Make the jump from G23 to G19 for EDC?

[iheartglock]

As the title states, I'm heavily weighing the possibility of changing from .40 S&W to 9mm. I was always under the assumption that 9mm was a "weak round" until I found this site. I'd like to pick up a G19 for EDC, but keep my G22 and G23 since I have invested time/money into reloading equipment over the years. They're also fun to shoot, I just feel 9mm would be more manageable for defensive use. I could also use the same holsters.

I feel that ammunition cost and recoil are the main factors in making this decision. I can buy (for example) CCI Blazer new, by the 1000, for around the same price I reload .40 S&W and I can reload 9mm for significantly less than that.

I've not shot a G19 to compare since the closest range that rents guns is hours away, one way. I would like to get my hands on one before, though, if possible.

Thoughts? Opinions?

[spinmove_]

Honestly I would save up and purchase a G19 to go with what you currently have. With the amount of investment that you have in your G22/G23, it doesn't make sense to totally move away from them, especially if you're just eventually switching to a different caliber and you don't currently have any issues with the guns you have.

[breakingtime91]

I am not a huge 40 fan. I am also not a huge fan of holding onto guns that just sit there but that is kind of a curse in itself. I would look at what you have, what you could get for it, and determine if that is a good enough deal to switch.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I ditched my 40 cal Glocks to go all 9mm. I have a 1911 which is more fun to shoot than the 40. But it's a match gun. Carry is 9mm.

I do think if I had the reloading stuff, I would keep it unless I could get a deal that wouldn't be a financial loss. I do recall during the Obama panic - 40 was more available.

[iheartglock]

I am not a huge 40 fan. I am also not a huge fan of holding onto guns that just sit there but that is kind of a curse in itself. I would look at what you have, what you could get for it, and determine if that is a good enough deal to switch.
I should have stated that I'm planning on trading a lightly used M&P40c that I really don't like toward the new G19. I'm not against ditching the 22 and 23, I just don't want to. If I fall in love with the 19, I could trade the 22/23 for another 19 (as a backup) and a 17. I would probably get a better deal trading Gen4 for Gen4 to begin with. What a head scratcher.


I ditched my 40 cal Glocks to go all 9mm. I have a 1911 which is more fun to shoot than the 40. But it's a match gun. Carry is 9mm.

I do think if I had the reloading stuff, I would keep it unless I could get a deal that wouldn't be a financial loss. I do recall during the Obama panic - 40 was more available. The Obama panic was another reason - besides my financial investment in .40 - that I wanted to keep the 22/23 because of how wiped out 9mm was everywhere.

[okie john]

You're on the right track. Get a 19 but keep the 40's for all the reasons stated.


Okie John

[spinmove_]

I'm not a huge .40S&W fan either. I simply don't see the logical point to the cartridge for the most part, but that's another topic. Given my viewpoints on that, I'd still keep either the G22 or G23 if you decide to go "all in" with 9mm Glocks. I say that simply from the standpoint of "you never know what might be and might not be available". If I had to choose between those two, and you were specifically switching to a G19, keep the G23 as it's the exact same size, shape, weight, and will fit in all the same holsters.

[HCM]

Unless it is an absolute necessity I would not get rid of your Glock 22 and 23. I would save up to buy the 19 to complement the other two.

During the ammo drought after Sandyhook 40 caliber was still available when 9 mm and 9 mm reloading components could not be found.

I would also recommend picking up 40 to 9 mm conversion barrels for your Glock 22 and 23. Several of the aftermarket barrel makers produce 40 caliber to 9 mm conversion barrel's including storm Lake, KKM, and Lone wolf. The Lonewolf barrels run about $100. All you'll need is the barrel and some 9 mm magazines. I'm currently running my Glock 23 with the Lonewolf conversion barrel. It runs and shoots very well as a 9 mm.

[psalms144.1]

I agree with the posters above, keep the G22 and G23, ditch the M&Pc to partially fund the G19. My G23 is the LEAST favorite GLOCK I own, but I keep it because it mirrors my G19 primary, and I get almost limitless .40 S&W ammunition from my agency, so, if something happens to my G19, I can holster up a pistol that feels exactly like my primary, and keep on keeping on.

I predict that, once you get used to the G19, you'll acquire a G17 and G26 to match it, then the G22/3 will really become backups to the backups, and POSSIBLY redundant.

[iheartglock]

I'm not a huge .40S&W fan either. I simply don't see the logical point to the cartridge for the most part, but that's another topic. Given my viewpoints on that, I'd still keep either the G22 or G23 if you decide to go "all in" with 9mm Glocks. I say that simply from the standpoint of "you never know what might be and might not be available". If I had to choose between those two, and you were specifically switching to a G19, keep the G23 as it's the exact same size, shape, weight, and will fit in all the same holsters.

The more I learn here, the more I wish I'd gone the 9mm route to begin with. Live and learn.


Unless it is an absolute necessity I would not get rid of your Glock 22 and 23. I would save up to buy the 19 to complement the other two.

During the ammo drought after Sandyhook 40 caliber was still available when 9 mm and 9 mm reloading components could not be found.

I would also recommend picking up 40 to 9 mm conversion barrels for your Glock 22 and 23. Several of the aftermarket barrel makers produce 40 caliber to 9 mm conversion barrel's including storm Lake, KKM, and Lone wolf. The Lonewolf barrels run about $100. All you'll need is the barrel and some 9 mm magazines. I'm currently running my Glock 23 with the Lonewolf conversion barrel. It runs and shoots very well as a 9 mm.

I had considered picking up conversion barrels and mags for both, but decided I'd rather just have a new weapon (or two).


I agree with the posters above, keep the G22 and G23, ditch the M&Pc to partially fund the G19. My G23 is the LEAST favorite GLOCK I own, but I keep it because it mirrors my G19 primary, and I get almost limitless .40 S&W ammunition from my agency, so, if something happens to my G19, I can holster up a pistol that feels exactly like my primary, and keep on keeping on.

I predict that, once you get used to the G19, you'll acquire a G17 and G26 to match it, then the G22/3 will really become backups to the backups, and POSSIBLY redundant.

This is almost my thought process exactly. I'm sure I'll end up with a G19 and G17 at some point at a minimum. I'd hate to get rid of a good Glock that I'm familiar with for no reason. I'll be going through my PD's reserve academy starting January and I've been told that the .40 ammo is on the house, so to speak. :)

[spinmove_]

The more I learn here, the more I wish I'd gone the 9mm route to begin with. Live and learn.





It happens. In all honesty, my first "real" gun was a Glock 23 Gen4. Had I known what I know now, I would have saved quite a bit of money, and had gone with a Glock 19. But I didn't, I've learned a lot, I'm sure I'll learn far more than I think I will in time, and I'll eventually have a Glock 19 in the safe.

[JonInWA]

Here's a great reason/substantiation for getting a G19: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4337-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Duty-and-Self-Defense-Ammo. See the quote DocGKR attached in the second posting to the thread regarding the Tier 1 operator's discussion vis-a-vis G17/G19G22/G23.

Most of my Glocks are 9mm, and Gen 3: G17, 2xG19s, G34, and a G21 in .45 ACP, and a just-acquired Gen4 G22, for which my acquisition rational is is dcussed in theis recent thread: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17908-Recent-Acquisition-initial-Report-and-Assessment-Glock-Gen4-G22

I'd definitely keep the Glocks that you've got in .40 for the reasons you, myself and others have enumerated, but I strongly recommend getting a 9mm G19, and possibly a G17.

Best, Jon

[Chuck Whitlock]

The pistol onmy hip as I type this is my gen3 G23 that I bought in late 2000. When I retired from my ".40-only" agency in 03/13, I purchased and installed a Storm Lake 9mm conversion barrel and some G19 mags. I've not had a lick of trouble. (my .40 barrel and mags are stashed away for later use if necessary)

That's the route I would have suggested, but since you have a gun you want to trade out of, trading into a G19 makes sense as well.

[HCM]

OP - if you trade your M&PC towards a 19, you will have / need 19 mags anyway, then pick up a conversion barrel - it will allow you to turn your 23 into a back up 19 / training gun for about $100.

If you are looking at getting serious about training, you will eventually want three identical guns. I carry gun which will be shot just enough to verify reliability, maybe a few thousand rounds. A training gun for high round /count high volume training and one identical spare as a back up in the event your carry gun is lost,stolen, or taken as evidence after a defensive shooting.

[JHC]

Pretty unanimous for a 19 at some point.

If you move now you can score one of the "battlefield green" framed 19s. I just saw one. Much more green than the old "OD". Why not right? It's not Safety Yellow or Zombie Green but it'll do. ;)

[olstyn]

The suggestions everybody is giving in this thread make a lot of sense. Once you get solidly switched over to 9mm, I'd probably only keep one of the .40 guns in order to hedge my bets between financial investment and ".40 ammo is always available," unless I was going to go down the conversion barrel path, which also seems like a pretty solid plan, and would somewhat negate the need to buy whole 9mm guns.

I've been pretty anti-Glock for myself for a long time (they've typically just felt wrong in my hands), but I recently fondled a Gen4 26 with an RMR on top at a match (the owner was shooting Carry Optics), and it actually seemed ok. Of course, the trigger safety thingy still feels really weird to me, but I somewhat feel like I should give Glocks a second chance. Perhaps a Gen4 19 will make sense to me at some point. I forget; are the mag releases reversible on Glocks? I'm not a lefty, but I'm so used to using my trigger finger on my Walther's paddle mag release that if I ever have a button gun, I think I'd rather at least have the option to have the release on the "wrong" side.

[iheartglock]

Gen4 mag releases are reversible and I'm a lefty, hence my fondness for the Gen4s. I've always thought the Glocks felt good in my hands, and when I shot my dad's G23 (which made me decide to buy mine) I thought it was the best feeling pistol in my hands other than a 1911 (or a VP9/40). Just my left hand's opinion, though.

[iheartglock]

Here's a great reason/substantiation for getting a G19: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4337-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Duty-and-Self-Defense-Ammo. See the quote DocGKR attached in the second posting to the thread regarding the Tier 1 operator's discussion vis-a-vis G17/G19G22/G23.

Most of my Glocks are 9mm, and Gen 3: G17, 2xG19s, G34, and a G21 in .45 ACP, and a just-acquired Gen4 G22, for which my acquisition rational is is dcussed in theis recent thread: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17908-Recent-Acquisition-initial-Report-and-Assessment-Glock-Gen4-G22

I'd definitely keep the Glocks that you've got in .40 for the reasons you, myself and others have enumerated, but I strongly recommend getting a 9mm G19, and possibly a G17.

Best, Jon

I actually read that thread recently and that's what got my wheels turning even more to 9mm.


OP - if you trade your M&PC towards a 19, you will have / need 19 mags anyway, then pick up a conversion barrel - it will allow you to turn your 23 into a back up 19 / training gun for about $100.

If you are looking at getting serious about training, you will eventually want three identical guns. I carry gun which will be shot just enough to verify reliability, maybe a few thousand rounds. A training gun for high round /count high volume training and one identical spare as a back up in the event your carry gun is lost,stolen, or taken as evidence after a defensive shooting.

I'm definitely going to be looking into a conversion barrel. Seems like a no-brainer for the price.


Pretty unanimous for a 19 at some point.

If you move now you can score one of the "battlefield green" framed 19s. I just saw one. Much more green than the old "OD". Why not right? It's not Safety Yellow or Zombie Green but it'll do. ;)

I had not seen those, that's a very interesting color. Big gun show next weekend, who knows! I personally like the gray frame but I think that will be hard to come by, too.

[ranger]

Another vote for the conversion barrels with G19 mags.

[HCM]

https://www.gtdist.com/products/firearms-parts-accessories/lone-wolf-barrel-m-23-32-conversion-to-9mm-stock-length.html

$99. I suspect they will have some sort of Black Friday sale as well - usually 15% off and $5 shipping.

[Kimura]

I actually like the .40 round. I think the recoil issue is overstated and yes I have shot a Glock 27. I really didn't find the 23 or the 27 that objectionable. Same for the USP Compact, and P226 in .40. But what do I know.

Having said that I'll also say that if you're a Glock guy, I think the 34/17/19/26 are the best of what they do. I actually like the .40s and .45s fine as well, but I still think what they do best is the 9mm pistols. And I think every Glock guy should have a 17,19 and a 26. They're cheap enough, so why not.

[breakingtime91]

I actually like the .40 round. I think the recoil issue is overstated and yes I have shot a Glock 27. I really didn't find the 23 or the 27 that objectionable. Same for the USP Compact, and P226 in .40. But what do I know.

Having said that I'll also say that if you're a Glock guy, I think the 34/17/19/26 are the best of what they do. I actually like the .40s and .45s fine as well, but I still think what they do best is the 9mm pistols. And I think every Glock guy should have a 17,19 and a 26. They're cheap enough, so why not.

not to be rude but what level shooter are you?

[JSGlock34]

I traded from the G23 to the G19 about 15 years ago and never looked back. For me, the G23 recoil is sharp enough to significantly reduce my speed compared to the G19. In addition, I get a very high grip on Glock pistols and would suffer slide bite with the G23. The latter issue does not manifest with the 9mm Glocks (or the G22 for that matter).

[LSP552]

I agree with the posters above, keep the G22 and G23, ditch the M&Pc to partially fund the G19. My G23 is the LEAST favorite GLOCK I own, but I keep it because it mirrors my G19 primary, and I get almost limitless .40 S&W ammunition from my agency, so, if something happens to my G19, I can holster up a pistol that feels exactly like my primary, and keep on keeping on.

I predict that, once you get used to the G19, you'll acquire a G17 and G26 to match it, then the G22/3 will really become backups to the backups, and POSSIBLY redundant.

What Kevin says.

[Kimura]

not to be rude but what level shooter are you?

I'll answer you the same way I answer everyone else that asks; I'm ok, not great not horrible. You can decide for yourself.

Shooting cold I usually shoot 3x5s @10 yards. I can guarantee hits in first shot in 2.3 with a glock and around 2.4 with a Sig DA/SA. Splits are usually .4 or .5. I've gone a little under 2 seconds for first shot and i can get my splits under .3 but cant guarantee a hit.

On a B8 @25 I usually live in the 8 ring. Sometimes I'll throw one into the 7. Sometimes, like yesterday with good ammo, I can stay in the 9-10, but not on demand.

The few times I've run the 10-10-10 drill, I've scored in the low to mid 90s.

But it doesn't matter if I was the best shooter on the board or couldn't hit the broadside of a B8, I still would have answered the same.

[breakingtime91]

I'll answer you the same way I answer everyone else that asks; I'm ok, not great not horrible. You can decide for yourself.

Shooting cold I usually shoot 3x5s @10 yards. I can guarantee hits in first shot in 2.3 with a glock and around 2.4 with a Sig DA/SA. Splits are usually .4 or .5. I've gone a little under 2 seconds for first shot and i can get my splits under .3 but cant guarantee a hit.

On a B8 @25 I usually live in the 8 ring. Sometimes I'll throw one into the 7. Sometimes, like yesterday with good ammo, I can stay in the 9-10, but not on demand.

The few times I've run the 10-10-10 drill, I've scored in the low to mid 90s.

But it doesn't matter if I was the best shooter on the board or couldn't hit the broadside of a B8, I still would have answered the same.

ok. It is pretty widely accepted that most people, not saying all, shoot 9mm better then they shoot a 40. By better I mean lower splits/more hits in less time on certain drills because the recoil DOES matter.

[Kimura]

ok. It is pretty widely accepted that most people, not saying all, shoot 9mm better then they shoot a 40. By better I mean lower splits/more hits in less time on certain drills because the recoil DOES matter.
Im not saying it doesn't matter. Nor am I implying that anyone is wrong. What I am saying, and apparently not very well, is that the difference isn't as big as the internet in general makes it out to be. If you frequent multiple forums, many make it sound like 40 recoils like Thor's hammer ecploded and 9mm recoils like a 22. Neither of which is true. I wasn't addressing this forum in particular, but forums in general.

Im not disregarding physics. Im simply saying I like 40 for what it is. Everything is a balance and each person has to decide how to strike that balance.

[HCM]

Im not saying it doesn't matter. Nor am I implying that anyone is wrong. What I am saying, and apparently not very well, is that the difference isn't as big as the internet in general makes it out to be. If you frequent multiple forums, many make it sound like 40 recoils like Thor's hammer ecploded and 9mm recoils like a 22. Neither of which is true. I wasn't addressing this forum in particular, but forums in general.

Im not disregarding physics. Im simply saying I like 40 for what it is. Everything is a balance and each person has to decide how to strike that balance.

No, but I shot mostly 40 for about 16 years and it takes a toll on your hands, wrists and elbows eventually. Also, all 40s are not created equal. The double recoil spring in the H and K USP 40s and they have your slide of the same 226229 make a noticeable difference versus shooting agent three Glock 23.

[JHC]

I could be wrong and my sample size if limited to just a couple, but a couple of exceptionally strong - I mean physically strong - shooters of some experience didn't seem to have the degradation with the .40 that I run into. So, the rule is true with exceptions. I have a hunch that's where Kimura may be coming from. I mean with a user name like that? Just sayin' ;)

[Nephrology]

I recently bought my first .40 (gen 4 glock 35) and I actually quite like it. i popped in a 9mm conversion barrel yesterday and while the recoil was certainly diminished, the difference was far less than I expected. Shooting it side by side with my G17 I didn't notice a substantial difference in my split times and I actually shot it far more accurately (but that is probably because of the smaller gen 4 frame size). I am not sure how much I'd like a G19 sized .40 but it really isn't that bad in a fullsize gun. I am definitely picking up a Gen4 G22 in the future. It's not that much more expensive than 9mm and will probably still be available during the upcoming election panic...

all things being equal 9mm is easier to shoot and will remain the handgun caliber I stock the most, but I am happy to have a .40 or two around.

[Appalachained]

I have carried a 9mm Glock everyday for a decade. I've had a g23 and a case of ammo for it for about Five years, but I never shoot it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JonInWA]

I recently bought my first .40 (gen 4 glock 35) and I actually quite like it. i popped in a 9mm conversion barrel yesterday and while the recoil was certainly diminished, the difference was far less than I expected. Shooting it side by side with my G17 I didn't notice a substantial difference in my split times and I actually shot it far more accurately (but that is probably because of the smaller gen 4 frame size). I am not sure how much I'd like a G19 sized .40 but it really isn't that bad in a fullsize gun. I am definitely picking up a Gen4 G22 in the future. It's not that much more expensive than 9mm and will probably still be available during the upcoming election panic...

all things being equal 9mm is easier to shoot and will remain the handgun caliber I stock the most, but I am happy to have a .40 or two around.

I've found that the Gen4 RSA definitely does make a difference in diminishing recoil in .40-so I think that there are clear advantages to be derived in choosing a Gen4 .40 Glock over the still concurrently offered Gen 3 Glocks. And then there is the additional longevity of the RSA, the additional Gen4 features, and the additional magazine offered with the Gen4s, and the price differentiation between Gen4 and Gen 3 pretty much vanishes.

However, even with the Gen4 RSA, the recoil forces in my Gen4 G22 are still significantly greater than those in my Gen 3 G17. And my heavier all-steel .40 Hi Power has even less perceived recoil force.

Best, Jon

[Kevin B.]

ok. It is pretty widely accepted that most people, not saying all, shoot 9mm better then they shoot a 40. By better I mean lower splits/more hits in less time on certain drills because the recoil DOES matter.

Sample of one, but my splits are virtually idential between a G19, G22 and a 1911. I really used to dislike the .40, but after spending a couple of years shooting a G22, I have really changed my mind.
I can pick up a modest increase in speed on my splits shooting a G17, maybe .02, but I consider that inconsequential.


No, but I shot mostly 40 for about 16 years and it takes a toll on your hands, wrists and elbows eventually. Also, all 40s are not created equal. The double recoil spring in the H and K USP 40s and they have your slide of the same 226229 make a noticeable difference versus shooting agent three Glock 23.

Agree. Shooting the larger calibers generally requires greater physical effort on my part and is more fatiguing.

[psalms144.1]

And, not all .40 S&W ammunition is the same, either. We're still issued 155gr JHP -the original DHS/USBP load that kills at the front and maims at the back. Most abusive semi-auto ammunition I've ever shot. Last range day, I ran a number of rounds through a sister-agency's .40s, using their now-standard 180 gr JHP, and recoil was almost pleasant - definitely not significantly worse than military 9mm NATO ball.

So, platform, loading, shooter - they all matter. For ME, shooting GLOCKs, and dealing with multiple injuries to my hands and wrists, it's 9mm all day, every day...

[Kevin B.]

So, platform, loading, shooter - they all matter.

Well said.

[DocSabo40]

not to be rude but what level shooter are you?

A truly just question my brethren! See this poor lost soul, wandering the Wasteland of the Forlorn Forty. Not yet seeing The Light of the Almighty 9mm(PBUI). Power he seeks. The fool! His wrist will sting and his flinch will be unbearable. For forty days will his ears ring from the blast, and his split times will be his caliber. But by the grace of the 9mm(PBUI) shall he be saved! - Parabellum 1:4-10

[iheartglock]

I've found that the Gen4 RSA definitely does make a difference in diminishing recoil in .40-so I think that there are clear advantages to be derived in choosing a Gen4 .40 Glock over the still concurrently offered Gen 3 Glocks. And then there is the additional longevity of the RSA, the additional Gen4 features, and the additional magazine offered with the Gen4s, and the price differentiation between Gen4 and Gen 3 pretty much vanishes.

However, even with the Gen4 RSA, the recoil forces in my Gen4 G22 are still significantly greater than those in my Gen 3 G17. And my heavier all-steel .40 Hi Power has even less perceived recoil force.

Best, Jon

And this is kind of what I was wondering as far as recoil goes....I agree, the Gen4 RSA does a good job slightly taming the recoil in comparison with the other .40's I've owned, but does that same Gen4 RSA in the 19/17 tame those down more than say, an equivalent Gen 3?
I know recoil is very subjective depending on the person shooting it

[psalms144.1]

And this is kind of what I was wondering as far as recoil goes....I agree, the Gen4 RSA does a good job slightly taming the recoil in comparison with the other .40's I've owned, but does that same Gen4 RSA in the 19/17 tame those down more than say, an equivalent Gen 3?
I know recoil is very subjective depending on the person shooting itI don't find the Gen4 9mm recoil to be significantly different from 3rd Gen recoil. In fact, I've said repeatedly that if GLOCK would make the 5.0 pistol a 3rd generation (old RSA and tool steel extractor) on a Gen4 grip (texture, magazine release, size and backstraps), it would be pretty close to my dream GLOCK. Add in the FBI-mandated lack of finger grooves and a return to the old Tennifer finish on the slide, and it would be the Uberness, very Operator, and make your beard grow quickly...

[Chuck Haggard]

I like the finger grooves

[psalms144.1]

I like the finger groovesso YOU'RE that guy. I knew there was someone out there who liked the fingergrooves on a G19...

[Chuck Haggard]

so YOU'RE that guy. I knew there was someone out there who liked the fingergrooves on a G19...

I prefer the finger grooves on the G17 due to the spacing, but I can deal with the gen 3 G19 spacing.

[Sero Sed Serio]

I don't find the Gen4 9mm recoil to be significantly different from 3rd Gen recoil. In fact, I've said repeatedly that if GLOCK would make the 5.0 pistol a 3rd generation (old RSA and tool steel extractor) on a Gen4 grip (texture, magazine release, size and backstraps), it would be pretty close to my dream GLOCK. Add in the FBI-mandated lack of finger grooves and a return to the old Tennifer finish on the slide, and it would be the Uberness, very Operator, and make your beard grow quickly...

Perfection?!?

[Wondering Beard]

so YOU'RE that guy. I knew there was someone out there who liked the fingergrooves on a G19...

He's not alone.

I like them even better on the g19 then on the g17.

[HCM]

And, not all .40 S&W ammunition is the same, either. We're still issued 155gr JHP -the original DHS/USBP load that kills at the front and maims at the back. Most abusive semi-auto ammunition I've ever shot. Last range day, I ran a number of rounds through a sister-agency's .40s, using their now-standard 180 gr JHP, and recoil was almost pleasant - definitely not significantly worse than military 9mm NATO ball.

So, platform, loading, shooter - they all matter. For ME, shooting GLOCKs, and dealing with multiple injuries to my hands and wrists, it's 9mm all day, every day...

This ^^^ 155 grain load is what I shot for 16 years. Even with this ammo, there is a noticeable difference between shooting my HK USPC and Gen 3 Glock 35 and shooting my Gen 3 23. My 23 shoots well but it is snappier than the similarly sized HK USPC.

[HCM]

A truly just question my brethren! See this poor lost soul, wandering the Wasteland of the Forlorn Forty. Not yet seeing The Light of the Almighty 9mm(PBUI). Power he seeks. The fool! His wrist will sting and his flinch will be unbearable. For forty days will his ears ring from the blast, and his split times will be his caliber. But by the grace of the 9mm(PBUI) shall he be saved! - Parabellum 1:4-10

How many rounds are you shooting a year?

[breakingtime91]

Lol whatever

[Rex G]

I just moved, voluntarily, to 9mm, from .40, as a duty cartridge, about as soon as my chief OK'ed 9mm as an alternative duty cartridge, because training with .40 had started becoming painful in 2011; aging can hurt. (The big-bore Magnums I used in training in the Eighties, and full-pressure .357 well into this century, probably caused most of the damage; I am not "blaming" the .40 S&W.) I had bought a G17 in early 2012, when I heard the chief was "about to" sign-off on the duty ammo policy change, and by later that year was already carrying 9mm on my own time. I bought my two G19 pistols in the 2013-2014 time frame. Do I feel less safe? No, I no longer see any real-world, practical advantage to carrying .40 S&W, and I patrol an area with the potential for serious trouble. (Israeli consulate, a major narco-traffic route from Mexico, many of the types of high-profile "soft" targets that terrorists like to hit, etc.) Adjacent districts have venues with more such desirable targets.

Even though my colleagues knew me as a big-bore guy in the Eighties, I actually briefly carried a pair of 9mm pistols in 1985, for duty and personal carry, because I really liked things about them other than the bore size. (HK P7) I went back to big bores, namely the .41 Magnum, because my employer abandoned the requirement that we use flap holsters in uniform, and went to specified open-topped retention holsters, which were not available for the P7. I'd had one scare, already, where the slow access to the P7 almost had a tragic consequence; a departure from the flap holster was a no-brainer. So, I was reasonably comfortable with carrying 9mm even before today's bonded-core +P JHP leveled the playing field.

OTOH, I do not entirely buy the assertion that a medium-bore is always as effective as a big bore. The "petals" of an expanded jacket can, indeed, cause damage to the important bits. I see this as more applicable, however, to the 9mm-versus-.45 debate than the 9mm-versus-.40 debate. The practical difference in size between .355 and .40 is quite minimal, in my opinion, so I think I would rather have the 9mm's somewhat higher magazine capacity, and shot-to-shot recovery advantage. The shot-to-shot factor is especially true with the two weapons the OP mentioned, the G19 and G23. I think the G23 crosses a line, in recoil and muzzle flip, that makes it less desirable as a carry piece. (I largely base this on the opinions of others, who have actual experience, as I have never shot a G23. I have owned both G22 and G17 pistols, and G27 and G26 pistols.)

To be clear, I am not a hater of the .40 S&W. I think it had a true practical/tactical advantage over 9mm, before today's excellent bonded, controlled-expansion +P JHP ammo, and, per shot, that advantage has not totally disappeared, it has simply lost most of its significance. I have no argument with those who wish to keep using using .40 S&W.

If I want to nail something really hard, I will shoot it with full-pressure .357 Magnum, fired with my "new" stronger hand, using a heavy revolver that will absorb/damp the recoil. :)

[Nephrology]

The biggest advantage to .40, in my opinion, is that 1) it is always on the shelves, 2) you can get great deals on large quantities of quality JHPs from Gov't contract overruns, 3) it is the cheapest off-the-shelf caliber that makes Major in USPSA and 4) all kinds of great deals of police surplus .40 cals. They practically give away posurp Glock 22s for free.

[Rex G]

so YOU'RE that guy. I knew there was someone out there who liked the fingergrooves on a G19...

Well, I am another "that" guy. I never had or shot a Gen3 G23 or G19, but the Gen4 G19 finger groove spacing does work for me, perhaps just a bit better than the Gen4 G17. I usually dislike finger groove spacing on just about any weapon, but the Gen4 G19 is an exception. (My ring fingers are notably slim, relative to my index and middle fingers, and my pinkies are comically small and skinny.)

[JHC]

Well, I am another "that" guy. I never had or shot a Gen3 G23 or G19, but the Gen4 G19 finger groove spacing does work for me, perhaps just a bit better than the Gen4 G17. I usually dislike finger groove spacing on just about any weapon, but the Gen4 G19 is an exception. (My ring fingers are notably slim, relative to my index and middle fingers, and my pinkies are comically small and skinny.)

I've owned Gen 1 and 2 and don't even notice them on my current 3s and 4s. But then I didn't notice smooth vs grooved triggers for years until the interwebz said it was a thing.

Pistol, 9mm, 1 each. Shoot.