Glock 23

G

Giles

Inactive
I'm thinking about buying a Glock 23. Any comments about recoil? Reliability? I tried a Kahr K40 and found the recoil to be too much.
 
I've never shot a .40 from anything other than a Glock, so take this with a grain of salt. The recoil in my 23 is snappy, but doesn't bother me at all. It's just a little "quicker" than from the .45's I have had the pleasure to shoot. I thoroughly enjoy my 23, and think it is an excellent weapon. I have never had ANY problems with it except when I threw in an aftermarket barrel. I've shot factory and reloads through it with no problem at all.

Go buy a 23 and enjoy it!
 
I just sold my Glock 23 because I wanted a 30 for CCW and my Wife wants a 19 for her, I had over 1500 rounds thru her and it was 110% reliable. One thing that did help with the snappy recoil was an ISMI 22# Spring which I had on a ISMI SS guide rod which I bought because I prefer a SS guide rod over plastic. I had the ISMI on for 90% of the time I owned it and never had a Hiccup, I grew out of love with the .40 caliber or else I would've kept it.
 

Attachments

  • dsc005312.jpg
    dsc005312.jpg
    60.1 KB · Views: 131
I doubt the recoil will be much less in the G23. But the plastic frame does "flex" a little and that soaks up a bit of the recoil forces.
 
The 23 is my daily carry gun. 100% reliable, accurate and satisfactory. Unless you're small or bothered by medium recoil, you should be fine. I've never been bothered by the .40's recoil.

Glock makes me happy. :cool:
 
I had one and liked it. It was very comfortable in my hands and the reoil was 'fast/snappy' but certainly not uncomfortable. I sold it because I liked a buddy's 30 better so the 23 sale helped fund a NIB 30.

Reliability was wonderful. It ate whatever I fed it.
 
I had one and consider the size/power/capacity, ratio of the G-23 to be virtually unbeatable. Sold mine only because the grooves of the third generation gun just didn't work for my hand. Ended up with a Second Generation G-19 just because I could not find second generation 23.

That said the 40 was to me substantially harder to shoot well than the 19. After about a 100 rounds through the 23 I'd get "shacky" and could not shoot very good groups and after 150 rounds I'd have flyers all over the place. My groups with the 19 just get better the more I shoot and I'm not worn out after 200 rounds.

One thing to think about is that if you get the 23 you can buy a Glock barrel in .357 Sig and have you a G-32. And/or buy a aftermarket conversion barrel in 9mm, 9mm mag, extractor and ejector (cheap) and voila! you have a G-19. The 19 can't be converted to anything though.

Good Luck
 
I had a G-23 once upon a time. Great gun,
very reliable; but accuracy was not quite
as good as the G-27. Why? I don't have a
clue; maybe I could just shoot the 27 a
little better. Both make excellent CCW
pieces.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, Life Member N.R.A.
 
The G23 is a great weapon but if you have problems with the Kahr, you might with the G23. The grip section is a bit wider to help distribute the recoil a bit more but most of us agree that the .40 is a "snappy" cartridge.

If you don't mind a bit larger weapon in .45, the G30 is a great way to go. It's a soft shooter and the catridge is one of the best if not the best handgun cartridge ever designed. If not, the G19 9mm is also a great choice.


Good SHooting
RED
 
Ever notice in threads about the G-23 it's pretty much praised (except for accuarcy) but it seems like everybody talking about it (myself included) *had* one but no longer does :confused:
 
Blue Duck:

I noticed also. I had been seriously considering the G23, but now, I'm having serious second thoughts. I hate to put $500 into anything with this many negative vibes. The feedback here is not very positive.
 
I currently own a 23 and am very happy with my choice. I fired a friend's 22 and 27, and found the 23 to fit my hand well, while still being small enough for comfortable carry. The recoil does not bother me at all, and have become quite accurate with the weapon.

Not one problem in about 1000 rounds through the gun.
 
Don't get spooked, I actually have a little pet theory about this phenomenom. The Glock 23 is about the perfect compromise between a small carry gun and a big gun you take to the range and compete with. But it is a compromise in both regards.

People interested in firearms and frequenting gun boards usually own more than one pistol therefore they end up with something small (snubnose,baby glock, Kel-tec etc) AND a fullsize 1911,G-22, SIG 220 etc... The 23 gets caught in the middle not filling either nich as good as both of the others and thus..Gets Sold!

Well thats my theory anyway;)
 
Just for a positive note, I have a G23 that I carry occasionally. In fact I when to the indoor range this AM and put 150 rounds through it. No pain, no shakes, no malfunctions.

My wife used to have a G23 and the only reason she doesn't still is because she traded it for a G27 which hides better in her purse. Since she has a G22 as a vehicle gun (sixteen rounds) the G23 was a trade in.

My 60 year old sister carries a G23 daily and has for two years now. She has fired well over 2500 rounds through it and the only problem was when the extracter broke (she bought it used and we have no idea of it's original treatement or round count). Replaced the extractor and it works fine again.

I think the G23 is probably the best compromise of power, capacity (original magazines), size, and controlability. No negatives that I can think of.
 
I consider it the greatest all-around combat handgun, bar none. It was my first auto pistol, but foolishly I sold it. I will get another some day.
 
I have both the G-23 and K40. The K40 definitely has the harsher recoil. The Glock is mild by comparison. With the Kahr, after 100 rounds, I can feel a sore spot in the web of my shooting hand. The Glock is much more comfortable. The only problem I've had with mine is developing a blister on my trigger finger after a 500 round session due to the trigger safety rubbing the same spot over and over again. That said, with over 6000 rounds through it so far, it hasn't malfunctioned yet. Get the Glock, you won't be disappointed :) .
 
I have only fired the Kahr on a very limited basis, but found the recoil of the K40 to be snappy. I also thought the gun felt top heavy, but others disagree with me on that point.

I have owned a G23 since they first came out in 1990. I bought it at the time because I thought that it was the best compromise between size and power available, and it holds a goodly amount of ammo.

I still carry this gun. In comparison to the Kahr, I find the Glock easier to shoot. The G23 is snappy, as others have pointed out, but I think a tad less than a Kahr. If you have a tendancy to limp-wrist, you will have problems with this pistol. If your technique is good, you will get good results.

I do not intend to sell mine. Ever.
 
Don't be spooked...

Don't be spooked, the 23 is an excellent weapon it's just that the 30 was calling me and the 23 is a lil too much for my Wife. If the economy wasn't doing so poorly I would've kept it
 
Well, i picked up my 23 a few hours and headed straight for the indoor range. Its a real beauty and shot darn good with no mishaps. But.......i do not think i am a .40 man and will probably try to trade it for a 17 or 19. I shoot my CZ75 pretty good, maybe i will like a Glock in 9mm better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top