the barrel ramps were peened (on each side) in the .357 guns, but that we probably wouldn't ever see it in the .40's. It was explained that the .357 developed its pressure spike differently than the .40 and that it resulted in more force being absorbed by the gun. In this situation under discussion it meant between the frame insert and the bottom of the barrel's feed ramp during recoil. he told us that if the peening became excessive in a gun we could file it down on each side so it was within normal spec again.

When I was discussing the .357's & .40's with different folks from Glock in the past it was often acknowledged that the .357's would generally experience more wear, sooner, from the recoil forces acting on the guns. (This isn't to mean the felt recoil will necessarily be perceived by the shooter as being greater in the .357, though.)

Besides that, many of these guns will never be asked to shoot more than a few thousand rounds.

A surprising number of them in private hands may not see more than a few hundred rounds, if that. ;) Not everyone is inclined, or can afford, to spend time at a range.

When it comes right down to it, if I didn't think the G27 was reliable enough to meet my anticipated needs I wouldn't continue to own and occasionally carry it.

GLOOB
December 22, 2010, 05:43 AM
Shooting factory .40 is like shooting +P+ ammo all the time.
Just curious... where did you get this idea? I keep hearing it thrown around, and just can't seem to understand it's validity. You see, standard pressure 9x19 and .40 S&W both have the same SAAMI pressure specs... that is 35,000 PSI. Actually, 9mm +P is higher pressure than any .40 S&W load, and rivals 10mm pressures approaching 37,500 psi. So, what makes you believe that the .40 equates shooting +P+ all of the time?
Actually, factory 9mm +P+ ammo can exceed 40k psi. But pressure doesn't mean anything in this context. Pressure is contained by the barrel/chamber and by the brass. When a gun wears out, the barrel doesn't blow up; it can either handle the pressure, or it can't. As an aside, look up Laplace's Law. A smaller diameter vessel is more effective at containing higher pressure, relative to the square of the diameter. This is actually common sense, and doesn't need a fancy name. Pounds per square inch, pretty much explains it. In a larger barrel there are more square inches. In other words, 35k psi in a 9mm barrel isn't equal to 35k in a 10mm barrel. For equal pressure, the larger diameter barrel and brass will require more structural integrity to hold up, but it will also propel the same weight projectile faster (the bullet has more surface area, thus more force is exerted at any given pressure). This is why 135 gr .40 loads are faster than standard pressure 115 grain luger loads, despite operating at the same pressures.

My point is that .40 SW is a modern cartridge. This means that any factory can produce a load that approaches the cartridge's potential limit without fear that they'll get sued for blowing up someone's gun. A +P .40 cartridge isn't feasible, because it's already at the max. Any much more in an autoloader, and the brass will fail. Luger brass can handle much more than 35k psi. But even though most modern 9mm guns can handle +P or +P+ loads, standard pressure loads are limited to 35k psi so they're safe to shoot in any gun chambered for 9mm parabellum, including C&R guns.

The fact that the 9mm standard pressure limit happens to be exactly the same as the .40 SW pressure limit is just coincidence, and it isn't apples to apples. Even against 9mm +P+ loads (assuming a practical limit of 40k psi, lets say, despite a lack of official designation), the .40 will still come out on top, due to powder capacity and Laplace's Law. There's only 1 factory 9mm load that barely makes major pf, and that's the Ranger 127 grain +P+. You'd be hard pressed to find any factory .40 load that doesn't make something close to major, and many make quite a bit more. So when you launch the average .40 load out of the same exact platform as a luger, the gun is going to get battered at +P+ luger levels, and then some.

So you can stop comparing pressures and just go with common sense. Shooting bullets with higher energy and recoil causes more wear. Same as saying shooting moderate .357 loads will wear your revolver loose as much as shooting 38 +P loads all the time.

JFrame
December 22, 2010, 10:22 AM
I have yet to experience an FTF/FTE with my G27 purchased in 1995 -- so I'm still running at 100%. :)

.

Coltdriver
December 22, 2010, 11:06 AM
Fastbolt thanks for the informative posts. I will take a look at my 27 and see how the pins and springs you mention are holding up. I did put a new recoil spring in my used 27 the day I got it.

To the OP the one thing I do with all of my semi auto pistols is change the recoil spring regularly. If I get a used one, it gets a new spring right away. I discovered this while shooting a couple hundred .45 rounds a week for about a year. Every failure to eject or stovepipe I ever had was from a worn out recoil spring. A good spring also reduces, to some extent, the battering of the frame.

Stevie-Ray
December 22, 2010, 08:40 PM
I have only a G26 and G29. My G26 has never had any malfunctions, the G29 has had one, a FTF where I had to yank back a bit on the slide to get it to go into battery. It was within the first 50 rounds, and has never repeated. I consider them both to be reliable, actually the 26, ultra reliable.

easyg
December 23, 2010, 12:46 AM
What beats the gun up is the momentum the slide/frame has to absorb. One measure of relative momentum the the "power factor" of the ammo. Typical 9mm is 135PF, 9mm +P gets up to 150PF, 180gr 40SW is about 180PF.

40SW has about 1.3X more momentum than 9MM thus it is harder on the gun.
Not true IF the handgun was designed to shoot .40 ammo.

Sure the .40 slide has more momentum, but the .40 pistol also has a stronger recoil spring which virtually negates the momentum difference.

DenaliPark
December 23, 2010, 01:19 AM
Not true IF the handgun was designed to shoot .40 ammo.

Sure the .40 slide has more momentum, but the .40 pistol also has a stronger recoil spring which virtually negates the momentum difference.
I believe the G-17/22 share the exact same recoil spring, err, at least they used too until the gen4 17s started to fail....Aside from that, all other generation 17s/22s wear the exact same recoil spring...

easyg
December 23, 2010, 01:04 PM
I believe the G-17/22 share the exact same recoil spring, err, at least they used too until the gen4 17s started to fail....Aside from that, all other generation 17s/22s wear the exact same recoil spring...
I don't think the Gen 3 Glocks shared the same recoil spring.

M1key
December 23, 2010, 01:57 PM
Armorers manual

#SP01533 Recoil Spring Assy 17# G17,G22,G24,G31,G34,G35
#SP02457 Recoil Spring Assy 18# G19,G23,G32
#SP05586 Recoil Spring Assy 17# G20,G21
#SP02211 Recoil Spring Assy 18# G26,G27,G33
#SP08063 Recoil Spring Assy 18# G29,G30,G36

Incidently, this is why I use a pound or two heavier Wolff spring assy in many of the 40, 357, and 10mm Glocks, on the advice of MarkCO @ Glocktalk.


M

TheProf
April 9, 2011, 09:36 PM
Here's the update on my G27.

I discovered the problem....

It seems that with the mag extensions (even with the +0 pinky extension), there is a tendency for me to apply too much grip pressure on the extension so that it affects feeding reliably.

I just went through about 250 consecutive rounds with zero failure when using just the standard mags.

When using the pinky extension, I noticed that i had 1 out of 100 rounds have "failure to feed" issues.

It's not really my Glock 27's fault. After all, its an aftermarket / or non-standard part for that model.

For a while, I switched to the G26....but the bigger caliber just kept calling me back. I really like my G27 and am glad that I figured out the issue. Overall, I am very please with this gun.

Pilot
April 10, 2011, 09:23 AM
From my experience...my Glock 26 is 99.999% reliable whereas my Glock 27 is 99.5% reliable.


That is statistically insignificant. You'd have a better chance of winning the lottery than telling them apart from a reliability perspective.

jackpinesavages
April 10, 2011, 09:42 AM
tolerate human error more so than the G27 (if we take the human error due to greater recoil)?

1. Has anyone else seen this from PERSONAL experience?


Absolutely, the majority of Glock malfunctions are human related, but the humans generally refuse to see it that way.

ironhead7544
April 10, 2011, 12:49 PM
With your carry load you should not have any "limp wrist" problems. If you do then you might need a more powerful load or a heavier bullet. Your hands may become injured so its best to have some thing that will operate with a lesser grip. I use a G26 and the CorBon 115 gr will not limp wrist jam. I can shoot it with just thumb and trigger finger.

Concerning the G26 VS G27, get both. Carry the G27 and practice with the G26. It really is best to have 2 of the same gun for carry. One to practice with and one for use. Check the carry gun for function a couple times a year.

Deaf Smith
April 10, 2011, 05:46 PM
Concerning the G26 VS G27, get both. Carry the G27 and practice with the G26. It really is best to have 2 of the same gun for carry. One to practice with and one for use. Check the carry gun for function a couple times a year.


And that is an excellent idea. I have both 27 and 26 and yes a AACK .22 unit for the 26.

Actually I have two 26's, one the practice gun and the other the extra incase I ever have a problem with my 27 and need another carry gun pronto.


Deaf

gofastman
April 10, 2011, 05:52 PM
With your carry load you should not have any "limp wrist" problems. If you do then you might need a more powerful load or a heavier bullet.
aren't Glock 9mm's designed with 9mm NATO in mind? (similar to 9mm+P)

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 26 vs. Glock 27 reliability?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!