[RWBlue]

Talk to me about the differences.

 

[awdxtc]

The difference is in the distance of the grip front to back, SF= short frame.

 

[RWBlue]

The difference is in the distance of the grip front to back, SF= short frame.

That is good information, but I was thinking more in the line of shootability/feel...

I have a couple G21s. I like them. I am not sure I want the SF, but ..

 

[my_old_glock]

.


The back of the pistol grip is about 1/8" shorter on the SF version. If you look at the cavity on the bottom of the SF version ir is smaller than the cavity on the non-SF version. The serrations on the backstrap touch the sear block pin hole on the SF version, but not the non-SF version. The pin is about 1/8" in diameter. If you have big hands, you may like the non-SF version better. I bought the non-SF version because I have big hands and can't readily get a Gen 4 in California without jumping through hoops.

From my understanding Glock will stop making the non-SF versions and continue with the Gen 4 and SF versions.



.

 

[GlockFanWA]

That is good information, but I was thinking more in the line of shootability/feel...

Relative to the shooter

 

[Mister-B]

The Gen 4 G20 is supposedly like an SF model, when you leave the back straps off. It comes with a medium and a large back strap, so having no extra back strap is SF. It'll be nice for you to have that option, I like the beefier spring, 3 included mags, and the grip texture.

 

[uncle_lawrence]

I like have the SF frames feel in the 20 & 21

 

[bac1023]

I have a standard G20 and I don't have an issue with the grip size. I don't have large hands either.

 

[ChicagoZman]

With average to small hands, you may not be able to reach the trigger adequately with the standard frame gun. That is, gripping the gun so as to keep it in line with the major bones of your arm, being able to reach the trigger with the distal interphalangeal joint.

You may be able to with the short frame gun as it reduces trigger reach by about 1/8 inch.

My hands are average, and I cannot reach the joint with either the standard or short frame .45/10mm. Your anatomy may differ.

 

[tenforme]

I have average size hands and handled both a G20 and a G20SF in my LGS for some time before choosing the SF version. The standard version just felt wrong. My SF handles and shoots really well. That said the SF does not have a small grip. My daughter shoots my SF kind of OK but struggles with the grip size.

 

[Eric2340]

So all that said, do those w/ 10mm experience feel the regular G20 is better for cutting recoil of the 10mm due to it's additional width than the G20SF?


I have both a G21 and a G21SF, and a G30 and G 30SF also. The recoil of the .45 does not bother me in any of my four, but I do find the recoil bothers me in the 40, in the G22 and 23, and I can not control the 27.

Am I then better off with the wider G20 then?

Both the standard and SF frames fit my large hands without issue.

.

 

[SDGlock23]

The SF models aren't any wider or thinner, as in left to right, than that regular models. The only area affected by the change is the very bottom area of the rear of the grip, so the end of the grip is shorter, as in back to front, on the SF vs the regular frame. I don't think recoil differs at all.

I've owned a regular 20 and a 20SF and a Gen4 20, as well as the same for the G21 (and 29 and 30!) and the only time I feel a recoil reduction is with the Gen4 frames, but that's because of the stronger dual sprung RSA, not with the grip. Most know by now, the the Gen4 grip is the same size (on the large frame .45's and 10mm only) as the Gen3 SF versions, they just have a different grip texture. The Gen4 grip on the 9mm/357/40 are like an "SF" version of the Gen3 grip, slightly shorter back to front at the bottom of the grip.

 

[tenforme]

So all that said, do those w/ 10mm experience feel the regular G20 is better for cutting recoil of the 10mm due to it's additional width than the G20SF?


I have both a G21 and a G21SF, and a G30 and G 30SF also. The recoil of the .45 does not bother me in any of my four, but I do find the recoil bothers me in the 40, in the G22 and 23, and I can not control the 27.

Am I then better off with the wider G20 then?

Both the standard and SF frames fit my large hands without issue.

.

No you are over thinking this. The mass is essentially the same as are the frame width and length. Its just a slightly smaller distance from the backstrap to the trigger on an SF

 

[Eric2340]

The SF models aren't any wider or thinner, as in left to right, than that regular models. The only area affected by the change is the very bottom area of the rear of the grip, so the end of the grip is shorter, as in back to front, on the SF vs the regular frame. I don't think recoil differs at all.

Ok, obviously if I own both frame sizes (21 and 30) in both frame designs (SF and non-SF) then I understand the differences and that they are not really any "wider" or "thicker". I miss spoke.

What I SHOULD have said, is I know with the original frames I know there is "more frame" there for me to grip - in essence a "larger area" for the recoil to be spread over my hand.

Do those with experience with the 10mm feel this is an advantage to shooting the 10mm, of having a larger "footprint" if you will for the recoil to be distributed over when shooting it?


That's what I meant to say.

.

 

[Eric2340]

No you are over thinking this. The mass is essentially the same as are the frame width and length. Its just a slightly smaller distance from the backstrap to the trigger on an SF

Oy vey No, I'm not, see last post.

If there's "less frame" to grip one way or another, there is less area for the recoil to be distributed over.


Again, does anyone with experience with the 10mm feel that if the larger grip is not a factor in fitting one's hands, do you feel having "more gun" to grip/distribute the gun's recoil over is an advantage?

I have never shot the 10mm, so I have nothing to base this off of from experience. I can only tell you that between the two frame styles I know shooting the .45 in the original frame feels better at least to me with the soft shooting .45, even if technically the SF frame does fit my hands just a little better.

But again, I still have NO trouble gripping the original frame designs in either the 21 or 30.

 

[Eric2340]

I am also NOT asking and NOT talking about downloading the 10mm to a lighter loading, or using a softer shooting factory load.

I am asking about regular, full power, factory 10mm loadings please.


Thanks -

.

 

[tenforme]

Oy vey No, I'm not, see last post.

If there's "less frame" to grip one way or another, there is less area for the recoil to be distributed over.


Again, does anyone with experience with the 10mm feel that if the larger grip is not a factor in fitting one's hands, do you feel having "more gun" to grip/distribute the gun's recoil over is an advantage?

I have never shot the 10mm, so I have nothing to base this off of from experience. I can only tell you that between the two frame styles I know shooting the .45 in the original frame feels better at least to me with the soft shooting .45, even if technically the SF frame does fit my hands just a little better.

But again, I still have NO trouble gripping the original frame designs in either the 21 or 30.

Unfortunate timing of my post. I didn't see the previous one saying the same thing. :embarassed:

To answer your question - based on what you have said then you may have hands big enough to take some advantage of the greater surface area of the non-SF. I definitely feel it in the heel of my hand after 200 round or so of Underwood's finest. A pair of shooting gloves makes a difference though.

Maybe get a Gen 4 and have the option of both size grips. :dunno:

 

[MikeS.]

I have 2 G20s and a 21 non SF. They fit my big hands well. Every time I handle a SF model it just doesn't feel right in my hands.

 

[Eric2340]

To answer your question - based on what you have said then you may have hands big enough to take some advantage of the greater surface area of the non-SF. I definitely feel it in the heel of my hand after 200 round or so of Underwood's finest. A pair of shooting gloves makes a difference though.

Maybe get a Gen 4 and have the option of both size grips. :dunno:

Considering the fact that now past 40 years old and with the onset of slight arthritis in my hands shooting the .40 cal in even a G22 or 35 bothers my hands for a couple of days later is part of the main reason I ask if I am better off with the large, original, non-SF frame in the G20? I have NO desire or need for the 29, so it's not even an issue.

Plus, I too have wondered if a Gen 4 G20 is not the answer, to also take advantage of it's dual recoil spring setup too?

I want to find someone local w/ a G20 and try it first before I commit to one though............

.

 

[GlockFan7]

I can handle either with no problem. I just don't care for the non-SF grip size. Of course the grips of the respective G20 and G21 are the same, but it wasn't until I held an SF sized grip that I wanted one or any Glock for that matter. It's not always about size, but more about fit. All of my 1911s have full thickness grips instead of slim grips, because I like the fit.