Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Glock 23 users

Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by waxik, Nov 6, 2012.

  1. waxik


    Sep 11, 2012
    Good day shooters! I am planning to purchase a g23 very soon but read that its recoil is even stronger if not the same as a 1911. Is there any truth in that? Thank you in advance for your replies.

    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
  2. stingray4540


    Aug 25, 2006
    Not so much stronger, as different. To me, a .45 is more of a push back, which is more pleasant to shoot. The .40 is more like the barrel snapping up and back very sharply. I guess that's the best I can describe it.

    I've got a 23c and added a heavier recoil spring, and it is much more comfy to shoot than a stock, uncompensated 23.

    Maybe others will have better insight.

  3. LT642


    Oct 19, 2008
    The recoil issue with the .40 SW round isn't as bad as people would lead you to believe. I carry a G23 as a duty weapon and have no issues with it.
    If you can I'd rent one and shoot a few hundred rounds through it, this is the best way to see if you like it or not.
  4. waxik


    Sep 11, 2012
    Thanks for your replies! Just a follow up question... Is there a big diff with the recoil of a 19 vs a 23?

    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
  5. 4Rules


    Mar 11, 2012
    Yes, there is.

    For me, the recoil of .40 from the G23 (when compared to 9x19 from the G19) results in trigger snatch becoming more of an issue. And for many users, myself included, the increased recoil of .40 means that times are markedly slower with the G23 than with the G19, so much so that the G19 - loaded with premium ammunition - seems to be the more appropriate choice. I can shoot my G23, and if I was without a G19 I would choose the G23, but I can shoot my G19 better, and with greater confidence, so the G19 is my first choice.
  6. clarkz71


    Aug 24, 2012
    South Florida
    I think everybody should own both. Why stop at one Glock.:winkie:
  7. If you are worried about recoil why not just buy a .22 and be done with it? I don't see why everyone gets so worked up over the increased recoil of a .40 over 9mm or .45. I personally don't want to put more bullets downrange in x number of seconds. I'm a civilian, so every bullet I let loose in a self defense shooting has to be aimed, not sprayed because I will be held accountable for any that injure an innocent bystander. If you can get more power out of the same sized pistol, isn't that preferrable? The more I practice, the less I notice recoil.

    Just my two cents. Flame on...
  8. SJ 40

    SJ 40

    Jan 17, 2011
    My perception of felt recoil difference with say 124 gr. Speer Gold Dots in a G 19 180 gr. Speer Gold Dots in a G 23 is about 15 to 18 percent more felt recoil for the 40 but everyone perceives it differently. SJ 40
  9. clarkz71


    Aug 24, 2012
    South Florida
    I agree 100%, good post .:thumbsup:
  10. PVolk


    Oct 2, 2009
    My 23c is more snappy but overall has less whallop than my dad's Kimber 1911. Both are comfortable and completely manageable though, so it's a bit of a moot point. They just recoil differently from each other.
  11. Yes. I have both and carry the 23 most of the time. The .40 is more snappy and may take a little practice to get use to but once you do, it's no big deal. Some people don't like the way the .40 shoots so as someone else advised, see if you can rent one and run a few hundred rounds through one before you decide.

    The 19 is no slouch. You'd be well armed with either one.

  12. krisspy


    Aug 8, 2012
    OH / No. KY
    While I don't have a 1911 to compare it to, I do think my G23 recoils more than my Stoeger Cougar .45. Generally, I find shooting my G23 .40 to be unpleasant, so 90% of the time I use a LWD 40-9 conversion barrel in it.
  13. F106 Fan

    F106 Fan

    Oct 19, 2011
    One reason the 1911 is more manageable is that it has a steel frame. The gun is heavy! And it's heavy down low where it helps.

    There is no question the .40 is snappy. Go to a range that rents the various guns and try them. Here's a test that anyone can do: Using slow fire at 7 yards, see how tight your group is with a 9mm and then with a .40 S&W. I would almost bet that the 9mm is going to be tighter. It isn't the gun, it isn't the ammo, it's the flinch.

    And make sure you are using 'real' ammo. In the .40 S&W try the Federal Classic 180 gr JHP at 990 fps. That's what LE uses around here. I don't know what the equivalent 9mm might be but perhaps you can find something marked 'NATO', probably 124 gr FMJ.

    Given that the modern 9mm SD ammo is nearly as capable as the .40 stuff, there is every reason to consider shooting 9mm. It really comes down to hitting the target. You can see where even NYPD had a horrific amount of collateral damage in their most recent highly publicized shooting. You absolutely must hit the target.

    In my view, the probability of hitting the target with a 9mm is much higher than with the .40 S&W with only a modest amount of practice. Sure, if you want to run through a few hundred rounds per week for months on end, you'll be a pretty good shooter. But, if 50 rounds is a big day on the range, you're likely to be better with a 9mm than a .40 S&W. BTW, around here LEOs qualify with 50 rounds 4 times per year. That's a walloping 200 rounds per year unless they do some homework on their own dime (and they don't!). I shoot that much or more every time I go out and while I don't shoot as much as I did when I was younger, I still get out a dozen or more times per year.

    Try as many guns as you can and then decide. And, no, I don't hate the .40 S&W. I am about to start reloading it and my first batch will be 2000 rounds. I expect to reload 4000 rounds by the end of January. That's because I have 4000 rounds of brass... Guess how I got them! No, they're not 'free-range' brass.

  14. Roering

    Roering Sorting nuts

    Feb 14, 2008
    Costa Mesa
    The .40 has a little more kick to it. Emphasis on "little". Not a deal breaker and as with any weapon a little practice and you will be good with it.
  15. adamrs


    Sep 24, 2012
    I purchased a glock 23 last week and have already gone to town changing the grip. I traded my 17 for it. The recoil is a bit snappier. My 45 xd pushed just as hard but felt smoother. The plan originally was to get a 40 to 9 conv barrel, which I can see my self using most the time. It's manageable and at 20 yards I couldn't see too much difference on accuracy. I train by having my brother load my mags and mix in 1 or 2 dummy rounds to check flinch. Learn to take the recoil instead of fighting it. For reference, shot the 26 side by side with the 23 and the 23 is still much harder. 9mm is more enjoyable to me, probably slightly quicker on the follow up but to each his own. Can't go wrong with either.
  16. davsco


    Feb 27, 2011
    well first of all you need to compare apples to apples. a g23 is chambered for .40 S&W. a 1911 may be chambered for 9mm, .40, .45 or others. with an equal caliber, i think you will find a 1911 format to be more ergonomic (combo of thinner and beavertail let you get a great grip) and also heavier than the same caliber in a glock. both these will give you less felt recoil in a 1911 over a glock. but the glock has a bigger grip because of the increased magazine capacity. so it's a trade off and you have to figure out what you want more.

    all that said, the g23 is a great gun and a perfect size for carry. the 'baby' glocks are too small for me to manipulate the controls easy, plus everyone adds a pearce grip extension to them, and by the time you've done that, they're pretty close in size to the 23 anyways. if you're not gonna carry, you should consider their full size guns, so the 22 in .40.

    but, don't take anyone's word for it, grip and ergos and the like are personal choices, so find a range that rents what you're interested in, and rent them and shoot them and decide for yourself.
  17. Glock40man


    Feb 1, 2011
    The Midwest

    The difference in felt recoil between 9MM, 40 S&W, and, 357 SIG is not as drastic as some will lead you to believe. But, YMMV.
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  18. rosco9


    Aug 15, 2012
    I'm def not a magazine writer but I'm an observant guy who likes to shoot ... I have a .45 1911, G23 & G27 amoung others. There is def a subtle difference in recoil and personally I shoot better with my G27 & G23 then my Kimber 1911 ... All that said I believe the difference, and the often talked about objection, to .40 makes for better magazine articles and thread chatter then anything else.... If you do get the .40 and you don't like it a conversion bbl pays for its self in about 20 boxes of 9mm instead of .40 ammo. Enjoy!
  19. If you are recoil sensitive then you might find the G23 to be a little bit sharp in that department. However, it really isn't all that much. Yes the gun does recoil but no, it is not bad. The Glock 23 is a fine self defense sidearm and you could do a lot worse, but not much better with this as you primary carry gun.