I am thinking about getting one of the two pistols listed above. Is the cost of a HK Mark 23 worth the cost of 4-5 Glock 21 SF's? What more do I really get? I am especially interested in the input of people that have experience with both the HK and the Glock. Thanks.
HK Mark 23 and Glock 21 SF
- Thread starter marineman
- Start date
- Status
The cost of the H&K MK23 is primarily because it is produced sporadically, and always in very limited quantities. It is a very large pistol. Too large for concealed carry. If you like the H&K's you might want to take a look at the USP45 or the HK45. They would cost less, be a more practical size, and have pretty much the same features.
Now, as for H&K vs. Glock, they will both do their job. The Glock costs less and is striker-fired. Cheap mags and parts. I can't remember what kind of warranty they offer.
The H&K's cost more, but have better fit and finish, and have hammers. More expensive mags, and parts are not as readily available. Comes with a lifetime warranty you'll never need (in all likelihood).
Jason
Boris Barowski
Member
the mark 23 is BIG, like, really _big_
It does have a planted and very solid feel
haven't shot it yet, but it should be ok.
as jason said, there is almost no practical way to carry a mk23
It wasn't really their intention either, as it was designed as an Offensive Handgun.
It does have a planted and very solid feel
haven't shot it yet, but it should be ok.
as jason said, there is almost no practical way to carry a mk23
It wasn't really their intention either, as it was designed as an Offensive Handgun.
akulahawk
Member
The Mk 23 wasn't designed to be an "Offensive Handgun", it was designed to be a Military Handgun, capable of being suppressed. In other words, it's designed for the Special Ops folks. It's designed to be carried openly. Period. It was designed for accuracy and low recoil. The .45ACP round is normally a subsonic round anyway, and is relatively easy to suppress, and has a good/excellent reputation for good stopping capability.
Personally, I'd love to get my hands on one... but I can't.
Personally, I'd love to get my hands on one... but I can't.
You can purchase G21 threaded barrels after-market.
Here are a couple of links:
http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Products.aspx?CAT=237
http://www.google.com/products?clie...+threaded+Glock+barrel&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=289610
Doc2005
Here are a couple of links:
http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Products.aspx?CAT=237
http://www.google.com/products?clie...+threaded+Glock+barrel&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=289610
Doc2005
Yes, it was designed for special forces units, but it gets used very little by operators because of its bulk. Most use Sig's, Berettas, and 1911's from everything reputable that I've read.
The HK45 would be a great alternative to an extremely large, extremely expensive pistol that does the same thing. You get vastly improved ergonomics to boot.
Jason
10mm Mike
Member
Is the HK45 available yet?
Monkeybear
Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2006
- Messages
- 1,178
Yes it is.
Boris Barowski
Member
Akulahawk:
the Mk23 was selected through USSOCOM's Offensive Handgun Weapon System (OHWS) program
the Mk23 was selected through USSOCOM's Offensive Handgun Weapon System (OHWS) program
MTMilitiaman
Member
I have a USP Tactical and a Glock 20. I am working on getting a 21SF, if that tells you anything.
I'd get the Glock long before I ever got another HK. You can get the Glock, add a new barrel and recoil assembly, a bunch of mags and ammo, a light, and a holster, all for less than the cost of the HK. The HK, either the Tactical or the Mk 23, is going to be more accurate than the Glock, but offers no other advantages, and the Glock will be plenty accurate for defensive purposes.
I'd get the Glock long before I ever got another HK. You can get the Glock, add a new barrel and recoil assembly, a bunch of mags and ammo, a light, and a holster, all for less than the cost of the HK. The HK, either the Tactical or the Mk 23, is going to be more accurate than the Glock, but offers no other advantages, and the Glock will be plenty accurate for defensive purposes.
Gixerman1000
Member
If this is to be a carry gun, go with the G21SF.
If this is to be a range / HD gun, then either will do.
If you just want one of the most heavily built and most accurate production 45autos ever made, with the option to shoot suppressed or handle continued firing of +P ammo or even 45 super, then go with the MK23.
If this is to be a range / HD gun, then either will do.
If you just want one of the most heavily built and most accurate production 45autos ever made, with the option to shoot suppressed or handle continued firing of +P ammo or even 45 super, then go with the MK23.
Last edited:
Yep, I was also going to say that the biggest difference is that the MK23 is capable of firing .45 Super without modification every so often, if that's your thing. But the Glock does offer many more options in aftermarket parts, much more customizable.
I've shot the MK23 SOCOM and to be honest, while a nice pistol it is way too overpriced. For such a large pistol, I did not find it particularly accurate. The only advantage I see is out of the box, you can mount a suppressor. The MK23 reminded of a Desert Eagle but in a .45 IMHO.
If some one is a HK fan and/or a collector, by all means get one as but if buying for a range or self defense pistol, it is not the way to go.
If some one is a HK fan and/or a collector, by all means get one as but if buying for a range or self defense pistol, it is not the way to go.
- Status
