Most of you guys have probably shot Glocks many times before, but I just wanted to share with you my encounter with the pistol after long time I hadn't shot one. The reason is, I got myself a Sig since then, and now I could closely compare each pistol's behaviour at the range. I've been trying to be as objective as possible which, I guess, is easier for me since I'm not a fan of any particular pistol.
Pros: Well, accuracy was great, barely any distracting recoil, and almost no muzzle flip. It KIND OF reminded me of shooting a 9 mm Sig P239, only little louder. I put 100 rounds of Winchester .40 S&W FMJ 165 gr. through it and got completely convinced I should buy 23 model for myself sometime in the future (in the year 2000
).
I always thought the grips on Glocks were probably one of the most inconvenient among pistols. Their rectangular edges press into the palm quite unevenly; however, for this reason EXACTLY, I was able to hold the pistol very firmly, without it shifting in my hand. Yes, it was still inconvenient but solid, and my hand, surprisingly, didn't get tired a bit (although I expected it to).
I've read many folks on TFL disliking the Glock's trigger. IMHO, it's almost perfect. And it's not THAT light as to be constantly affraid of AD (ND?). The pistol had regular sights, a square U-shaped back and a dot front (I'm almost certain there's a specific term for them, I just don't remember it). They worked very good and in combination with low recoil, practically complete absence of muzzle flip, and a consistent trigger pull provided me with very quick reacquisition of a target after each shot.
Cons: The plastic mag, although looking sturdy, bulged a little and was very hard to pull out, especially loaded -- I'm sure it's not very consistent from pistol to pistol but as long as plastic is used, the problem is going to be there for you. Forget about dropping a mag for a quick replacement after it's been shot. Yes, I forgot, the capacity was 10 (you know who to thank). Moreover, with the slide forward, inserting a full mag is done ONLY by literally slamming it into the handle. Hard. If the slide is locked back, the mag goes in very smoothly. Also, this pistol was REALLY "broken", with most likely many thousands rounds through it, but its mag was very difficult to load due to either an overly stiff spring OR to the fact that the mag almost felt smaller than normal, and it was the shooter's responsibility to "bulge" it with rounds. I know it sounds like nonsense, but it's what I've felt, no more, no less.
In comparison with my Sig P229, Glock feels much lighter and slimmer. It has, nevertheless, very sturdy construction and feels extremely rugged as opposed to somewhat refined and elegant 229, and its looks are better left undiscussed...
I checked the notorious "unsupported" chamber and yes, brass is exposed just a bit, and yes, it gets somewhat deformed when shot, but I don't care for I'll never make or shoot reloads with Glock in .40 S&W, especially 180 gr. Why? There's a higher chance to overpressure 180 gr round in factory conditions due to a bigger size bullets, left alone in amateur reloading. And with slightly exposed brass and overall loose chamber (for reliable feeding, I guess) it can go kb!
P.S. I'm picking my new Kahr MK40 from an FFL holder tomorrow and will post my experience with it once I shoot it enough -- my short encounter with a rental one is not sufficient.
Pros: Well, accuracy was great, barely any distracting recoil, and almost no muzzle flip. It KIND OF reminded me of shooting a 9 mm Sig P239, only little louder. I put 100 rounds of Winchester .40 S&W FMJ 165 gr. through it and got completely convinced I should buy 23 model for myself sometime in the future (in the year 2000
).I always thought the grips on Glocks were probably one of the most inconvenient among pistols. Their rectangular edges press into the palm quite unevenly; however, for this reason EXACTLY, I was able to hold the pistol very firmly, without it shifting in my hand. Yes, it was still inconvenient but solid, and my hand, surprisingly, didn't get tired a bit (although I expected it to).
I've read many folks on TFL disliking the Glock's trigger. IMHO, it's almost perfect. And it's not THAT light as to be constantly affraid of AD (ND?). The pistol had regular sights, a square U-shaped back and a dot front (I'm almost certain there's a specific term for them, I just don't remember it). They worked very good and in combination with low recoil, practically complete absence of muzzle flip, and a consistent trigger pull provided me with very quick reacquisition of a target after each shot.
Cons: The plastic mag, although looking sturdy, bulged a little and was very hard to pull out, especially loaded -- I'm sure it's not very consistent from pistol to pistol but as long as plastic is used, the problem is going to be there for you. Forget about dropping a mag for a quick replacement after it's been shot. Yes, I forgot, the capacity was 10 (you know who to thank). Moreover, with the slide forward, inserting a full mag is done ONLY by literally slamming it into the handle. Hard. If the slide is locked back, the mag goes in very smoothly. Also, this pistol was REALLY "broken", with most likely many thousands rounds through it, but its mag was very difficult to load due to either an overly stiff spring OR to the fact that the mag almost felt smaller than normal, and it was the shooter's responsibility to "bulge" it with rounds. I know it sounds like nonsense, but it's what I've felt, no more, no less.
In comparison with my Sig P229, Glock feels much lighter and slimmer. It has, nevertheless, very sturdy construction and feels extremely rugged as opposed to somewhat refined and elegant 229, and its looks are better left undiscussed...
I checked the notorious "unsupported" chamber and yes, brass is exposed just a bit, and yes, it gets somewhat deformed when shot, but I don't care for I'll never make or shoot reloads with Glock in .40 S&W, especially 180 gr. Why? There's a higher chance to overpressure 180 gr round in factory conditions due to a bigger size bullets, left alone in amateur reloading. And with slightly exposed brass and overall loose chamber (for reliable feeding, I guess) it can go kb!
P.S. I'm picking my new Kahr MK40 from an FFL holder tomorrow and will post my experience with it once I shoot it enough -- my short encounter with a rental one is not sufficient.
) most of the time. I use the same G23 that I carry to compete in IDPA, with the same holster. I have probably put over 50k rounds through my 23, and I have enve cleaned it four or five times! (they made me scrape gunk out of it when I took the armorer's course....).