Page 44 of 49 FirstFirst ... 344243444546 ... LastLast
Results 431 to 440 of 482

Thread: Glock 47 MOS

  1. #431
    These days, I find myself gravitating to a 47 or a 19 with a comp and LTT a grip anchor.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  2. #432
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by HCM View Post
    Personally the best analogy is the 47 shoots or more correctly tracks like a shorter 34. I prefer the 47 to the 45, 17 and 34.
    Interesting. Thanks for your feedback.

  3. #433
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    These days, I find myself gravitating to a 47 or a 19 with a comp and LTT a grip anchor.
    So it sounds like you prefer the longer backstrap over a standard G19. I was going to ask if anyone has tried a G47 slide on a G19 frame for a CCO-like variant but so far I don't see anyone mentioning a benefit to the G19 frame (except maybe easier to conceal).

  4. #434
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokarev View Post
    I think Glock should look at simply dropping the 17 from the lineup. Why make two guns that are essentially the same? The only differences being the length of the frame dust cover and recoil spring?

    Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
    They dropped the 17 MOS when the G47 was released to the public.

  5. #435
    Pilgrim/Stranger awp_101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    DFW
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    Hehehe. On that....

    Me: "Yeah, I shot the Glock 45. It's pretty nice."

    Them: "Oh, really? I thought you only wanted Glocks in 9mm."

    Me: "I do."

    Them: "But you said Glock 45."

    Me: "The Glock 45 is a 9mm."

    Them: "No dude, the 9mm and 45 are two different calibers."

    Me: "visible sigh"
    Name:  PBS_WhosOnFirst version  2.jpg
Views: 775
Size:  93.5 KB
    Nothing so needs reforming as other people's habits - Mark Twain

    Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy / Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

  6. #436
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Okay so I answered some of my own questions today. I went and compared the grip/balance/etc... on a Gen 5 G19 and a G47. To me the G19 feels fine whereas the G47 just feels "off", which is what I remember from the G17. I went ahead and bought the G19, lubed it, and shot 100 rounds. After just one range session I already like it better than the G17s I've owned. The recoil is snappier but I find it easier to get hits with the G19.

    It was a positive outing, since I like the G19 and the Dan Wesson Pointman Carry (CCO) 45 I just bought looks to be excellent based on shooting today.

  7. #437
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by Robinson View Post
    Okay so I answered some of my own questions today. I went and compared the grip/balance/etc... on a Gen 5 G19 and a G47. To me the G19 feels fine whereas the G47 just feels "off", which is what I remember from the G17. I went ahead and bought the G19, lubed it, and shot 100 rounds. After just one range session I already like it better than the G17s I've owned. The recoil is snappier but I find it easier to get hits with the G19.

    It was a positive outing, since I like the G19 and the Dan Wesson Pointman Carry (CCO) 45 I just bought looks to be excellent based on shooting today.
    My 47 slide lives on my 19 grip frame. I’m crazy about and it shoots like a house afire
    “Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais

  8. #438
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Robinson View Post
    Okay so I answered some of my own questions today. I went and compared the grip/balance/etc... on a Gen 5 G19 and a G47. To me the G19 feels fine whereas the G47 just feels "off", which is what I remember from the G17. I went ahead and bought the G19, lubed it, and shot 100 rounds. After just one range session I already like it better than the G17s I've owned. The recoil is snappier but I find it easier to get hits with the G19.

    It was a positive outing, since I like the G19 and the Dan Wesson Pointman Carry (CCO) 45 I just bought looks to be excellent based on shooting today.
    Did you shoot the 47 ?

    Did you shoot the 47 slide on the 19 frame ?

    In dry handling the 47 feels like a 17, but when you shoot it, the recoil impulse and tracking is noticeably better.

    IME about 1/3 of people shoot the G17 grip 10-15% better, 1/3 shoot the G19 grip better and 1/3 shoot both about the same.

    I’m a G17 grip person but YMMV so shooting both the 47 and the 47 slide on a G19 grip are necessary to make any real determination.

    If how guns feel in the hand dry was an accurate measure of performance I would be shooting S&W M&Ps, VP9s etc. I feel great but I don’t shoot them because timers and Targets don’t lie.
    Last edited by HCM; 09-10-2023 at 07:55 PM.

  9. #439
    Site Supporter Cool Breeze's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bluegrass in every direction
    It took me awhile but I read this whole thread. While a couple people that actually have the 47 really love the 47, I'm surprised more people didn't chime in on their experience. I'm tentatively assuming its because it not been widely purchased yet by folks here (or maybe full size Glocks are not very popular anymore). As someone who loves the 17, I am admittedly a little miffed that the 17 MOS got dropped from the line up as I was planning to pick one up so now I don't know what to do.

    I also just read a few of the M&P 2.0 threads regarding accuracy, lockup geometry, lockup timing, etc. so that is also on my mind. Maybe just the M&Ps were poorly engineered in the beginning or the Glock engineers are really that good that they can just play legos with Glock parts by replacing the dust cover with the Glock 34-like slide extension and changing RSA to a 19 version with no adverse effects. While I am aware that that is what they originally did with the 34, they also cut out a piece of the slide to cut weight. In the 47 case, you are getting not only a 17 length slide but the additional weight of the slide that is replacing the dust cover with the shorter 19 RSA.

    Maybe this isn't that big of a change as I imagine or I'm over thinking it but my brain just doesn't understand how this is a better option from a functional/shooting/reliability perspective (institutional needs for inventory controls is irrelevant to me). That is not to say that it is not, but I just don't understand.
    Last edited by Cool Breeze; 09-10-2023 at 08:38 PM.

  10. #440
    Quote Originally Posted by Cool Breeze View Post
    It took me awhile but I read this whole thread. While a couple people that actually have the 47 really love the 47, I'm surprised more people didn't chime in on their experience. I'm tentatively assuming its because it not been widely purchased yet by folks here (or maybe full size Glocks are not very popular anymore). As someone who loves the 17, I am admittedly a little miffed that the 17 MOS got dropped from the line up as I was planning to pick one up so now I don't know what to do.

    I also just read a few of the M&P 2.0 threads regarding accuracy, lockup geometry, lockup timing, etc. so that is also on my mind. Maybe just the M&Ps were poorly engineered in the beginning or the Glock engineers are really that good that they can just play legos with Glock parts by replacing the dust cover with the Glock 34-like slide extension and changing RSA to a 19 version with no adverse effects. While I am aware that that is what they originally did with the 34, they also cut out a piece of the slide to cut weight. In the 47 case, you are getting not only a 17 length slide but the additional weight of the slide that is replacing the dust cover with the shorter 19 RSA.

    Maybe this isn't that big of a change as I imagine or I'm over thinking it but my brain just doesn't understand how this is a better option from a functional/shooting/reliability perspective (institutional needs for inventory controls is irrelevant to me). That is not to say that it is not, but I just don't understand.
    If you like the 17 why are you assuming you won't like the 47? And why are you assuming that changing the recoil spring will make the pistol less reliable/functional?

    Nobody is complaining about the change to a standard locking block. I'm surprised someone isn't claiming he can feel the difference in recoil with the change from the legacy 17 locking block in the G.5 guns.

    Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •