Glock's New Gen 5 40 Caliber Pistols

[RWH24]

I have somebody at Glock check with their tech people and they said that previous generations .357 bbls were a no-go for Gen5 40s. Take it FWIW.

Correct, G17.5 uses the same lock up geometry as the G19 has for years. I am guessing the G22.5 has the same change.

[robbins290]

Correct, G17.5 uses the same lock up geometry as the G19 has for years. I am guessing the G22.5 has the same change.

But why wouldn't a G32 barrel work in a G23 gen 5? shouldnt it be the same specs? They should be the same block size.

[RWH24]

But why wouldn't a G32 barrel work in a G23 gen 5? shouldnt it be the same specs? They should be the same block size.

I have no detailed info on the lock up of the Gen 5 40 cals. Gen 4 a 32 would fit into a 23 EZPZ.
Me thinks I would contact an after market barrel mfg and ask about Gen 5 40 cal lock up vs gen 4. They are probably looking into making barrels for them now.

G22/23 barrels at the Glock Store Please Note: Does not fit Gen 5 models.

https://www.glockstore.com/KKM-Preci...=1&custcol7=34

[Cajunkraut]

Hey Gents, I don't pop in too often and since I still (choose to) duty carry .40, figured now was a good a time as any to chime in.

I get the 9mm fandom. Besides the Bureau convincing everyone it's "good enough" as a duty round, it's generally cheaper and easier to shoot. Some points to ponder based on my unscientific anecdotal observations as an instructor over the same pool of twenty-five Gen 3 or Gen 4 G22s and fifty Gen 3 G23s in the last decade:

• Most of the aforementioned pistols were in service years before I arrived. That said, I've observed one frame rail failure on a Gen 4 G22. Part replacement needs for all pistols was comparable to any other pool of high round count duty guns of various calibers. The excessive .40 wear and tear narrative is a myth IMO.
• When shooting steel, .40 generally knocks targets over with far fewer shots than 9mm.
• .40 was developed as the 'more weight retention through barriers and heavy clothing' answer to 9mm back before bonded ammo was standard. The current miracle of 9mm depends almost entirely on that bonded technology. If you're left with non-bonded JHPs or hardball, .40 still dominates.
• The standard-load 9mm ammo initially used to convince everyone to switch was so effective that the Bureau quietly upgraded to +P.
• While it may be minimal, .40 generally expands larger than 9mm. I'll take any extra girth I can get when it comes to the increased possibility of striking vital tissues.
• My Gen 4 G22 had way more muzzle flip than my Gen 3 G23 using the same ammo.
• For the preppers, you see now that .40 might be easier to find than 9mm when supply gets thin.
• Two words: bigger holes.

YMMV and I'm not trying to start a dumpster fire. At the end of the day, choose the caliber you shoot the most efficiently and confidently with. Stay safe!

[ST911]

[*]Most of the aforementioned pistols were in service years before I arrived. That said, I've observed one frame rail failure on a Gen 4 G22. Part replacement needs for all pistols was comparable to any other pool of high round count duty guns of various calibers. The excessive .40 wear and tear narrative is a myth IMO.

Not a myth, but the devil is in the details. The ownership interval is almost always shorter than the life expectancy of the gun, so most issues miss most users. "High round count" would also need to be defined. 10k is a lot for many, but nothing for the gun.

[*]When shooting steel, .40 generally knocks targets over with far fewer shots than 9mm.

That's a target setup and calibration issue.

[robbins290]

I have no detailed info on the lock up of the Gen 5 40 cals. Gen 4 a 32 would fit into a 23 EZPZ.
Me thinks I would contact an after market barrel mfg and ask about Gen 5 40 cal lock up vs gen 4. They are probably looking into making barrels for them now.

G22/23 barrels at the Glock Store Please Note: Does not fit Gen 5 models.

https://www.glockstore.com/KKM-Preci...=1&custcol7=34

interesting. Maybe they added some mass in the locking block area for the 40's. I guess time will tell. In the meantime, I will search for a gen 3 or 4 G23/32

[Bimmer]

[*]When shooting steel, .40 generally knocks targets over with far fewer shots than 9mm.

That's a target setup and calibration issue.

Uhhh... You mean that's a "physics" issue? .40S&W packs more energy than 9mm. Period.

You can plausibly argue that 9mm is "good enough" (I would agree), but you can't argue that it hits as hard as .40S&W.

[Cajunkraut]

Uhhh... You mean that's a "physics" issue? .40S&W packs more energy than 9mm. Period.

You can plausibly argue that 9mm is "good enough" (I would agree), but you can't argue that it hits as hard as .40S&W.

To Bimmer's point, Newton's Law applies; I definitely think perceived recoil can be an indicator of what's happening downrange.

[ST911]

Uhhh... You mean that's a "physics" issue? .40S&W packs more energy than 9mm. Period.

You can plausibly argue that 9mm is "good enough" (I would agree), but you can't argue that it hits as hard as .40S&W.

I understand what you mean, but I meant what I said. Targets can be hung, adjusted, and calibrated to fall at an energy threshold. To say that any given caliber takes fewer hits to fall than any other doesn't mean anything until you have the details. A popper can be adjusted to fall with .380, .32. But to your point as an example, you guys are absolutely correct to assert that it takes fewer hits (even marginal hits) to get a revolution on a Farnam rotator with .40 than 9.

[Disciple]

Uhhh... You mean that's a "physics" issue? .40S&W packs more energy than 9mm. Period.

Isn't momentum the relevant quantity for flipping steel targets?