| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Dov
Advanced Member
USA
2728 Posts |
 Posted - March 25 2019 : 10:13:54 PM
|
I don’t pay as much attention to the minutiae of guns in general as I used to do, mainly just ones I find interesting now.
So haven’t paid attention to generational differences of the Glocks, I can look up the differences easily enough but I’m looking for differences that matter for defensive gun use because I’m looking to add Glock 34 or 17.
Do any of the differences really matter?
It will be replacing N frames for nightstand and other full size handgun duties since health issues are limiting me to non magnum loads even in N frames.
Not that there is anything wrong with good 38 or 44 special load, but 9mm Glock will hold lot more than 6 rounds.
I’ve had pair of Glock 26’s for long time now as my normal carry guns, and have plenty of Glock 17 mags because that’s what I’ve used as reload for the 26’s.
|
Edited by - Dov on March 25 2019 10:16:00 PM |
|
|
dubiousone
Senior Member
644 Posts |
Posted - March 26 2019 : 05:37:23 AM
|
Nope. Each generation is 'better' but its relative.
Gen 1 glocks, no finger grooves, slick frame finish. "Slippery" depends on conditions. Dry, sweaty, bloody, rate of fire. The slick frames will squirm around on you a little but the slickness also doesn't hinder you from reacquiring your grip. Biggest differences are lack of a modified spring loaded bearing (unless added) and the old style extractor which was prone to chipping.
Gen 2. Very minor changes to extractor/spring loaded bearing. See above. Upgraded texture, no grooves. Introduction of 40SW, third pin frames.
Gen 3, finger grooves/texture.
Gen 4 saw two different textures, recoil spring upgrades for all models. Lengthened mag catch is now ambidextrious.
Gen 5. No mo finger grooves on the frontstrap, mag well flared, beveled muzzle and some other minor changes internally too minor to fuss about. Biggest difference is the ambi-slide release.
IMO none of the differences is enough to pick one over the other. The last Glock I bought was a gen 3 21SF only because I wanted parts compatability with what I already have but I see a gen 4 or 5 17 in my future, LOL. |
Expert? I ain't no expert, just a
Reasonably Knowledgeable Individual... |
 |
|
|
Dov
Advanced Member
USA
2728 Posts |
Posted - March 28 2019 : 12:42:54 AM
|
| Thanks. |
|
|
|
Arvinator
Advanced Member
USA
5382 Posts |
Posted - March 28 2019 : 07:37:39 AM
|
While I own a Gen 2 & Gen 4 Glock 17, I was recently issued a Gen 5 Glock 17 for work. If I had to pick just one, and with owning several mags I'd stick with my Gen 4 Glock 17.
just personal preference.
|
Be honest, fair, and always prepared... |
|
|
|
Ten Driver
Advanced Member
1923 Posts |
Posted - March 31 2019 : 4:46:50 PM
|
This is one of those areas where personal preference will dictate. I think any of the generations will do, but you might find that some features are more attractive than others.
The first cut is finger grooves. If they are preferred, you go with 3/4. If not, 1/2/5.
If you don’t care about finger grooves, the next cut is the trigger. Gen 1/2/3 have the same system, but Gen 4 was different—heavier weight, but crisper release. The Gen 5 changed things yet again, with a minor tweak to the feel that lots of folks see as an improvement over Gen 4. I can live with any of them.
Gen 4/5 introduced double-captive recoil springs that change the cycling a bit. Honestly, they don’t make a huge difference to me, but some folks feel differently. They might make a difference to people who have a harder time cycling the slide.
If you plan on mounting a weapon light, then 4/5 get the nod. Gen 3 has a rail, but was notorious for reliability issues with light attached. Gen 4 was developed for the sole purpose of fixing that—the reason for the double-captive spring.
Late in Gen 3 production, Glock switched to MIM for extractors and strikers, which shortened service life. The older steel parts of 1/2/earlier 3 are generally preferred for hard use.
Gen 4 recoil spring assemblies were problematic at first, resulting in many generations. If you get a used Gen 4, make sure you update to current standard.
Gen 5 introduced lots of changes to internal parts that make it incompatible with previous generations, so if you have a stockpile of parts, stay with Gen 1 - 4. The MIM Gen 5 striker is redesigned and more robust than Gen 4, and I would prefer a 5 over a 4 for that reason.
Mike
|
|
|
|
ajt
Average Member
USA
306 Posts |
Posted - March 31 2019 : 6:02:31 PM
|
| Mike - very informative and great info. Thanks. |
|
|
|
jle3030
Advanced Member
USA
5421 Posts |
Posted - March 31 2019 : 7:52:45 PM
|
Meanwhile my 26 year old Gen 2 M19 just keeps soldiering on. I know the gun intimately and can't get fired up to fix what ain't broke. Or it could be that I'm too obtuse to perceive the improvements of the "upgraded" models. Or maybe I'm just cheap... It's not as if the old G19 will wear out any time soon. I expect it to be running strong well after it passes to one of the grandsons.
Anyway, every time I've got the spare cash and the itch for a new (or used classic!) gun there's always something else that I "need" more.
Having examined one at the LGS, I do believe that if I were starting from scratch I would go with the current Gen 5.
Jeff |
jle3030 |
Edited by - jle3030 on March 31 2019 7:58:33 PM |
|
|
|
MikeG
Average Member
USA
319 Posts |
Posted - April 02 2019 : 12:21:39 AM
|
In an effort to modernize/upgrade my firearms, I just bought a Glock19 gen 5 with night sights at the Ft Carson PX. They *are* nice pistols.
The world isn't getting any saner, and I want to be prepared. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Significant differences between Glock generations?
