Glock 23 or Glock 19?

N

NinoCappuccino

Inactive
I'm looking at getting a Glock 23 Gen 4 but the Glock 19 is an option. Is the 23 gen 4 .40sw compact good if i buy slightly lower recoil ammo from Buffalo Bore? Does anybody own the 23 and are there known issues? I know the caliber is a preference but I was wondering if it's reliable.
 
Last edited:
No problem

A Gen 3 or Gen 4 23 will have no issues. Earlier Glock .40 cals had a reputation for Kabooms. Although Glock won't admit it, they did change the chamber to offer better support.

I would buy the 23. If you find .40 to intense a 100+/- dollar barrel will switch it to 9mm. It's nothing more than a field strip.
Reports indicate the .40 mags work fine with 9mm. For a gun in an SD role I would buy dedicated 9mm magazines.

The 23 can be two guns in one, the 19 can not.
 
I have a G19 that I love, but I wouldn't turn down a good deal on a G23. Particularly since I'm already outfitted with holsters and stuff that would fit it.

According to what all I've read on the internet (so you know it's gotta be true :p), there were some early issues with unsupported chambers in the early .40 Glocks, but those have been resolved.
 
If you don't reload, it's kinda a moot point to be concerned about glock chamber support.

I'd buy the 23 and for less than an additional $200, you can have two calibers in one.....or less if you don't swap out mags and ejectors/extractors.
 
There are absolutely zero concerns about Glocks chambered in any caliber, much less in .40. There are probably more .40 S&W Glocks in holsters for LE agencies throughout the US than there are of any other firearm. Further, there is no reason to believe that there is any difference between the 23 and 19, specifically.

If you don't have an agency based requirement to be using .40 S&W, and you don't need the slightly enhanced barrier-blind quality of .40 S&W, particularly on auto glass, then the 9mm is the clear choice. There is a reason that the Glock 19 is the most ubiquitous modern handgun in the world. My issue firearm is a Glock 22, but I carry a Glock 19 on my own time.

For the sake of ease of shooting, and the cost of ownership, 9mm is the better choice.
 
The only considerations are caliber and the resulting differences in capacity. Reliability should not be an issue unless you happen to get a lemon, and they are neither common nor completely impossible. If I am reading between the lines too much in your post, forgive me, but it kind of sounds like you may have little experience with .40 caliber pistols. If that is indeed the case, you would be well advised to shoot similar pistols in 9 mm and .40 because the recoil difference seems to bother some people more than others. In my opinion, it is neither negligible, nor as bad as some people make it out to be. You will have to judge for yourself - my preference won't matter when the pistol is in your hand.
 
Either one Nino!

I have Glocks in 22, 31, 32, 17, 26, 42 and 43 persuasions.

The .40s work fine. The .357 Sigs work fine. The 9mms work fine. And yes the .380 works fine.

In compact format the .40 will kick a bit more than the 9mm and hold a few rounds less. But we are taking 12-13 .vs 15-16. No biggie!

Nice thing about the Glock 23 is you can easily convert it to .357 Sig or 9mm not to mention .22 lr using a AACK .22 slide and mag.

Anyway, they are all good.

Deaf
 
I'll be the contrary voice here.

Unless you are already highly invested in .40SW ammo and .40SW Glock mags, I don't see much reason to go with the 23 over the 19.

Lower recoil, lower cost ammo, higher capacity, essentially equal performance with modern ammo.
 
The next panic era when the next libtard gets elected to the White House is a great reason to get a gun that can shoot multiple calibers with little investment. It will happen again.....
 
I have shot the Glock 23 and was not fond of it. I am not particularly recoil sensitive, but the Glock 23 has a single recoil spring. Even the Glock 27 has a double recoil spring which tames the recoil some. It is very easy to turn this into a caliber war, but if you feel comfortable with 9mm, go with the 19. Who cares that you can have 2 guns for a couple hundred bucks more if you never shoot the .40?
 
I had both (Gen 2). I preferred the 23. Of the two, the 23 is the one I miss the most. Shouldn't have traded it away.
 
Our department carried G 22 and 23 pistols, the .40 is a bit more in the recoil dept but i managed to train both men and women to be proficient with the pistol. We shot upwards of 100,000 rounds each year and breakage or malfunctions were extremely rare. Officers were not allowed to modify the internals of the pistol after one decided to change springs and guide rod etc effectively rendering a on duty firearm totally unserviceable (carried it for several weeks before attempting to fire it ). I restored the factory parts and the pistol was once again serviceable.
 
I'd go with the G23 and take advantage of all that LEO brass that's available for reloading. Then buy a Lone Wolf or Storm Lake 9mm barrel for cheaper shooting or to mitigate recoil sensitivity issues.

My wife shoots a G23 here on our farm. It's as close to 100% for reliability as it's possible to achieve. Accuracy is good for ~1" gps at 10+ yds, slow fire. If you're concerned with recoil, which can be overcome with practice and perhaps some training, go with the lighter weight (135-155 gr) loads.

To take advantage of cheaper 9mm ammunition, I bought a Lone Wolf 9mm barrel. And it's the equal of the .40, for accuracy and reliability. In our case, the 9mm shoots to the same POI as the .40 out to 10 yds. Beyond that (at 20 yds) the 9mm bullets begin to drift left about 1-1/2". Certainly not a factor for CC carry, or even small gun hunting. We use the same recoil spring in both calibers (the .40's). And as a bonus, either magazine will reliably shoot, feed and lock back with either caliber! How's that for versatility?

HTH's Rod
 
I've owned both. No issues with either and it really comes down to 9mm vs 40. My preference is 9mm and the G19 as long as you're talking about human threats. I think the 40 with heavier bullets is a better option if 4 legged predators are a concern. But at that point the G29 or G20 in 10mm is the better option. I sold my 40 S&W pistols after getting into 10mm.
 
I had both. They both work fine. But could always could better accuracy out of the G19 longer. The practice Ammo is cheaper. If one is better than the other is a totally different argument. I now have a G30 and a G21 and a G26. So I may have to do a triple tap with a 9mm and just a double tap with the .45. I enjoy shooting the 9mm and the .45 , not so much the .40 .

I traded my G23 for a G20 in 10mm.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
My favorite gun I own is my glock 19. that being said if i were to do it again i would get a glock 23 police trade in and buy a lone wolf conversion barrel, occustom trigger with trigger housing and eventually a glock 19 recoil spring. If you look around online and try and find good deals that will set you back right around $550. The lone wolf conversion barrel will be around $100, the police trade in glock can be found for less than $400 and the occustom trigger will run about $80, this is just personal preference but you could order it with the ejector tat is for a 9mm. With all this you would have a reliable 9mm and a reliable 40 that is super easy to swap between calibers for the same price as a new Glock 23 gen 4.
 
Nope. 23 and 19 are the same gun. Just different chamberings.

The GEN 3 and earlier Glock 23 is snappier then the competition mostly because it was a 9mm scaled up not a .40 scaled down to 9mm so to speak. That said I really think .40 recoil is VASTLY over rated in all but the itty bitty guns.

The Gen 4 changed the recoil spring assembly to a dual one and supposedly completely changes the feel of the .40 guns. I have, however, not shot them.

Honestly I say go with the 19. I am not a huge Glock fan nor do I dislike .40 but when you take every tangible data point into consideration the Glock 19 is one of, if not the best single do all handgun you can buy.

Yes you can convert the 23 but I would always have that nagging feeling that it won't be reliable enough etc.

The caliber doesn't really matter one way or the other and I could happily argue the merits and why one is better then the other either way so go with what you will enjoy / be more confident with.

And remember no matter the model every Glock comes with extra added ugly at no extra cost to the consumer. :p
 
I have had both a gen 3 model 19 and a gen 3 model 23 for a decade or more, shot way more rounds than I can count with no issues. The 23 does have a "snappier" recoil but it is not so significant as to make it difficult to shoot. I prefer the gen 3 models over the gen 4.

If you want a little more power and don't mind a little more recoil go with the 23.

If you want a couple of extra rounds a softer shooting pistol go with the 19.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top