Glock Generations

[Grizzly_A]

So a buddy of mine just picked up a brand new compensated G23. Which got me thinking about Glock...of which I only really know the name and that they are very popular with LEOs.

That being said, is there a brief summary of the differences in the generations of Glocks? I see a lot of listings for 1st gen, 2nd gen, etc. How does one make an informed decision?

If a person wanted to see what all the hype was about and was looking at a G17/G19....how would you advise them?

Read More

 

[skud_dusty]

Here are the different generations:



There aren't a ton of true first gen guns around, most are second gens that people claim are first. I've owned 4 Glocks so far, 2 17s and 2 19s. With my hands I prefer the 2nd gen guns. The 3rd gen 17 comes in second, with the 3rd gen 19 coming in last. The 19's finger grooves are closer together than the 17's and bunch up my finger uncomfortably. I like the non-grooved guns because they provide plenty of grip without forcing me into specific finger placement.

My advice? Go to the next show and try to handle all the different generations and grip sizes.

The 9/357/40 Glocks are all the same grip spacing/width. IE: G17=G22=G31, just different calibers.

IIRC the 45/10mm Glocks are the same, as in the .45 and the 10mm are the same sizes, but are larger than the 17 etc...

FWIW, if you're into caliber conversions you can convert the .40 guns to fire .357 or 9mm with just a conversion barrel. IIRC, you can use a factory .357 barrel to convert, it's just the 9mm that requires an actual conversion barrel as factory won't work.

From what I've seen the vast majority of people prefer the 19. I like them well enough, but for all around work (range, concealed, nightstand) the 17 just works for me. If you have any other questions feel free to ask, I'll help however I can

 

[actionflies]

Glock is in their 4th generation variant now.

 

[skud_dusty]

Glock is in their 4th generation variant now.

This is true, the Glock RTF2 (rough texture frame) just recently came out. They are the exact same dimensions as the gen 3 guns, they just have a rough textured frame (as the name implies) I haven't handled any yet, but most people report they feel like a 3rd gen frame that has been covered with grip tape. Most of the people I've talked to don't care for them much because the texture is very aggressive and can tear up your hands. Glock also changed the rear cocking serrations in the slide as can be seen here:



I believe Glock has only brought out the 22 with the RTF so far, but they're planning on releasing more (if they haven't already)

Glock also has the 45GAP cartridge, of which I know nothing about, so you're on your own with that one

 

[Grizzly_A]

My advice? Go to the next show and try to handle all the different generations and grip sizes.

Thank you for the pics and advice. The thing I run into with some of the sellers is that they will tell you one thing and you may not know the difference because you don't know any better.

Of course if you know your stuff you can tell the difference between someone who knows and who doesn't. That's why I appreciate sites like this, and people like those found here.

The caliber conversion does interest me. With the 40cal and go down caliber to 357/9mm, can you get a 9mm and convert up-caliber in the same way?

I think I read somewhere that the mags are interchangeable, so if I bought a G31, I could buy a 9mm mag for a G17 and it would work? Would a G17 mag fit in the G19, but not the other way around right?

Thanks for your assistance!

 

[skud_dusty]

You can't convert the 9mm pistols with just a barrel as the breech face is physically smaller on the 9mm. The .40 and .357 have the same breech face, so you should have factory reliability with just a barrel swap. Some people have 100% reliability with 9mm conversions, but just IMO I wouldn't use a conversion for serious defense purposes.

Mags are for the most part interchangeable, you can use .40 mags in .357 pistols and vice versa. I think you can use .40 mags with 9mm conversions as well, but I'm not 100% sure on that. You can use larger mags in smaller pistols, Glock 18(33round 9mm), 17, 19, and 26 mags all fit in the Glock 26. In fact I think I might pick up a Glock 26 for summer carry, then just carry a 17 mag as a backup.

If you're plenty happy with just 9mm I'd get one of the 9mm guns, but if you want the flexibility of carrying a .40/357 but with slightly cheaper plinking, I'd get whatever caliber you'll be shooting the most and then buy a conversion barrel.

Glock does a great job of standing behind their guns too. There have been a couple of recalls/upgrades that Glock/most Glock armorers will do for free. The issue isn't big enough to really worry about however.

If you can, shoot one before you buy one. I was convinced that Glocks were crap when I first got into shooting, but after shooting one I had to try them out. Since then it's been an off and on love and hate relationship. The one thing I cannot argue with, they just work. Thick and thin I know my Glock will work.

 

[Grizzly_A]

Thanks for the info.

I think I'll go handle some if I can find them in stock somewhere.

Why is your relationship with them love/hate?

 

[skud_dusty]

I love them because they work no matter what, I shoot them well, and even the full size pistols carry easily.

I hate them because they have no soul. I'm a 1911/BHP man at heart, and just can't like Glocks In the end, I think this 2nd gen 17 is the one that I won't end up selling, I really like this pistol.

 

[Oro]

+1 for skud dusty's love/hate thing. I feel the same way.

I went through just what you are describing early this month. I wanted to know what the iconic "buzz" was about Glocks, which in 35 years of pistol shooting I had never even touched one. A few weeks ago I traded a 1911 frame and some $$ for a Glock 23 to check it out. I also had a few hundred rounds of .40 lying around from when I had a 1911 in that caliber, but currently no gun to shoot it in. It was a gen 2, which was I think the best of the grips (I sampled some at a gun show the next weekend, but I did not actually fire the gen 1, 3 or 4's, though - just handled them).

I took it straight to a range. I warmed up with some revolvers and 1911s since I hadn't shot in a little while and didn't want to bias myself by going at it cold. My impressions were

1) The trigger was fine - yes it has a slightly different feel but it was fine. I have heard complaints about it, but the action was fine in my opinion -and I have some sweet triggers on a few guns, so it's not like I don't know a good trigger from a bad one.
2) The gun was very easy to shoot accurately once I realized the three-dot sights required a "hold over" instead of a six-o'clock sight picture. Else it was printing low at ranges from 25 to 50 feet.
3) came with four mags. All of them worked flawlessly with full or partial loadings, and the gun ran like a champ with LSWC, ball, and HP ammo.
4) The grip was a bit annoying, and the trigger safety needed to be reshaped a little, at full depression it leaves a little bit of the edge of the safety proud of the trigger and it bites into your finger a bit - very annoying and stupid, but easy to fix with a dremel, a hot oven and some cold blue.

I left very impressed with the gun. Of the guns I had on hand, the only gun I could easily shoot more accurately was a 1942 S&W Victory .38 Special (this included two 1911's and even an S&W 27-2, also). The WWII and earlier S&W "long action" revolvers are amazingly smooth, more than compensating for the generally poor fixed-sight picture they give on the non-target models. But then as I handled the gun overnight, detail stripped it, and considered potentially carrying it, I then cooled to it over the night and next day - it was just too clunky, really, for it's size. A 9mm or .40 should be more size efficient. Even though this was a smaller model (19/23 are the more compact ones) and light, it is still darn bulky. The receiver is pretty cheaply cast steel and not forged, and that grip was just not designed for a human hand - you can shoot well with it, but it's just weirdly shaped. I decided that I would continue to carry my S&W 19 instead.

If I were choosing a weapon for an army or a law agency, I would definitely consider the Glock as it's accurate, reliable, simple, and cheap. If I could have only one gun and needed to trow it in a truck or boat or something, this would be a great candidate. But choosing a gun as a civilian for it's pleasure to shoot, and appearance, it really leaves me cold. I have a number of other pistols, and this one was just the least interesting of any of them. I traded the gun away a day or two later. But it was very educational experience and definitely made me respect the Glock as an piece of engineering and utility.

 

[Sun195]

I went through just what you are describing early this month....

Nice review!