SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Glock Gen 5 17 vs. 19, balance and recoil impulse
Page 1 2 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Glock Gen 5 17 vs. 19, balance and recoil impulse Login/Join 
Member
posted
Hi all,

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
 
Posts: 1251 | Location: Oregon | Registered: March 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sigforum K9 handler
Picture of jljones
posted Hide Post
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.




www.opspectraining.com

"It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for them"



 
Posts: 37295 | Location: Logical | Registered: September 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Slugo
posted Hide Post
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!
 
Posts: 59 | Registered: June 26, 2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Cool. Thank you both. Appreciate the info, jljones.


________________
tempus edax rerum
 
Posts: 1251 | Location: Oregon | Registered: March 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
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?
 
Posts: 1821 | Location: Austin TX | Registered: October 30, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
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.


 
Posts: 6727 | Location: Charlotte, NC | Registered: November 09, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dehughes:
Hi all,

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.


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.
 
Posts: 6650 | Registered: September 13, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sns3guppy:

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
 
Posts: 1251 | Location: Oregon | Registered: March 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dehughes:

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.


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.
 
Posts: 6650 | Registered: September 13, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
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.
 
Posts: 388 | Location: Ohio | Registered: November 01, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jljones:
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.


Hey jljones, you mentioned the 17 vs. 34 in your post....curious if you've shot the Gen 5 Glock 34 yet, and if so, what your thoughts are.


________________
tempus edax rerum
 
Posts: 1251 | Location: Oregon | Registered: March 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of ruger357
posted Hide Post
The cut out bothers me on the g5 19 but not on the 17.


-----------------------------------------

Roll Tide!

Glock Certified Armorer
NRA Certified Firearms Instructor
 
Posts: 8040 | Location: Hoover, AL | Registered: November 06, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I shot a G19 gen 4 quite a bit, I like it for the most part but I have large hands and was not a gun that I could shoot during extended range sessions. I own a G17 gen 3 and a G17 gen 5 and by far the G17 gen 5 is the one I like the most, I have shot several thousand rounds through all of my Glock and honestly don't remember last time I had a malfunction. All of those rounds were factory brass case ammo with factory recoil springs, not until recently that I put a 14# spring with a stainless steel guide rod in my G17 gen 5 and I really like but that is only for practice. When my G17 gen takes the role of defensive tool I put the factory recoil spring in it.
 
Posts: 947 | Registered: September 17, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer
posted Hide Post
With past generations the compact frame has always worked the best for me. Not so with the Gen5; I find that I prefer the G17 and G19X significantly more than I do the regular G19. The backstrap 'hump' that bugs me with my Gen4 G34 and my Gen3 G17 is a non-factor with the Gen5 tall grip. Losing those front strap finger ridges in conjunction with the Gen4 length of pull makes the full size frame the winner for me.
 
Posts: 8983 | Location: Drippin' wet | Registered: April 18, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I have a g17 that hurts my knuckle everytime I shoot it. My wife has no problem and likes the Glock.
 
Posts: 1616 | Location: Simpsonville SC | Registered: April 27, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigsuby:
I have a g17 that hurts my knuckle everytime I shoot it. My wife has no problem and likes the Glock.


sigsuby: I found that rounding off the hard edges of the trigger guard where it meets up with the grip helps with the hurt knuckle thing.

All: Thanks for the input on the new frame vs. old frame. I too found myself gravitating toward the Gen 5 17 when I held/shot both it and the 19.

Has anyone here shot the Gen 5 Glock 34? I'm curious how it feels (balance, recoil impulse, tracking, etc..) in comparison to the Gen 5 G17.


________________
tempus edax rerum
 
Posts: 1251 | Location: Oregon | Registered: March 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
In search of baseball, strippers, and guns
posted Hide Post
I could never really have G19s

I have big hands. So on the finger groove generations my hands didn’t fit. On the gen 2 I got pinched by the mag cut out


So I was always a 17 guy

When the gen 5s hit, I got a 17 enthusiastically and loved it. Figured I’d try the 19

I could finally comfortably shoot the 19!

But the 17 felt better in my hand

But I’ll be damned if I didn’t shoot the 19 better

Plus, for my method of carry, the 19 works better

I don’t actually currently have a gen 5 17, but I do have 2 19s, a 19x and a 34 MOS

Love the 34 MOS

Really want a 19 MOS


(The surprise in the group was the 19x. I don’t know what crazy space magic Glock used there but it had the feel of the 17 and I shot it like a 19)


——————————————————

If the meek will inherit the earth, what will happen to us tigers?
 
Posts: 7796 | Location: Warrenton, VA | Registered: July 09, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Thanks Kevbo. I'll have to check out the 19X.

Can you speak to the differences between your 17 and 34 in terms of balance, recoil impulse, etc.?


________________
tempus edax rerum
 
Posts: 1251 | Location: Oregon | Registered: March 18, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
In search of baseball, strippers, and guns
posted Hide Post
The differences between the 34 and 17 are similar to what they’ve been for all generations

The interesting thing in the gen 5 34 is it doesn’t have the cut out on the top of the slide as in generations past...Glock removed material from different parts of the slide to avoid the top cut out and still got the weight of the gun very close to the gen 4

I have no solid numbers on this, but I think the difference in the slides makes the gen 5 recoil a little less than previous gens. A lot of the material removed from the slide on the gen 5s is behind the center of the gun rather than the front, and I think the difference keeps the muzzle down more under recoil

I also am a huge fan of the MOS



quote:
Originally posted by dehughes:
Thanks Kevbo. I'll have to check out the 19X.

Can you speak to the differences between your 17 and 34 in terms of balance, recoil impulse, etc.?


——————————————————

If the meek will inherit the earth, what will happen to us tigers?
 
Posts: 7796 | Location: Warrenton, VA | Registered: July 09, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I have all three and the Gen 5 34 is so perfectly balanced. The 19 is second and the 17 third. I don't know why. For me that's just how it is. I compete with the 34 and carry the 19. It disappears in a Bravo IWB. I'm tempted to get another 34 to use as a house gun and dump the 17. But I probably won't. It's paid for.
 
Posts: 4676 | Location: Middletown, PA | Registered: January 09, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Glock Gen 5 17 vs. 19, balance and recoil impulse

© SIGforum 2024