Saturday, May 30, 2015

Reader Question: Glock 43 vs 17

I tried your contact button but it did not work.

My question is: I have some spare cash laying around and I can pick up a Glock 17 that I have spare parts and mags for, or I can get a Glock 43.  I am wondering if there is a significant difference between the two.  I realize the size thing and the 17 versus 6 thing.  I handled a 43 today and it felt top heavy without a loaded mag, much more so than a 42.  I currently have a S&W 638 and model 10 with a 2 inch barrel, a Keltec P3AT, and a Ruger 101. So I have smaller "deep carry" guns.  I am thinking the money would be better spent on a 17 as my son has one so then I would be looking at a two is one situation, this is why I have the spare parts and mags for the 17.  I carry a 1911 so carrying the 17 would not be a problem.

That or I say piss on it all and buy the Savage A17 that I really don't need but want, or is there something else out there I should consider?

Maybe you can make this into a blog post, I am not expecting a direct answer.

Thanks
Jeff


Ryan here: I'll check out the contact button thing. Onto the question.

I suppose it depends a lot on what you want the gun for. Do you want a different CCW pistol (it doesn't sound like you do) or do you want to stash another Glock in case S hits the F?

In general I am really underwhelmed with single stack 9mm's. Tried it and the whole thing just didn't really work all that well. .j    b b l;lThey are (most would say) too big for pocket carry.They are really not that much smaller (.89-.95 width vs 1.2ish) than double stack semi auto's but hold a lot fewer bullets. Also since the butt is necessarily uniform throughout they are harder to conceal than a J frame even if the dimensions are comparable. When people, as they almost universally do get an extended mag so they have more grip these guns are as long as a compact (G19) sized pistol. Personally I carry the Ruger LCP in and around my little sleepy town and the Glock 19 when I venture further, carry a lot of cash, etc.

As to the Glock 43 in general. For the sake of full disclosure I have little to no experience with this gun, can't remember if I've even fondled one or not. I think it is a bit expensive since there are so many competitive guns at lower prices (Kahr CW series, Ruger LC9, S&W Shield, etc). Still it has value because it should bring Glock reliability to a market with some questionable guns (Kel Tech, Diamondback, etc). With the concealed carry market booming and people loving Glock 9mm's I'm sure they will sell a bunch; this guy just isn't interested. I find that with a decent belt and pants bought 2 inches larger with a pistol in mind I can conceal a similarly sized double stack pistol as easily as a single stack. Until technology advances to the point where we are getting single stack 9mm's in the Walther PPK size range I don't see that opinion changing.

One of the biggest benefits about Glocks is that so many parts are inner changeable. For Glocks in 9mm and 40 S&W I believe the only size specific parts are barrel, slide, recoil spring and frame. This means my parts box for the G19 could probably fix a friends full sized .40 cal G22. Magazines are downwards compatible (a G26 can take 19 and 17 mags, a 19 can take 17 mags).

Paul Howe uses a Glock 26 for CCW and a G19 with a light for a duty type setup. Aside from G26 mags they both take all the same ammo, mags, parts, etc.  I don't mention that entirely from a fan boy perspective but A) it bears on this discussion and B) it's interesting to see the gear/ firearm choices really experienced people make.

As to .17 honestly I don't get it. I guess it can theoretically be a bit more accurate but if my 10/22 won't do the job I'll grab Project AR. Sort of along these lines I once looked at getting a .22 mag rifle and decided against it.

To your specific question I would go with the Glock 17 especially since you have a few small CCW type pistols. However to better answer the question I would consider a smaller Glock like a 19 or 26. I would lean to a G19 since your bench is pretty deep on small guns. That would give you compatability with the G17 and a slightly smaller gun that has a lot of bullets yet is realistic to conceal in anything less than a jacket.

So those are my thoughts on that. What do the readers think?

6 comments:

3rdman said...

I have to agree on the G17 over the G43. I have handle and shot the G43 and I did not care for it.

Anonymous said...

Jeff, a couple of quick, general comments.
Get the biggest caliber in the biggest frame that you can comfortably and reliably shoot. Also, get what you want, train with what you have, and at least learn about all the common types/brands.

As to your question, I think Ryan nailed it on all the major points. In the situation you posted, a 17 is the only logical choice.

If money were no concern I would carry a Wilson Combat .45 at all times. Alas, I'm poor. My daily carry is a G19. On rare needs for deeper concealment I have a P3AT in a pocket holster. (I also have an ankle holster for it but it is less desirable for me.)

Ryan, have you ever shot a .17? Fast, flat, and a lot of fun. Specific use? I can't think of one. But I haven't tried real hard.
DRJ

Theother Ryan said...

DRJ, I have not shot .17. That being said I don't really care as the gap between my .22 and my rifle in 5.56 is limited. . I need need a. .17 about as much as I need another hole in my head.

AM said...

The Glock17 is the best option in terms of utility. Sure it is a service pistol, but you can cut the handle down if you want a compact frame.

Unknown said...

Agreed. You have the small gun covered. The 17 will run forever and is cheap to use, holsters, mags, etc. everyone should have one.

--LC

Anonymous said...

I own a Glock 22. I swap barrels ONLY and shoot 357 SiG. I swap barrel and mags and shoot 9mm. To shoot 22LR I swap the entire slide and mags. Sat down with a Glock Rep years ago in an armorer's course and he detailed how the Slide and frame are identical between 40S&W and 357SiG firing models. He also showed me the points of interest on the Glock 22's slide and frame making it far more robust than you need for 9mm. I asked if you could do the same swapping for 10mm & 45 he said you could, people did but while Glock will "stand behind" the 40S&W-2357SiG-9mm swaps if done based on the Glock 22 they would not for the 10mm/45 swaps.

He as the first one who ever told me, "If you want to treat a firearm like you treat your lawnmower... buy a Glock." So far it's worked fine for me for over 10 years with NO fails.

Actually doing the same on a M16/M4 lower. A mil-spec 5.56 lower will run 5.45, 6.5, 6.8, and 22LR uppers...

Doing the swapping is a helluvalot cheaper than buying one of each.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts