Finally was able to hold both the 17 and 19 in Gen 5 today. I really liked them both (which sucks as I was all set to go S&W or CZ for my polymer purchase), but surprisingly seemed to prefer the feel of the 17 in hand. In past generations (Gen 3 and 4) I've preferred the 19, especially in terms of shootability, as the 19 seemed to shoot flatter than the 17. Add a TLR-1 and the 17/22 is improved, but overall the 19 was the winner for me in the past.
My question for you who have shot both the 17 and 19 in Gen 5: Is one more flat shooting than the other?
Thanks in advance.
tempus edax rerum
|Sigforum K9 handler|
The 17 does have the edge in my hands. A couple of Saturdays ago, a coworker and I went to the range with a couple cases of various ammo and a Gen5 17 and 19.
Now the disclaimer- While many people hail the G19 as the best combat/concealed handgun ever made, I have never been a fan. I have never been able to shoot the 19 at the same speeds as I can a 17 or a 34. This is speeds past the 15 yard line. So, I have always opted for a 17 or 34 for my Glock needs. The size isn't that much greater.
We set up a course of fire that we were both familiar with and took turns shooting it with each pistol. We kept notes of time and accuracy. Course of fire was 25 rounds and had two targets. From the 25 yard line, draw and fire two on each target. 15 yard line, draw and fire two on each target. 7 yard line, draw and fire two on each target. 7 yard line, draw fire two, emergency reload, fire two, emergency reload, fire two. 5 yard line, draw fire two strong hand only, transition to the weak side and fire two. And finally, draw and fire 3 from retention at the 3 yard line. Pretty standard police type qual with the last phases shot on a single target.
What we both found is this. The gap that I have previously not liked between the 17 and 19 has narrowed. One particular reason I think it narrowed is the lack of finger grooves. I can get my hands so much higher on the new 19, where I never thought the older finger groove guns were that bad. As a matter of fact, I never understood the obsession with having the finger grooves removed. Now, I get it completely. IIRC without looking at my notes, my strings at 25 yards with the 17 averaged between 3.80 or so to 4.10 seconds or so. That is drawing and firing a pair on two targets. (Targets were QIT with the 8 inch circle). At 25 yards with the 19, my times were around 4.0 to 4.3 seconds (or so). The time gap at that distance used to be much wider with Gen4 guns. My goal at that speed was to keep all rounds in the 8 inch circle on both targets. If I got much faster than that, I could still score hits, but they weren't guaranteed 8 inch circle hits. With the previous generations, I could shoot them at that speed but the hits were in no way shape, form or fashion going to be 8 inch circle hits with any reliability.
I would not be afraid of going either route. If I were to transfer to the detective bureau, I would not balk at getting the 19 instead of the 17, where in the past, I would have carried a 17.
The only "time will tell" at this point is if the guns start to have issues one way or another.
"Make it a shooting, and not a gunfight" LSP552 02/19/2011
I just bought the new G19 Gen5. Very nice gun and reliable to boot. My only complaint about the 19 is the sharp edge around the magazine well. Not a problem on the 17, I just wanted the comact model to complement my P320 Compact!
Cool. Thank you both. Appreciate the info, jljones.
tempus edax rerum
Thanks jljones for your string of reports on the Gen 5. Any failure to feed or eject or slide locking issues with any of the gen 5 so far?
I carry a 19 during the summer, and cooler months i switch to a 17, for me the 17 has always been a better option, but the 19 fits a role for me.
Glad to see they have closed the margin between the two.
I'll defer to Jerry Jones on which is better to shoot, as I've seen him shoot them. I think more grip and longer barrel and sight radius is always a plus in terms of shooting; the only edge the G19 has is slightly smaller size for concealability. I think if concealment isn't an issue, then G17 (or G34), hands down.
As for "flatter shooting," it makes no difference, other than a slight increase in velocity from the longer barrel of the G17. Given the same cartridge and same loading, making cosmetic changes to the frame won't make a cartridge shooter "flatter."
A G19 Gen 5 won't shoot any "flatter" than a Gen 3 or 4. The perception of how it might feel may change, but the facts don't, and neither do the ballistics.
I'm not referring to the ballistics of the round after it leaves the barrel....I'm referring to the tendency of the Gen 3 G17 to "nose dive" (in my hands, at least) when returning to battery after the shot whereas the front sight of my Gen 3 G19 always seemed to return to where it started. I'm curious if the same holds true with the Gen 5.
tempus edax rerum
That's a shooter issue, not a firearm issue.
It sounds like you're attempting to force the muzzle down to counter the rise with recoil from the shot. Otherwise, it may be a grip issue, but the muzzle should rise and return to the original position if the grip is proper.
Flatness or a flat trajectory is a function of velocity.
IMHO, any pistol that is over sprung with too heavy of a recoil spring, can and will noise dive more when the slide returns to battery. If the factory standard weight recoil spring is being used, it should not be much of an issue.
|Powered by Social Strata|