March 2, 2013

Glock G22 Gen4 40 S&W, $649

One of the most popular handguns for law-enforcement personnel is the Glock Model G22. The G22 is a full-size handgun that fires from a 4.49-inch barrel. Since the introduction of the Glock pistol, there have been only subtle changes, and most people still think of the Glock as being available without options or variation. But we’ve been able to purchase different models with upgrades to the trigger, sights, slide release, magazine release, and other operational components. Also, at www.teamglock.com, we found another lineup of RTF pistols that offer streamlined grips with a radical surface texture—but the Gen 4 Glock pistols go even further. They offer an aggressive grip texture and a choice of three different backstrap profiles. The Gen 4 pistols include the 9mm G17 and G19, the .357 SIG G31, and the 45 GAP G37.

When we began putting these guns through their paces, we first wondered how bullet weight might affect accuracy. The most popular and readily available 40 S&W rounds are topped with 155-, 165-, and 180-grain bullets. The 155-grain JHP bullet is rapidly gaining popularity with law enforcement. This round was represented by Black Hills Ammunition. Next, we chose two Winchester USA rounds, one topped with 165-grain FMJ bullets and the other driving 180-grain JHP slugs.

Baseline accuracy was recorded from the 25-yard line firing from a sandbag rest. We also fired an action test standing offhand from the 7-yard line. This was a timed exercise designed to tell us more about trigger response and consistency, grip fit, and sight acquisition. We chose the Black Hills 155-grain JHP ammunition for our action test because we wanted to test each gun’s rapid-fire capability firing a hard-hitting defensive round. Our drill began with the shooter facing the target with the pistol held in both hands, arms retracted towards the chest. The front sight was at the bottom of the shooter’s peripheral vision. An electronic timer emitted an electronic start signal and registered elapsed time for each shot fired. We recorded the total elapsed time for all three shots as well as the time that had elapsed from the start signal to the first shot. After ten separate strings of fire were completed, we looked for 30 shots on the IPSC-P target from www.letargets.com. Vaguely humanoid in shape the lower A-zone is a 5- by 9-inch vertical rectangle. The upper A-zone measures 4 inches wide by 2 inches tall and could be considered the space between the cheekbones and the brow. We considered two hits inside the lower A-zone and one hit inside the upper A-zone a perfect run. Our overall objective was to find out what was required of the shooter to perform perfect runs on a consistent basis.

In all of our tests, reliability was a top priority. Ease of maintenance, cost, and shooter enjoyment were also high on the team’s grading list.

Upon first look, we thought our G22 Gen 4 arrived with three alternate backstraps. After looking for a way to release the backstrap in place, we realized that this was not the concept. At no time does this system ask you to disengage a segment of the frame. Instead, the two supplied alternate backstraps were designed to slide over the frame. We were fooled in part because the base grip frame showed a ridge outlining the rear border of the side panel. Not just a cosmetic feature, the purpose of this ridge was to grasp the edge of the alternate panels. Furthermore, there was a solid pin inserted at the top of the backstrap. But that was just a place keeper. A pushpin tool was supplied along with an extra retaining pin of greater length to accommodate the larger panels. We think this was a very clever design.

Gun Tests, October 2010

Courtesy Gun Tests

The Gen 4 grip system should make this gun more appealing to a wider variety of shooters.

There are two additional features that make the Gen 4 special. Most noticeably would be the grip texture, consisting of rows of flat-tipped spikes molded into the surface of the grip. We found these spikes to be helpful, but not necessarily a perfect solution for sweaty hands. They actually work much better should you wear gloves, as many patrolmen do. We thought the downside to this texture might be unbearable abrasion to bare skin or garment when carried concealed, such as in an inside-the-waistband holster. But we tried wearing the G22 Gen 4 (unloaded), tucked into our belts beneath our shirt for an entire day. We were pleasantly surprised not to suffer a rash or other abrasion.

The last feature that makes a Gen 4 different was the fully captured plunger-style recoil assembly. We’ve seen several of these units, but we think this one appeared to be stronger. We certainly had to work harder to compress and reinstall it. The Gen 4 recoil unit utilized three separate springs. The plunger that worked in from the rear or barrel lug side was wrapped with one close-coil spring. The rod fed into a steel guide that encapsulated another larger diameter spring. The pipe-shaped guide was fit with a polymer bushing for contact within the slide yoke. The third spring, fashioned from noticeably heavier wire, surrounded the second spring and the guide. Alternate design recoil systems generally are designed to slow down and spread recoil over a longer period of time. We weren’t able to record any actual data regarding recoil reduction, but we do think our G22 Gen 4 suffered less muzzle flip than standard G22 pistols we have shot in the past.

Common features of the G22 pistol consisted of a front end with an effective taper to ease concealment and smooth holstering. The accessory rail on the dustcover measured a full 2 inches in length, but it offered only one cross hatch. Our pistol arrived with standard sights, meaning a single-dot blade up front and a white outlined notch in the rear. Features like those on the aforementioned Smith & Wesson SD40 included barrel movement via barrel lugs contacting the locking block, takedown procedure, and frame wear was protected by steel guides mounted in the frame rails. Three 15-round magazines were supplied. The trigger-pull weight measured 6.5 pounds. The trigger movement was defined by about 0.2 inches of takeup followed by a sense of compression.

Gun Tests, October 2010

Courtesy Gun Tests

The grip texture consists of rows of flat-tipped spikes molded into the surface of the grip. We found these spikes to be helpful, but not necessarily a perfect solution for sweaty hands. They actually work much better should you wear gloves. We thought the downside to this texture might be unbearable abrasion to bare skin or garment when carried concealed, such as in an inside-the-waistband holster.

From the bench we focused on steering the front sight through the surprise break of the trigger. Frankly, we didn’t feel as though we were shooting as accurately as the paper targets indicated. The G22 Gen 4 produced an average group radius measuring 1.58 inches when firing the 180-grain rounds, but liked our other ammunition better. Rounds topped with the 165-grain and 155-grain bullets landed an average group radius of 1.21 and 1.20 inches, respectively.

In terms of producing muzzle energy, the G22 Gen 4’s longer barrel didn’t seem to make a significant difference. Velocity being the key component to figuring muzzle velocity, the Glock’s half-inch-longer barrel accounted for less than 7 fps on average, compared to the Smith & Wesson and HK pistols. All three guns offered adequate sight radius, but some eyes may immediately prefer the front sight dot placed that half-inch further downrange.

Elapsed times in our action test were the slowest of all three guns. Only two runs broke the 2-second mark. But we did land seven of ten runs with perfect results, and we learned something very important about shooting the G22 Gen 4. Fired from the bench with full support, it didn’t seem to make much difference which backstrap we applied. But when we stood up and dry fired in preparation for our first run, our test shooter realized that he needed some help getting the gun higher in front of his eyes and leveling the sights. The fact is that some shooters take to the classic Glock grip angle right away and others have to work at it. We found applying the medium grip panel made shooting the G22 Gen 4 much easier from the standing position. Elapsed times were slow (2.06 seconds on average with a 0.85-second average first shot), but the result was very good accuracy, especially inside the upper A-zone. Two shots were noticeably high, but the A-zone was filled with a 2.5-inch eight-shot group. Our range notes read, "Held high, the gun felt more instinctive." We think this proves that the Gen 4 grip system is a valuable component. The lower A-zone showed a dense group that was pushed a little bit left by the shooter, but with minimal practice we think speed and accuracy would improve.

Our Team Said: Not everyone takes to a Glock pistol the first time they handle it. But we think the alternate grip system means shooters who passed on the G22 or any of the Glock pistols should give a Gen 4 model a try. The attractive new grip pattern looked aggressive was surprisingly benign to bare skin. Those who wear gloves while shooting will notice the greatest functional improvement. Crediting reduced recoil to the new guide rod may be difficult to prove, but we’d give it the benefit of the doubt.

Comments (27)

There you go again, Wild Romanian, The .40 cal in the Glock 23, & 23 is very reliable and makes bigger holes and more mass than the 9mm versions . It is only 1mm larger, but because it is 3 a dimensional object delivers considerabley more energy at impact. It is not a particularly "hot" round compared to the magnums (I include the 10mm and .38 super in the "hot" catagory). So dude, if you are so worried about straying from your beloved 9x19....don't. Virtually every gun maker has a .40 version. Try the Baby Eagle if you want an over-strong platform for the fearful .40 cal.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 9, 2011 12:52 PM    Report this comment

Comment on the .357 Sig.

The .357 Sig. has some of the same problems the .40 S&W does. Attempting to put a very powerful cartridge in a 9mm size frame gun. The wear and tear and recoil of this cartridge is best left to a gun with a much larger frame.

Hand-loading a bottle neck cartridge also is much more complicated than loading a straight wall case. The bottle neck .357 has very little neck gripping area and great care must be taken when sizing the nick and seating bullets or you will get bullet set back.

For the small velocity gain in this .357 Sig over the 9mm and the much more expensive and scarce ammo does not justify on the headaches connected with owning, shooting and hand-loading this cartridge.

Again a large frame pistol with a long barrel would make a great hunting handgun if used only with factory ammo in regards to the hand-loader that does not possess the advanced skills needed to safely hand-load this cartridge.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 9, 2011 11:44 AM    Report this comment

I would like to make a comment about the "Urban Legend" that poly-gonnal bores cannot safely shoot lead bullets.

Gun makers know that the skill level of hand-loaders is often very low and when a gun blows up it most likely was due to a faulty hand-load not because the fellow used lead bullets.

I have used lead bullets in the Glock 19,17,21 and Walther p99 as well as the Japanese Arisaka's .7.62 and 6.5mm. Although the Arisaka is not considered exactly a polygonnal bore the style of rifling is so close it merits mention with lead bullet loads.

Any type of rifling will blow up a gun if it accumulates too much lead in the bore. By simply cleaning out leading before it clogs the grooves will enable anyone to fire lead bullets.

Just remember its the under-size lead bullet that causes leading to begin with wether it is cast hard or swag-ed soft.

I have fired as many as 200 rounds at a time and only got a trace of leading with properly sized lead bullets. A few passes of a brass brush soaked in Hoppe's no. 9 solvent will remove it in minutes.

To date I have fired thousands of lead bullet reloads through all types of rifling including the poly-gonnal bores with no problems.

Another Urban Myth that custom barrel makers like to spread around is that poly bores do not shoot lead accurately. Pure baloney. My poly bore pistols shoot it every bit as good as jacketed bullets. Just size them correctly. Undersized bullet shoot badly even in jacketed bullets.

I also agree 100 percent with the above poster that said the .40 S&W should never have been put in 9mm frame size handguns. I too have seen a lot of parts failures in these 40 cal. guns.

If you like a .40 go with the 10mm cartridge in a bigger framed gun which can take the recoil to both its slide, frame and internal parts. Again the .40 in my opinion is one of the worst pistol cartridges invented in the last 100 years by far.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 9, 2011 11:36 AM    Report this comment

I agree with you on the whole "plateform should be big enough to handle the recoil. I cannot imagine enjoying their .45 Kahr. On the other hand, they bought Auto-ordinance (the Tommy Gun folks) now THAT is a .45 subgun I would like to take to the range.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 8, 2011 9:53 PM    Report this comment

Actually I put 1500 rounds through the Kahr Pm40, of all types and brands of ammo and bullet weights. I really think the 40 caliber is just too much cartridge for such a small gun and you have to hold it with a vice grip using your hands or the recoil will not allow the slide to work properly. I believe the 9mm is about as potent a cartridge as one should use in such small guns as the bigger cartridges are too hard on them. If you go on the internet Kahr pistols are kind of hit and miss, for everyone who has a good experience you will find someone who has had a bad experience. Not so much with Glock, HK and Sig where a bad experience seems more rare. I do not recommend Kahr and would not trust my life to them, about all I can say good about them is some people like them and more power to them, I respect their opinion, and they are made in the USA.

Posted by: PH/CIB | March 8, 2011 8:48 PM    Report this comment

The Kahr is not for everyone. It is like owning a Porche. It requires 200 rounds of break-in. During break-in, you need to over-lubricate. Re-assemble carefully. You cannot just slap it back together like a Glock. As to the mag falling a part, they should have replaced the faulty mag and thrown in another for your trouble. I know the folks at Kahr Arms. They are serious about making you happy.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 8, 2011 12:52 PM    Report this comment

I am looking further into this also, on another forum a guy just had a Springfield XD blow up using .40 caliber reloads, he was not hurt and blamed it on his reloads he was on the fifth or sixth loading for that brass. I too have wondered about if there was a weakness in the 40 caliber brass case in its design. I have a Barsto barrel in my Glock 34 and highly recommend Barsto barrels. I think Glocks and CZ'S are fine guns as are Sigs and Hk and most makes, I have also owned the Walther PPK, P38, P5 Compact with left side eject and Walther P88 the first completely ambidextrous handgun. I had the Seecamp 32, and did not like it, no sights and too small a caliber. Of the 50 to 75 different handguns I have owned over a lifetime, I have had very few lemons. I have the Kahr PM40 very accurate, easy recoil, and very light and small and easy to conceal, but almost totally unreliable, failure to return to battery, failure to feed, failure to eject, magazines falling apart, been back to Kahr three times, but I have heard good things about the Kahr PM9.Thanks OregonGreg and Wild Romanian very interesting comments.

Posted by: PH/CIB | March 7, 2011 7:02 PM    Report this comment

Thank you "Wild Romanian" for finally referencing your source (2001 Sept. edition of Combat Handguns) a magazine I have read since its inception. I have not been able to locate a copy to verify you report yet. For now i will reserve judgement. I did spend about 2 hours online to see if anyone else referred to it the event on a forum. How could such a "shocking expose'" go without comment by other gun writers? I am writing Glock for their side of the story. I notice that you did not comment on the case of Glock 21s exploding in the hands of Portland Police. Are.45 ACP loads too hot for Glocks too? Since you are so knowledgeable? Do you know the CUP rating for the Glock 19, 22, 21 ? By the way, another forum says that the culprit in the case of the Kabooming G22 is the pre-2001 batches of Federal range ammo. According to some, the "web" of the shell on their 180 grain SW 40 was weak. Couple this with less than 100% case support in the firing chamber and you have trouble. Again, if you are worried Bar-Sto and KKM both make great barrels that solve this problem. As a side benefit, since they do not have polygonal rifling, you can use the lower cost unjacketed lead slugs. I find your fixation on the 9 x 19mm amusing. Yes. A deer can be taken with a 9mm handgun, or a .38 special. Better yet, a .40, .357, or .45 ACP (just in case the shot is not as perfect yours. I have no problem using 9mms on a man sized target within 50 yards. my back-up. (deep concealment) gun is a Kahr pm9. I look at the 9mm as a minimum self-defense round. The .40 has much better stopping power, without recoiling a great deal more. Personally I would carry the 10mm, but the ammo is expensive and recoil is more than I wish to train with. The G21 is to fat for my hand. As Front Sight Training says "Any gun will do if you will do." But the founder of Front Site also recommends the highest caliber Glock that you can comfortably shoot. I bought my G22 in 2001. It is safe, accurate, and reliable.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 7, 2011 2:18 PM    Report this comment

I have shot 1000's of rounds through my Gock 22 over the years, not one problem. That being said, I like my H&K's better.

Posted by: Robert J | March 7, 2011 1:05 PM    Report this comment

PH that's a tough question to answer. I could probably write a book about it.

I have carried the Original Detonics .45, Starfire 9mm (which is single action hammer fired and is not much bigger than a .380), the Glock 19, Walther p99, Walther p5, Walther p88 compact, CZ75 compact, Walther ppks, Browning baby .25, Seecamp .32 to name just a few.

HK and CZ have come out this year with new plastic hammer fired guns that look interesting.

Both Ruger and Taurus make plastic pistols in 9mm with manual safeties which I like very much.

Generally I like the 125 grain bullets in the 9mm and 230 grain bullets in the .45acp.

I shot a 180 lb. deer with the glock 19 using a hand-load with Remington 125 grain hollow point bullets loaded with a stiff charge of Unique power. It killed the deer instantly with a shot behind the shoulder. The bullet did a tremendous amount of damage and penetrated right through to and past the vitals.

I have not had any luck with light weight bullets in the .45acp when hunting. Stay away from the 185 grain bullets and use the 230 grain bullets instead. The 230 grain bullets work at close range but as the range increases they really run out of steam no matter how hot you load them, that's why I prefer the 9x19 as it has plenty of extra velocity for longer shots and still has plenty of penetration with the 125 grain bullets.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 6, 2011 6:37 PM    Report this comment

PH that's a tough question to answer. I could probably write a book about it.

I have carried the Original Detonics .45, Starfire 9mm (which is single action hammer fired and is not much bigger than a .380), the Glock 19, Walther p99, Walther p5, Walther p88 compact, CZ75 compact, Walther ppks, Browning baby .25, Seecamp .32 to name just a few.

HK and CZ have come out this year with new plastic hammer fired guns that look interesting.

Both Ruger and Taurus make plastic pistols in 9mm with manual safeties which I like very much.

Generally I like the 125 grain bullets in the 9mm and 230 grain bullets in the .45acp.

I shot a 180 lb. deer with the glock 19 using a hand-load with Remington 125 grain hollow point bullets loaded with a stiff charge of Unique power. It killed the deer instantly with a shot behind the shoulder. The bullet did a tremendous amount of damage and penetrated right through to and past the vitals.

I have not had any luck with light weight bullets in the .45acp when hunting. Stay away from the 185 grain bullets and use the 230 grain bullets instead. The 230 grain bullets work at close range but as the range increases they really run out of steam no matter how hot you load them, that's why I prefer the 9x19 as it has plenty of extra velocity for longer shots and still has plenty of penetration with the 125 grain bullets.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 6, 2011 6:37 PM    Report this comment

Actually I carry a 9mm, but I really like the .40 and the .45ACP, the .40 seems like the best compromise between the .45ACP big bore lethality and the 9mm high capacity and penetration. The 40 gives you almost as many rounds as the 9mm with almost the big bore effectiveness of the 45ACP. Wild Romanian I have always enjoyed your posts, and the great thing about America is we can peacefully disagree on anything or everything. And if we all agreed on everything it would be a boring world. Most of your posts have been thoughtful critical analysis of most handguns, so I would like to know, since you carry a Glock 19 in 9mm, what do you think are reliable effective brands and models of handguns and in what calibers and bullet weights and bullet configurations? Thanks!

Posted by: PH/CIB | March 6, 2011 9:44 AM    Report this comment

Quote:You know I shot all kinds and brands of factory ammo, 180 grain bullets, 40 caliber out of my Glock 27 with absolutely no problems whatsoever. Whatever problems they might have had back in 2001, I am sure they are resolved now. Glocks are fine pistols Quote:

In a way you are partially right. The ammo companies lowered the amount of powder they were putting in the 180 grain loads which of course reduced velocity. The most lethal handgun rounds are those shooting heavy bullets at higher velocities for maximum penetration.

To give you one example it was known as far back as WWI that the 115 grain 9x19 did not have the penetration the heavier 125 grain bullet did so the German Army then switched to the more deadlier round. It proved so deadly that it could penetrate helmets at an astonishing 125 yards.

So we can see that by lowering the velocity of the .40 cal. 180 grain bullets to avoid blow ups in bullet set back scenarios you are actually defeating the main purpose of this cartridge and that was to invent a cartridge that was supposedly more deadly than the 9x19 and just as deadly as the .45 acp.

In short the .40 has proved to be pretty much of a failure from more than just one angle.

One must keep in mine though that if you are a hand loader using hot 180 grain loads is not advisable at all. If you are looking for higher velocity the less lethal lighter weight bullets are your only option in the .40 and then the question is why not just stick with the 125 grain 9x19, cheaper ammo, and the 9x19 does not blow up with the heavier 125 grain loads either.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 5, 2011 11:09 PM    Report this comment

You know I shot all kinds and brands of factory ammo, 180 grain bullets, 40 caliber out of my Glock 27 with absolutely no problems whatsoever. Whatever problems they might have had back in 2001, I am sure they are resolved now. Glocks are fine pistols.

Posted by: PH/CIB | March 5, 2011 1:35 PM    Report this comment

For the shocking report on .40 blow ups see Combat Handguns magazine page 94 Sept. 2001

Posted by: wild romanian | March 5, 2011 11:39 AM    Report this comment

I have the original plastic framed striker fired pistol, the HKP9S, EXTREMELY ACCURATE AND RELIABLE WITH A TRIGGER THAT BREAKS LIKE GLASS. I also own a number of beloved Browning High Powers and 1911's, but if I had to go back into the "BLOOD AND THE MUD OF VIET NAM" again, my backup pistol for my PRIMARY RIFLE would be a Glock 34 with the 33 round magazines. I have fired Glocks that were not kept clean or lubed at all, no problems. I once did a side by side comparison of a Sig250 compact hammer fired .45ACP and a Glock36, compact striker fired .45ACP, both failed to set off a few rounds of hard primer Fiocchi Ammo. Not a fault of the gun a fault of the ammo. The hammer fired gun did allow a second or third strike of the hammer where the Glock you racked the slide and put a new round in the gun, my prefered method with either pistol. Glocks are fine pistols.

Posted by: PH/CIB | March 5, 2011 11:03 AM    Report this comment

"The kabooms I refered to were reported several years ago in Combat Handguns magazine." You will have to do better than that. Get us the actual articles. Barring that, at least site the month and year published. Sounds like an Urban Legend to me. You have failed to address my objections. Logically now, lets pretend that the alleged problem exists. Then, with all of the striker fired 40s being operated every day at shooting ranges in the USA, why are we not filling up grave yards with tons of broken guns? Why is it that that the failures you describe have not reappeared in later publications? Why has "Gun Test" magazine not covered this? Has it occurred to you that perhaps the few actual cases of Glock .40s going "kaboom" might be the same 2 reasons other guns get blown up? Bad ammo (usually hand reloads) and barrel obstructions. By the way, keep your condescending advice on how I must take special care of my poor fragile Glock 22. For a guy that claims to know gun history, how is it that you seem so ignorant of the famous Glock torture tests? They work after being sand blasted, soaked in salt water, buried in mud.etc. And bye the way. They are from Austria, do you think they can handle cold weather?

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 5, 2011 2:46 AM    Report this comment

I forgot to mention the "High Primer Test". If you want the shock of your life take your favorite striker fired pistol like a Glock, Walther P99 etc. and use brand new empty cases and then high prime them, no powder or bullet. Try then to shoot off the high primer and most tests I have conducted showed 100 per cent failure with the Glock and about 75 per cent failure with the Walther P99 (new Walther test conducted several days ago on a new gun). I have also had German Luger's also fail the test.

On the other hand the bone crushing blow of some hammer fired pistols I have tested such as the Colt 1911 and Browning High Power actually drove the primers down into the primer pocket and then crushed the "H" out of them and naturally they all fired. Seeing is believing.

Now all this does not mean you cannot rely on a striker fired gun. Just use some common sense and never use hand-loads for self-defense, keep the gun squeaky clean and use a low temperature lube very sparingly and you will probably experience no trouble. This subject and advise are nothing new it was discussed decades ago by gun writers who never new that someday plastic striker fired guns would even exist but the basic mechanical striker fired system has not changed just the plastic frames they are now wrapped in. It is an old subject that mystifies the younger and very inexperienced younger generation who seem to know little about gun mechanisms or their history.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 4, 2011 11:02 PM    Report this comment

The kabooms I refered to were reported several years ago in Combat Handguns magazine. All were firing factory .40 cal loads with 180 grain bullets. The guns that failed were a Glock, a Ruger and a Browning High Power, all known for being very rugged in 9mm but not in .40.

When the NYPD carried the first Generation Glocks they had so many accidents with them they demanded another type of trigger. Glock had to do something to keep such a big order so they came up with the heavier New York trigger system but alas it was and still is a single action short stroke mechanism. Yes a little better than the former trigger but not by much.

I think too the "mentality" that since any big police or military organisation adopts some weapon it is assumed by the "uneducated" that it has to be the very best there is. This illogical thinking shows a complete ignorance of weapon history. I refer to just a few military disaster weapons such as the German Luger, French Chauchat machine rifle, M16 rifle, Japanese Papa Nambu, just to name a few of the guns that should never have been adopted by any military.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 4, 2011 10:49 PM    Report this comment

I have a Glock 34, excellent gun, very accurate, reliable, and safe, actually for a self defense pistol I prefer no safety, in the high stress of combat nothing to forget to take off and get killed. I have also owned the Glock 36 in 45ACP AND Glock 27 in 40 caliber both excellent firearms. I would not worry about the Glock in 40 caliber, most pistols coming apart including all brands are due to faulty reloads with excessive pressures.

Posted by: PH/CIB | March 4, 2011 4:58 PM    Report this comment

More on Glock reliability. If you are really worried about "bullet set-back" or firing out of battery, get a Bar-stow barrel(approx $200.) There are those that fret about such things. I do not. I would rather spend my money on ammo, range membership, and training. Think about it. Glocks come in 357sig. 10mm mag. Both are high chamber pressure loads. If the Glock firing chamber was weak, these loads would reveal it. What we find is that both the 357 and 10mm are digested with no safety or reliability problems. The Glock platforn is now proven as a "you can bet your life on it" reliable and safe gun. After more than 25 years on the market (and millions sold), we would know by now if there we any real problems with the fundamentals of the Glock design or manufacturing process. As for the lack of external safety: Well, if the "Safe Action" trigger and loaded chamber indicator in the Gen4 G22 is not enough for you, your safety training needs some work. If you want lots of "safety features" go back to the 1911, or the Springfield XD series (if you can tolerate the striker-fired system in the XD). By the way, if the striker-fire system is so bad why do so many top-of-the-line gun makers copy Glock and offer not one but many striker fired polymer guns? Bottom line. There are not a lot of "bad guns" being make today. Even a $200. HighPoint will do in a pinch. In the face of an attack, "Any gun will do if you will do." Everything else is a question of personal taste, budget and skill.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 4, 2011 2:45 PM    Report this comment

O.K Wild Romanian. Until you can refer me to your original source documents the "Documented blow ups with 3 major brands of .40 cal pistols show that if you are using the 180 grain bullet and experience bullet set back the excess cartridge pressure will blow the gun sky high."

I understand your logic on the "striker fired vs hammer fired" systems of ignition. One glaring omission. You provide no test data to back-up your theory. You only blather on about how "documented" your anecdotal stories are. I remember when Glocks first came out. You remind of the silly folks that refused to accept that Gaston Glock may have come up will an advancement in design and manufacturing. You grudgingly accepted the Glock in 9mm (very big of you) When you are on a gun forum, do us all a favor. When you attack the safety and reliability of a platform adopted widely by law enforcement, military and security professionals world wide,....you had better be able to back it up with published repeatable tests performed by objective engineers. Theoretical logic is not enough. The fact Glock 40s fire thousands of 40 cal ammo every week in this country without incident gives the lie to your speculation. As for reliability: if you are going to go for greater reliablity than a Glock. I guess you could go for a hammer fired DAO only Sig. Better yet...a revolver. If that is not good enough, how about sheath knife.
By the way. You can shoot very hot Cor-Bon ammo safely through any caliber Glock.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 4, 2011 1:07 PM    Report this comment

This is my department issue sidearm. For uniform duty, it works great.

For plainclothes duty, the G-23 works just a bit better. A little smaller for concealed carry, but not by much. Still, not a bad choice.

For plainclothes and off-duty, the G-27 with an 11 round magazine works very well. The capability of taking a G-22 magazine (15 rounds) as a reload, is quite appealing. Obviously, it is my favorite for concealed carry.

Posted by: RICHARD H | March 4, 2011 1:03 AM    Report this comment

I carry a Glock 19 in 9mm but want no part of the .40 caliber. Documented blow ups with 3 major brands of .40 cal pistols show that if you are using the 180 grain bullet and experience bullet set back the excess cartridge pressure will blow the gun sky high.

Also Glocks are not the most reliable pistols under extreme temperatures, dirt, or excess lube. They are striker fired and striker fired pistols have often 4 lbs less striking energy than the bone crushing blow of a hammer fired gun.

The firing pins of striker fired pistols also have a short reach and that coupled with the less striking energy will cause them to misfire with high primed hand loads and or excess lube, dirt and low temperature.

Cold weather mandates you keep a clean gun and a good low temperature lubricant used very sparingly or the weaker striker mechanism as opposed to a hammer fired gun can cause misfires.

The Glock has no manual safety making it extremely dangerous to handle and carry so carry the gun in a hard shell leather or plastic holster and never, ever carry it loaded without using such a holster. The latest incident involved a famous black athlete that stuffed a loaded glock in his waist band and when at a restaurant it naturally went off shot him. One of many, many such incidents I have read about.

The comment "the best safety is between your ears" is pure arrogance and pure nonsense as all humans are subject to stress, fatigue, distractions or just plain unusual situations. Understand that the Glock has no manual safety and a mere touch or brush of the trigger will set it off. Being aware of this will enable you to carry your Glock and handle it without shooting your self or someone else.

Posted by: wild romanian | March 3, 2011 10:54 PM    Report this comment

Glock pistols have a great reputation for going "Bang" every time you pull the trigger. They are touted for their reliability and simplicity, but if they don't fit your hand, they might as well be a C-96 Broomhandle Mauser! I have owned several Glocks. They are great guns for people who are not gun people.....simple and reliable. What's not to like?.....I have sold or traded every Glock I have ever owned. They just aren't right for me.....and that is the one criterion that really matters.

Posted by: canovack | March 3, 2011 4:44 PM    Report this comment

"Not everyone takes to a Glock pistol the first time they handle it." Would that statement not be true of any gun? Oh yeah...everyone loves (or should love) the 1911 A.C.P. and the .38 revolver right? I have owned and operated a variety of guns. Grip fit and feel finally got the space it deserved in this article.Just to engage in heresy: Personally, I think that the 1911 is out of date, too heavy, low in capacity and has too many parts. In addition, I do not find it to be particularly attractive. Back to the G22: Few moving parts. Very reliable. High capacity, light weight, reasonable cost, adequate power, plenty accurate. So, if the G22 fits you, it is a great personal self-defense tool or open carry "duty" gun. Since it is so popular among law-enforcement and civilians alike, there are plenty of parts, customizations, accessories and holsters available to adapt the weapon to the warrior.

Posted by: OregonGreg | March 3, 2011 3:58 PM    Report this comment

I've been a subscriber for years and I've always appreciated the detailed, technical, yet easy to understand descriptions that GunReports provides. Thank you!

Posted by: billhoke133 | March 3, 2011 3:57 PM    Report this comment

Add your comments ...

New to Gun Tests? Register for Free!

Already Registered? Log In