Posted: 2/26/2006 1:34:17 PM EDT
|
I'm just woundering why Glock went from a Full Size 21 to subcompact 30. Why not a compact version like the 9mm has? Any comments? |
| I don't think there would be that much of a difference if they had one between a 21 and a 30 size wise. A few guys have cut down the grip of a 21 to take 30 maqs. That would be nice. You would have the barrel length and sight radius of a 21 and the more concealable grip of a 30. It's alot easier to hide barrel length than grip length. Maybe this would be the model you are thinking of? Terry |
Pretty much. The 36 is thinner as it's a single-stack, but I think other than that they're about the same size. If you have something to complain about, it would be the lack of a subcompact model in .45. That being said, I don't know why you'd want to shoot a 3" barreled polymer subcompact .45. That short of barrel with that light of a gun would be somewhat uncomfortable I would think. |
| I haven't seen the chart at TopGlock but you are right. GLOCK calls the G30 a subcompact and the G36a subcompact Slimline. They do not have a compact model per se. I use the 9 round mags for deep concealment in the summer and the 10 round mags the rest of the year. The flush 9 rounder really conceals well and handles similar to a G26/G27; and with the 10 rounder in use it is slightly shorter than a G19 frame. |