Home > Glock Talk > General Glocking > Gen 5 40 models (pics)

Gen 5 40 models (pics)

  1. Nice!, but no love for the .40!
    Glock please bring the G21 Gen5 ASAP.
     
  2. Once again, sign me up for a gen 5 G23.
     
  3. These could prove interesting,
     
  4. Nice...I see a new Gen 5 23 in my future.
     
  5. Looks like they’re repurposing all those 45 GAP slide blanks.
     
  6. Interesting. Two pin receivers.
     
  7. I'll take a G22 please.
     
  8. Please, please, please let them run well with a WML. I'd be all over one if they do !
     
  9. I might have to pick up a Gen 5 23.
     
  10. Yup which means holster fitment hell for LE guys. The new 40's will require a completely new holster as far as Safariland duty gear.

    Holsters with some give may be fine.


    TXPO
     
  11. I'm sure some folks will get a serious case of heartburn over that, but it isn't a big deal. The 3rd pin was added originally, because Glock THOUGHT the 40 caliber needed the reinforcement. They had no empirical data at the time to validate it's need.

    Now years later after how many thousands upon of thousands of rounds through 40 caliber Glocks, they have determined, it wasn't really necessary. What's old is new again....:)


    TXPO
     
  12. I’d rather have a 3rd pin instead of a fat slide.
     
  13. Well. This means more police surplus Gen4’s coming when the gen5 hits.
     
  14. You’re saying the 40’s will not have the same dimensions as the 9mm’s?

    If so, that’s monumentally stupid. One of the biggest selling points for Glock is the vast accessories and not having to buy multiples, for each individual weapon.
     
  15. I'd like a 23X please.
     
  16. My understanding is that the 40 slides are thicker than the 9s. Don’t know if they are the same thickness as the GAPs.
     
  17. The fat slide was done to slow and control the recoil impulse, it had nothing to do with the deletion of the third pin. The slide is actually heavier, which slows slide travel. In theory it will reduce felt recoil, and aid in less wear on the pistol.


    TXPO
     
  18. I’m all about a fat slide G22. Part of what makes the G37 such a joy is the fat slide. Finally a Glock actually built around the cartridge!

    The slide appears to be somewhere between the width of the 17 and 37, based off the radius on the lower edge.

    01ECDFC0-BCFD-4DDD-8FFD-5AF00F94181C.jpeg

    9F419CCF-2BA9-4ED9-B89F-B3130452EA17.jpeg

    DC253FFD-05A2-4981-9D37-B16413F1EFF1.jpeg
     
  19. Almost, but not quite. The New Gen5 40 caliber slides are 1.08 inches in width. The GAP slide were 1.13 inches. The current 9mm Glock slides are 1.00 inches.


    TXPO
     
  20. I carry a gen3 23 that’s been shot a lot since 1998. Recoil nor wear is an issue.
     
  21. That's what I'm afraid of. The Brazilian gen 5 G22's had thicker heavier slides just like the 45 GAP used to have. I wouldn't mind it on a G22, but on the G23 and G27's that are meant for IWB carry, it makes the gun less desirable.

    My first Glock was a G19. But then when I found out that I could have the same exact size and weight gun in a more powerful caliber, I upgraded to a G23.

    If the Gen 5's G23's have the thicker slide, I'll probably pass. Additionally, I hate forward slide serrations and wish Glock would make them optional.
     
  22. Glock just updated their engineering on the 40 calibers to make them a bit more tame. I had no issues with the 40 either, but there is no doubt, there were complaints about the 40 caliber and it's recoil characteristics. Like all manufacturers, they are trying to improve on it's shoot ability for a wider range of shooters.


    TXPO
     
  23. They are wider, but not as much as the GAP guns were. The 40 Cal Gen5's are .08 inches wider than the current Gen5 9mm's.

    The GAP slides were actually as wide as the G20 and G21 slides, but they had radiused edges which made them seem a bit smaller visually.


    TXPO
     
  24. The GAPs should have had thin slides. For a 45, the 30S and 41 are the ACPs designed around the cartridge. The GAPs could have been likewise.
     
  25. I want a gen 5 33
     
  26. I agree, despite what Glock may have been trying to do, they should have just built the Gen5 40's around the same design parameters as the 9's.

    Gen 3 and 4 40 caliber guns have been running with no issues, and glock should have just updated their designs to the Gen5 without the added slide mass.

    From and LE standpoint, it is a huge advantage in retainment when you try to move a current customer to a new generation of the same platform, when it doesn't require a whole new set of gear.


    TXPO
     
  27. So why does the 30s and 41 have thin slides? +p 45s are pretty snappy. The 40 does NOT need a thicker slide.
     
  28. So...now that we’ve made it this far, bring on Gen 5 10mm! :waving:
     
  29. This will push a lot of LEA’s into considering other options.

    When we moved from the Gen3 to the Gen4’s, a huge selling point was that all of our gear would work and we would have updated firearms. If we had to buy new holsters, mag pouches, send people to new armorers’ schools, retrain all officers on the new weapon system, it would have been a deal breaker.

    We got new guns for around $100-150, per weapon. Some short time on the range, to ensure function, and done.

    New holsters and mag pouches are $150-250, depending on particulars. There, you’ve already doubled the cost of “upgrading” firearms and haven’t got to training. Now, everyone who likes FN, S&W, SA, Sig Sauer, etc has an argument to go from Glock to the platform they prefer, since they’ll have to buy gear and retrain, anyway.
     
  30. I agree, and I wouldn't have done it, but Glock decided it was a better option.

    I was pretty sure Glock was going that route with the slides after seeing the MHS23 a few years back. That was the test mule for the 40 cal Gen 5 platform, and apparently they liked it enough to stick with that design.


    TXPO
     
  31. You posted this while I was typing. It seems we agree.
     

  32. Exactly, all those add on can break a line item on a budget.


    TXPO
     
  33. In a way, it’s impressive a company as large and successful as GLOCK can make such a bonehead move. It’s almost like they, too, want to push toward 9mm.
     
  34. Yup, as someone who has written budgets for department issues weapons, a few thousand dollars one way or another can kill a project altogether.


    TXPO
     
  35. I don’t know what I’m complaining about. I won’t have a gen5 anyway. The continuation of the unnecessary dual recoil spring and ambi slide stop kill the deal for me. And yes I’m left handed.
     
  36. I like what I see, and am a .40 fan boy, but I think I will keep trying to find an old FPF G-3 G-23 next and wait a bit to see how they perform, and then get a BL from my dealer.
     
  37. I would like to see a G21/41 hybrid .... G21 slide length, G41 slide width.

    Not gonna happen, but a man can dream.

    iwouldlike.jpg
     
  38. I don't see any mention of the G35Gen5 or G24Gen5. Did I miss it?
     
  39. I agree. Also, I would like to think technology has improved since the .40 was first introduced to make stronger polymer receivers.
     
  40. I'm in!
    01ECDFC0-BCFD-4DDD-8FFD-5AF00F94181C-1.jpg
     
  41. The price of the Gen5 40S&W will be the same as the Gen4 40S&W. The blue label Gen5 is $398.20 and the Gen5 MOS is $477.40.
     
  42. I would think a .08 wider slide would fit in most holsters, of course there is always the heat gun:dancing:
     
  43. Might have something to do with the operating pressures. .40 = 35,000 p.s.i. , 45 = 21,000 p.s.i. Or possibly the recoil impulse of the .40.

    I really don't know, but there is some reason that the .40 S&W GLOCKs have problems with WML's and .45 and 9mm don't. Hopefully the beefier Gen 5 fixes this like the Gen 4 was supposed to.

    In my experience, the .40 S&W never did well in a repurposed 9mm frame/slide. It was a nice idea, but it has it's flaws. I know my SIG P229 was built around the .40 S&W cartridge....and it shows.

    9mm's in guns built for .40 are good-to-go. .40 S&W in guns built for 9mm …. not so much ! Yeah, they might be slightly beefier and heavier, but I guarantee you it'll be worth it.

    The Gen 5 .40 S&W (especially the G23) might be the answer to my dreams. I love the .40 S&W, and I love GLOCKs, I just don't love .40 S&W in any of the previously manufactured GLOCKs.

    That is the reason I switched back to .45 ACP and 9mm, after being a staunch .40 S&W man for 25 years.
     
  44. My gen3 40s have no issues with lights. In my experience, the gen3 22, 23, and 35 are perfectly suited for 40.
     
  45. Nobody wants a fat slide 40!

    I want two :dancing:
     
  46. I'm very happy to hear that Gen 5 40s are coming out this fall! I got my eye on the G27.5 :cool:.
     
  47. Most commercial style non kydex molded holster will likely work with them. Kydex molded specific holsters, probably aren't going to work with them. Of course you could always massage some of them with a heat gun.

    The ALS duty holsters don't have the clearance for a wider slide and they don't have any give.

    FWIW I spoke with Safariland and they are gearing up for Glock Gen5 40 specific holsters.


    TXPO
     
  48. We can complain now, but everybody will love it later and praise it for being a huge improvement and a gloriously soft shooter.

    G42: From "Glock is so stupid, this should be a 9mm" to "I love my 42, it's the sweetest shooting .380 ever."

    G43: From "Too little, too late; S&W already has the market" to "I'll never give up my 43, since it's so easy to carry and still delivers a service caliber in a reliable platform."

    G45: From "That's not practical, who wants to try and conceal a full size grip - it should be a 17 slide on a 19 frame" to "This is the best handling Glock ever made; you'll be a believer once you try one."

    Gen 5 .40s: From "That thicker slide is a terrible and unnecessary move - they should just use the existing size" to ... (Just wait and see all the praise threads to come)...