glock owners

[stangfan93]

I have been planning out my next purchases over the next few years. I want a Glock 40. I have been thinking of the G22. A friend of mine has one and i found it to be VERY accurate. Which i liked and it fit my hand really well. But i was thinking of something a little smaller. I thought about the 27 and i have shot as another friend of mine owns one and i liked it also. But i didnt like my pinky hanging off. So i have been thinking about the G23. I was wondering if there is anyone who has shot both the G22 and the G23 and in their opinion if the 23 is a "better" choice. Is the the recoil more noticeable? I am looking for this to be a carry piece. Please let me know thank you.

 

[jlh26oo]

Yeah I mean obviously if you are b/t the 22 and 27, it's quite literally the 23.

The of all the best in ccw imo: where maximizing firepower in cartridge/capacity/barrel length intersects the minimizing of size and weight.

If you like the .40sw, there is no denying the G23. As small as you can get while still getting all three fingers on the GRIP (frame- not a +1 extension). Same width as a 27, and <3oz of a 27's weight (and this is fully loaded!)- can't go wrong*. My vote's for the G23.

Yeah, supposedly the .40sw is not an accurate round, but the G22 shoots pretty good in my hands.

[tom cruise] GO! (for it) [/tom cruise]





*unless you would ever consider dropping a 27 in a pocket- then you can have three fingers on a mag extension :barf: and potentially pocket it w/flush mags in big enough pockets. Purely IWB- G23

 

[Buglight]

I have them both 22 and 23, in the recoil department, the 22 is a bit lesser, accuracy is also better than 23 but the 23 is with me most of time while the 22 is in the safe.

 

[FS2K]

A lot can be done to tame a G23's recoil.

I'm a big fan of the mid-sized Glocks. I've done a little experimenting with my store's managers G23. I sold him the gun awhile back since he really wanted a Glock and it was the only .40 cal gun I owned and I didn't like not being able to buy its ammo in bulk like I do my other guns. Anyway...

The Snappy recoil of the .40 S&W round comes with the territory, something I didn't like about the gun. My buddy asked me to help him work on the G23 after seeing the stuff I did on my G17 and how it effected that gun. I replaced the plastic recoil spring rod with a tungsten steel one with a captured 24lb. spring on it, and fit a Shok-Buf to the end of that rod. This made a HUGE difference in the way the G23 shot, and tamed down the 'kick' of the .40 caliber round way more than I thought it would. The gun feels more like a 9mm shooting hot loads now, and my buddy can now double tap that gun with good control. He had a hard time with follow up shots before.


You can also order the G23 with factory porting on the barrel & slide. The G23C has diagonal porting which isn't as bad to shoot at night as vertical ported barrels. I did the same modifications to my G17 as I did to my friends 23 along with a fitted Bar-Sto 3 port barrel (amoung other things) and that gun shoots extremely smooth now. The only difference being that a 20lb. spring was way more than enough to handle the pulse of the 9mm rounds.

I can guarantee you that with the mods I did to that G23, it shoots allot smoother than a stock G22 does.

 

[stevelyn]

I carry a G-22 and my department issues the G-23. I'm also the firearms instructor and have shot both extensively.

Side by side I can certainly shoot the G-22 for longer periods of time without fatigue than I can the G-23. This is more due to the shorter grip delivering the recoil impulse more to the center of my palm than actual recoil.

I've installed a Buffer Tech recoil buffer on my G-22. I'm not sure that it reduces felt recoil, but after a few hundred rounds it starts getting chewed up pretty badly. If nothing else, it's keeping my gun from getting battered prematurely.

Both are more accurate than most people for what they are. I can regularly hit a regulation Pepper popper at a lazed 100 yrds with the G-22. I haven't tried it with the G-23, but have watched recruits and instructors hit a popper at the same range with their G-23s.

For concealed carry it's hard to go wrong in choosing a G-23 as your primary. As others have stated it balances concealability with firepower very well. As for it being a better choice, that is an individual decision.

 

[whitebb]

Every G22 I have shot has been very accurate, with the right ammo. Its been awhile, but I reload, and a dedicated Glocker gave me the load that works. He claims it works in every G22, and so far he's been right.

 

[mes228]

Glock 23

I have owned many handguns. The Glock 23, in my opinion, is the number one carry semi-auto made. The size, balance, accuracy, reliability, is in the top 1% of all guns ever made. I've had several and all have never had a burp of any kind. I truthfully believe that it takes exposure to many handguns, much firing, to trully appreciate how refined the 23 really is. A lot of people see "plastic" and automatically dis-like them. They are a great gun.

 

[CrackerJim]

I have a g23 which I like as well. I've considered carrying it but have heard in a couple of carry threads that some people don't consider the gun safe to carry with one in the chamber (even in a holster). I was under the impression that the post '92 examples were "upgraded" and had no safety issues.

I'm not interested in a pistol that I have to rack the slide prior to using so would like (and hopefully the thread originator will be interested as well ) to hear experienced opinions.

Thanks,

Jim

 

[Ralph2]

Those who think the Glock loaded is bad are those who think pistols need an external safety ala the 1911. It is a hard habit to overcome to those who have it ingrained by years of use and habit. They don't think a modern revolver is bad to carry loaded. With a modern quailty gun like a Glock, XD or similar such concerns aren't founded. Now a Lorcin loaded is a bad thing. On many levels.

 

[stangfan93]

I am relatively new to guns but in the last 2 and half years i have acquired six of them and i am taking in everything that i can. i personally dont feel having one in the hole while carrying would be a bad thing. i was reading the other night that if you car you must be able to have the gun out of the holster and aimed within 2 seconds. from what i got from that article means that a round has to be in the hole because a bg will not wait for you to rack the slide. safety is obviously the biggest thing for me. i do not want to be like cheddar bob and shoot myself in the leg.

i want to thank everyone for their input. it is really helping me out

the .40s&w is very snappy. my sigma hurts my hand after about 100 rounds whereas my 1911 does not. i have shot over 250 rounds in one day (while taking breaks and talking to my buddys or other people at the range) and had no problem with my hand hurting. the only thing i did have to do was tighten the grip screws.

the .40 in the g22 when i shot it wasnt bad at all. nor in the 27, but the 27 did have a little work done to it from what is told. it didnt kick that bad either.

 

[swk314]

I own a Glock 23 and it can't be beat. You get accuracy, reliability, capacity, and good concealment size for a reasonable price. They are a great overall gun, but like it's been said the .40 caliber round is snappy, but it can be overcome with practice or the ohh so many aftermarket items that can be purchased. Many people are afraid of carrying with one in the pipe, just be careful not to get clothing or your finger stuck anywhere near the trigger when holstering and you'll be good to go. People also complain about the odd grip angle on Glock pistols. Make sure the gun fits your hand before your purchase. I would suggest renting or borrowing one before you decide.

 

[jlh26oo]

I have a g23 which I like as well. I've considered carrying it but have heard in a couple of carry threads that some people don't consider the gun safe to carry with one in the chamber (even in a holster). I was under the impression that the post '92 examples were "upgraded" and had no safety issues.

I'm not interested in a pistol that I have to rack the slide prior to using so would like (and hopefully the thread originator will be interested as well ) to hear experienced opinions.

Thanks,

Jim

Pulling the (entire face of) trigger is both necessary and sufficient for the gun to fire. Whether this is safe for you, is up to you to decide.

Having a handgun that will ONLY fire when the trigger is pulled, and ALWAYS fire when the trigger is pulled is actually a requirement of mine (DA revolvers DAO autos, safe action glock etc). External safeties, internal locks, and an empty chamber render the trigger "necessary" but no longer "sufficient". Ymmv.

 

[Dj Dust]

I Have a G30 and You can only get 2 fingers on the frame but I put a pearce grip extension (not adding any rounds just grip extension) it replaces the floor plate on the mag and lines up PERFECTLY with the front strap of the gun. I didn't like small guns like this until I tried this now it is by far my favorite gun.

PS try adding the backstrap insert as well it really makes for a smoother grip in your palm.

 

[Desertscout1]

For those that like the longer sight radius and balance of the full-sized or midsized guns and the and shorter grip of the mid or sub-compact models for concealment purposes, you might consider a chop:

 

[DanV1317]

i have come to conclude all hand guns are accurate. You shouldn't base you buying a guy theory on "because it's accurate". They all hit what they are supposed to hit from where they were meant to hit from. Realize it's a handgun and not a long gun.

If you're doing competition that is one thing. If you're using it to protect your life, you dont need to search and search for the most accurate gun, because its going to be more accurate than you unless you're shooting from a rest or aiming for like 10 seconds on every shot before the trigger breaks.

 

[RecoveringGT'er]

If I had only one gun, it would be the 19 or the 23. Their size and capacity are balanced very well. Since they're Glocks, reliability is pretty much a given.

I've owned both 22s and a 23, and the recoil is bit more noticeable in the 23. That said, it fits the hand well, its has a capacious magazine, and is fairly easy to conceal. I don't have one anymore because I can't shoot 40s well. I don't know why. Kinda sad really, but anyway, as Jlh26oo said, the 23 is literally the middle ground between the 22 and 27.

 

[The Terminator]

I have owned all 3, the 22,23, and the 27. The 22 is great for a full sized pistol. I carried the 27 for years, with Pierce grip extentions on it. Essentially, I made it a 23 in height. I eventually sold it for financial reasons. I really liked it. When my fortunes improved enough, I found an unshot 23 for $400, a few months ago. I bought it. To me, the 19/23 is the perfect pistol. Large enough to carry a lot of ammo, and small enough to conceal. It is the best. Recoil? I have not noticed any recoil. It is the best.

 

[neuroblade]

I own a 23, and I couldn't be happier. This gun is pretty accurate, don't believe the hype. The size and round capacity make this an ideal weapon. Also, the recoil is also not as bad as you'd think. Actually, mine is my home defense piece, with night sights and an Insight M3. I also just added the sandpaper grips, which by the way are great...

 

[Glock2000]

I also own a G23...great little pistol. Will shoot all day long. Only had to replace the recoil rod cause the factory one cracked at the end...which i hear is rare but does happen. Can't complain though cause I've put many many 1000s of rounds through it. Replace with stainless rod from glockmeister...heavier and much more durable.

Makes for a great CCW weapon (though i don't carry with one in the chamber, believe the deterrance of the pistol itself will buy me time to rack one...save for another thread )

 

[stephen426]

Size wise, I would have to agree that the 19 and the 23 are hard to beat. You get a "full grip" unless you have enormous hands. You are only sacrificing a few rounds with the shorter mag. You lose just a little in the sight radius department and maybe a little velocity from the shorter barrel. What you do get is a much more concealable weapon.

This would be like picking the Sig P228 versus the P226. Personally, I think the balance is even better with the smaller guns as well.

I carry a Glock 26 however, since size (concealablity) is the most important factor for me. I am a relatively small guy and am not "thick" enough around the middle to hide a Glock 19 without having the grip stick out. Then again, that is probably because I carry at the 3 o'clock position rather than SOB. SOB carry hurts my back and I can't sit comfortably. 3 o'clock is perfect though (for me).