Rob72

If you "get serious" about Glock, try all three (the 17, 19, and 26). The grip sits very differently between the models, at least for most folks. Couple of thoughts:

1) The Glock is a "pusher". It points very naturally, when your head scrunches down between your shoulders, and you shove a hand/hands forward (classic fight/flight).
2) Factory sights suck. Get some steel, of some sort, either from the distributor, or from the local shop, when you pick it up.
3) There is no easier, faster trigger out there. That's good and bad - , but I found I was "gun-conscious" from the moment an eye opened to the moment I was dead asleep with Glock. Maybe not the "way it should be", but I thought a lot more about safety, than with a GP-100 or 1911.

Re, the XD. To me, it is the answer to the unasked question. Unless the ergonomics are just unusually suited to you, or you just want a "plastic" 1911, the Glock is (to me) a better fast reaction piece, and the 1911 a better SA C&L option.

Glock isn't for everyone, but it does what it's intended to do with darn few failures, overandoverandoverandover, regardless of what you do to it. The epitome of KISS.......

FortyFive

I shot with a Marshall at the range often and he had Sigs like you wouldn't believe. I have always liked the Sigs and shot them well. The reason I am on this hunt is I have a very nice 1911 and also a S&W 4506 a .45. The S&W grip angle is different than the 1911 and I don't shoot it very well. Its a real nice gun though and I should be content with hitting the paper instead of groups. The concern is having the 1911 taken from me for some stupid reason.
There sure are many folks with Sigs here!!!

__________________
As you slide down the banister of life,
May the splinters never point the wrong way.
---
NRA Life Member

CLASS3NH

I've had the 26, 27, 33 series, as well as the 19, 23, and the 10mm 29 ( I currently have the 29 and a 19 Glock.
They still seem to feel a bit strange in my hands, as I have lots of other handguns to choose from doe Carry puropses. The 26 shot like a dream, I placed winchester subsonic 147Gr thru it and it ran without a flinch. The G19 also feeds without a hiccup. The 29 ( I also have the 357 Sig BBl that fits the 29) shoots VERY well, and I do carry it very often. I'd say to try several at a public range and then make your choice. I also love and carry the HK USP Compact in 40 Cal, just in case you might like that one too.

gregarat

I like my Glock19 as a carry gun, especially when traveling.

Because its low maintenance, dont really need to worry about another mag, extremely reliable, ist a prime example of K.I.S.S. engineering, and its easy to shoot. I dont have issues with the firearms safety. I firmly believe that the only safety issue is due to human error. Therefor, I am very vigilant every time I handle it. As I am with any firearm.

country85

GLOCKS are good guns, yes not for everyone, no gun is. I would trust my life with my GLOCkK 23. That being said I carry my XD9 service more often. Just like the feel better

ExSoldier

Since the safety is embedded in the trigger mechanism, it relegates the safety issue to where it truly belongs: THE SHOOTER. Right? If you're "safe" then the gun is safe. Period. I love my Glock. I have owned a Glock M21 (45) a Glock M30 (45) and I just currently own a Glock M27 (40) and I loved them all. But for utter relability and durability, gimme a Glock anyday. It is currently my nightstand gun.

When Glocks first came out, I hated them, but like a lot of things (new foods, new beers) it grew on me. Whenever a firearms student asks me for a gun recommendation and they want a semi auto, I always recommend the Glock and I let them try mine. Having said that, I think the M19 is a near perfect gun, however, I'm also of the opinion that nobody should enter a gunfight without a gun whose caliber does not begin with a "4" So why not a Glock M27? Recoil is negligible. Accuracy and reliability are superb and they can be had at a gunshow for about $400 or less.

__________________
Former Infantry Captain; 20 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

F350

How 'bout a "1"...as in 10mm G20 full of 180 gr Double Taps...when I go to the chitty I pack my G20 with 2 spare mags.
Day in day out I love my G19, small and light enough to be comfortable all day. I use to be a dyed in the wool 1911 fanatic but I have given in to the dark side I will admit the Para P-14 is starting to win me back.

AZG23

pssst...(WHISPR VOICE)..still starts with a "4"...:)

__________________
Brad B.

ExSoldier

The 10mm and the 45GAP are both answers to the unasked question. Ostensibly, the 10mm was supposed to ramp up the 45 for the FBI. The Bureau, discovered a couple of things mighty fast. The round kicked more than many agents (male or female) could handle. It BEAT weapons into an early demise. And the S&W pistols they contracted for it tended to lockup at critical moments with the slide in full battery.

They tried a shortened version and the 40 was born, but this is only a partially better solution to the 9mm. Why not just stay with the 45? DUH.

It seems to me that the 10mm might make a superb round for use in sub-guns. Say an H&K variant to the MP5 That way the shooters entire torso is the recoil absorbing platform and there is more length to more fully burn the powder and build good muzzle velocity and muzzle energy even in a round that might be weakened to subsonic levels for a suppressor.

__________________
Former Infantry Captain; 20 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

Euclidean

Actually I'm glad for the existence of .40 S&W for a variety of reasons. Like it or not, the 9mm cartridge is satisfactory to most people (self included), but with very few exceptions, anything you can build in 9x19 you can change a couple parts and build it in .40 S&W. This creates a lot of affordable, quality pistols in a dirt common service caliber more effective than 9x19.

Honestly, with modern ballistics, we don't really need the bigger bore so badly any more. If this was 1972 and all there was, was a choice between a .357 Magnum revolver and a .45 ACP 1911A1, I can see why a lot of people would develop an allegiance to the .45 ACP cartridge.

But this is 2005 and we have other rounds that'll do the same thing because we have greater technology now. And I know this is nobody on this forum because you guys know better, but most 1911A1 lovers that don't have such passion as to go on the internet and rave about their gun use military ball ammo. I'll take 9x19 hollowpoints with modern bullet designs any day over that.

I do agree that it does seem bass ackwards the way it developed and it would never have gone anywhere if not for "politics" for lack of a better word.

But eventually by hook or crook something like the .357 SIG or the .40 S&W just had to come along and start edging in on .45 ACP. It just had to. I admit I was nervous about .40 S&W at first, but when I started to really look at it, when you take the emotion out of it, the only thing I like better about .45 ACP is that it's in a bigger casing.

__________________
I am The Armed Educator.