View Full Version : Glock 19 slim frame?
Hey guys, I have not really been following Glock's newer handguns (have had a 17 for around twelve years now). I called CDNN to order some Glock 19 mags in anticipation of picking up a 19 and the sales guy mentioned that all they had were Glock 19 slim frame mags.
Can anyone give me some info about these? I was told that the SF mags will fit the older frames, but not vice versa.
I own a single glock since 1989, model 19. I've bought magazines from various sources and as recent as a few months ago. I've never heard of a "slim frame" pistol and magazine.
shooter521
12-05-08, 14:55
Can anyone give me some info about these? I was told that the SF mags will fit the older frames, but not vice versa.
First, there is no such thing as a "G19SF" (or 22SF, or 23SF, etc). The only SF models are the 21 and 30 (the 20SF and 29SF will supposedly make their public debut at the SHOT Show in January).
Second, the "SF" designation stands for "Slim Frame" and has nothing to do with whether or not the gun has an ambidextrous mag catch (the G21SF can be ordered without, and none of the 30SFs have it).
Finally, what CDNN is trying to say is that the only mags they have in-stock are current production, which have the center cutout for the ambi mag catch as well as the standard side cutout. Those will work in guns with either type of mag catch, while older mags lacking the front cutout will not work in guns with the ambi mag catch.
Clear as mud?
MisterWilson
12-05-08, 14:56
The mags are good, get 'em while you can. They just added a little indentation on the magazine in preparation for an unreleased product.
Also IIRC, they're in anticipation of a ambidextrous G19, not SF. I could be wrong though.
ETA: I know that it's just arguing semantics but doesn't SF stand for "short frame"?
varoadking
12-06-08, 07:58
Second, the "SF" designation stands for "Slim Frame"
Short Frame...
...doesn't SF stand for "short frame"?
Yes it does...
Gutshot John
12-06-08, 10:55
My guess is that the "SF" magazines just have an extra cutout for a "future" ambi mag release generation of the 19.
Mags are good and can be used in both.
Does anyone know if or when the Glock 19 and 17 SF models will be available? I was recently told by a Glock rep that there were no plans for these guns to become available.
:confused:
Does anyone know if or when the Glock 19 and 17 SF models will be available? I was recently told by a Glock rep that there were no plans for these guns to become available.
:confused:
Just my opinion but I can't see why they'd bother making either. I doubt there have been many complaints about grip size on the 9mm versions. Different case with the grip size on the .45's.
Just my opinion but I can't see why they'd bother making either. I doubt there have been many complaints about grip size on the 9mm versions. Different case with the grip size on the .45's.
Yeah, but the grip reduction on the G21SF is barely noticeable! It's still too big. I have no idea why Glock can't do what Springfield did with the XD45, or even Taurus did with the .45 24/7. Their grips are much easier to deal with than a G21 or G30.
Even the HK45 with a traditional hammer strut and mainspring is easier for me to deal with than a G21. There is nothing in the back of the Glock grip except air, they could make the grip as small as the magwell if they wanted. Why they don't continues to perplex me.
RAM Engineer
12-06-08, 17:57
Does anyone know if or when the Glock 19 and 17 SF models will be available? I was recently told by a Glock rep that there were no plans for these guns to become available.
:confused:
Let's hope "never" is the correct answer. The Glock ambi mag release, as implemented on the G21SF, is a POS for two reasons:
1. It is hell on the dominant hand if you use a proper high hold.
2. It is needlessly complex. If you ever need to remove the mag release for maintenance or replacement, may God have mercy on your soul...
2.1 There is no Vickers mag release for the ambi models.
Let's hope "never" is the correct answer. The Glock ambi mag release, as implemented on the G21SF, is a POS for two reasons:
1. It is hell on the dominant hand if you use a proper high hold.
2. It is needlessly complex. If you ever need to remove the mag release for maintenance or replacement, may God have mercy on your soul...
2.1 There is no Vickers mag release for the ambi models.
Same complaints I always heard too. I thought there wasn't a Vickers mag release for the 45 frames, just the 9/40 frames?
These reasons are why I waited to find a 21SF with the standard rail and mag release. I didn't want the headache of limited holsters for the picatinney rail and the complexity of the mag release.
Thanks for the info guys.
A slim frame Glock 19 can be purchased today. Thats right. Its called a Kahr P9.
I'm a huge glock fan, but found I never carried my "baby" glock 26. It was just too fat.
The P series from Kahr functions just like a glock but is much slimmer and lighter. I also like it because I shoot a Glock 34 in IDPA and carry a Kahr. I wanted them to both function exactly alike. And theydo.
Don
Robb Jensen
12-10-08, 21:14
As far as I know there won't be a short frame G19 but there will be a G19 w/ambi mag catch.
Gutshot John
12-10-08, 21:32
Glock is making money hand-over-fist. There is no reason to make a "slim frame" if they're not inclined to make interchangeable backstraps either. The latter seems to be a much cheaper fix from a production standpoint.
Future generations may incorporate a reduced grip size across the board, but I can't see them making two models of each gun.
All that said, my understanding is that SF generation fits in both, but the earlier generation won't fit in the ambi-releases.
The Kahr is not really a fair comparison. You got almost twice the rounds. Not that it's a bad gun, just that there is always a trade off for something, and I'd rather not compromise on firepower. You can easily have the grip reduced by a qualified smith or yourself if you're good, but the G19 fits a broad range of hands very well.
The Kahr is a fair comparison to a "slim glock" because any slim glock is going to be a single stack affair. It will suffer similar reduction in round capacity compared to a fat glock.
I'm not slamming the concept of the fat glock. It works for millions of people, including me, as an IDPA gun.
What I'm saying is that a slim, single stack, glock exists today. Its made by Kahr.
Gutshot John
12-10-08, 21:43
The Kahr is a fair comparison to a "slim glock" because any slim glock is going to be a single stack affair. It will suffer similar reduction in round capacity compared to a fat glock.
Actually no, but we are probably using confusing terminology. The only extant "SF" Designated Glocks are the 21SF and 30SF, both hold the same number of rounds as the standard 21 and 30.
Glock only makes one single-stack. The 36.
A quick google of the models you referenced made me realize that I'm not upon the proper terminology.
What I considerd to be a slim glock, the slim .45 which is a single stack gun, is not correct. My apologies.
However my logic still stands. If you are willing to trade some capacity for even less girth, take a look at the Kahrs. To anyone who has wished that Glock would produce a VERY slim single stack version of their favorite gun, take a look at the Kahrs.
Regards,
Don
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.