Glock 23 Gen 5 Question

[YankeeIronSights]

Hi,

Anyone knows why Glock increased the size- thickness of the slide on the Glock 23 Gen 5? Are the older generation mags compatible with the Gen 5 model?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[totaldla]

Yes, older mags are compatible.

Regarding slide thickness, I think Glock felt that the primary use would be holstered carry where thickness was not a major concern. After all, they have other pistols optimized for concealed carry.
I'm sure that increased slide mass increases service life, but I've never seen/heard about the average guy wearing out a G23.

S&W did the same thing with the M&P40c which closely resembles a G23.

 

[cslinger]

I believe it was to compensate for the change from a 3 pin back to 2 pin design. I think the extra slide mass slows things down a tad and is easier on the system as a whole.

Don’t take this as Gospel, however as I could be wrong.

 

[Forte S+W]

While the exact reasons why Glock chose to increase the thickness of the slide on .40cal pistols such as the G22/23 were never officially stated as far as I am aware, there are a number of inherent benefits to the redesign.

• The added mass enables them to utilize lower powered recoil springs, thus rendering the slide easier to actuate. In addition, this most likely has the fringe benefit of improving parts interchangeability between 9mm and .40 S&W chamberings, since they can most likely use the same weight recoil spring now.
• The added weight of the slide serves to reduce felt recoil as well as providing a marginal decrease in muzzle flip, thus lending itself to improved accuracy, faster target reacquisition, and follow-up shots.
• The added thickness improves the overall strength of the slide, thus rendering it less prone to stress fractures, with the fringe benefit of making the slide less likely to be damaged in the event of catastrophic case failure.

I presume that the main intention of the redesign was for the latter benefit of d increased strength, as historically .40cal Glock pistols possessed a higher probability of catastrophic case failure due to loose chamber tolerances as well as a rather large cutout on the feed ramp leaving a large portion of the case unsupported and therefore likely to become bulged/structurally compromised when fired, thus rendering reloaded brass more prone to blowing out, especially with overpressure reloads.
In addition, after Gen 3 when Glock introduced the double-nested recoil spring assembly, a new potential point of failure was introduced as a result of more material being removed from the muzzle end of the slide in order to accommodate the larger diameter RSA.

 

[YankeeIronSights]

Very interesting points. I think that the extra weight and slide width are not deal breaking, if recoil is reduced and structural integrity is strengthened. I have owned Gen 3 and 4 models but ended up trading them for something better each time. I still have .40 mags and have decided to add the G23 to my collection once again. I like the caliber and the ammo is readily available in my area.

The only thing holding me back is having to buy yet another holster that can accommodate the bigger slide. I already have various holsters for my G19 and would rather spend the money on ammo.

G23 Gen4 are not easy to find nowadays. My LGS sells them used at reasonable prices but they do not have any in stock at this time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mosin44az]

I always thought reducing slide mass was supposed to REDUCE felt recoil and muzzle flip—hence the slide cutouts on competition pistols.

 

[JohnKSa]

Some of that is to allow lighter loads to function properly and the lighter loads are the actual reason recoil is lower.

 

[tangolima]

I have a g23 g3. It is my "working" pistol. I like it as it offers me great flexibility. Easily I can convert it into 9mm, .357 sig, and 22tcm9r (requires a cheap g19 slide).

Making the slide heavier and fatter goes against image of ccw friendly gun. Glock must have done it because they have to. I wonder whether it has anything to do with the RMR cut. Lighter recoil is possible as people have been whining about it for .40 s&w. But I wonder how critical this is. Like they are going to stop whining.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[JohnKSa]

The first Glocks were 2 pin guns. They didn't have the second locking block pins. When the .40S&W caliber was added to the line, it was initially a two pin design.

Later, Glock decided that to improve durability, they were going to alter the .40S&W guns with a different locking block and an additional locking block pin. To maximize frame similarity they made the same changes to the 9mm gun so the two calibers could use the same frames. The changes were not necessary for the 9mm guns.

When the Gen5 Glocks came out, initially they were only in 9mm. Glock went back to the 2 pin design to allow them to add the ambidextrous slide stop.

When Glock then extended the Gen5 design to the .40S&W guns, it appears that they were still concerned about the durability issue in the caliber. Because adding the reinforcing third pin wasn't an option with the Gen5 design, they did the next best thing. They increased the slide weight. Increasing the slide weight decreases slide/barrel velocity since slide/barrel velocity is a function of momentum. Momentum is the product of mass and velocity--with the same amount of momentum being imparted to the slide by recoil, one way to reduce the impact velocity is to increase slide weight.

That's important because energy is what tends to damage things. When you reduce the velocity of a moving mass, you reduce the energy of the moving mass by the square of the velocity reduction. So even with the increase in mass, the impact energy is reduced significantly.

 

[Forte S+W]

@YankeeIronSights
That's odd, as I was just browsing a website that has Gen 4 G22/23s in Excellent Condition for $419 and Very Good for $388, so they seem to still be out there at decent prices.

 

[Ruger45LC]

The Gen5 G23 is a great shooter, can't go wrong with them. They are thicker in the slide but they shoot really well.

 

[YankeeIronSights]

I placed a G23 gen4 on layaway at my LGS and hope to pick it up this weekend. I got a very good price under $400.00 with two magazines. It has very little, if any, holster wear and does not seem to have been shot much at all.

I compared it to a gen5 and it became evident that there is a weight difference. Since my hands are not extra large, the finger grooves fit my hand perfect.

The sales clerk told me that the Glock website has restricted the gen4 to police officers only. Gen3 and 5 are now the only models in production for everyone else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Forte S+W]

That's weird, but whatever, police trade-ins are everywhere, so it's not like that makes Gen 4s unobtainable by any means.

At any rate, make no mistake, there was nothing actually functional nor structurally wrong with previous generations of .40cal Glocks, unless you count the unsupported chamber, which is easily remedied with an aftermarket barrel, and really isn't a problem unless you go full Bubba at the reloading bench by trying to stuff a 10mm Auto load into a .40 S&W case, but that's really not safe for any gun, not even if you plan on shooting it out of a particularly robust pistol like an H&K USP40 or a S&W 4006, let alone even a 10mm Pistol for that matter.

At most, you'll get some slightly bulged brass with full-power factory ammo, which can be a bit of a pain if you're a reloader, but again, buy pretty much any aftermarket barrel and that problem goes away because they basically all have full chamber support.