Glock 19 or 23: 9mm vs 40

Status
Not open for further replies.
I carry a Glock 17 often. It really is a great tool. Very easy to shoot well. I think follow up shots with the .40 are much harder but of course someone will be along to say he can do double taps all day long with it.
Ammo is cheaper for the 9 generally. And if you want .357sig there's always 9mm +P+ which is practically the same thing without the expense.

Again, "shot placement is king; penetration is queen; everything else is angels dancing on the head of a pin." Not original with me but a great summation of the issue.
 
Try them both

My suggestion as a former GLOCK carrier is to start with a 19, shoot the load you want to use and then try a 23. If you shoot the 23 just as well, then you may want to go with it. If not, hits count more than caliber and stick with the GLOCK 19.

I carried the 19 and later on a 17 for 5 years in MIAMI and found it to be completely reliable and light enough not to notice after a 12 hour shift.

In the 19, I recommend you try at least one or two +P loads with either the 115 or 124 grain bullets. They equaled the performance of our .357 magnum loads and were easier to control than the 155 grain .40 caliber ammo we went to later on.

Jim
 
In the 19, I recommend you try at least one or two +P loads with either the 115 or 124 grain bullets. They equaled the performance of our .357 magnum loads and were easier to control than the 155 grain .40 caliber ammo we went to later on.//

almost equaled the 357 sig, not mag im sure he ment
 
I think he means shooting results, going from the .357 Mag to the 9mm 115/124+P
 
I have shot most every glock in the 9mm and .40 caliber and ended up buying the Glock 19. Shot placement takes precedence over caliber. The best weapon for a defensive shooter is mindset.
 
g-23

glock 23 my everyday carry , no difference in recoil to me 9mm vs. 40...heres mine......
 

Attachments

  • Picture0002.jpg
    Picture0002.jpg
    52.5 KB · Views: 17
I know the differences between the two are miniscule

If you are convinced of this statement, then your choice is easy.

9mm ammo is cheaper and more available.
G19 has less recoil.
G19 has more ammo capacity.
 
I meant what i said

CONHNTR,

My agency used the 110 grain semi-jhp .357 magnum round. It fired a 110 grain bullet at @ 1,300 fps. Our +P+ 9m.m. loads fired a 115 grain jhp at @1,300 fps.

Not the SIG, we never used it.

Jim
 
oh; well if you use a light 357 load, and a really hot 9mm load i guess they could even out. but i would post a disclaimer stating that your dep. issued light 357 loads and HEAVY 9mm and in that case they are almost even (357 still can have a better bullet profile). but for most people they would be comparing your 1300fps 115gr 9mm vs a 1500+ fps 125gr 357...
 
Depends totally on preference, the .40 is too snappy for me in the glock, and I can shoot the 9mm very quickly and accurately. I would say to go with whichever you shoot best.
 
My agency used the 110 grain semi-jhp .357 magnum round. It fired a 110 grain bullet at @ 1,300 fps. Our +P+ 9m.m. loads fired a 115 grain jhp at @1,300 fps.

Yeah but that's not really a fair comparison. That's a really light .357mag load, and you're comparing it to a heavy 9mm.

If you want an apples to apples comparison, look at a heavy .357mag like DoubleTap's 158gr gold dot hollow point at 1300fps.
(that's actually my woods carry load.)
 
I carry a 23, and practice with a 34. recently i had to use my carry weapon and discharge 5 shots of 180gr hydra-shok. I noticed absolutely no recoil difference between that and my 124gr 9mm loads. That's me though, everybody perceives things differently.
 
It's a fair comparison because he isn't comparing the effectiveness of all .357 Magnum revolver loads to all 9mm loads, he is comparing the performance of the load that his department was using to the load they switched to.
 
Fair enough

CONHNTR,

Fair enough request, I should have been more specific.
I never considered the 110 grain loads to be light in the way the 125 grain MID LOADS made by REMINGTON were considered light. They are effective and easier to control than the 125 grain loads and I like them for that reason.

19-3Ben

Ben, I do not know of any LEO agency that uses 158 grain bullets in the .357 magnum load. They work well in the woods, but the woods that LEO'S work in are crowded with people and overpenetration is a VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM.
The 125 grain load used by the BORDER PATROL worked very, very well in gunfights and do not overpenetrate, but is hard to control and has a very load roar and sometimes a tremendous flash. It also was very hard on lightweight guns like the S&W K frame.

We actually had a gun barrel burst (S&W model 13) when it was used to qualify with the 125 grain load.

We were issued model 13 S&W'S with 3 inch barrels. I put on a pair of PACHMAYR bound butt rubber grips and never had any complaints.

The 110 grain load was MUCH, MUCH easier to control. It has a kick like a +P .38 Special load, but is more effective. We had no failures to stop with it, but then we had only a few inciddents compared to the BORDER PATROL.

Jim
 
The .40 is just a tad snappier than the 9mm, but it's certainly nothing that one can't control.

Heck, tiny female cops and agents qualify every year shooting Glocks in .40S&W.
 
Recoil is subjective

EASYG,

I had a GLOCK 22 and found it unpleasant to shoot, while my 17 & 19 were fine.

I now carry the .40 S&W, but in an H&K 2000 which is heavier and has a recoil absorbing feature that seems to really work.

I go rid of the GLOCK 22 because I just did not enjoy shooting it, but shoot .40 S&W all the time in my BERETTA and in the H&K.

Jim
 
I have found the Glock 19 easier to shoot quickly and accurately that the 23. The .40 has more snap in a Glock in my hands than does the 9mm. Plus 9mm is cheaper to shoot. So I vote Glock 19.
 
147 Golden Saber is a good load, one you can't go wrong with.

Golden Sabers lost out to HST when I was looking for my carry load because of the 25 round boxes, and the HST gets a little more expansion, generally the most in a given caliber.

Golden Saber is a great design though, if that's what you can find then go for it, it's an accurate and well-made load.
 
Golden Sabers lost out to HST when I was looking for my carry load because of the 25 round boxes, and the HST gets a little more expansion, generally the most in a given caliber.

Really? Wow. Do you have a link to HST gel tests?
 
Just my humble opinion...

I've owned 38 super, 38 special, 380, 9mm, 40 cal and 45. These days I keep it simple. If I want high capacity, I go 9mm. If I want large caliber, I go 45. I saw no really huge difference between 40 and 9mm ballistics and I don't shoot lots of people for a living. I wouldn't stand in front of a 9mm, it'll get the job done with the right ammo.

My 40 just seemed like a compromise between a high cap 9 and a big honkin 45. I know my shot placement with my 1911 45's should be good enough I won't need more than one or two shots so I don't feel short on ammo. 9mm with proper ammo will kill a bad guy any day, so I in no way feel outgunned...and the extra capacity is comforting. The 40 just left ME wanting more or less.

Either way, you can't go wrong. Both rounds will get it done. We're all gun nuts here, so I wouldn't consider any choice inferior. Shoot em all, decide your purpose and make an informed decision based on your needs and wants.

Just my 2 cents.

:)
 
Ballistically the 40 has a slight edge, but it has been my experience that 9mm pistols just seem to be more reliable than any other cartridge. Not a knock on Glock. I've observed the same with almost every brand of pistol. I vote to go with the Glock 19.
 
I decided to go with 9mm myself and now own the G17, 19 and 26. I previously had the .40s but got tired of the extra recoil and higher ammo price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top