Glock 40 10mm slide width

R

roklok

New member
I handled a Glock 40 10mm today at a local shop. First one I have seen in person, I was anxious to get my hands on one since they were announced back in January.

I was disappointed. When they were introduced, the pics and reviews I read (as well as Glocks 360 degree viewer on their website) showed a slimmer slide than the model 20 and 21, the slide was the width of the Glock 41 and various 9mm and .40 S&W Glocks. The example I handled today had a wide slide, the width of the Glock 20 and 21. At some point between the introduction of the new longslide 10mm back in January, and now, the slide was widened. I never liked the width of the big Glocks, and being a fan of the 10mm, I was very interested in the 40. Not anymore. Glocks website still shows the slim slide on the 360 viewer, but unless the example I saw was an anomaly, they are now just as wide as the 20.

Any Glock 40 owners out there that can comment ? If so, how wide is your slide ?
 
... the slide was the width of the Glock 41 and various 9mm and .40 S&W Glocks.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, the Glock 41 slide is not the same width as the 9mm/.40 S&W Glocks. It's the same width as the 20, 21, 29, 30 & 40 slides.

Pretty sure the 41 has always been that way. Here's an article from January 2014 that lists the width as being 1.28 which is the standard width for the .45ACP/10mm Glocks.

http://concealednation.org/2014/01/introducing-the-glock-42/

I can't find anything remotely official that suggests that the 40 or the 41 ever had slimmer slides than the other 45ACP/10mm pistols.
 
The Glock 41 slide is definitely narrow. I have handled one. Take a look at this video, at 1:20, Hickock 45 is describing the difference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95YAUBUK4rA


If you look at the 360 degree views on the Glock website, the 40 and 41 slides are pictured narrower than the 20 and 21. Glock (and the article you referenced) lists the overall width, but not the slide width. The frame width is the same between the 20, 21, 40, and 41, but not the slide, at least on the 41, and the 40 when it was first announced.

Look at the 360 degree views on Glocks website from the rear of the pistol, it is very apparent what I am talking about between the Glock 40 and 20 (and the 41 and 21).
 
Last edited:
Well, it does appear that you're correct on the Glock 41. At least some of them did have slimmer slides--maybe they still do.

However, I'm not sure that the 40 is the same way even if the 360 view does make it seem that way.

The article by Mas apparently assumes that the 40 is a counterpart to the 41 and that's not correct. If you look at the paragraph about the 40, it states that it has a 5.3" barrel and is identical to the Glock 41 in appearance. Obviously none of that is correct. It has a 6" barrel and a similarly longer slide which means it's a good bit longer the Glock 41.
 
AHA ! I finally found a reference that supports my claim that the slides WERE changed between the "introduction" and when they started shipping. Take a look at post 13 in the following thread.

http://www.glocktalk.com/threads/glock-40-mos-holsters.1592031/

I saw pictures and video when they were first introduced back in January that shows them with the thinner slide. Now they are different. Maybe that was what caused the rather large delay between the intro and actual release.

The barrel length mistake was corrected at the bottom of the Ayoob article
 
...the slides WERE changed between the "introduction" and when they started shipping.
Click to expand...
Interesting. So the prototypes (and possibly the guns shipped for some of the very early reviews) were apparently using the thinner slide but they changed it before shipping production guns.

By the way, the dimensions on the Glock website are apparently pretty messed up. They have a diagram showing what they're measuring to provide "overall width" but the diagram clearly indicates that it's the slide width. However, measuring the slide width as the diagram indicates doesn't provide the measurement from the website.
 
Yes, the Glock diagrams are messed up, it looks like they are showing the measurement for the slide, but really are showing overall widths. I guess my question is answered now that I did some more research, it seems that Glock may have made the first few G40s with rebadged G24 slides, but then beefed them up to G20 width before releasing them. My interest in them has plummeted as a result.
 
Weirdest reason I've ever heard not to like a gun, ever.
Especially a Glock.

I suppose if one wanted to fork out the extra cash, Lone Wolf would do a slide for it...

The G40 is a straight-up hunting pistol, it is a tool with a specific purpose...
looks, other than looking like a Glock, probably aren't important...but Function would be.
If the slide went from slim to normal-sized, probably a physics reason ;)
 
I was also looking fwd to the G40 since it had the slim slide, the only fault I had of my 20 was the wide slide.


I may have to reconsider now...I've been wanting a 10mm again since I started reloading.
 
Glock's website shows the Glock 40 as being lighter than the Glock 20. According to Hickok45's measurements it is actually 5 ounces heavier.

As it stands, I'm going to have to say that Glock's website is currently not a good source of technical data on the dimensions and weights of their pistols.

I've notified them via their website, we shall see if anything comes of it.
 
Right, I believe the first slim slide version of the G40 WAS lighter than the G20, but now that the slide is as wide as the G20, it is heavier. Just like the G41 is a bit lighter than the G21. Glock apparently has not updated their 360 degree view of the G40 or their specs since the change. It will be interesting to see if you get a response to your email.

As to the weirdest reason to not like a gun ? Maybe. But, I like what I like, and I cant change that. I think most gun nuts have certain preferences that others have trouble understanding. To me, looking down across the wide slide of a 20 or 21 is like sighting down a 2x4, (and not too far off dimensionally). The width of the G17, G19, G22, G41, etc is the limits of my tolerance for slide width. I think that maybe because I am an avid 1911 shooter, and just prefer a slimmer gun. Also, as a result of the wider slide, it is close to half a pound heavier than when first introduced.
 
Last edited:
If you don't like the feel of the gun then don't buy it I guess. I just recently bought the G40 and I couldn't be happier. It shoots like a beautiful 10mm dream. I couldn't tell from the pictures how wide the slide would be before I found one in a shop but i also didn't expect it to be any slimmer than the G20. I put the smaller dovetail back strap on and it fits my hand perfectly, however, I have no problems with the feel of any Glock. I have about 500 rounds through it since I bought it a few weeks ago and I love it more each time I bring it out. if you like 10mm I'd say this is a nice gun to shoot the round out of. I won't put a red dot on mine but the 6" barrel and the 9" of sight radius really make this gun a fun one at decent distances. Longest I went with it has been about 40 yards but it's great at that distance. I definitely feel 100 percent safer at long range than I do with my ruger lc9, and I have put well over 1500 rounds through that (we all know how bad the trigger on the lc9 is though..).
 
The prototype G40 did have the thinner slide but the production model has, basically, the same fat slide as 20/21/29/30. Someone on another forum measured and I think it's a hair thinner but essentially the same width. The positive thing about that is that it will help tame recoil. I've ran 180gr from my Glock 35 (with 6" KKM barrel installed) at 1400 fps and I'll tell you, a heavier slide is going to benefit those wanting full power 10mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top