I guess Armscor/Rock Island has their Glock 17 and Glock 19 conversions for the .22 TCM on their website (though currently listed as out of stock). But to use the TCM in a Glock 17 or 19, you have to buy the entire upper, and use a version of the TCM specially loaded short for the magazine sizes. I've known about them since early 2015, and being a bit of a caliber whore, I wanted one. But I forgot about it as money became tighter. Then I found a few pieces of .22 TCM brass at the range the other day, and I started thinking about it again. And thinking about it got me a little confused.
Here is where I am a little perplexed: The TCM is based on a cut-down .223, which has rim dimensions comparable to the 9mm. I know that you can convert a Glock 22 to shoot 9mm with a specific Lone Wolf Barrel, though the difference in rim dimensions between .40 and 9mm are far greater than 9mm and .223. (This same argument can be used, but substituting a Glock 20 using a simple barrel swap to shoot .38 Super.) A good example of the interchangeability is Demolition Ranch's YouTube video on swapong G19 and G23 barrels. But I digress... If we were to convert a Glock 17 to shoot the short-loaded .22 TCM, why is an entire upper necessary, instead of just a barrel change? Wouldn't the similarities in rim size allow for a standard Glock slide to work with the TCM cartridge, allowing for nothing more than a barrel swap? Wouldn't that be much cheaper, and therefor a little more popular and quick to catch on? Because the conversion kits do not include a magazine, we can safely assume that the G17 magazines will fit these special .22 TCM 9R rounds.
But my confusion continues... If converting a Glock necessitated an entire upper, why make it a G17 and G19, but not a Glock 20/Glock 21? Because the TCM was designed to fit into 1911 mags (specifically, .38 Super), it was designed to have the same length as the .45 ACP, which is why special short loads were developed for the G17 magazines. However, a G21/G22 conversion would not require a truncated version of the cartridge, and they would take only negligibly more material to craft. Granted, this conversion would require a magazine to be developed that will feed a round that has 9mm-ish diameter. But if you are going to design a new round, then design a Glock conversion for it, and then create a special variety of the round specifically for that conversion, then maybe a new magazine isn't all that out of the way for you. Also, such a magazine might see use with Glocks that have .38 Super or 9x23mm Winchester conversion barrels. Hence, a demand (albeit, limited) for your product outside the original target market.
I am sure that the decision to convert the G17 had something to do with the popularity of these pistols. But I doubt that people who want a super vanilla gun like the G17 are the ones lining up for the TCM. But I can't really speak to that, personally.
So tell me, for those who might like the TCM, would YOU prefer a conversion for a your Glock 20 or 21, with the extra cost of a special magazine, or is a shorter special version of the round worth the compatability with a more common gun? Would YOU be more interested in a G17 conversion if it only required a barrel swap? Let me know, and thanks for your replies!
Here is where I am a little perplexed: The TCM is based on a cut-down .223, which has rim dimensions comparable to the 9mm. I know that you can convert a Glock 22 to shoot 9mm with a specific Lone Wolf Barrel, though the difference in rim dimensions between .40 and 9mm are far greater than 9mm and .223. (This same argument can be used, but substituting a Glock 20 using a simple barrel swap to shoot .38 Super.) A good example of the interchangeability is Demolition Ranch's YouTube video on swapong G19 and G23 barrels. But I digress... If we were to convert a Glock 17 to shoot the short-loaded .22 TCM, why is an entire upper necessary, instead of just a barrel change? Wouldn't the similarities in rim size allow for a standard Glock slide to work with the TCM cartridge, allowing for nothing more than a barrel swap? Wouldn't that be much cheaper, and therefor a little more popular and quick to catch on? Because the conversion kits do not include a magazine, we can safely assume that the G17 magazines will fit these special .22 TCM 9R rounds.
But my confusion continues... If converting a Glock necessitated an entire upper, why make it a G17 and G19, but not a Glock 20/Glock 21? Because the TCM was designed to fit into 1911 mags (specifically, .38 Super), it was designed to have the same length as the .45 ACP, which is why special short loads were developed for the G17 magazines. However, a G21/G22 conversion would not require a truncated version of the cartridge, and they would take only negligibly more material to craft. Granted, this conversion would require a magazine to be developed that will feed a round that has 9mm-ish diameter. But if you are going to design a new round, then design a Glock conversion for it, and then create a special variety of the round specifically for that conversion, then maybe a new magazine isn't all that out of the way for you. Also, such a magazine might see use with Glocks that have .38 Super or 9x23mm Winchester conversion barrels. Hence, a demand (albeit, limited) for your product outside the original target market.
I am sure that the decision to convert the G17 had something to do with the popularity of these pistols. But I doubt that people who want a super vanilla gun like the G17 are the ones lining up for the TCM. But I can't really speak to that, personally.
So tell me, for those who might like the TCM, would YOU prefer a conversion for a your Glock 20 or 21, with the extra cost of a special magazine, or is a shorter special version of the round worth the compatability with a more common gun? Would YOU be more interested in a G17 conversion if it only required a barrel swap? Let me know, and thanks for your replies!
