There's probably no argument in saying that glock pistols are undersprung - especially their .40's.
Specifically pertaining to the glock 19 and 23 pistols, can someone give me an understanding as to WHY glock used the same recoil # spring in both chamberings?
The 40 is significantly more powerful than the 9mm in terms of putting demands on the pistol. It shoots a larger, heavier bullet at equal or faster speeds and has more energy, momentum, and more felt recoil. If the stock recoil spring is 18#, why didn't glock fit the model 23 with at least a 20# spring? I would think a slightly heavier spring would help the pistol cope with the harsher recoil, lowering slide velocity and possibly reducing wear and tear on the pistol.
Specifically pertaining to the glock 19 and 23 pistols, can someone give me an understanding as to WHY glock used the same recoil # spring in both chamberings?
The 40 is significantly more powerful than the 9mm in terms of putting demands on the pistol. It shoots a larger, heavier bullet at equal or faster speeds and has more energy, momentum, and more felt recoil. If the stock recoil spring is 18#, why didn't glock fit the model 23 with at least a 20# spring? I would think a slightly heavier spring would help the pistol cope with the harsher recoil, lowering slide velocity and possibly reducing wear and tear on the pistol.