quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
Glock rep was in town today and I got to actually handle a couple of Gen 6 19s and 17s. Sadly, did not get to shoot them.

Those Glock reps are really making the rounds. They were in this area last week and had several stops to make that day so no one was able to shoot them. I heard those that handled them liked the slight palm swell and undercut trigger guard.

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:

I would like if Glock tossed the .40 on the large frame. Reduce some of the “snappyness”.

A couple years back there was a thread on .40 (Hell, I may have started that thread myself, don't remember) and a couple members said a 23 was easier to handle than a 22. That's one reason I wanted a Gen 5 G-23 over the G-22. Sounds like you would disagree?

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
Glock rep was in town today and I got to actually handle a couple of Gen 6 19s and 17s. Sadly, did not get to shoot them.

Those Glock reps are really making the rounds. They were in this area last week and had several stops to make that day so no one was able to shoot them. I heard those that handled them liked the slight palm swell and undercut trigger guard.

The ergonomic changes are definitely upgrades in my opinion. Not really game-changing, but definitely nice improvements. Except for that damn flat trigger, lol.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

The ergonomic changes are definitely upgrades in my opinion. Not really game-changing, but definitely nice improvements. Except for that damn flat trigger, lol.

Yea, nothing game-changing at all with some subtle improvements for most people. A lot of folks weren't sure about the direction Glock would head after Gaston's death. Kathrin seems content to maintain the conservative approach. I've got to admit I was a little disappointed regarding the lack of a modular chassis. Other makers have done it with little downside or added complexity.

Did you happen to ask the Glock rep. about the Gen 6 43x and 48? I heard they were being released about a month or so after the G17,G19,G45, etc..

nothing game changing and no chassis.

yet Glock will sell millions of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Chowser:
nothing game changing and no chassis.

yet Glock will sell millions of them.

Hey...it's hard to argue with what works.
My Gen5 G19 is an early model with the cutout and no slide serrations. It's not as cool as a Gen 6 so I'm getting one.

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:
Did you happen to ask the Glock rep. about the Gen 6 43x and 48? I heard they were being released about a month or so after the G17,G19,G45, etc..

Unfortunately no, I didn't. Which was dumb, because those are the ones I might actually buy.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:

I highly doubt we will see a .357 Sig Gen 6 gun. I think it is unlikely that we will see .40. Maybe they'll buld a .45, but frankly I doubt it as well.

Because they just don’t sell. Fanboys can claim how popular their favorite caliber still is but an average shop will sell 150 9mm/.380s for every 1 other caliber gun. You can’t give away a used .40/35 here locally. 45s take forever to sell but at least they will probably eventually sell.

Waiting for my gun shop to get the new GEN six looking to pick up a 19 and put all RMR on it sold all my other ones went with the Smith & Wesson 2.0 MMP for now can’t wait till they come out

Reviews are starting to come out now:

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:

I would like if Glock tossed the .40 on the large frame. Reduce some of the “snappyness”.

A couple years back there was a thread on .40 (Hell, I may have started that thread myself, don't remember) and a couple members said a 23 was easier to handle than a 22. That's one reason I wanted a Gen 5 G-23 over the G-22. Sounds like you would disagree?

I don't have any time behind the Gen5 .40Cals, Gen 2 & 3 mostly.
Me, personally? I think the .40's are a little "Snappy". The 5th Gen may be different, I don't know.

I think if Glock would have put the .40 Caliber on the large frames (.45 Cal / 10mm Frame) it would reduce the "snappiness".
IIRC, there were problems in the early days of Glock and I believe it was with the .40Cal. Toss it on that large frame, and most of those problems would have went away. Not saying that Glock didn't re-engineer stuff.

The early 40 cal problems were case ruptures from very poor case support from the barrel. I'm not sure if moving it to the large frame would help with that kind of a failure.

I am actually pretty stoked about them. FINALLY, they have a built beaver tail without the need for extra parts. The texture and slight design changes look interesting and well done. Just when I thought I didn't need anymore Glocks. The price on the other hand, sounds a bit pricey of $619.

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:

I don't have any time behind the Gen5 .40Cals, Gen 2 & 3 mostly.
Me, personally? I think the .40's are a little "Snappy". The 5th Gen may be different, I don't know.

I think if Glock would have put the .40 Caliber on the large frames (.45 Cal / 10mm Frame) it would reduce the "snappiness".

I was actually told that, in any generation, a 23 was easier to handle than a 22. It doesn't make sense, but then I've never shot either a 23 or a 22.

quote:

Originally posted by patw:
The price on the other hand, sounds a bit pricey of $619.

It's one thing if you think Gen5s are overpriced, but the price of an optic-ready Gen6 is the same as a Gen5 MOS.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:

I don't have any time behind the Gen5 .40Cals, Gen 2 & 3 mostly.
Me, personally? I think the .40's are a little "Snappy". The 5th Gen may be different, I don't know.

I think if Glock would have put the .40 Caliber on the large frames (.45 Cal / 10mm Frame) it would reduce the "snappiness".

I was actually told that, in any generation, a 23 was easier to handle than a 22. It doesn't make sense, but then I've never shot either a 23 or a 22.

I didn't like either of them. Or the 27 for that matter. It's not that either is uncontrollable, they're just a lot snappier than a P229 in .40. And the 17/19/26 are noticeably softer and smoother in operation.

Also, certain generations of the G22 would choke when you put a WML on the rail. Like 3-4x per mag. Something about how the frame needs to flex and the clamp from the light alters the way it does that. Take the light off and it's back to running 100%. Craziest thing I ever saw.

I traded a frankengun Beretta 92 Centurion for a Glock 23 gen4 years ago. I used to have access to a ton of duty 40 ammo paid for by the govt. I tried it out as a 40. I disliked it enough that that 23 has been a customized 19 for quite a long time now. I still have the complete slide assembly for “just in case” (still have a wall of 40 duty ammo) but no plans to ever shoot it as such. Me no likey.

If you want help getting rid of all that 40, Glockstore will turn your 23 into a 23C for $100.

https://www.glockstore.com/10-...tcol7=21&custcol13=4

In regards to the Gen 5 Model 23, it has a thicker/wider slide than previous generations; wider than a 9mm, but not as wide as a .45/10mm.

I grabbed a Gen 5 Model 23 MOS Blue Label while there were still some available. I like it; I like it even more with a KKM .357 SIG barrel.

The gen 6 is almost two ounces lighter than the gen 5??

gen 5 w/empty magazine: 24.36 ounces

gen 6 w/empty magazine: 22.45 ounces

??