Which is better?..Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................I know everyone has their own personal preference but I am looking for Pro's and Con's of both. Also, what is the accuracy of both....and what ammo (165's or 180's) do they tend to like. Any info is appreciated.
Suppressors Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
- Thread starter Bullseyelr
- Start date
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Well, I wonder about your criteria.
Accuracy in a defensive pistol is pretty much irrelevant. You're presumably choosing a pistol in that size primarily for concealability.
If I encounter a threat at a distance where the accuracy of the pistol - <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> pistol - becomes a consideration, I'm probably going to escape and evade rather than shoot.
Most defensive engagements occur without the pistol being fired, and the ones which do involve shooting nearly always occur at ranges where accuracy is irrelevant.
I have Glocks in medium size frames - 19 &23 - and small, a 26. I think both frame sizes are about equally concealable. The 26/27 frame size is really too thick for concealing in a pocket - I prefer J-frame S&Ws for that - and carried in an IWB or conventional holster, there isn't much difference between them.
My recommendation would be to go with the Glock 23 rather than the 27, for the simple reason that you're more likely to shoot it. The 27 is small enough to be uncomfortable to shoot given the sharp recoil impulse of the .40 S&W.
Just my opinion - but you might want to think about that.
Well, I wonder about your criteria.
Accuracy in a defensive pistol is pretty much irrelevant. You're presumably choosing a pistol in that size primarily for concealability.
If I encounter a threat at a distance where the accuracy of the pistol - <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> pistol - becomes a consideration, I'm probably going to escape and evade rather than shoot.
Most defensive engagements occur without the pistol being fired, and the ones which do involve shooting nearly always occur at ranges where accuracy is irrelevant.
I have Glocks in medium size frames - 19 &23 - and small, a 26. I think both frame sizes are about equally concealable. The 26/27 frame size is really too thick for concealing in a pocket - I prefer J-frame S&Ws for that - and carried in an IWB or conventional holster, there isn't much difference between them.
My recommendation would be to go with the Glock 23 rather than the 27, for the simple reason that you're more likely to shoot it. The 27 is small enough to be uncomfortable to shoot given the sharp recoil impulse of the .40 S&W.
Just my opinion - but you might want to think about that.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Our department has carried glock 22's for years, and we recently had the opportunity to test S&W mp 40's. The choice between the glock and m&p was overwhelmingly M&P. Comfort, recoil management, trigger, virtually every aspect of the two pistols was better with the M&P. Not by a ton, but noticeably better w/ the Smith. Ultimately the department made the choice to go away from the Glock and go to the M&P. We started the transition and I have mine now and like it. So in a nutshell I like the M&P's better than the glocks (so far) and so does virtually everyone that has received their M&P on our outfit.
As for accuracy, in my humble opinion, the difference between the two in construction (barrel etc.) wouldn't be noticeable. However differences in the ability to manage recoil and the trigger pull would most likely affect how accurate you will be with each gun. In my opinion both of those aspects are better in the Smith.
I would agree w/ Lindy on the purpose of a concealable pistol, in my opinion the glock 27 was too big for concealed carry for my taste. I would try to go with a small revolver or a single stack pistol like a kahr etc. that would slim down the gun for carry purposes.
I haven't handled the S&W M&P .40c yet, but the guys that I have talked to that have said it is bigger than the glock 27 and a little smaller than the 23, so maybe it would be a good compromise if you take Lindy's suggestion to move to a little bigger frame to handle recoil.
As far as ammo, we have also been testing the 180's (we currently shoot the 155's) and the guys testing it have said the larger 180's also seem to reduce recoil. But I am not a super savvy guy on ammo/loads and since I haven't shot the 180's I can't say either way on it.
If you decide to go with those possibilities - hopefully, if you are able, you can go shoot the 27, 23, and the M&P .40c w/ both the 165's and the 180's and make the choice yourself.
Good luck.
Our department has carried glock 22's for years, and we recently had the opportunity to test S&W mp 40's. The choice between the glock and m&p was overwhelmingly M&P. Comfort, recoil management, trigger, virtually every aspect of the two pistols was better with the M&P. Not by a ton, but noticeably better w/ the Smith. Ultimately the department made the choice to go away from the Glock and go to the M&P. We started the transition and I have mine now and like it. So in a nutshell I like the M&P's better than the glocks (so far) and so does virtually everyone that has received their M&P on our outfit.
As for accuracy, in my humble opinion, the difference between the two in construction (barrel etc.) wouldn't be noticeable. However differences in the ability to manage recoil and the trigger pull would most likely affect how accurate you will be with each gun. In my opinion both of those aspects are better in the Smith.
I would agree w/ Lindy on the purpose of a concealable pistol, in my opinion the glock 27 was too big for concealed carry for my taste. I would try to go with a small revolver or a single stack pistol like a kahr etc. that would slim down the gun for carry purposes.
I haven't handled the S&W M&P .40c yet, but the guys that I have talked to that have said it is bigger than the glock 27 and a little smaller than the 23, so maybe it would be a good compromise if you take Lindy's suggestion to move to a little bigger frame to handle recoil.
As far as ammo, we have also been testing the 180's (we currently shoot the 155's) and the guys testing it have said the larger 180's also seem to reduce recoil. But I am not a super savvy guy on ammo/loads and since I haven't shot the 180's I can't say either way on it.
If you decide to go with those possibilities - hopefully, if you are able, you can go shoot the 27, 23, and the M&P .40c w/ both the 165's and the 180's and make the choice yourself.
Good luck.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I wonder about your criteria.
Accuracy in a defensive pistol is pretty much irrelevant. You're presumably choosing a pistol in that size primarily for concealability.
If I encounter a threat at a distance where the accuracy of the pistol - <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> pistol - becomes a consideration, I'm probably going to escape and evade rather than shoot.
Most defensive engagements occur without the pistol being fired, and the ones which do involve shooting nearly always occur at ranges where accuracy is irrelevant.
I have Glocks in medium size frames - 19 &23 - and small, a 26. I think both frame sizes are about equally concealable. The 26/27 frame size is really too thick for concealing in a pocket - I prefer J-frame S&Ws for that - and carried in an IWB or conventional holster, there isn't much difference between them.
My recommendation would be to go with the Glock 23 rather than the 27, for the simple reason that you're more likely to shoot it. The 27 is small enough to be uncomfortable to shoot given the sharp recoil impulse of the .40 S&W.
Just my opinion - but you might want to think about that.
</div></div>
^^^^ This, except I prefer the 357 round so Glock 32 for me.
Colts and Kimbers are what you show your friends.
Glocks are what you show your enemies.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I wonder about your criteria.
Accuracy in a defensive pistol is pretty much irrelevant. You're presumably choosing a pistol in that size primarily for concealability.
If I encounter a threat at a distance where the accuracy of the pistol - <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> pistol - becomes a consideration, I'm probably going to escape and evade rather than shoot.
Most defensive engagements occur without the pistol being fired, and the ones which do involve shooting nearly always occur at ranges where accuracy is irrelevant.
I have Glocks in medium size frames - 19 &23 - and small, a 26. I think both frame sizes are about equally concealable. The 26/27 frame size is really too thick for concealing in a pocket - I prefer J-frame S&Ws for that - and carried in an IWB or conventional holster, there isn't much difference between them.
My recommendation would be to go with the Glock 23 rather than the 27, for the simple reason that you're more likely to shoot it. The 27 is small enough to be uncomfortable to shoot given the sharp recoil impulse of the .40 S&W.
Just my opinion - but you might want to think about that.
</div></div>
^^^^ This, except I prefer the 357 round so Glock 32 for me.
Colts and Kimbers are what you show your friends.
Glocks are what you show your enemies.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
i have both and i like the m&p c better it has a rail on it if you want to run a light it is the same size as the 27 and you get one more round in the magazine and you also get the option of interchangable backstraps. the glock is hard to beat but i think smith & wesson did a great job on this and after shooting one i was sold
i have both and i like the m&p c better it has a rail on it if you want to run a light it is the same size as the 27 and you get one more round in the magazine and you also get the option of interchangable backstraps. the glock is hard to beat but i think smith & wesson did a great job on this and after shooting one i was sold
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Hey Lindy, spot on. Mind if I keep this for later, writing a course for Buffalo Chip Shooting Complex for 2011.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I encounter a threat at a distance where the accuracy of the pistol - <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> pistol - becomes a consideration, I'm probably going to escape and evade rather than shoot. </div></div>
Hey Lindy, spot on. Mind if I keep this for later, writing a course for Buffalo Chip Shooting Complex for 2011.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I encounter a threat at a distance where the accuracy of the pistol - <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> pistol - becomes a consideration, I'm probably going to escape and evade rather than shoot. </div></div>
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
You're welcome to my ramblings.
You might include this old story:
A Sheriff encounted a woman at a social function one evening. She said,
"Sheriff, I see you brought your handgun. Are you expecting trouble?"
"No," replied the old Sheriff, "If I were expecting trouble, I'd have brought my rifle."
Which is how he got to be an old Sheriff.
You're welcome to my ramblings.
You might include this old story:
A Sheriff encounted a woman at a social function one evening. She said,
"Sheriff, I see you brought your handgun. Are you expecting trouble?"
"No," replied the old Sheriff, "If I were expecting trouble, I'd have brought my rifle."
Which is how he got to be an old Sheriff.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
The weather is the same in VA. I have a M&P 40c now and I like the way it feels. The recoil is really not bad for a compact handgun. I like all of the stuff that comes with it and the way it looks as well. I have only shot 100 rds through it and all were without any issues. I have heard all good things about the M&P 40c's so I got one, but when I shoot it, it hits 2-3 inches low and left of the bullseye at 7-10 yards with 165's and about 1-2 inches low and left with 180's. (better groups and not as far off with 180's). I had a XD40sc and that thing would put all rounds in a 4 inch shoot-n-c target at the same range. I know I am not used to the tigger, grip, or anything on it yet but this accuracy kinda worries me. I sold the XD 40sc to fund another rifle but it was actually too bulky to carry anyways (for me). I carry an LCP in my pocket since you dont even know it is there. I just wanted something in a 40 and still concealable. I have never owned or shot a Glock 27 but their reputation is great as well. I have picked on up at a gun show and I am not crazy about the feel. It is a little too fat for my hands. Like I said, I really like everything about my M&P 40c but the accuracy thing gets me every time. I know I need to practice with it and get used to it but I was wondering about the Glocks. I would like to stick with the M&P in the long run but I want something I can conceal <span style="text-decoration: underline">and</span> plink with (thats accurate) as well. I figured if the pistol is accurate, The rest is up to me.
The weather is the same in VA. I have a M&P 40c now and I like the way it feels. The recoil is really not bad for a compact handgun. I like all of the stuff that comes with it and the way it looks as well. I have only shot 100 rds through it and all were without any issues. I have heard all good things about the M&P 40c's so I got one, but when I shoot it, it hits 2-3 inches low and left of the bullseye at 7-10 yards with 165's and about 1-2 inches low and left with 180's. (better groups and not as far off with 180's). I had a XD40sc and that thing would put all rounds in a 4 inch shoot-n-c target at the same range. I know I am not used to the tigger, grip, or anything on it yet but this accuracy kinda worries me. I sold the XD 40sc to fund another rifle but it was actually too bulky to carry anyways (for me). I carry an LCP in my pocket since you dont even know it is there. I just wanted something in a 40 and still concealable. I have never owned or shot a Glock 27 but their reputation is great as well. I have picked on up at a gun show and I am not crazy about the feel. It is a little too fat for my hands. Like I said, I really like everything about my M&P 40c but the accuracy thing gets me every time. I know I need to practice with it and get used to it but I was wondering about the Glocks. I would like to stick with the M&P in the long run but I want something I can conceal <span style="text-decoration: underline">and</span> plink with (thats accurate) as well. I figured if the pistol is accurate, The rest is up to me.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Haha, good one.
Haha, good one.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
We were issued the G22 1997 through my Department, and the G27 became the carry of choice for plain clothes. I am a large guy with big hands so the the G27 with the pierce extension was my carry choice in the Bureau for years. If we were allowed to carry a .45, the G30 fit my hand better, but we weren't. A very solid gun, point and shoot practicality, and very accurate for its size and use. The M&P is nice, but I still prefer the G27, though that preference is due to years of use and training with it, Glock's KISS mentality. Admittedly when we went to the Glock I was an unwilling participant, but through the years of service I have grown to fully appreciate the weapon.
The S&W M&Pc is very similar to the Glock with a few added features; slide release, magazine safety, and a thumb safety (decocking plate). It also has three palm swell pieces to adjust grip, a built in tool for stripping the pistol, magazine extenders, and a better rear sight for sight radius. The trigger safety is also very similar to the Glock and is the equivilant to the NY Stle trigger at about 7 pounds total. The thumb safety and magazine safety are options. I personally do not like either of these mechanisms on a striker-fired pistol, but others may. In my opinion, you train how you fight, so either pistol with proper and consistant training are fine. However, for the average person who will be shooting at the range, if a situation presents itself in real life, those feature would be a hinderance and more things to think about in a situation were response is essential.
The palm swell replacements are a very nice feature for proper fit, and the included disassemby tool is also a nice feature. The Glock Gen 3 has these as well, but the dissassemby tool is an extra you can buy. Most people will never completely field strip their pistol, but it is a nice feature, though a paper clip will do the same. For practical field stripping for basic cleaning, the S&W is a bit more complicated, you have to lock the slide to the rear and use the tool to release the slide and move the slide lever down. This is a bit more than the Glock, however you do not need to pull the trigger. With the Glock you simply clear the weapon, pull the slide back just far enough to clear the the slide lock, allow the slide to move forward and pull the trigger, and the slide comes right off. Many people have hap-hazardly has an AD because of this with the Glock, but again that is a training issue. I will say this regarding the field strip, The S&W can be field stripped by pulling the trigger also, though S&W doesn't tell you that. I did find the following on youtube, it is a pretty good overall of both guns.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ts7HzqLDI9E"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ts7HzqLDI9E" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
Over all, I still like the simplicity of the Glock for ease of shooting and field stripping. The few features that I do like on the M&P are easily purchased as aftermarket items relatively cheaply; ie: the disassembly tool, rear sight, and grip extenders.
Regarding accuracy and ammunition, I has seen little difference in either pistol.
Hope this helps you out
We were issued the G22 1997 through my Department, and the G27 became the carry of choice for plain clothes. I am a large guy with big hands so the the G27 with the pierce extension was my carry choice in the Bureau for years. If we were allowed to carry a .45, the G30 fit my hand better, but we weren't. A very solid gun, point and shoot practicality, and very accurate for its size and use. The M&P is nice, but I still prefer the G27, though that preference is due to years of use and training with it, Glock's KISS mentality. Admittedly when we went to the Glock I was an unwilling participant, but through the years of service I have grown to fully appreciate the weapon.
The S&W M&Pc is very similar to the Glock with a few added features; slide release, magazine safety, and a thumb safety (decocking plate). It also has three palm swell pieces to adjust grip, a built in tool for stripping the pistol, magazine extenders, and a better rear sight for sight radius. The trigger safety is also very similar to the Glock and is the equivilant to the NY Stle trigger at about 7 pounds total. The thumb safety and magazine safety are options. I personally do not like either of these mechanisms on a striker-fired pistol, but others may. In my opinion, you train how you fight, so either pistol with proper and consistant training are fine. However, for the average person who will be shooting at the range, if a situation presents itself in real life, those feature would be a hinderance and more things to think about in a situation were response is essential.
The palm swell replacements are a very nice feature for proper fit, and the included disassemby tool is also a nice feature. The Glock Gen 3 has these as well, but the dissassemby tool is an extra you can buy. Most people will never completely field strip their pistol, but it is a nice feature, though a paper clip will do the same. For practical field stripping for basic cleaning, the S&W is a bit more complicated, you have to lock the slide to the rear and use the tool to release the slide and move the slide lever down. This is a bit more than the Glock, however you do not need to pull the trigger. With the Glock you simply clear the weapon, pull the slide back just far enough to clear the the slide lock, allow the slide to move forward and pull the trigger, and the slide comes right off. Many people have hap-hazardly has an AD because of this with the Glock, but again that is a training issue. I will say this regarding the field strip, The S&W can be field stripped by pulling the trigger also, though S&W doesn't tell you that. I did find the following on youtube, it is a pretty good overall of both guns.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ts7HzqLDI9E"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ts7HzqLDI9E" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
Over all, I still like the simplicity of the Glock for ease of shooting and field stripping. The few features that I do like on the M&P are easily purchased as aftermarket items relatively cheaply; ie: the disassembly tool, rear sight, and grip extenders.
Regarding accuracy and ammunition, I has seen little difference in either pistol.
Hope this helps you out
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Thanks for all the info guys. I appreciate it.
Thanks for all the info guys. I appreciate it.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Go with the Glock! I hate the look but shit they are reliable. Buy one, shoot it, and you'll understand.
SS
Go with the Glock! I hate the look but shit they are reliable. Buy one, shoot it, and you'll understand.
SS
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Will the smith take higher capacity mags? I sometimes carry my G27 with the +1 pinky extension and a G22 15rd mag (just in case of magazine failure, and for tac reload).
Will the smith take higher capacity mags? I sometimes carry my G27 with the +1 pinky extension and a G22 15rd mag (just in case of magazine failure, and for tac reload).
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
27 gets my vote... I carry one every day.
27 gets my vote... I carry one every day.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
If I'm going to carry a polymer gun, I'll make it a Glock.
If I'm going to carry a polymer gun, I'll make it a Glock.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Like was said above, G27 with the A&G grip extention and a 23 mag. Works like a charm and I hide it under a teeshirt.
Like was said above, G27 with the A&G grip extention and a 23 mag. Works like a charm and I hide it under a teeshirt.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
9mm for Glock, .40S&W for the M&P's.
Glocks were always built at 9mm's and had .40S&W guts shoehorned into them...which is why they never ran as well as the 9mm Glocks. The new 4th gen pistols were built as .40S&W's, and converted to 9mm...so in the 4th gen Glock, .40S&W's tend to run better.
M&P's were built first in .40S&W, so they tend to run very well in that caliber.
That said, S&W has been screwing the pooch on this gun, and literally throwing their place in the market away. Quality control on these guns is not where it should be.
If you are willing to go to 9mm (which will do the same thing a .40S&W will) then a 3rd Gen G19 would be best. If you want to go smaller, a G26.
If you insist on staying with .40S&W, a gen 4 G23 would be best, unless you want to go smaller, then look at the M&P40c.
Shot placement trumps caliber. Unless you are willing to shoot the .40S&W just as much, and just as often as you would a 9mm (few people are) then look at a 9mm.
JHP's today like the HST, SXT, and DPX (Barnes copper solid) are expanding to .65"+ consistently. In a class I took this March with Ken Hackathorn, he commented that if you were shooting a modern JHP out of either a 9mm or a .45ACP, there was effectively no difference in lethality on the target. If you were shooting ball ammo, you tend to see about a 20% increase in lethality by going to .45ACP.
.40S&W wasn't even discussed because the difference in performance between 9mm JHP and .40S&W JHP is so insignificant it wasn't worth spending the time talking about it in class.
9mm for Glock, .40S&W for the M&P's.
Glocks were always built at 9mm's and had .40S&W guts shoehorned into them...which is why they never ran as well as the 9mm Glocks. The new 4th gen pistols were built as .40S&W's, and converted to 9mm...so in the 4th gen Glock, .40S&W's tend to run better.
M&P's were built first in .40S&W, so they tend to run very well in that caliber.
That said, S&W has been screwing the pooch on this gun, and literally throwing their place in the market away. Quality control on these guns is not where it should be.
If you are willing to go to 9mm (which will do the same thing a .40S&W will) then a 3rd Gen G19 would be best. If you want to go smaller, a G26.
If you insist on staying with .40S&W, a gen 4 G23 would be best, unless you want to go smaller, then look at the M&P40c.
Shot placement trumps caliber. Unless you are willing to shoot the .40S&W just as much, and just as often as you would a 9mm (few people are) then look at a 9mm.
JHP's today like the HST, SXT, and DPX (Barnes copper solid) are expanding to .65"+ consistently. In a class I took this March with Ken Hackathorn, he commented that if you were shooting a modern JHP out of either a 9mm or a .45ACP, there was effectively no difference in lethality on the target. If you were shooting ball ammo, you tend to see about a 20% increase in lethality by going to .45ACP.
.40S&W wasn't even discussed because the difference in performance between 9mm JHP and .40S&W JHP is so insignificant it wasn't worth spending the time talking about it in class.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
Glock 27 with 357Sig & 9mm drop in barrels for practice & special use... G23 mags with grip adapters are also handy. The new Glock 40S&W 23 round mag is another good item.
Glock 27 with 357Sig & 9mm drop in barrels for practice & special use... G23 mags with grip adapters are also handy. The new Glock 40S&W 23 round mag is another good item.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
go with the G27 i had one before they were banned here and i carried it everyday when i was working security conceeled and it was awsome. the glocks just work and i do not see the need for a rail for lights on a compact if you want to hang shit off a glock get the compact not the sub compact different beasts and different roles. they are thick and i would have loved to see a true single stack thin 40 can sub compact it would have made the glock the best. as for the 9mm and 40 cals being the same they are not the 40 cals have another cross pin and a different locking setup built stronger to handle the added pressure Glock did not just stick a different barrel and open the slide on the 9mm to make the 40 cal ther completly re designed the frame and barrel lockup.
I never felt that the grip angle was a problem i actualy find Glcoks to point the best of any handgun for mee even over the 1911 but that is a personal choice and i was also sceptical off Glock until i fired one then i was hooked.
i would fit a grip extender aswell to your 9 shot mag and then carry a full sized mag as a backup as if you need it it is just as easy to conceel a compact of full size mag as a sub compact mag.
I also fitted a set of ghost ring sights with fyber optics to mine and a lightened disconnector but it depends if you can use a lightened trigger for carry that was all that was done to it and then it was a dreem to shoot.
Either the 165 or 180's will shoot but with the shorter barrel the heavier projectiles do not loose as much velocity as the light ones and for close ranges the harder you can hit your target the better you will be. I used mine for all my Qualifications and at 25 yards it is easy to hit the centre mass of the targets and that is all that is required of any piston because if a threat is 25 yards away you can likley leave the situation without getting into a gunfight the thing to do is live to shoot another day as mentioned before.
We had a tacticle match at our club once and the club captain on the buzzer turned around and walked from the door to his car, then the range officer asked what he was doing he said that if there is a bag guy or more in there why go inside to get shot? it is a good point but sometimes you might have to to protect someone or you do not have an exit oppertunity so you might have to use it but when the time comes the Glock WILL work.
go with the G27 i had one before they were banned here and i carried it everyday when i was working security conceeled and it was awsome. the glocks just work and i do not see the need for a rail for lights on a compact if you want to hang shit off a glock get the compact not the sub compact different beasts and different roles. they are thick and i would have loved to see a true single stack thin 40 can sub compact it would have made the glock the best. as for the 9mm and 40 cals being the same they are not the 40 cals have another cross pin and a different locking setup built stronger to handle the added pressure Glock did not just stick a different barrel and open the slide on the 9mm to make the 40 cal ther completly re designed the frame and barrel lockup.
I never felt that the grip angle was a problem i actualy find Glcoks to point the best of any handgun for mee even over the 1911 but that is a personal choice and i was also sceptical off Glock until i fired one then i was hooked.
i would fit a grip extender aswell to your 9 shot mag and then carry a full sized mag as a backup as if you need it it is just as easy to conceel a compact of full size mag as a sub compact mag.
I also fitted a set of ghost ring sights with fyber optics to mine and a lightened disconnector but it depends if you can use a lightened trigger for carry that was all that was done to it and then it was a dreem to shoot.
Either the 165 or 180's will shoot but with the shorter barrel the heavier projectiles do not loose as much velocity as the light ones and for close ranges the harder you can hit your target the better you will be. I used mine for all my Qualifications and at 25 yards it is easy to hit the centre mass of the targets and that is all that is required of any piston because if a threat is 25 yards away you can likley leave the situation without getting into a gunfight the thing to do is live to shoot another day as mentioned before.
We had a tacticle match at our club once and the club captain on the buzzer turned around and walked from the door to his car, then the range officer asked what he was doing he said that if there is a bag guy or more in there why go inside to get shot? it is a good point but sometimes you might have to to protect someone or you do not have an exit oppertunity so you might have to use it but when the time comes the Glock WILL work.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
go with the glock, plenty accurate for its size and very easy to carry all day.
go with the glock, plenty accurate for its size and very easy to carry all day.
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wild_Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">as for the 9mm and 40 cals being the same they are not the 40 cals have another cross pin and a different locking setup built stronger to handle the added pressure Glock did not just stick a different barrel and open the slide on the 9mm to make the 40 cal ther completly re designed the frame and barrel lockup.</div></div>
The 9mm's and .40S&W's have the same number of parts. All Gen 3 and 4 guns have 2 pins through their locking blocks. Gen 2 G22's ate locking blocks like candy, so that inspired the 3rd pin...how ever they all have them.
The frames are identical. The only difference is the ejector which is a separate part in the sear housing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I never felt that the grip angle was a problem i actualy find Glcoks to point the best of any handgun for mee even over the 1911 but that is a personal choice and i was also sceptical off Glock until i fired one then i was hooked.
i would fit a grip extender aswell to your 9 shot mag and then carry a full sized mag as a backup as if you need it it is just as easy to conceel a compact of full size mag as a sub compact mag.
I also fitted a set of ghost ring sights with fyber optics to mine and a lightened disconnector but it depends if you can use a lightened trigger for carry that was all that was done to it and then it was a dreem to shoot.</div></div>
Ghost ring sights are designed to be up close to your eye, not held at arms length as in how a pistol is used.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Either the 165 or 180's will shoot but with the shorter barrel the heavier projectiles do not loose as much velocity as the light ones and for close ranges the harder you can hit your target the better you will be. I used mine for all my Qualifications and at 25 yards it is easy to hit the centre mass of the targets and that is all that is required of any piston because if a threat is 25 yards away you can likley leave the situation without getting into a gunfight the thing to do is live to shoot another day as mentioned before.
We had a tacticle match at our club once and the club captain on the buzzer turned around and walked from the door to his car, then the range officer asked what he was doing he said that if there is a bag guy or more in there why go inside to get shot? it is a good point but sometimes you might have to to protect someone or you do not have an exit oppertunity so you might have to use it but when the time comes the Glock WILL work.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wild_Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">as for the 9mm and 40 cals being the same they are not the 40 cals have another cross pin and a different locking setup built stronger to handle the added pressure Glock did not just stick a different barrel and open the slide on the 9mm to make the 40 cal ther completly re designed the frame and barrel lockup.</div></div>
The 9mm's and .40S&W's have the same number of parts. All Gen 3 and 4 guns have 2 pins through their locking blocks. Gen 2 G22's ate locking blocks like candy, so that inspired the 3rd pin...how ever they all have them.
The frames are identical. The only difference is the ejector which is a separate part in the sear housing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I never felt that the grip angle was a problem i actualy find Glcoks to point the best of any handgun for mee even over the 1911 but that is a personal choice and i was also sceptical off Glock until i fired one then i was hooked.
i would fit a grip extender aswell to your 9 shot mag and then carry a full sized mag as a backup as if you need it it is just as easy to conceel a compact of full size mag as a sub compact mag.
I also fitted a set of ghost ring sights with fyber optics to mine and a lightened disconnector but it depends if you can use a lightened trigger for carry that was all that was done to it and then it was a dreem to shoot.</div></div>
Ghost ring sights are designed to be up close to your eye, not held at arms length as in how a pistol is used.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Either the 165 or 180's will shoot but with the shorter barrel the heavier projectiles do not loose as much velocity as the light ones and for close ranges the harder you can hit your target the better you will be. I used mine for all my Qualifications and at 25 yards it is easy to hit the centre mass of the targets and that is all that is required of any piston because if a threat is 25 yards away you can likley leave the situation without getting into a gunfight the thing to do is live to shoot another day as mentioned before.
We had a tacticle match at our club once and the club captain on the buzzer turned around and walked from the door to his car, then the range officer asked what he was doing he said that if there is a bag guy or more in there why go inside to get shot? it is a good point but sometimes you might have to to protect someone or you do not have an exit oppertunity so you might have to use it but when the time comes the Glock WILL work.</div></div>
Re: Glock 27 or S&W M&P 40c...........................
nothing wrong with the Glock 27, but I carry the mp40c, so it gets my vote. its all personal preference
nothing wrong with the Glock 27, but I carry the mp40c, so it gets my vote. its all personal preference
