Glocks

[GLOOB]

I have to say I'm not 100% convinced on the Glock 40-9 conversion. If you push down on the barrel hood while a round is chambered, my aftermarket conversion barrel doesn't pop back up. It stays depressed. If you were to fire it like that, I would think it would shoot a full degree or two too high. I don't have any others to compare it to, so I dunno if it's the brand or if it has something to do with the excess breechface space inherent on a conversion, or maybe it's something that is specific to my particular gun.

I sent it back for that and for accuracy concerns, and the company said it checked out fine and returned it to me in same condition.

 

[BADUNAME13]

Wasn't advocating trusting your life on the aftermarket barrel.

Buddy of mine bought a glock 27 for CCW.

Uses the 9mm barrel for inexpensive practice.

Several thousand rounds and hasn't had a failure (He doesn't even change the ejector)

But carries it with the stock 40 barrel.

 

[postalnut25]

I've owned both the 17 and the 22. I voted for the 17. I just never got into the whole 40 thing. Give me a 9 or a 45, but 40 just does nothing for me.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I hate .40 caliber Glocks, they are so uncomfortable! I did like the 19 that I shot.

 

[Mags]

Glock 19

 

[gulogulo1970]

I had a Glock 22 it was a fine gun, but then I bought a Glock 17 and can just shoot it so much faster. So, now I've got the 17 but not the 22.

Can't lose with either one, but the 17 won out and it is quite a bit cheaper to feed so I can practice more with it.

 

[tostada]

I get that .40 has slightly better ballistics with slightly worse capacity, but if you look at good ammo like Federal HST, you're really splitting hairs between calibers.

So to me it comes down to the fact that .40 and .45 practice ammo is significantly more expensive than 9mm, and to me the .40 is the worst of both worlds because even the cheapest practice ammo is more uncomfortable to shoot than either 9mm or .45.

If you want something meaner, go ahead and get a 10mm, not the .40-cal "weak 10mm for people who don't like the recoil of real 10mm".

Seriously, though, it's all personal preference. The service calibers are all more similar than they are different. Don't argue about stopping power or capacity or recoil of 9mm vs. 40 vs. 45. They're all about the same.

If you like the .40 by all means get the .40, but there's definitely something that rubs me the wrong way about the wannabes who get a .40 because the police carry it, and get an AR-15 or a Benelli M4 because the military carries it.

 

[smallbore]

+1 for the G17

 

[rightside]

G17

 

[JDGray]

If you like the .40 by all means get the .40, but there's definitely something that rubs me the wrong way about the wannabes who get a .40 because the police carry it

Nothing wrong with wanting what works.....Assuming police carry 40Cals after testing and real world data, prooving it superior over the 9mm. I personally wouldn't feel undergunned with a 9mm, hell I carry a .380

 

[Dups]

Here is my .02 on the whole Caliber discussion....

9mm: Great caliber, adequately powered if CORRECT ammunition for the job. Their are a lot of good Self defense Hollow points out there. 350+ fpe gun.

45 ACP: BIG HOLES slow moving bullet... proven manstopper... shouldn't have to tell anyone... Prices are still pretty expensive for bullets.

40 Smith... newer caliber(only released in 1999 or so?), very high power (in fact, a 155 grain Federal HST has more power than a .45 acp +p 230 grain HST). Ammo is relatively cheap, and very easy to find.

all 3 are great calibers, and all serve there purposes well. my preferance is for more power, so i gravitate towards the 40, but thats not because i feel afraid or worried that a .380 or 9mm won't do the job, i just like shooting it!

 

[Dups]

PS***** i own a G23 3rd gen... has all the fancy doo da's (trijicon sights, extended mag and slide releases, trigger spring LB reduction etc). I have customized it to me, and i love it. I sold my Taurus PT145 for the price i bought a NIB glock from a neighbor i know very well. gun was unfired and he needed money.

 

[rightside]

40 Smith... newer caliber(only released in 1999 or so?), very high power (in fact, a 155 grain Federal HST has more power than a .45 acp +p 230 grain HST). Ammo is relatively cheap, and very easy to find.

Also very high PRESSURE, stands to reason why if a Glock is gonna blow it is usually a .40.

 

[tostada]

Relatively cheap? Everywhere I've been .40 ammo is almost as much as .45.

If you're only concerned with muzzle energy, why not get a .357 SIG or 10mm?

.40 wouldn't be so popular if it wasn't good, but it just kinda strikes me as having a 9mm that can only fire more expensive and less comfortable +P+ ammo.

 

[481]

Also very high PRESSURE, stands to reason why if a Glock is gonna blow it is usually a .40.

Actually, both cartridges (the 9mm and the .40) are loaded to the same SAAMI standard pressure of 35,000 psi so both should have the same catastrophic failure rate if that criterion is what you are using as a basis for your assertion above.

 

[wally]

You didn't mention your shooting experience. If this will be your first "full power" pistol 9mm is significantly easier for most people to start with.

Other than that, I don't really like Glocks as they don't fit me well at all.

 

[Trigun]

I hated Glock for long long time, two years ago I saw a young girl shoot a G17 with great success, so I have a short chat with her, turn out that was the first day that she shot a pistol. I then bought one at dirty cheap price, open up my mind to learn understand why people like glocks. Now I have two G17, one black and one OD.



Trigun

 

[7thCavScout]

+1 for the 17
.40 S&W is the answer to the question that never needed to be asked.

 

[kmbrman]

I've had a Glock 22 before , the problem was muzzle rise . In shooting in dense woods I had to take care to watch for low hanging limbs overhead so as to not get a skinned hands when shooting . The 23 I've fired from a LE friend doesn't have as much rise and is more of a straight back push. The 17 is easier in recoil and you can find effective loads now in 9mm. ,so the gap is narrowing .

 

[Snakum]

There's no "best". Rather, there is only what works most effectively for you.

If recoil is an issue, go with a 9mm. If you like to shoot a lot a 9mm might be the answer again due to cost.

I went with .40 S&W on all my pistols because when I first got back into serious shooting there was no 9mm ammo to be found anywhere. This was during the first months of the Obama Scare, and all I could find anywhere locally and online was .40 S&W, and after reading about the round and studying the ballistics and wound data I tried one (a Kahr CW40) and liked it. The Kahrs went bye-bye (9mm and 40S&W both) and I got Glock fever, which I've had ever since.

With a pair of G23s and a pair of G22s I can set them all up to feel and pull alike, and I can change the barrel and extractor, add a couple of mags, and have a 9mm pistol if I need one for competition (and I am doing just that with one of the G22s for IDPA and 3-gun). So for me it's .40S&W all the way. But for you the answer may be different. A fast 9mm hollowpoint will kill you just as dead as any .40S&W.

 

[OrangePwrx9]

I voted for the 9mm; the round the Glock was originally designed for. The .40 is a more intense cartridge than the 9mm luger, yet the .40 glocks share most of the 9mm dimensions and, as such, are only 9mms minimally modified to accept the larger cartridge. This suggests that the .40 glock's margin of safety is reduced below that of the 9mm (the .40 hole is bored bigger, therefore the chamber & barrel sidewalls are thinner). This is borne out by the greater number of difficulties and KBs reported in the .40 Glocks.

I reload and take pains to keep my ammo safe and below max pressures. Yet the .40 Glock is marginal to the point that I would not want to reload for one. I think the Glock really shines in 9mm and .45 ACP. I wouldn't hesitate to reload for either. The track record for both suggest that the safety margin is quite reasonable.
Bob

 

[ricebasher302]

G17 because I already have a hi-cap .45 and a .40 just isn't needed. Cheap, plentiful ammo and components too.

 

[9mmforMe]

Whichever you shoot the best. I would take the model 17/19.

 

[REAPER4206969]

If you like the .40 by all means get the .40, but there's definitely something that rubs me the wrong way about the wannabes who get a .40 because the police carry it

This is not a bad means of choosing a caliber for someone that is not well versed in ballistics. For example, the FBI is the authority on handgun ballistics; if they use it, it is good.

40 Smith... newer caliber(only released in 1999 or so?)

January 1990. The Glock models 22 and 23 were the first .40S&W pistols on the market, beating S&W themselves.

Also very high PRESSURE, stands to reason why if a Glock is gonna blow it is usually a .40.

The .40 is the same pressure as standard 9x19, and much lower pressure than 9x19 +P or +P+. The reason .40 Glock's seem to experience catastrophic failures at a higher rate is because there is far more .40 Glock's in heavy use than any other pistols in the country (continent?)

Relatively cheap? Everywhere I've been .40 ammo is almost as much as .45.

.40 is $4-$6 more than 9x19 for target ammo, and the same, or cheaper for defensive loads here.

If you're only concerned with muzzle energy, why not get a .357 SIG or 10mm?

The .40 is superior to the .357 and equal to the FBI 10mm loads in terminal ballistics while fitting in a smaller, lighter, cheaper and more readily available pistol with cheaper and more available ammo with more variety.

.40 S&W is the answer to the question that never needed to be asked.

The FBI disagrees.

are only 9mms minimally modified to accept the larger cartridge.

The .40 models were given more than twelve minor and major alterations to the 9x19 design.

(the .40 hole is bored bigger, therefore the chamber & barrel sidewalls are thinner).

One of those alterations was to increase the barrel dimensions to alleviate such worries.

 

[Tomcat47]

9MM over .40 Hands Down

If I were forced to take a Glock

It would be the 17 (9mm)

There is the issue with costs and availability when these 2 cartridges come to mind, and the 9 wins hands down on both issues!

The other issue would of course be ballistics which I believe to be neglegent and a failed attempt to replace the 9mm anyway.

Sorry if any one twas offended! But this after all is what our opinion is and I do not prefer poly pistols or .40 cals.......

And Im with Kmbrman...... They will both kill you dead!