Standardizing on Glock 9mm.....

[trackskippy]

I was referring to the 26 vs the 42/43. Ive heard the ergos on the 26's suck, yet the same basic-size guns, albeit a tad thinner, are fine. So maybe it is the thickness.

Ive owned and shot all three pretty extensively too, and the "thinner" guns arent as hand filling, and dont offer as positive a grip, and tend to move around more in your hand as you shoot them.

Stippling is an advantage to all Glocks, but especially with the "skinny" guns.

Glock would have been smart to have kept the RTF2 texture, or at least offered it as an option.

 

[red rick]

I guess it is how you are going to be carrying them . I carry IWB at 3:300 position . I don’t have any problem carrying a 19 and I get more gun than a 26 , more grip length , more capacity , and longer sight radius and less recoil impulse .

 

[trackskippy]

@Ks5shooter
Years ago I had a Gen 3 G19. I didn’t like it because of the finger grooves. They didn’t match my fingers. I bought a Polymer 80 Compact (G19 size) and like it very much and decided to buy a G19. After renting a G19 I discovered I really don’t like the bump on the backstrap. The Standard sized Glock G17 frame fits my hand perfectly. The 19 does not, but the G48 is just fine. Go figure. Its got to be the thickness plus the hump I don’t like.
I have a G44 the same size as a 19. I don’t like its grip much either.

Glock kind of screwed the pooch with the 19 and constantly changing the front of the grip. Some have the "mag rip" cut, some dont. Some of those, like the Gen 5 isnt bad, where some earlier versions with it were terrible and really annoying.

My Gen 5 19 has the cut, but neither of my 44's do. Of the lot, the one that comes close to feeling the best, is my Gen 3 19, without the cut.

 

[amd6547]

The G26 is the Glock that converted me. When I found I shot it as well as, or better than the Browning HiPower I shot for decades.
As for G19 vs G26, I haven’t had a G19, but I did carry a G23 for a while, and find the G26 much easier to carry.

 

[C0untZer0]

The 17L might make a good home defense gun.

Longer sight radius, easy to aim, hardly any recoil, great range gun and nightstand gun.

 

[JTQ]

This addition for the G19 may be helpful to some, the "Grip Anchor"

https://langdontactical.com/grip-anchor-for-the-glock-19/

 

[The Night Rider]

it is very hard to argue you must stick to the G19 mag compatablity.

Would you mind clarifying this statement?

*************************************

I bought my Glock 19 in 2013. I bought it because my employer required all of their armed guards to provide their own handgun. They gave us a list of approved manufacturers and (OFC) Glock was on it.

I said it Upthread but I chose the Glock 19 over the Glock 17 because standard Glock 17 magazines are illegal in Colorado and even though the standard magazines were and still are readily available my (former) employer would not permit any guard to carry any magazine with a greater than 15 round capacity regardless of date of manufacture.

In 2018 I decided I wanted a smaller handgun for carrying in non permissive environments. The Glock 48 & 43X hadn't been introduced yet and I'm still not sure that I would have bought them because the idea of magazine compatibility really appeals to me.

The Glock 48 is a non-starter. I'm giving up five rounds for not that much greater concealability.

But for the sake of this discussion, let's say I wanted to buy a Glock 19 and a Glock 48.

Anytime I buy a handgun I want at least five complete sets of three magazines for it.

Glock19 + Glock48 = thirty magazines

Glock 19 + Glock 26= twenty magazines(15 Glock 19 magazines and 5 26 ) and approximately $300 in savings.

 

[bannockburn]

Riomouse911

The 43x was one that just clicked the boxes when it came to a smaller Glock to carry. The 48/43x magazine is not compatible with the 19/17/26 series, but they are plentiful, legal in 10-round max states and not expensive.

I bought a G17 when they first came out, Got it because it was so innovative in it's design and construction. Only problem was ergonomically speaking it just wasn't a good fit for my small size hands, subsequently I rarely shot it. Haven't found a Glock that felt great in my hand , (especially the G26) until I tried the G43X and the G48 one day at the LGS. Now this was more like my idea of "Glock Perfection" than anything they had previously offered. Liked them so much that I bought both of them!

 

[CapnMac]

To my mind, the G19 hits that "Commander" sweet spot, which may explain its popularity.
Big, but not "full size" big; small, but not "not enough fingers on the grip "small."

 

[trackskippy]

I would say the Glock 45 fits that definition more than the 19.

And if you compare them side by side, the Colt Commander and 17 are pretty much a match. The 17 doesnt really qualify as "full size" compared to most of the others.

 

[jmorris]

I have put more rounds down range with a 34 than any other model. Carried a 26 longer than the others. The 17/19’s don’t get out near as much.

 

[JTQ]

To my mind, the G19 hits that "Commander" sweet spot, which may explain its popularity.
Big, but not "full size" big; small, but not "not enough fingers on the grip "small."

I would say the Glock 45 fits that definition more than the 19.

I agree.

Glock was just about the last manufacturer to get in on the "Commander" bandwagon, the full size grip and the shorter slide. Heck, they were late by nearly 20 years. Practically every other manufacturer was making a gun with a 4"-ish barrel and the full size grip (regardless of capacity - Glock does get points for stuffing 15 rounds in that shortened G19 grip) since at the latest, the early 2000's.

Even when the G19X and G45 were introduced, most folks on gun forms commented it was the dumbest thing ever. They wanted the G17 slide on the G19 grip - interestingly, a configuration nobody else makes and still don't make. For some period, I believe, the G19X/G45 was the top seller for Glock. The G45 size is becoming the preferred dimension for LE, the full size grip with the shorter slide, just like the Commander.

 

[trackskippy]

I have a 45 and its really pretty silly when you compare it side by side with a 17. The only difference is about a half inch, if that, in the length of the slide.

Yet, you see people arguing about them being all that, and that much better. Kind of crazy, but then again, a lot of all this is when you get down to it.

Hey, if you can get it out and up and running quickly from how you carry it, and make it work, thats all that really counts.

 

[WrongHanded]

If you don't think you can conceal a G19, get the G26. That's the only reason I would have to get the smaller gun with a shorter barrel.

 

[shoobe01]

Would you mind clarifying this statement?...

If you don't see it, then nothing I say will help, but it is conventional wisdom that flatter guns conceal better.

 

[JR24]

19 is a great EDC but, for me, not really all that different to conceal over a 19X.

I would consider a 43x or 48 MOS myself, almost as easy to shoot, for me, as a 19 and significantly easier to carry. Shield mags make the comparison even easier to the 19.

Then again, you can’t go wrong with a 19.

I eliminate the 26. Chunky for a small carry gun and the heel/palm swell just hits my hand in a really uncomfortable way. Especially since the 48/43x exist now with their thin grips.

But that’s me, YMMV

 

[JR24]

Glock 19 + Glock 26= twenty magazines(15 Glock 19 magazines and 5 26 ) and approximately $300 in savings.

Why do you decide your complete sets for the 26 are 1 10 round and 2 15 round mags? I’ve often found if you have the small mags, carrying spares that are smaller can be more convenient sometimes. Also, are you factoring the cost of x grip sleeves? Because those gaps can be annoying.

 

[The Night Rider]

If you don't see it, then nothing I say will help, but it is conventional wisdom that flatter guns conceal better.

A QUARTER INCH difference. ! ! That much. If that's too much for you to work around you probably shouldn't be carrying a gun.

 

[JR24]

View attachment 1151355

A QUARTER INCH difference. ! ! That much. If that's too much for you to work around you probably shouldn't be carrying a gun.

In practical terms the difference is absolutely noticeable and striking. Granted I compare a 365xl with 15/17 round mag to a Glock 19 but the weight and ease of concealment are far greater than what’s on paper or a calipers.

Not that I have any issue concealing a Glock 19, I was out hiking and mini golfing with the kids this weekend with a steel commander 1911, but to make the argument that there isn’t a difference in ease of concealment between the thin micros and the chunky compacts strikes me as silly, it’s so obvious when I do.

 

[The Night Rider]

Why do you decide your complete sets for the 26 are 1 10 round and 2 15 round mags?

First, it's 1 12 round and two 15.

Second, If I have a set of three 15s for the 19 and 3 12s for the 26 that's two unnecessary extra magazines plus half a box of ammunition. That's 60 bucks.

 

[JR24]

First, it's 1 12 round and two 15.

Second, If I have a set of three 15s for the 19 and 3 12s for the 26 that's two unnecessary extra magazines plus half a box of ammunition. That's 60 bucks.

No 10’s? Interesting. The OEM +2s are pretty close to a 15 round IMO, surprised one would go with a 26 and ignore the smallest mag altogether.

 

[The Night Rider]

In practical terms the difference is absolutely noticeable and striking.

I've never carried a Glock 48 so I'll take your word for it.

to make the argument that there isn’t a difference in ease of concealment between the thin micros and the chunky compacts strikes me as silly, it’s so obvious when I do.

That seems subjective. It's obvious when you do it, therefore it's obvious to everyone else?

When I bought my 19 the 48 didn't exist. If it did I probably wouldn't have bought it because I was buying for work.

Now that I have the 19 I'm not laying out 400 plus bucks plus more for magazines for a gun that covers the same space as my 19.

No 10’s? Interesting. The OEM +2s are pretty close to a 15 round IMO, surprised one would go with a 26 and ignore the smallest mag altogether.

The twelve round magazines offer a more comfortable grip

 

[JR24]

That seems subjective. It's obvious when you do it, therefore it's obvious to everyone else?

Indeed it’s subjective. Just about everything relating to firearms is subjective since we are all different. Hand size, strength, body size and shape, etc. Much like:

A QUARTER INCH difference. ! ! That much. If that's too much for you to work around you probably shouldn't be carrying a gun.

is entirely subjective opinion since you have a different body than the poster, dress style and life requirements.

I would think this should be understood by most as accepted stipulation.

 

[JR24]

Forgot to add:

The twelve round magazines offer a more comfortable grip

I absolutely agree. Have you tried the 12 round Magpul (if those aren’t what you use)? A little smaller footprint and are more comfortable than the OEM +2 or Pearce baseplates, to me.

Never had a reliability issue when I had a 26 with them.

 

[shoobe01]

View attachment 1151355

A QUARTER INCH difference. ! ! That much. If that's too much for you to work around you probably shouldn't be carrying a gun.

As JR24 said, 1/4" is totally noticeable. But also I said width. And you need to remember scale. Much less than 1/4" in width difference but that's almost 20%!

Plus weight, etc.

That said I carry a full size most of the time, with WML and RDS no less. BUT... I also have a very small single stack as sometimes that's all that will conceal. Not saying to only have a tiny gun, just that smaller guns are noticeably smaller, have their place.