Posted: 6/15/2011 1:26:20 PM EDT
|
I have a G20 and a S&W 637 (technically my wife's). I am freeing up some money and don't know whether to get a G29SF to keep my G20 company, buy a G27 (same components but different powder from my 10mm) or a G26 (different components but same powder, less recoil) or to just buy a S&W J frame or Ruger LCR as I already have lots of .38 on hand. My wife can shoot any of them but almost prefer to stay away from .40. I believe I can pocket carry the G26/27 and can easily IWB carry all three choices. I can pocket the hammerless snubbie too. I like the models where I can put an XS big dot front sight. Downside to the 10mm is agencies here won't let you use them as a backup weapon. I do have the G20 w/ 7 mags and plenty of ammo and components. I have owned all of these models but just can't make my freaking mind up. Damn, so many choices these days. Recommend another firearm if you can think of it as long as it is under $600. |
|
Quoted: How about a Kahr CW9? Around here they go for about $450 and it should be slimmer than the glock. If I were you I would either do the G26 or .38 both should be more than enough to carry. i did look at the CM9. i just know having owned kahrs that they can be hit or miss. |
|
I just bought a G 27 Gen 4 and of all the Glocks I've owned, it has quickly become my favorite. It has been 100% reliable so far. I also have a 9mm conversion barrel for it. It has not missed a shot with the 9mm either. So I have both .40 and 9mm with the same pistol and a simple barrel and mag change. I've never changed the extractor in either my G 23 gen 3 or the G 37 gen 4.
I also have a Kahr PM9. It is a little thinner but I don't find it much easier to conceal than the G 27. Plus I like 10 or 11 shots with a 15 or 17 round back up mag better than 6 or 7 shots with the Kahr. Dave N |
|
Quoted: The G27 would be nice but if your wife can't shoot .40 and you have to buy the 9mm conversion barrel for her you might as well buy her the G26. Take that money you saved not buying a conversion barrel and get yourself a G27. Its win win! I like being able to get LE rate on Glocks and S&W. That means more money for night sights and ammo. |
|
Quoted:
The G27 would be nice but if your wife can't shoot .40 and you have to buy the 9mm conversion barrel for her you might as well buy her the G26. Take that money you saved not buying a conversion barrel and get yourself a G27. Its win win! A conversion barrel is about $120. A new G27 is $500 |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The G27 would be nice but if your wife can't shoot .40 and you have to buy the 9mm conversion barrel for her you might as well buy her the G26. Take that money you saved not buying a conversion barrel and get yourself a G27. Its win win! A conversion barrel is about $120. A new G27 is $500 G27 for me is $398.20!  |
|
Quoted: Blue label I assume? Quoted: Quoted: The G27 would be nice but if your wife can't shoot .40 and you have to buy the 9mm conversion barrel for her you might as well buy her the G26. Take that money you saved not buying a conversion barrel and get yourself a G27. Its win win! A conversion barrel is about $120. A new G27 is $500 G27 for me is $398.20!  |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Blue label I assume? Quoted: Quoted: The G27 would be nice but if your wife can't shoot .40 and you have to buy the 9mm conversion barrel for her you might as well buy her the G26. Take that money you saved not buying a conversion barrel and get yourself a G27. Its win win! A conversion barrel is about $120. A new G27 is $500 G27 for me is $398.20! yup. |
|
I've got to recommend the G23 over the G27. The G23 has a much better grip, holds more ammo, generates higher velocities, has less apparent recoil, and balances better than the G27. Further, if you add a mag extension for your little finger, you've made the G27's grip as long as the G23's but still don't have the capacity. BTW: the difference between the 10mm and 40s&w isn't just the powder they use, the 40s&w's case is .125" shorter and not as strong. |
|
Quoted: I've got to recommend the G23 over the G27. The G23 has a much better grip, holds more ammo, generates higher velocities, has less apparent recoil, and balances better than the G27. Further, if you add a mag extension for your little finger, you've made the G27's grip as long as the G23's but still don't have the capacity. BTW: the difference between the 10mm and 40s&w isn't just the powder they use, the 40s&w's case is .125" shorter and not as strong. The 19/23/32 doesnt fit my hands worth a damn and won't fit in the occasional pocket. I know .40 uses a different case. It does use the same primer, bullets, and dies which is why I am interested. |
|
Quoted: Actually, the .40 S&W uses a small pistol primer while the 10mm Auto uses a large pistol primer. As for the gun, the G27 makes some sense, but its also hard to beat a hammerless small frame revolver. It is a tough choice. i thought the .40 i was looking at the other day had larger pistol primers. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Actually, the .40 S&W uses a small pistol primer while the 10mm Auto uses a large pistol primer. As for the gun, the G27 makes some sense, but its also hard to beat a hammerless small frame revolver. It is a tough choice. i thought the .40 i was looking at the other day had larger pistol primers. I've never seen a .40 S&W with a large pistol primer, but I won't go so far as to say one doesn't exist somewhere. The reason for the downsizing to the SP primer was because of the smaller size of 9mm sized pistols as compared to the 10mm/.45 frame guns. It was possible, at least in some designs, for the ejector to strike a large pistol primer and set it off when a live round was being cleared from the weapon. The use of a SP primer eliminated this problem. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Actually, the .40 S&W uses a small pistol primer while the 10mm Auto uses a large pistol primer. As for the gun, the G27 makes some sense, but its also hard to beat a hammerless small frame revolver. It is a tough choice. i thought the .40 i was looking at the other day had larger pistol primers. I've never seen a .40 S&W with a large pistol primer, but I won't go so far as to say one doesn't exist somewhere. The reason for the downsizing to the SP primer was because of the smaller size of 9mm sized pistols as compared to the 10mm/.45 frame guns. It was possible, at least in some designs, for the ejector to strike a large pistol primer and set it off when a live round was being cleared from the weapon. The use of a SP primer eliminated this problem. It's a good reason when explained like that. I'm not a big fan of .40 so after reading that, I may just say screw it and go with a 10mm or down to 9mm. |