Just like the title says. I really dont want to buy a 26. Rather spend the money on something else.

I figure with barrel, 9mm extractor and a couple mags, I would be around 175.

This gun would only serve as a backup to my 19 ccw.

I run my Glock 23 in 9mm most of the time. All I did was change the barrel and magazine not the extractor.

James

I would not. I'd carry it in .40, or sell it and get a G26. I have a p229 with a barsto 9mm barrel. It gets lots of range use, and has been quite reliable, but I still swap in the .40 barrel if I'm going to carry it (which is pretty rare these days).

Not with a 9mm barrel but I have with the 357Sig barrel..

If it runs 100% why not. I run my G35 with a Lone Wolf 9mm conversion barrel and G17 mags. I've not changed the extractor and has been 100% with probably 300+ rounds of various self defense loads and at least 500 rounds of Winchester white box and Blazer brass ball ammo.

quote:

Originally posted by CQB60:
Not with a 9mm barrel but I have with the 357Sig barrel..

I'd trust that more since the case head diameter is the same

quote:

I would not. I'd carry it in .40, or sell it and get a G26

+1

I had zero problems with the (older-style) LWD conversion barrel in my Glock 27. Fed both ball and JHP and no extraction/ejection problems. That said, the G27 is just too big and heavy for a 10-shot 9mm in the current climate. I put it on consignment and took a beating on it. Unrelated to your question - but no more .40's for me.

If you hunt around you could probably have a 26 for another $200, not counting S&H on the conversion parts and test ammo.

There's frugality, then there's cheaping out. Just IMHO.

Mine ran 100% flawless with a lone wolf 9mm barrel. Then I met a guy who was wanting to trade his 9mm g26 for a g27.....so I made the trade. Didn't cost me anything so why not?

Even though the 27 ran flawlessly with the conversion barrel I never felt confident enough to carry it like that.

If it runs reliably with the 9 barrel I’d carry it. I had P226 in 40 that I used a Barsto 9mm in and carried it for 8 years.

Swap out all the 40S&W pieces for 9mm parts, and run 700-1000 rounds of ball and defensive loads with no hiccups...yes I'd have confidence in it. The biggest unknown for me is the barrel. If after the swap it works continuously reliable over a largish round count, I wouldn't have any hesitation in believing that it will continue to do so in the future.

I wouldn't carry it. I have the G26, G27, and G33; in the 27 and 33 I use a 9mm conversion barrel to reduce range costs for some shooting, and it functions well. I have KKM barrels. I have the G26 and do sometimes take it with, but if I need a pistol that size, it's usually the G33.

This summer on days off, I got to a range where I'd try to shoot 500-600 rounds. In the .357 Sig, it would have been a lot more expensive, so I did much of it with a 9mm conversion barrel, and then ran a couple of boxes of .357 Sig through the pistol. It meant the difference between shooting just the two boxes, or a lot more; the cost helps.

I know the factory set up is reliable. I don't know that I'd risk my life on an aftermarket barrel and different cartridge. If I really want to carry a 9mm in that frame size, I'll carry a G26.

I had a 23 that I used a Lone Wolf 9mm conversion barrel in. Thousands of rounds and never a hitch.

I used the .40 barrel, the 9mm, and a .357 barrel (also Lone Wolf) never changed any other parts, all of them worked without issue.

I had no hesitation whatsoever carrying it with any of the barrels.

Get the barrel, run a few hundred rounds through and so long as it gives you no problems, go for it.

I chuckle at these folks who say they would never carry something with a conversion even after being proven with several hundred rounds. Their “what if...” theory holds as true with a stock gun having a part break, magazine failure, etc.

Always a chance of something going bad, but if you use the gun regularly, clean, care, and inspect as necessary it will be every bit as reliable.

quote:

Would you be confident carrying a Glock 27 coverted to 9mm?

Sure, as long as the job was done properly, and the gun has been run through by me with various defensive ammo to ensure reliability.

Honestly, despite logic, probably not. There'd be a nagging little doubt in the back of my mind.

Even if I shot, say 500 rounds first without a malfunction. At that point each round is 0.2%. So if you had 1 failure it'd be 99.8% reliable. Even without a failure, my mind would be telling me "there's a reason Glock made them different. It would be cheaper and easier for them to mill all the slides the same. If it didn't matter, why wouldn't they?" It goes against my usual logical mindset, but I know it'd bug me the tiniest bit.

What's the expected sight difference?

quote:

Originally posted by walker77:
Just like the title says. I really dont want to buy a 26. Rather spend the money on something else.

I figure with barrel, 9mm extractor and a couple mags, I would be around 175.

This gun would only serve as a backup to my 19 ccw.

The 9mm and 40/357 extractors are the same. The 9mm ejector is the different part. I have run a G23 in 9mm as a training gun for thousands of rounds with just the barrel and magazine swap. When it's time for the same gun to sleep under the bed it goes back to 40 caliber. I know there are people who have had 100% success with caliber swaps of this nature, but I just like to play it safe.

You can also get a Glock 26 upper assembly and use G26 mags. Did this with my G33 - Works fine, and no need to change the ejector.

quote:

Originally posted by MWC:
You can also get a Glock 26 upper assembly and use G26 mags. Did this with my G33 - Works fine, and no need to change the ejector.

Where can you get a Glock 26 upper assembly for a reasonble price? Everywhere I’ve looked it would be almost as expensive to buy a new gun.

quote:

The 9mm and 40/357 extractors are the same.

Glock lists separate SKUed extractors for the two caliber groups. When it comes to such matters, I tend to have faith in what the manufacturer is saying or at least implying, that the parts are indeed different.

I've also shot a decent amount 9mm through converted 40S&W Glocks without changing out the extractor and had encountered no extraction issues to date. But playing it safe would be my preferred and recommended choice, particularly since Glock extractors aren't that expensive to begin with.