• If you are having trouble changng your password please click here for help.

Glock: Compact or sub-compact

Compact or Sub-compact

  • Compact (IE 19, 23)

    Votes: 45 66.2%
  • Sub-Compact (IE 26, 27)

    Votes: 19 27.9%
  • Tacos (IE Delicious!)

    Votes: 4 5.9%

  • Total voters
    68
I'll tell you why........

.40 sucks especially in anything smaller that a full sized service sized pistol. I have a G22 so if I wanted to do the switcheroo so that negates that.

Secondly, I will not carry a gun with aftermarket parts and that includes barrels.

.40 doesn't do anything any better than a 9mm. In fact more recoil and fewer rounds.....no thanks.


I shoot my G27 and G23 better than I shoot a G22. I don't know why but I do.

.40 stops bad guys better than 9mm. It has much more stopping power and the recoil everybody talks about is overrated. 9mm handles easier because of less recoil. That's true. But if one is involved in a shootout the recoil of your weapon is the last thing you'll be thinking about.
 
The back strap of the 19/23 frame is much for comfortable. It's far more comfortable IMO than the subs. Just a better balanced firearm. That extra bit on the back strap I think that helps with controlling the weapon when doing drills. I want as many advantages as I can get with the right sized package.

As far as recoil, I'm recoil sensitive. The 40 S&W cartridge is a little snappier but it does put more energy into a target with the right ammo choice for your needs. The sooner I learned to except the fact that recoil is going to happen and that I need to learn to allow the recoil to happen and not be afraid of it, the better I have become. As long as you feel you've got enough gun/caliber on your hip the better you'll sleep. 9 and 40 are both great calibers. Shot placement most important because if you can't hit the broad side of a barn at point blank range then you need to step back and practice your ass off.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom