Posted: 3/22/2017 9:33:20 AM EDT
|
I'm going to be issued my choice of a Glock 22 or 23 soon. Now, It's been a long time since I've shot anything 40 caliber, so I'm kind of undecided. On the one hand, I sometimes carry a Glock 19 when I'm not carrying my CZ. So, I'm used to the compact frame, and have several other duty holsters and concealed holsters that would fit the 23. On the other hand while I'll get to take my issued firearm home, it will be a duty gun worn outside the waistband almost exclusively.
Considering the added weight and bulk of the 22, do you think it's worth the extra 2 rounds and half an inch of sight radius over the 23? |
|
Quoted:
G17 is best Glock made and the G22 is same size as G17. If you are going OWB G22 is obvious choice the G23 is just easier to conceal. The added weight will help with the slightly snappier recoil of the 10mm Kurz so I would choose the G22. |
|
Quoted:
I have XXL hands and 2 decades of experience with handguns, so recoil to me is negligible. I've owned a 17, 19, 21, and 23 and haven't noticed any extreme difference between them recoil wise. My greatest concern is comfort while driving. Full framed pistols tend to jab me right in the pelvic bone, whereas the 19 which I've carried on duty in the past has been fairly comfortable. I was leaning toward the 22, and I think that's what I'll end up choosing. The issued holster is a Safariland ALS/SLS standard ride, and in the past I've use the ALS/SLS mid-ride with the Glock 19. Guess I'll just suck it up and go with the full sized frame.  I think once you adjust to the size (which is really not much bigger) it will not be a concern. I hear you on big hands they soak up recoil. It is funny when I shoot with some of my Trump handed friends who pick up my G21 and complain it is huge and it feels right at home in my hands.
|
|
I also had the option of picking between the 23 and 22 at my agency. Personally I would pick whichever is most comfortable in your hand. Personally I chose the G23 since it's a perfect for my hands.
I also like that it's smaller which helps with space with all the other random gizmo's and gadgets they constantly issue us to attach to our duty belts and make mandatory to carry as if there is unlimited space. Pepper spray, baton, gloves, flashlight, first aid kit, handcuffs, tourniquet, rubber gloves, recorder, the taser we CAN'T EVEN USE ANYMORE due to that new legislation. Yet still carry it because the agency paid out the butt for them. And it's the size of an x frame s&w.....etc etc |
|
I have both. Both shoot about the same to me. Slight more "felt recoil" in the 23, but just minor.
But where I see the difference, is in carry. The 22 (Yes, the 22) carries slightly more comfortable for me in the same holster. A Comp-Tac MTAC, but I carry a S&W 1911ES either way. Glocks only when I am in a boat out on the ocean. |
|
My 23 was my first carry gun starting almost 8 years ago. Just picked up a 22 the other week, and I will likely be carrying that more often when I'm not at work. I used to care if I printed at all, but got over that quick. The size isn't much larger going up to the 22, and my off work attire allows me to conceal easier than what I wear at work.
I've been carrying the 22 in a Crossbreed IWB holster, no issues. If capacity is an issue, I'd say get the 23, with 23 mags with a +2 extension. That's how I carry my 27 frequently. |