This feels weird- I may buy a Glock

[george burns]

I have had all the Glocks, you mention. Currently I go 26, 19, and 30 S. They are all pretty similar in size. I never found the size prohibitive when deciding what to carry, honestly I can take either the 26 or 19 with me interchangeably 95% of the time if not all of the time. If I had to choose 1, I would get the 26, because as mentioned, I can ass a 17 round mag, and I have a full sized gun.
It's the muzzle that is the part that limits you and if you carry IWB, you can hide that easily.

 

[FireInCairo]

Springfield Armory XD40 for sure.

I've owned a number of G27's over the years, and they're a fine weapon. That being said, I found the XD subcompact to be better ergonomically for my smallish hands. Something to consider, Chaim, if the Glock feels too blocky. And the XD line of pistols is every bit as good, better even, than what Glock offers.

 

[justin22885]

meh, ive shot a few glocks, werent as accurate, as reliable, or as durable the glock "crowd" makes them out to be.. no more spectacular than any other pistol and the ergos were awful to boot, i'll pass on glocks myself

 

[helitack32f1]

I have been a gun owner for over 15 years now and I have never bought a Glock. I've considered them several times, but they never quite did it for me. Now, I'm in the market for a .40S&W carry gun, and the more I think it over, the more it seems that Glock is the way to go this time around. I started with a bunch of guns on my list, and the Glock 27 and 23 near the bottom, but I think I will buy one or the other Glock.

I wanted something that wasn't too big or too small, not too heavy or too light, something big/heavy enough for lots of practice, but small/light enough to carry. The G27 seems to be one of a few "just right" guns.

So, I guess my question is, which of the two CCW Glock .40s should I buy?

All else being equal, the G27 seems like the better choice for my uses. With the mag extension it is big enough to get my whole hand around the grip, yet it is quite short for concealment. It will be a great carry gun. However, I found a new Glock 23 G3 online for $70 less than the next closest new G27.

The G23, while larger, is still small and light enough to make a more than reasonable CCW gun. While I'd prefer the smaller G27, it is nice that the G23 can hold 4 more rounds with a flush fitting mag (both can take the larger 15 round G22 mags for reloads). It seems to be similar in size to my .45ACP SIG P250C (the Sig is 0.08in shorter in length, but the Glock is a little shorter in height and it is thinner) so it should be carryable 90+% of the time.

So, as a CCW gun, which would you suggest? Who carries a G23? Anyone who owns a G23 that thinks it is just too large to carry?

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

I am a person who is of average size, 5'9" 180 or so pounds and I carry a Glock 23 all day every day, from the time I put my pants on till I go to bed.

At one time, I decided to buy the Ruger LCP for those times when I didn't think I could conceal carry the G23. I eventually got rid of the LCP when I realized that there really was not a situation where i couldn't conceal the 23. Even at work in the summer when wearing shorts and a t-shirt, I feel comfortable with the Glock 23.

I use the Crossbreed Super tuck IWB holster and generally wear untucked t-shirts or work shirts. I have observed myself in the mirror to see what is the most effective way to bend while minimizing any printing. In light of recent attacks, I have finally started carrying an extra Glock 22 magazine in a cheapo Glock magazine holster that works excellently and conceals well under those same t-shirts.

I am sure packing a Glock 42 or 43 or 27 would be a bit more comfortable or slightly easier to conceal but it just isn't an issue IMO.

The only thing I might consider replacing my 1992 G23 with is either a new Gen 4 version or a Glock 19 to pair with my 17.

 

[helitack32f1]

meh, ive shot a few glocks, werent as accurate, as reliable, or as durable the glock "crowd" makes them out to be.. no more spectacular than any other pistol and the ergos were awful to boot, i'll pass on glocks myself

What would posses you to come into a thread about guns you have no interest in and then bother to make a post of such utter uselessness?

A person such as yourself who seemingly has the ability to ascertain the reliability and durability of firearms by just randomly shooting "a few" clearly has talent that could be used for good rather than evil.

 

[AK103K]

meh, ive shot a few glocks, werent as accurate, as reliable, or as durable the glock "crowd" makes them out to be.. no more spectacular than any other pistol and the ergos were awful to boot, i'll pass on glocks myself

Ive owned a lot of different handguns, including Glocks, and the Glocks have ended up on the short list of guns Ill spend my money on, and are currently what I use daily.

Accuracy is as good or better as any of the others, reliability has been better than most, durability is still an ongoing thing, but right now, I have one 17 thats nearing 100,000 rounds, and a 26 thats got well over 20,000 rounds on it (I quit counting with it over a year ago). Both get shot pretty much weekly.

I suppose ergos are a personal thing, but I dont really understand the comment, as there are really no controls to reach or fiddle with, the grip is smaller/narrower than my Colt Commander, and the grip angle is very close to it too. The grip angle drama (and it is drama) is so overblown, its obvious that the person whining about it, has little time on one. Anyone with some experience with one, knows its not a big deal to switch back and forth between different things. Once your brain has it learned and stored, its really a simple switch.

 

[LiveLife]

meh, ive shot a few glocks, werent as accurate, as reliable, or as durable the glock "crowd" makes them out to be.. no more spectacular than any other pistol and the ergos were awful to boot, i'll pass on glocks myself

25 years ago I started shooting USPSA matches with 1911/Sig P226 with an eye for CZ75. My shooting/reloading mentor was a bullseye match shooter who did all his gunsmith work. My match Norinco 1911 was heavily fortified with Wilson Combat components and I was taught to do the trigger job (2.5 lbs) and hand fit all the replacement components. We tested our match loads at 25/50 yards using jacketed/plated/moly coated/lead bullets. His accuracy threshold was sub 2" at 25/50 yards.

I never gave Glocks much consideration after I handled one at a gun store in the 80s. My initial impression was, "Who the heck would make a pistol out of plastic (polymer)!?" When a fellow match shooter offered me to run the practice match stage with a Glock 17, I was curious. When I got faster stage time than my P226 (which I was proficient with) I could not believe it and ran the stage again. Guess what? I got even faster stage time with a G17 I was unfamiliar with.

Reluctantly, I bought a G17 and after shooting over 100,000+ rounds, sold the G17 to another match shooter and switched match caliber to 40S&W and used two Glock 22s. When I got married, I bought his & her G17s and transitioned from Makarov/P95/G17/19/26/21/30 to TCP738/G22/23/27/M&P40/M&P45/PT145 for SD/HD pistols.

I still like 1911s and currently use railed Sig 1911 XO for 45ACP accuracy platform along with M&P45/40 with trigger jobs - http://www.burwellguns.com/M&Ptriggerjob1.htm

With round count now over 400,000, I have shot plenty of different pistols over the years. We had "bring your other pistols" day on some of our all-day practice match sessions (we would shoot 500-1000+ rounds per shooter) and got to try different modified match and factory stock pistols. I have shot over 100+ different pistols and now only thing that really matters to me is holes on target. When someone praised the virtues of a particular pistol, we would say, "Let's see how it does on a match stage" and took our turns shooting the pistol. If the accuracy of double taps at 7-25 yards and stage times were good, we were interested. If the accuracy and stage times were not good, it didn't matter what name was on the slide or how much the pistol costed - it wasn't good for match shooting or SD/HD as far as I was concerned.

To demonstrate the accuracy potential of Glocks and to standardize my load development process with more objectivity, I currently use unmodified factory Glock 22/23/27 (Sig 1911 for 45ACP) along with KKM/Lone Wolf 40S&W and 40-9 conversion barrels. In the "Handloading & Reloading" category, I post actual pictures of target shot groups as I conduct various load development. I even had range staff verify the accuracy testing and had a THR member witness accuracy testing and talk to range staff to verify the posted shot groups are actual and not made up.

Here are some samples of target shot groups shot with G22/KKM/LW barrels at 25 yards - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9924922#post9924922

Shot group verified by THR member - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9646469#post9646469

Glocks are mass produced pistols with parts put together instead of hand fitted 1911s. With anything mass produced, you are going to get stacking of tolerances and parts performance so some of the Glocks will perform better than others. When buying pistols, I tell people to watch the front sight while dry firing to see if the front sight jumps/moves when the hammer/striker is released and to buy the pistol that doesn't move the front sight for greater accuracy out of the box before trigger surfaces break in. Before I bought my last Glock, I went through several samples before I found one whose front sight did not jump/move when the striker was released.

Are Glocks the most accurate pistols you can buy? No.
Do Glocks have the best triggers? No.
Are Glocks most ergonomic? No.

There are many reasons why Glocks are popular for match shooting but certainly not because they are "terrible". More likely because they produce more consistent, tighter, faster shot groups on target. When was the last time you saw a HK at a regional level match?

Will you find Glocks at bullseye matches? Not likely as Glocks lack the trigger required for bullseye matches but you won't find many other factory polymer pistols at Bullseye matches either.

Over the years, I have seen a lot of "Glock dislike" posted on various forums. Why? For someone who transitioned from 1911/P226 to Glocks, I can empathize with such sentiment but certainly do not "hate" them. While I admire many other pistols, Glocks are ones I reach for when I want something that needs to work. Many match shooters who shot $1000-$3000+ pistols often said when they go home, they lock up the match pistols in the safe and put the Glocks on the night stands.

When people ask me about Glocks now, I tell them there are better pistols but my Gen3 Glocks are like a pair of well worn jeans I feel comfortable with. It's not dress pants I would wear to formal occasions but jeans I feel comfortable doing everything else.

 

[george burns]

It's the ammo that makes it heavy, not the gun. Get some Liberty aluminum 50 grain hollow points and it weighs a lot less. Read up on newer ammo that's out, the lightweight stuff, I know I went with 9mm 10 yrs ago because 10 rounds of 9 mm Liberty weighs half or less than standard 115 or 125 grain loads, or 40 cal 165's. I have had 23"s and 27's now it's a 19 and 26, same story, with the right ammo, I can carry either or both. If you can carry a 27 you can carry a 23.

 

[tarosean]

More likely because they produce more consistent, tighter, faster shot groups on target. When was the last time you saw a HK at a regional level match?

Consistent or cheap? I can buy a pistol, mags, holster and mag holders for a glock or MP cheaper than I can even buy a HK/Sig/etc.

(Yes I started USPSA shooting with Glocks)

 

[chaim]

Since my last post, there have been one or two posts suggesting the G23. While I strongly considered it for a time due to the one that was available for significantly less money than the G27, I decided against it (at this point I haven't checked but I doubt it is still available at that price, and at roughly the same price I'm definitely going with the G27). In fact, I'd be more likely to compromise on the caliber and go G 26 than go with the G23 (I love both 9mm and .40S&W, and the G26 better fits the niche I'm looking for right now). I have guns that fit several carry niches, a SIG P250c (similar in size to the G23), a SIG P290, and an even smaller Kel-tec Pf-9 and Ruger LCP. However, the gun that fit the same spot as the G27/G26, my Taurus PT140 Millennium Pro has been retired by me due to three issues (I had one minor issue, and one major issue, and Taurus has recalled them due to a safety issue that, thankfully, I have not seen firsthand, yet).

Due to my SIG 250 Compact being essentially the same size, I don't see the G23 as having enough advantages over the P250c to be worth the cost of a new gun. Both are good, well made guns. The G23 is a tad smaller (in all but length) and lighter, but those differences are small enough that they just chip at the margins. Capacity is an advantage (4 more rounds in the G23) and .40 and .45 are close enough in capability that any advantage that the .45 has is, just like the G23's size advantage, just marginal. So, they are pretty comparable guns IMO, and it isn't worth around $500-600 for me to get something that covers bases that I already have well covered.

If the G27 wasn't available, I might see the capacity as sufficient advantage for the G23, but the G27 seems to differentiate itself from the SIG P250c better. The G27 is significantly smaller and lighter, still has the same capacity as the P250c with flush mounted mags, but can use much higher capacity mags for reloads (the G27 can use the G23's 13 round mags and all three can use the full-sized versions' mags for reloads: 10 rounds for the .45ACP P250, 15 rounds for the Glocks). The G27 fits a spot between the P250 and P290 which I don't currently have filled.

 

[helitack32f1]

Since my last post, there have been one or two posts suggesting the G23. While I strongly considered it for a time due to the one that was available for significantly less money than the G27, I decided against it (at this point I haven't checked but I doubt it is still available at that price, and at roughly the same price I'm definitely going with the G27). In fact, I'd be more likely to compromise on the caliber and go G 26 than go with the G23 (I love both 9mm and .40S&W, and the G26 better fits the niche I'm looking for right now). I have guns that fit several carry niches, a SIG P250c (similar in size to the G23), a SIG P290, and an even smaller Kel-tec Pf-9 and Ruger LCP. However, the gun that fit the same spot as the G27/G26, my Taurus PT140 Millennium Pro has been retired by me due to three issues (I had one minor issue, and one major issue, and Taurus has recalled them due to a safety issue that, thankfully, I have not seen firsthand, yet).

Due to my SIG 250 Compact being essentially the same size, I don't see the G23 as having enough advantages over the P250c to be worth the cost of a new gun. Both are good, well made guns. The G23 is a tad smaller (in all but length) and lighter, but those differences are small enough that they just chip at the margins. Capacity is an advantage (4 more rounds in the G23) and .40 and .45 are close enough in capability that any advantage that the .45 has is, just like the G23's size advantage, just marginal. So, they are pretty comparable guns IMO, and it isn't worth around $500-600 for me to get something that covers bases that I already have well covered.

If the G27 wasn't available, I might see the capacity as sufficient advantage for the G23, but the G27 seems to differentiate itself from the SIG P250c better. The G27 is significantly smaller and lighter, still has the same capacity as the P250c with flush mounted mags, but can use much higher capacity mags for reloads (the G27 can use the G23's 13 round mags and all three can use the full-sized versions' mags for reloads: 10 rounds for the .45ACP P250, 15 rounds for the Glocks). The G27 fits a spot between the P250 and P290 which I don't currently have filled.

Very well thought out! Congrats on coming to a well informed decision and choosing a gun I am sure you wont be disappointed in. I may have missed it but is the pistol you are buying a 3rd Gen or 4th?