G20 Gen 4

[Up1911Fan]

I'll have one soon, it'll be a Gen4.

[secondstoryguy]

I'm a big fan of the G20s, whether they be Gen 3 or 4. I've owned several and they have all shot extremely well, even with factory barrels. I've shot several sub 2" groups at 25 yards with the ones I've owned. Since moving to warmer climates with fewer animals that can eat me I've sold them off but the G40 has me thinking about buying another.

[DocGKR]

We unfortunately have been doing some recent 10 mm testing--definitely gets my hand sore shooting full power loads. With the G20 grip reduction, feels about like a G17. While 10 mm is a great SMG cartridge, I have little use for it in handguns, tending to prefer a rifle or 12 ga backed up with an M&P40 for backwoods use.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Sold!

Does no one else own a 20?

I do but aside from putting real sights on it, there's nothing non-factory about it. It's a gen 3 SF. The regular gen 3 I had before ran fine but the SF was nicer to handle.

I brought the SF to a Hackathorn class and talked it over with him...he picked it up and said, "man, aren't these things great? This is the best god damn Glock. It's the only Glock other than a 17 or a 19 that I care for. The nine and ten mil Glocks are pretty damn good guns, except that gen 4 19 they gave me. What a dog."

And that is pretty much a direct quote.

Anyway I do love my 20SF. Great pistol if you need to shout "get some".

[GJM]

The problem is there are basically NO .40 loads suitable for penetrating a brown bear's skull, and those that might work are sketchy as to manufacturer and reliability. The hard cast loads I tested in a Glock 22, for example, would not function reliably through a KKM barrel.

In 10mm, there are a number of FMJ loads that might penetrate, and the new Federal Trophy Bonded load which seems the best 10mm load for woods use from a major manufacturer.

Everyone that has been around big bears prefers a Guide Gun or shotgun, but there are times when you are doing things without your long gun or it becomes inoperative. The 10mm gives you the best chance of penetrating a skull with a service pistol sized handgun.

[JHC]

How did you conclude that a .40 FMJ and 10mm FMJ would perform so differently? Assuming say both purchased from the same manufacturer.

[GJM]

How did you conclude that a .40 FMJ and 10mm FMJ would perform so differently? Assuming say both purchased from the same manufacturer.

Fair question that involves some speculation, since live testing isn't likely to be popular with brown bears or load testers. This has been part of an ongoing conversation the last few years, with input from many. Double Tap used to make a FMJ FP load in .40, but it has been discontinued. Currently, I am not aware of any FMJ ammo designed as a penetrator load, that is available from the same manufacturer in .40 and 10.

Apparently, an Alaska Wildlife trooper did some testing with a bear skull, and found JHP did not reliably penetrate. (I haven't spoken to the person who supposedly did this study.) I don't find this surprising, since reliable expansion, while desirable in a service load, is not ideal for penetrating a bear's skull. From a hunter's perspective, what you do want to penetrate a skull is some combination of velocity, bullet construction and bullet shape.

The problem with most .40 FMJ loads is they are "value" loads, designed for economy and not penetration. The .40 loads that seem most suitable are hard cast, but they have not been reliable in the two G4 G22 pistols we tried with after market barrels. They have run in a FNS. I have been reluctant to try them in an HK, due to the HK barrel design. My source for loaded hard cast is Double Tap. The DT hard cast loads, which are heavy and relatively fast, feel like they may be at the edge of the reliability envelope for the .40 pistols I have tried them in. While fast for .40, they are slower in velocity than the 10mm loads.

In 10, there are a number of loads marketed specifically as penetrator loads, of 180-200 grains, about 1,150-1,200 fps. These loads are faster than the heavy .40 loads, which should help in penetrating a skull. Their bullet shape is a flat point as opposed to round ball. I believe that at least some are monolithic, as opposed to the value .40 ball construction of plated lead.

Looking at Gary's pictures of the Trophy Bonded 180 bullets, they look exactly like what I expect my hunting bullets recovered from a moose, caribou or elk to look like. I do not want them to expand. Unless he found the bullets to come apart in some of the test medium, this looks ideal. I also like that they are made by Federal, that they feel good, and that I have yet to have a stoppage with them in multiple Glock 29, Glock 20, S&W 1066 and 1076 pistols.

[JHC]

Got it. Alaska Troopers supposedly tested calibers on bear heads (not just skulls but intact heads) before choosing the G22. The report of said testing was that basically all service loads popped the brain pan when hit through nostrils or mouth and big boomers like .44 mag sometimes failed from other angles. Ever heard tell of those tests? They'd have occurred quite some time ago.

I've seen a few places post 25" of gel penetration of the .40 180 grain Win load. Seems like a lot but things like bone are not gel obviously.

Besides this newish Federal I wasn't aware of 10mm penetrator loads other than specialty brands like BB, DT, Corbon etc. That is loads where you aren't counting on the FMJ construction.

[GJM]

Got it. Alaska Troopers supposedly tested calibers on bear heads (not just skulls but intact heads) before choosing the G22. The report of said testing was that basically all service loads popped the brain pan when hit through nostrils or mouth and big boomers like .44 mag sometimes failed from other angles. Ever heard tell of those tests? They'd have occurred quite some time ago.

I've seen a few places post 25" of gel penetration of the .40 180 grain Win load. Seems like a lot but things like bone are not gel obviously.

Besides this newish Federal I wasn't aware of 10mm penetrator loads other than specialty brands like BB, DT, Corbon etc. That is loads where you aren't counting on the FMJ construction.

Joe, I am pretty sure the only time I heard of the AK Troopers (the organization, as opposed to an individual) doing such testing is from you, but I can't remember if that was in person or in a thread. One odd thing is the reference to ".44," which varies from 180 puff loads to stuff so powerful it requires a Super Redhawk to fire.

My first requirement for a bear cartridge in a semi-auto is reliability. Second is penetration. Ideally a warning shot makes the bear go away, as it has done for me a number of times. Next, the statistics show a shot striking the bear anywhere anywhere often stops the charge. Only in a small number of cases, is it necessary to penetrate the brain to stop the attack. Good thing, because otherwise the statistics would look a lot different.

Keeping the above in mind, if I had a Glock 19 and Speer 124+P, and was just visiting AK, I would be tempted to buy a large container of bear spray before I bought a .40, just for its additional capability around bears. If I had a .40, I would probably just run my regular JHP, a load Gary recommends, or maybe the Hornady 180 XTP, as I have a good impression of the penetration with XTP bullets. (Hornady lists the .40 180 XTP as 190/950 fps, and the 10mm 180 XTP/1,180 fps). If I hung around bears a lot, or just wanted to, I would get a 10mm, as the XTP 180 example shows the difference between the two cartridges.

If I was carrying a Glock, I would run Federal Trophy Bonded or Hornady XTP ammo because I have a high degree of confidence it will function in these pistols. If I had a third generation S&W, I would consider hard cast or one of the two previously mentioned loads. In all cases, I would try to keep a long gun as primary. I would not hesitate to have bear spray along, especially if you have an unarmed member of your party with you.

[Chuck Haggard]

You guys obviously need this;