close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Glock 26 vs S&W CS9 Comparison

Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by watsoncb, Jun 9, 2007.

  1. watsoncb

    watsoncb CLM

    Messages:
    620
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Location:
    Falls Church
    Has anyone done a comparison of a Glock Model 26 9mm with a Smith & Wesson Chief's 9mm Model CS9?

    I think the CS9 is slightly shorter but weights about 2 onces more. I am interested more in the versitility and shooting characteristics comparision.

    I have not been able to find a CS9 to my own range shootout.
     
  2. fastbolt

    fastbolt

    Messages:
    14,797
    Likes Received:
    7,253
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Location:
    CA Central Coast
    Similar in some ways, dissimilar in others ...

    I find the CS9 is much less susceptible to grip stability issues than the G26. The G26's ejection pattern can send an errant empty case into my face, chest or right past my ear if my grip becomes a bit less firm, while the CS9 will consistently send them off to the right, in my hands.

    The G26 seems to cycle a bit less briskly than the CS9. This is likely because of the stronger captive dual recoil spring assembly in the G26. The CS9 uses a short single, flat-wound recoil spring which isn't captive. I replace the CS9 recoil spring more often than I do in the G26.

    The Glock Safe Action (constant double action) trigger of the G26 is much different than the traditional double action (DA/SA) trigger of the CS9. This is probably going to be a personal preference and/or training issue for most folks, albeit an important one. The CS9's traditional double action has a longer, heavier initial DA trigger stroke followed by a shorter, faster-resetting SA trigger stroke. The cocked hammer is intended to be decocked by depressing a safety/decocking lever on the slide, which is then raised to return the pistol to the ready-to-fire condition.

    The slide of the G26 is a bit longer and blockier than the CS9's, but the length of the CS9 frame's grip tang makes it about the same overall length. The CS9 has a taller grip profile. This is another subjective, personal preference issue.

    The magazine design and capacity issue is a bit different. The G26 has the standard plastic clad, metal-lined double column Glock magazine with a 10-rd capacity, while the CS9 has a stainless steel, single column 7-rd capacity magazine.

    I find the loaded weight of them to be similar when it comes to 'heft'. The G26 will probably end up weighing a bit more loaded, as weighing both of them empty (with magazine) I get weights of 1 lb 6 7/8oz (CS9) and 1 lb 5 5/8oz (G26). The weight of the ammunition will add another 3-4 ounces, though ... with 7 rounds of 147gr USA9JHP2 ammunition weighing in at 3 3/8oz and 10 rounds at 4 7/8oz, for example.

    The CS9 has a 3" barrel of conventional design and the G26 has a 3.46" barrel with a hexagonal profile.

    Clickable images (to enlarge) of a G26 & CS9. The G26 magazine has a Pearce base installed.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    You can barely see the shorter (height) rear backstrap of the G26 grip peeking out from behind the CS9 grip backstrap
    [​IMG]

    You can barely see the top of the CS9's rear sight above the G26 slide
    [​IMG]
     

  3. watsoncb

    watsoncb CLM

    Messages:
    620
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Location:
    Falls Church
    Thanks Fastbolt ! Your evaluation is super. AAA+++ :thumbsup:

    I tend to feel a bit more at ease with the S&W decocker when I have one in the pipe.

    Have you shot a CS9? How are the ergonomics of the S&W (point and shoot, etc.)? I use to own a Glock 39 and found it's point and shoot ergonomics to be pretty good due to the angle of the grip to the slide.
     
  4. fastbolt

    fastbolt

    Messages:
    14,797
    Likes Received:
    7,253
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Location:
    CA Central Coast
    Have you shot a CS9?

    Yep. Own one.

    How are the ergonomics of the S&W (point and shoot, etc.)?

    Subjective issue.

    Since I've been issued, trained with and have carried S&W TDA pistols since '89/90, I've become somewhat acclimated to their design, ergonomics and operation. ;)

    While I've handled and fired various Glock models since their introduction throughout the years, I didn't decide to buy any of my own until after I became a Glock armorer a few years ago. I'd always found the grip angle and overall ergonomics of the Glock pistols to be a bit different than several other designs which I've owned, used, handled and fired over the course of my life. Nothing training couldn't resolve (in my case) ... and I eventually found a couple of the subcompacts to be to my liking.

    I still have a personal preference for either a 1911-style single column pistol or one of several S&W TDA pistols, of which the CS9 is one. The CS9 simply fits my medium-sized hand (why do glove makers think I have large hands???) as if made for it.

    I find the CS9 to be a bit more 'lively balanced' in my hands than my well-used and well-liked 3913 (as well as my SW99C, for that matter). The 3913 is a bit more controllable from the perspective of felt recoil and recoil management, especially when I'm using our previously issued 127gr +P+ (T-series RA9TA) ammunition. A bit less of a difference when standard pressure ammunition is being used, from my experience, anyway. The 3913 has more 'muzzle heft', so to speak. Ditto the SW99C TDA 9mm I own, although it feels lighter overall than the 3913.

    The practical accuracy of the CS9 surprised me. I was able to virtually equal the accuracy I experienced with my 3913 at the ranges around which our training has been centered ('close contact' to 11 yards), although the longer sight radius and slightly heavier 'heft' of the 3913 seems to offer me an advantage when I start getting out to farther ranges 15, 20, 25, 35, 50+ yards. Of course, the CS9 wasn't likely intended as a 'target pistol'. ;)

    If you find you like the G39's ergonomics and overall 'feel', you may, or may not, find the CS9's characteristics in this regard to suit your personal preferences. That's something you'd have to decide for yourself, and it would probably be better to do so after actually shooting one, not just handling it at some gunstore counter. Although I've come to really appreciate S&W TDA pistols, the CS9 (and especially the CS45) didn't 'feel' as good in my hands, just handling it, as it did once I started shooting it on the firing line.

    The problem is that S&W has recently decided to discontinue commercial production of a much of their metal-framed TDA line, in favor of their M&P pistol line ... and apparently the CS9 & CS45 have been discontinued for this reason.

    My partner just bought a M&P9 Compact, and while we haven't wrung it out on the firing line yet, his first impression was that it's going to immediately replace his favorite off-duty pistol, which up to now has been a G26. He said the balance, ergonomics and slimness of the higher capacity M&P9 Compact feels better to him. Interesting, but I'll reserve judgment until after having spent some range time with it.

    One thing about the CS9 is that like other metal-framed TDA pistols in the S&W line up, there are still a couple of parts which still require hand-fitting, the extractor and the sear release lever. Fitting an extractor requires the use of a bar gauge (No/No-GO) and a force dial gauge (for extractor spring tension). The sear release lever is filed to fit each pistol (based upon the manual safety body in each slide) and the 'timing' tolerance is checked with Go/No-Go gauges (numbered drill bits, using the smooth shank ends).

    Barrels still have to be checked for proper fit and function in each slide/frame, and occasionally one may need some adjustment of the barrel tab. Not like it used to be, though.

    From an armorer perspective it's easier to train armorers to support Glocks than some other pistols, including S&W pistols ... 1 day class for Glocks, 2-day class for Sig Sauer pistols, 2-day class for Colt Model O Pistols (1911's), 3-day class for S&W TDA pistols, etc..

    S&W's Lifetime Warranty for owners of new pistols is a nice thing, though.

    Probably still some NIB CS9's floating around in the commercial marketplace.

    The early (original) models had a single-side safety/decocker assembly and plastic sights. Later production models had ambidextrous safety/decockers and metal Novak Low-Mount sights.

    The 7-round magazines come with 2 floor plates, a curved one and a flat one.

    While I realize felt recoil is subjective and varies from one person to another, personally I find the G26 to be a bit 'softer shooting' than the CS9. Probably one of the reasons the G26 has exhibited some ejection pattern variance in my hands if I soften my grip or the angle of my grip changes for whatever reason during qualification and training involving fast-paced threat-target(s) engagement.

    I do, however, find I can personally experience an advantage when shooting the CS9 (or most other S&W TDA models) when it comes to speed of follow-up shots and transitioning among targets in similar training conditions. The Glock is about as fast, for me, as a Sig Sauer or HK USP TDA design pistol, and faster than a DAK or LEM-type design.

    Everybody's got their own personal favorites, though, or can probably wring some slight advantage from one design or another on a firing line, on a controlled range. May not be as critical a factor, or advantage/disadvantage, once the situation changes to somewhere outside the range environment, though. Lots of other factors and conditions can influence how things occur.

    I happen to like my CS9 AND my G26 ... but I carry one or another J-frame off-duty more often than either of them.;)