I have a Ruger Mark II Target and a 22/45, both with 6 7/8" slabside bull barrels, so I can compare the same gun with both the Luger-style and the 1911-style grip angles.
I've used both for competitive shooting, too.
The Target gun has a thumbrest, and when held out at arm's length with the thumb on the rest, the grip angle balances out the long bull barrel pretty well.
The 22/45 feels more muzzle-heavy, but also comes up more naturally when not using a full-on target-style stance. It's a tad harder to hold in position with the bull barrel, but it comes up very naturally.
I really don't like the Glock angle. I do, however, like the P38/M9 grip style and its plastic imitator, the XD, especially for "practical" shooting as opposed to true target shooting.
IMO there are several ways for a gun to fit a given person, and several ways for it not to. The overall weight and balance of the gun matter, too.
I think the 55 degree angle really works on a target gun, but I really can't see using it for a gun that lives in a holster. Different purpose, different design to match the application.
You can see that in Beretta's handguns. The strictly-recreational .22LR Neos has the weird target angle, whereas the M9 is a lot more vertical.
See these pictures:
55 degree grip can work well for this...
1911 grip angle seems more comfortable for this and other stances/grips...