There is very little difference. Although the G22 is slightly heavier, the bullet is traveling slightly faster. I suggest a G19 for your father.

 

There is very little difference. Although the G22 is slightly heavier, the bullet is traveling slightly faster. I suggest a G19 for your father.

I shot the G19 alongside the G23 before I bought mine and I thought if I had to put a percentage difference on the G19 to G23, I would say the G19 was about 20 percent less recoil. Would you say that is accurate?

 

I have shot both the 22 and 23 during the same range visit. I can't tell any difference between the two. I have a 23 and love it. I am looking for a 19 but my 23 is my everyday carry gun.

 

to be honest, I couldn't feel a difference between the 19 and 23, so I got the 23.

if you dont mind me asking, whats your dads reasoning for wanting a handgun?

 

Get a nine or get a .45, the .40 sucks and is a compromise round, when you compromise nobody really gets what they want. I hate the recoil of a .40 it's snappy(not heavy) and my follow up shots are poor compared to 9mm or .45acp.

 

Ever consider the 22 or 23 in a "C" (compensated) model as an alternative? The relief’s cut into the end of the barrel should alleviate some of the recoil or kick that he isn't a fan of, while still retaining the .40 status.

 

Get A 19 best combo of size/capacity

 

Using 9mm 147 gr and .40 180 gr. factory golden saber ammuniton the calculated approximate recoil for each of the Glock models is:

G19 - 5.45 ft/lbs (100%)
G23 - 8.56 ft/lbs (157%)
G22 - 8.14 ft/lbs (149%)

Percantage noted to right are as compared to G19/9mm.

So a G22 will be about 5% less that a G23 - by the math.

 

Using 9mm 147 gr and .40 180 gr. factory golden saber ammuniton the calculated approximate recoil for each of the Glock models is:

G19 - 5.45 ft/lbs (100%)
G23 - 8.56 ft/lbs (157%)
G22 - 8.14 ft/lbs (149%)

Percantage noted to right are as compared to G19/9mm.

So a G22 will be about 5% less that a G23 - by the math.

Gotcha, so the G19 would be about 50% of the recoil of the 23. This is great. Also, to whoever asked about why he wants a handgun. The answer is for home defense and possible concealment in the future.

 

Get a nine or get a .45, the .40 sucks and is a compromise round, when you compromise nobody really gets what they want. I hate the recoil of a .40 it's snappy(not heavy) and my follow up shots are poor compared to 9mm or .45acp.

Some people call it a compromise...

....others might call it a balance.


In compact models, G30 (.45) and the G23 (.40)

.....the .40 has less recoil* (8.56 vs. 9.36 ft/lbs; -9%)....

.....the .40 holds more rounds (13+1 vs. 10+1; +27%).....

.....the .40 weighs less (8.14 vs. 9.36 oz; -15% )....

.....the .40 has more energy* (412 vs 391 ft/lbs; +5%)

and a shorter length of pull.

If length of pull is a factor, you can train for "snappy recoil", but you can't train for bigger hands.

Of course you can get a .45 GAP or have a grip reduction done.


*Based on factory Remington Golden Saber (.40/180 gr) (.45/230 gr)

 

Gotcha, so the G19 would be about 50% of the recoil of the 23. This is great. Also, to whoever asked about why he wants a handgun. The answer is for home defense and possible concealment in the future.

It would be about 64% of the recoil.

 

Some people call it a compromise...

....others might call it a balance.


In compact models, G30 (.45) and the G23 (.40)

.....the .40 has less recoil* (8.56 vs. 9.36 ft/lbs; -9%)....

.....the .40 holds more rounds (13+1 vs. 10+1; +27%).....

.....the .40 weighs less (8.14 vs. 9.36 oz; -15% )....

.....the .40 has more energy* (412 vs 391 ft/lbs; +5%)

and a shorter length of pull.

If length of pull is a factor, you can train for "snappy recoil", but you can't train for bigger hands.

Of course you can get a .45 GAP or have a grip reduction done.


*Based on factory Remington Golden Saber (.40/180 gr) (.45/230 gr)

I know, but I see no real advantage over the 9mm, and I see no reason to try and train around something when I can fire a round that works for me in the first place. Many people have this idea that .40 is vastly superior to a 9mm, and it just isn't. Factor in the cost of ammo and I see no advantage. Why settle for a .40 when you can have a 10mm? Same capacity and a significant advantage over 9mm? Thats something worth training around.

 

this kid needs my PDW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMZkINdG57I

 

I know, but I see no real advantage over the 9mm, and I see no reason to try and train around something when I can fire a round that works for me in the first place. Many people have this idea that .40 is vastly superior to a 9mm, and it just isn't. Factor in the cost of ammo and I see no advantage. Why settle for a .40 when you can have a 10mm? Same capacity and a significant advantage over 9mm? Thats something worth training around.

.40 ammo is actually a little easier for me to find now-a-days compared to all the MIA 9mm ammo.

Also, if you think .40 ammo is too expensive then why would you even mention the 10mm as it cost even more than .40 ammo.