Member
| quote: Originally posted by andronicus: 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.
Interesting. I'm curious if the longer slide of the 34 changes the recoil impulse and has you chasing the front sight relative to the 17 and 19...for me, shorter slides seem to be "faster" and flatter in that regard, and that combined with the overall balance of a pistol has me gravitating toward shorter slides in general. How is target acquisition with the 34 compared to the other two?
________________ tempus edax rerum
|
| |
Fighting the good fight

| quote: Originally posted by ruger357: The cut out bothers me on the g5 19 but not on the 17.
Check out the Pearce PG-FML basepads. They were originally designed to fill in the cutout on the Gen 1/2 Glocks, but they work just fine on the Gen 5s too. http://www.pearcegrip.com/Products/GLOCK/PG-FML When using standard basepads, the cutouts bother me on the G19 as well, but with the Pearce basepads, that issue is resolved. I've used them for years on my Gen 2 G19, and have continued on my Gen 5. Just make sure you practice reloads. If your hands are big enough to be bothered by the cutout, they're likely big enough to get your pinky pinched between the new basepad and the top of the cutout in the frame during reloads, if you're not careful. If you're already in the habit of lifting your pinky a bit during reloads, from practicing reloading subcompact guns with abbreviated grips, then it shouldn't be much of an issue to translate that to the G19. |
| Posts: 33935 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008 |  
IP
|
|
Member
| I always feel odd when my G26 performs better than my 19 and 17.
I have not noticed much of a difference between the 19 and 17. |
| |