Glock 22

Gentlemen and Ladies,

Please sound off (let me know) how you feel about the Glock 22.

I am an Old School 45 ACP fan.

But at work they want me to adopt a Glock 22 which is a 40 cal S&W.

I suspect they are both fairly similar.

What do you think?

 

Power of a .45, weight of a 9mm. I like mine.

 

.40 cal is a good, viable caliber for defense. For a .45 ACP fan, you will probably not enjoy shooting it as much as you would enjoy shooting a Glock 21 (.45). The recoil from the .40 is not really "more", but has a sharper feel to it. That said, you can get used to it with some practice, and, if you shoot the .45 well, you'll most likely shoot the .40 well.

My

 

Available evidence suggests little difference in performance between the three calibers when utilizing modern, quality ammo for defensive purposes.

https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/

If such is indeed the case, what reason is there to choose a larger diameter round at the cost of reduced ammunition capacity?

 

I think that like most autos they're grossly over-priced for the job, and you/your employers should just get a used but well maintained S&W .38 Police Special.

 

A review of prices on the secondhand market put some specimens of such revolver at just as high, if not even higher, than the retail price of a new in the box Glock pistol.

 

It's been over 30 years since I bought mine, so I'm not surprised; most people tend to keep the Specials, for one.

 

I have a G23 which is the compact version. The only possible shortfall for the G22 is the grip size. Some people prefer the thinner grip on a single stack than the Glock.

 

Never found an auto that felt comfortable in my hand. I could probably find one somewhere among all the new brands and models, but don't feel inspired enough to put out the effort. when I bought my last new revolver, most average to mediocre quality autos were outrageously expensive compared to the price of an excellent revolver. Maybe I just shopped during some sort of current fad or something.

 

There are very few pistols that are well balanced and have a natural aim.

Most revolvers have a natural aim while most pistols don't have a natural aim.


P-08 Luger is well balanced and has a natural aim.

 

Glock 9mm all the way.

 

.45 ACP M-1911 A1 all the way.

Forged milled cold hard steel.

A pistol that you can still shoot when it's over 100 years old.

Cold hard milled steel not stamped and steel don't get brittle over time and cracks like Glock's polymer frames.

 

Oh, sure.. just to show everyone what a dinosaur you are!

BTW, i'm not dissing a revolver.. i'm a revolver guy, myself, & shoot them more than autos. But i would not want to show up with a 6 round capacity pistol, when there are equally good 13 (or 17) round magazines available. As a civilian, with concealed carry, i like a 5 round snubbie.. but if i were a LEO, a full sized service pistol would be the minimum. And the 40 cal is a good caliber, especially if you're not buying the ammo. I think i'd go that route, if i were a cop. And Glock 22? Why not? A great, reliable, high cap pistol. I can see no downsides..

 

Let me see.. i have 4 38spl revolvers, & would not part with any. And several more, if you count the 357's. And i am much more accurate with a revolver, even in double action, than an auto. But i am old school, too. If i were a young leo, i would go with an auto.. higher capacity, lighter, reliable. There are plenty good autos out there, in the popular calibers.

While i like the idea of the 40 caliber, i have never taken the plunge. Why? I have 45's & 9's. I don't really 'need' anything between. Small & light? Grab a 9. Want more? Nothing like a 45 for a big honkin' slug going downrange.

It's like the 380.. or 9mm short. I have 22 magnums.. or 9mm.. i don't really need any more 'tweeners'. Well, even if i do, i don't have time to shoot what i've got, anymore, so why add more guns & more calibers?

 

Nothing wrong with revolvers. As I pointed out, revolvers are natural aim while except for a few exceptions like the P-08 Luger, pistols aren't natural aim. So you have to compensate using a pistol.

There are three basic combat handgun stances that are taught, the Applegate stance, Weaver stance and Isosceles stance (Isosceles stance being a natural stance and the easiest to teach and learn)

Excellent training film from WW ll.
What's funny is this is the exact training film we watched in 1969 at Camp Pendelton. The Marine Corps was still using the Applegate stance back then.
Right around 4:35 they explain natural aim and the difference between a pistol and a revolver's natural aim.

 

In truth such frames can and do crack.

 

My wife prefers autos but she has to practice a lot more than I do, because in order to keep your aim accurate and reflexive you can't go a month or so and then just get it back automatically; maybe after 10 years or so, with the same model it might work that way. I practice a few shots every 3-4 months for 10 minutes or and it takes no time at all to gain from it.

 

Striker fired, Polymer framed pistols are the future for military pistols. Soldiers carry a lot, I know some officers complain that the M9 is like carrying a metal brick. Polymer gun is lightweight, very reliable with their strikers, high capacity and recoils just as well as metal gun. Reason why US is adopting SIG P320. Sure their triggers will never be as good as 1911, but good enough for the job. Their a sidearm after all. SEALs, Delta Force, MARSOC, FBI etc all are going Glock.

Between Glock and the other polymer guns, they are relatively similar. Glock is known for crappy sights, long triggers, akward angle of the grip, however modified it is just as good. Replace the sights with standard night sight, get a lighter trigger, a 1911-style backstrap and it's a one of the best handguns. I never had a problem with cracking.

 

Most ergonomic gut I ever owned was the Bersa full sized 9mm.

 

I'll check them out sometime. I'm not in the market for a sidearm now. I'm think of buying a crossbow or bow here recently for my next toy collection additions. They might be fun to hunt drones with.

 

Since they were not expensive I sold it to a friend that wanted a full sized sidearm. My favorite full size is my Sig MK25.

 

Favorite full size.. hmm, that's a tough one. I really like my glock 21 in 45acp. But the beretta 92 is a fine service pistol, & can be used to break up concrete, if necessary. Even the S&W M&P is a reliable, functional weapon. For all around versatility, i'll have to go with the glock 21, which can be modified slightly to shoot 45 super & even Rowland level loads. 13 +1 (or more) of 300+ grains of lead going at 1400fps is pretty impressive ballistics, even if it is overkill for a carry piece. But at least it is an option.. like shooting 357 or 38spl in a revolver.

The beretta, CZ, & 1911 are fine pistols, but are kind of heavy for the more modern military & police use. I'd pick a plastic gun, if i were an armorer for a dept, or part of the military decision making unit. They are lighter, cheaper, carry more rounds, & comparably reliable to any of the heavy steel guns.

XD, glock, H&K, Sig, & even S&W have more modern weapons, for military & leo applications. That does not mean that a standard revolver can no longer do the job, or that it might be better in some applications. For breaching swat teams, revolvers are often preferred as sidearms, especially for the guy holding the shield.

 

I'm also looking for something to deal with these pesky drones.

 

An inexpensive 12 ga pump would fit that bill, nicely.

 

What size shot would you think would accomplish the mission ?