Possibly a stupid question, but...
Given the same load being fired from both, and guns that are otherwise identical (let's say, stock) would the Gen 3 or Gen 4 be regarded as having less felt recoil, or is there no difference?
Possibly a stupid question, but...
Given the same load being fired from both, and guns that are otherwise identical (let's say, stock) would the Gen 3 or Gen 4 be regarded as having less felt recoil, or is there no difference?
Negligible difference if any, imo. I'd pick one or the other based on the mag release or grip/beavertail options long before recoil set ups, particularly given that a lot of people who shoot glocks in competition end up going to non-captured guide rods with reduced power recoil springs anyway.Originally Posted by rob_s
The 34 to the 17 feels about like the 17 to the 19 to me.
Not so much about less or more recoil, but more about slide cycle, sight tracking, and the extremely subjective "feel" of the gun. The 34 also comes out of the box with Glock's reduced weight trigger, which makes a difference to many shooters on the accuracy side of the equation. This is not a universal like though.
I find the 34 different enough from the 17 to make me choose to shoot the 17 in competition for a better cross-over of technique/ability.
If I was setting myself up to win, I would shoot a G35 in LTD (but not in production), and spend a lot of time on competition oriented skills.
Director Of Sales
Knight's Armament Company
Only reason I ask is that any deviation from the G19s I already have is strictly recoil-sensitivity driven on my shooting arm, so differences that others may not notice can make the difference for me between finishing a match and not, or regretting it the next day or not.
Understood. In that case we might not be able to answer that question for you and it may require you trying both to see if there is a difference for you.
In the end though, my guess is you'll notice the greatest difference in shootability just moving from the 19 to the 17 or 34 rather than real differences between generations of either the 17 or 34.
I was very resistant to the 34, preferring the 17 for being easier for me to carry OWB and AIWB, and for being more reliable across a wider range of power factor ammo. This despite knowing what Robert Vogel, Origami and my wife think about the 34 being a better shooter.
Based on some prodding from YVK, I recently tried a 34 upper with the same sights as my 17 (on my 17 lower to keep everything else constant). After five range sessions, it was absolutely clear the 34 was easier to shoot in USPSA type shooting. I found the 17 a smidge easier to draw than the 34, and to shoot slightly smaller groups at 25 yards. The 34 absolutely ruled, though, on quick shooting at 15-30 yards on paper and steel. When I messed up trigger or sights slightly with the 17 resulting in a C, the 34 would most often still be an A. Pure speculation, but I attribute this to the 34 being better at aiming for a given amount of effort.
From a performance perspective for carry, I am indifferent between 19, 17 and 34, and actually prefer a G4 19. For USPSA, it is a Gen 3 34 all the way. (Vogel, Origami and my wife also agree on the Gen 3 34 for the slightly better trigger.)
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
I am not a competition shooter so I won't drift too far, but I do own several Glocks. Gen3's and Gen4's, in particular a Gen3 and Gen4 34. As mentioned box stock the triggers in the Gen3's are a bit better generally lighter in a one to one comparison but that is an easy fix. For myself the biggest factors for the Gen4 are the grip size, since I have medium hands with short finger reach, the magazine release button and the texture. Texture is a bit of a moot point as I texture my pistols, but if I was not able to do so the Gen4 is much better that the Gen3. So on the Gen 4, I can get a better trigger finger placement, more ideal grip on the weapon and I don't need to alter my grip or rotate the weapon to eject a magazine.
I am also in the camp that I seem to have better accuracy results on paper overall as a group with the Gen4's, but ironically one of my Gen3 19's is one of the most accurate Glocks I own and has the tightest lockup of any of my Glocks (stock barrel, not a fitted barrel) which I am sure is the reason. As for felt recoil in the two Generations 34 to 34, I can't really perceive much difference. I personally perform better back to back with my 17's. I really don't care for my 22 or 35 in a full load, but if you did your own loads to make certain power factors, it can be a good thing. But since I don't deal with that my .40 cal Glocks see very little use. I still have an unfired OD, Gen 3, G23 from several years ago that I have not fired.
Also keep in mind that part of the dominance of the 35 in USPSA is that it will get mouse-fart loads to major.
Director Of Sales
Knight's Armament Company
My impression is that the 34 is the dominant Glock and the 35 is much less common with the 2011 ruling Limited?
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
No doubt, 2011 type purpose-built limited guns are more prevalent on the winners' podium in my experience.
But for those that aren't dropping 4k on USPSA guns and mags, and aren't cleaning their mags after each stage, the 35 is a thing.
Director Of Sales
Knight's Armament Company
Reply With Quote