Colt Defender or Glock 36
- Thread starter kyonic
- Start date
- Status
GunNut
Member
If you are a Glock guy then go with the 36. If you're a 1911 guy go with the Colt.
Either are great guns, but don't trust either without shooting some of your carry rounds through them.
Personally i'd go with the Glock.
Either are great guns, but don't trust either without shooting some of your carry rounds through them.
Personally i'd go with the Glock.
Vitamin G
Member
One thing that drives me nuts are the glockophiles that will detract from the 1911style guns, and continuously bring up "Cocked and Locked" carry, and its "Dangers".
I think the real question that people should be asking, and what I asked myself, was...
"Would you rather have a gun that LOOKS like it will fire if you unholster it and pull the trigger by accident/negligence, or would you rather have a gun that WILL fire if you unholster it and pull the trigger by accident/negligence?
I think the real question that people should be asking, and what I asked myself, was...
"Would you rather have a gun that LOOKS like it will fire if you unholster it and pull the trigger by accident/negligence, or would you rather have a gun that WILL fire if you unholster it and pull the trigger by accident/negligence?
GunNut
Member
You want to know what drives me nuts? People who start arguing with imaginary posts.
I have not seen ONE post bringing up the dangers of "cocked and locked" guns for carry.
A lot of people feel unsafe carrying around a 1911 style gun because of the cocked hammer. Has nothing at all to do with "glockophiles", has to do with someones comfort level and training.
Hell one of my friends can't believe that I would ever have a 1911 cocked and locked or have a round in the chamber of my Glock. Different strokes for different folks.
So what do you have against Glocks? Besides they're ugly or plastic or blocky...the standard answer for wood and steel gun owners.
8830
Member
Having owned and carried both I like the Defender better. I like cocked and locked over any other systems. Plus my G36 mags would not drop free. Weight difference is not an issue.
macadore
Member
IMO, the Glock handles better and seems to recoil less. I don’t know if this is due to the ergonomics, the plastic frame absorbing the recoil, or my imagination.
Vitamin G
Member
Oh believe me, I have nothing against glocks. I have a glock 20 and a glock 17 in my regular carry rotation. I also tote along a p7m8, BHP, Govt 1911, and Kel-tec .380. I know the conventional wisdom is to dress around the gun, but being single and lucky enough to have a good job, albeit in social work, I was able to splurge and can pick a gun around my clothes of the day.
With that said, my only complaint about glocks are the grip angle, and a very very very nagging "uh oh" about the lack of actual safety. My concern about the safety is about as superficial as a freckle on the playmate of the month's pinky toe, while she's laying naked on my bed.
As far as "imaginary posts", i've semi-regularly seen people raise their concerns about the dangers of "cocked and locked" carry, in this and other forums. Even in this very thread, the implication that 1911's are more dangerous than other guns was made...
So really, whats the difference in some safety prerequisite in carrying a 1911 vs. a revolver, or a 1911 vs a sig? Is there a point system that some states use that i dont know exist?
1) Draw 2) Flip off safety 3) Point 4) Shoot
How is a 1911 any different than a Sig, CZ, EAA Witness, BHP, et all. In fact, the only guns that come to mind quickly that have significant differences are glocks and revolvers (No #2), and p7's (#2 = Squeeze)
The only difference that I can readily see is that the 1911 style guns "look" scary & dangerous, because they have a visible hammer. If we're going to make a big deal of how a gun looks, are we really any different than Kerry and Feinstein?
With that said, my only complaint about glocks are the grip angle, and a very very very nagging "uh oh" about the lack of actual safety. My concern about the safety is about as superficial as a freckle on the playmate of the month's pinky toe, while she's laying naked on my bed.
As far as "imaginary posts", i've semi-regularly seen people raise their concerns about the dangers of "cocked and locked" carry, in this and other forums. Even in this very thread, the implication that 1911's are more dangerous than other guns was made...
So really, whats the difference in some safety prerequisite in carrying a 1911 vs. a revolver, or a 1911 vs a sig? Is there a point system that some states use that i dont know exist?
1) Draw 2) Flip off safety 3) Point 4) Shoot
How is a 1911 any different than a Sig, CZ, EAA Witness, BHP, et all. In fact, the only guns that come to mind quickly that have significant differences are glocks and revolvers (No #2), and p7's (#2 = Squeeze)
The only difference that I can readily see is that the 1911 style guns "look" scary & dangerous, because they have a visible hammer. If we're going to make a big deal of how a gun looks, are we really any different than Kerry and Feinstein?
I have handled both guns in a local gunshop not too long ago. My impression is that the G36 is more or less the same size as the G19 (just a bit slimmer). I found it to be both larger and thicker than an Officer's ACP. The Colt Defender strikes me as being easier to conceal.kyonic said:
I haven't shot either gun. But, I have read that the G36 is less accurate than most compact .45's on the market. And I have read that it is less reliable than a typical Glock. Again, this is NOT based on personal experience...just what I've read!
I hope people with hands-on experience will share their thoughts.
MICHAEL T
Member
Ive been packing a Defender and have a new Agent on layaway No glock in my family
Neither. I have owned several of each size of 1911, and found anything smaller than full-sized to be likely to have reliability issues. An acquaintance who works at a gun range has a G36, which he shoots A LOT, and he has experienced several parts breakages. A colleague I do trust has found the SIG P245 to be reliable and durable. It is discontinued, but the Compact P220 is in production.
Last edited:
DHart
Member
.45 acp in a gun with a 3" barrel is just a little "wacko" in my opinion. THe velocity loss is quite significant with a barrel that is 40% shorter than the barrel length which .45 acp loadings are designed to work well with. THat said, I wouldn't choose to be shot with a 3" .45, but .40 and 9mm are much better suited to such short barrels. If you must choose .45 acp for a caliber and need a small-ish concealment pistol, may I suggest a Colt Commander with a 4.25" barrel or a Glock 30 with a 3.8" barrel? Both are much better choices for a variety of reasons and, I feel, quite easily concealed. Otherwise, buy a Glock 23 and have 14 rounds of hot forty on tap in a relatively small, lightweight, easily concealed, highly reliable platform.
DHart
Member
WayneO.... not sure what you are saying with reference to what I wrote? Can you clarify? I never mentioned the Glock 36.
The Defender has a 3" barrel. The barrel in the Glock 30 & 36 is 3.8", IIRC, and has polygonal rifling, which tends to keep velocity from dropping as much. You WILL get better velocity from the Glock 30 and 36 w/3.8" polygonal barrel than you will with the Defender's 3" standard rifling barrel.
And you'll get MUCH better CAPACITY with the Glock 30, if you can handle it's "beefiness" in the grip.
The Defender has a 3" barrel. The barrel in the Glock 30 & 36 is 3.8", IIRC, and has polygonal rifling, which tends to keep velocity from dropping as much. You WILL get better velocity from the Glock 30 and 36 w/3.8" polygonal barrel than you will with the Defender's 3" standard rifling barrel.
And you'll get MUCH better CAPACITY with the Glock 30, if you can handle it's "beefiness" in the grip.
Last edited:
Lonestar49
Member
Cocked and Locked is SAFE, and
...
IMHO, you can't beat a SAO trigger (pull) exactly the same sweet pull, every time..
Good luck, (hope ya get a Defender 45), as mine is, as mentioned by Doc, one of the best point shooters I own, besides my EMP..
Ls
...
IMHO, you can't beat a SAO trigger (pull) exactly the same sweet pull, every time..
Good luck, (hope ya get a Defender 45), as mine is, as mentioned by Doc, one of the best point shooters I own, besides my EMP..
Ls
ak-kev
Member
To me, its a no-brainer. Colt all the way baby
10-Ring
Member
I've had a 36 & didn't much care for it...go w/ the Defender!
DHart
Member
Though I prefer the Glock 23 (14 rounds of hot .40 cal.), as hinted at above, for my primary carry gun (capacity is important to me), I really, really LOVE Colt 1911's! Here's one of my two favorite Colt 1911's for carry duty:
The other fave Colt carry gun is set up just like this one, but is a LW Commander bobtail.
The other fave Colt carry gun is set up just like this one, but is a LW Commander bobtail.
Hunter0924
Member
My vote goes for the Colt Defender with a suggestion to look at the New Agent.
MICHAEL T
Member
Once again COLT DEFENDER or AGENT use 185 gr ammo and they work fine.
DHart
Member
This is wrong. 185 gr. ammo may function fine, but the 185 gr. loads are much less effective from a 3" barrel than they are from the 5" barrel they were designed to be fired from.
Lighter weight (200 and 185 gr.) .45 acp bullets LOSE velocity at a HIGHER RATE than the 230 gr. bullets do... so, a 230 gr. bullet will retain desired velocity a little better (due to momemtum) than the 185 gr. bullet will. Therefore, the 230 gr. bullet will stay a little closer to it's designed velocity (which is with the 5" barrel) than the 185 gr. bullet will. Simplified: the 185 gr. bullet suffers from a greater slow-down rate from the short 3" barrel than the 230 gr. bullet does. Stick with 230 gr. if you must shoot a 3" 1911. You will give up most if not all of your expansion, but you'll still have the 230 gr. weight for good penetration and.... don't forget, penetration is KING! (Assuming good placement.)
NOW, if you really want good penetration AND expansion, as well, with the short 3" barrel, there are only two good ways to do so that I know of: Corbon 165 gr. PowRBall and Corbon 185 gr. DPX. These are proven to penetrate deeply AND expand fully when fired from a 3" barrel. BUT, these are really expensive loads to shoot; and VERRRRY expensive if you want to practice with your carry load!
I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but 1911's with 3" barrels are the worst possible choice for both the 1911 platform AND for the .45 acp caliber.
I can certainly see the attraction to the Defender... in fact I was so attracted to one, that I bought one for myself. But with time and use I began to realize that a LOT had to be given up/compromised by choosing the Defender (or any 3" barrel 1911) and a bobtailed Commander is a MUCH smarter choice for a carry gun.
The reason I sold my Defender and decided to stick with Commander 1911's for carry use is multi-fold:
• cost of the Corbon ammo (necessary for achieving excellent terminal ballistics from a 3" barrel) is so high and I wanted to be able to shoot a LOT of practice WITH my carry ammo - too costly for me to do with the Defender, but affordable with the Commander.
• cost and replacement frequency of recoil springs in the Defender is high. Recoil springs in a Defender should be replaced as early as 750 rounds, typically, and the compound springs are MUCH less readily available and much more expensive than springs for a Commander, a model who's recoil springs last a LOT longer, are much cheaper, and much more readily available all over the place.
• Capacity of the Defender is reduced due to the short butt... whereas a bobtailed Commander has a very easliy concealed butt, yet retains use of full size/full capacity Government magazines! Choose mags without the bumper at the bottom and the bobtailed Commander has a VERY easily concealed butt.
• The 4.25" barrel on the Commander provides much better terminal ballistics with a wide variety of ammo types than the 3" barrel does.
• The 4.25 " slide on the Commander gives a much better sighting radius, enabling more accuracy if you need to take a longer shot, than the 3" barrel does.
• The greater weight of the 4.25" slide on the Commander reduces felt recoil and muzzle rise such that follow up shots are quicker to get off than with the 3" barrel 1911.
• The slide length on the Commander lends generally greater overall reliability than is typically found with 3" 1911's.
• The Commander is a more enjoyable gun to shoot and practice with - over a high volume of shooting, than is a 3" 1911.
REALIZE that you have to compromise/give up a LOT when you choose a 3" 1911 for a carry gun!!!
Don't get me wrong, I think the Defender is a GREAT and fun little gun, very attractive indeed, but I finally figured out after owning one that I didn't NEED to go that small and didn't HAVE to put up with lackluster terminal ballistic performance and high maintenance... I found that I could carry a bobtailed Commander JUST as easily and would have a MUCH better performing 1911 which allowed use of full capacity mags as well. Even full capacity 1911 mags are on the low end of capacity as far as I'm concerned, so giving up even one round had to result in gaining a HECK of a lot more in something else in return. What I found is that 3" 1911's are all about "giving up" a lot and not so much about "getting back".
GO with a Defender over an Agent if you must have a .45 with such a short barrel, but seriously consider a bobtailed Commander as a very strong, less-compromised 1911 alternative. And, if your hands are large enough to handle one, look at the Glock 30 ... they're an awesome (11-round) .45 acp choice in a small package that doesn't give up much in terminal ballistics with it's 3.8" polygonal rifled barrel and has awesome capacity for a compact .45!
The Defender is a much better choice, IMHO, than the new Agent because of the sights on the Defender. But neither are as smart a choice, in my view, as the Glock 30 or a bobtailed Commander. That's my reasoning. Your mileage, and others, may certainly vary!
Why am I so big on capacity?
We've all heard the statistic dating back to the revolver days that a civilian is not likely to need more than 5 shots in a self-defense situation.
In today's world, that's not a smart statistic to base your gun choice on. With that mindset, statistics show that you will never need to shoot anyone in defense of your life, so why even carry a gun at all?
Let's face it... you could very easily (in about 4 seconds) empty a low capacity auto in a hot hurry and still not have STOPPED an assailant. Add another assailant or two and you're totally screwed. RELOAD? Yeah, right... odds are strong that you'll never even get half chance to do that. This is not to discount the importance of training, which I think it critically important, no matter what the capacity of your carry gun.
It makes a huge amount of sense to carry a gun with as much capacity as you can reasonably carry. In a 1911 that's gotta be a full size mag. But my preferred choice is a GLock 30 with 11 rounds of .45 or even better, a Glock 23 (14 rounds on tap) or a Glock 19 (16 rounds on tap) or for me. You can never have too many rounds on tap before a reload!
Sorry for the extremely long post, but these are matters of great importance and I have given considerable years and energy to these matters. Rant off. ;-)
Last edited:
- Status