Glock 31 - Dumb or Not Dumb

[Tamara]

I know that the only Glock that physically, no-shit broke while I was actually present was our rental Gen3 .357SIG gun at CCA... I wanna say it was a 31, but it might have been a 32...which suddenly started shooting to the left. Sure enough, the slide was cracked through from the bottom front corner of the ejection port clear down to the slide rail. Probably a victim of not staying on top of the RSA replacement schedule, to be honest.

[LockedBreech]

I have nothing to contribute to the G31 discussion. But I do not think it is dumb.

Have you put hands on the G21SF? It seems so silly but the minute dimensional changes make all the difference in the world on how the gun feels and handles. For instance, the G21 Gen3 is too fat for me, when I grip it, it just causes a nasty flareup of my carpal-tunnel by contrast, the G21SF Gen3 doesn't do that. I mean seriously...only difference is the "slim frame".

In .357 Sig land have you considered the Sig 250/320 series of guns? I've thought so hard and nearly convinced myself about six times to buy a P250 Full size in .357 Sig, because they can literally be had for less than four Benjamins.

I really want to hold the Gen 4 G21, I've heard it does good things regarding that chubbiness. I'll try to stay open to that.

The P250 is very, very tempting to me but I'm bothered that the rear sight can't be swapped.

The P320 is still too much of a new kid on the block for me to want to jump on board yet. I'm pretty conservative (except for my early-adopter PX4) and I like designs that have been proven and run their paces.

I have never heard of a Sig not handling .40 or 357. I may be out of date on that info, so I'm curious to hear if anyone has any more recent, relevant experience. Or , maybe the 229's are just much better than the 226 with the heavier calibers.

If I recall it popped up once or twice on conversations about guns designed for 9mm being "up-calibered" without appropriate engineering to make them durable enough (i.e., the Beretta 96 series).

I know that the only Glock that physically, no-shit broke while I was actually present was our rental Gen3 .357SIG gun at CCA... I wanna say it was a 31, but it might have been a 32...which suddenly started shooting to the left. Sure enough, the slide was cracked through from the bottom front corner of the ejection port clear down to the slide rail. Probably a victim of not staying on top of the RSA replacement schedule, to be honest.

Yep yep *Rain Man voice* definitely Gen 4, def...definitely Gen 4

[HCM]

When 40 hit the scene SIG designed the P229 for the 40 from the ground up, including a one piece stainless steel slide replacing the old two-part slide of the original 226 and 228. SIG also redesigned the slide of the P226 with a one piece stainless lied as well.

The Sig and HK 40s and 357's are the most durable and reliable as long as you do the proper preventive maintenance, particularly recoil spring changes.

Every failure or parts breakage I've ever seen in a 40 caliber SIG or HK can be traced back to failure to change recoil springs. Especially when using hotter ammunition like the 155 grain and 135 grain loadings.

[GJM]

The 357 Sig is an awesome round that I find to absolutely do things the others don't. Whether that matters or not is a different story...

Glock 357's have always been a bit suspect to me, as they haven't been widely used, and I've heard lots of negatives from those few serious guys who have used them. Also, industry scuttle on how they came to be, but that's neither here nor there.

If you really want 357, I'd get a 226.

if you really want glock, I'd get a G17, or to be really glockish, maybe the 45gap.

If you really aren't going to shoot it much, and just want to try it, then who cares, go for it.

I also really enjoyed shooting the 31 out west. Got it for coyotes but mainly used it on long range steel.

SLG you are slacking, wasn't the .357 Sig developed in the 229?

[JonInWA]

I've had multiple SIG-Sauer P229s (three come to mind), and held onto precisely none of them over time. Never any mechanical/operational issues; I just migrated out of their niche in my scheme of things-and they did too. While well built, at the end of my particular usage of them I found them to be just a bit too big, chunky and heavy-nothing terribly drastic, but just enough for them to be edged out of the line-up. My last one was a very nice non-railed DAK, with both .40 and .357 SIG barrels; I found the DAK to be an all-or-nothing sort of proposition to run the gun advantageously-and for me it ended up being nothing. Someone got a good gun, but I've had no visceral regrets about its loss-despite it being of the "good" SIG vintage years of production.

For a heavy-duty, hard use, high roundcount .347 SIG, based on my use and anecdotal reports of others', I concur with SIG or HK as probably being the pre-eminent choices. But I think the Gen4 G31 will be ok also, unless there's specific data points available indicating the contrary.

While I'm not holding my breath, it might be interesting to see if HK provides .357 SIG barreling for the VP40 and P30 platforms.

Best, Jon

[Handy]

When 40 hit the scene SIG designed the P229 for the 40 from the ground up, including a one piece stainless steel slide replacing the old two-part slide of the original 226 and 228. SIG also redesigned the slide of the P226 with a one piece stainless lied as well.

The Sig and HK 40s and 357's are the most durable and reliable as long as you do the proper preventive maintenance, particularly recoil spring changes.

Every failure or parts breakage I've ever seen in a 40 caliber SIG or HK can be traced back to failure to change recoil springs. Especially when using hotter ammunition like the 155 grain and 135 grain loadings.

Sig added 80 grams to the slide to go from P228 to P229. Glock initially added nothing, but later put 15 grams extra on the G22, but didn't add anything to the G23. The G31 and G32 got 30 and 10 grams respectively over the 9mms. All of these guns use the same weight recoil springs for a given frame size (which makes sense), so not having more massive slides for .40 guns doesn't seem like a good idea. Of course, the Gen 3 problems with attachments makes it appear that .40 and .357 Glocks moderate slide velocities through friction from the frame flexing and binding the slide a bit.

After 22 years of .40, Glock may be the last company shoehorning .40 (and .357) into a largely unmodified 9mm pistol. Well, the Beretta 96A1 would be the other, I guess.

[SLG]

When 40 hit the scene SIG designed the P229 for the 40 from the ground up, including a one piece stainless steel slide replacing the old two-part slide of the original 226 and 228. SIG also redesigned the slide of the P226 with a one piece stainless lied as well.

The Sig and HK 40s and 357's are the most durable and reliable as long as you do the proper preventive maintenance, particularly recoil spring changes.

Every failure or parts breakage I've ever seen in a 40 caliber SIG or HK can be traced back to failure to change recoil springs. Especially when using hotter ammunition like the 155 grain and 135 grain loadings.

That is my understanding as well.

[SLG]

I also really enjoyed shooting the 31 out west. Got it for coyotes but mainly used it on long range steel.

SLG you are slacking, wasn't the .357 Sig developed in the 229?

Given that the 229 birthed western civ as we know it, I'm sure that's true.

I've been thinking about asking Tom to rename this forum to "P229-Pistolforum.com Then the correct answer to these types of threads wouldn't take so damn long to get to.

[GJM]

Given that the 229 birthed western civ as we know it, I'm sure that's true.

I've been thinking about asking Tom to rename this forum to "P229-Pistolforum.com Then the correct answer to these types of threads wouldn't take so damn long to get to.

I bet a PF dollar he has already reserved that name.

[L-2]

Regarding Post 26, with Gen4 Glocks, the recoil spring assembly (RSA) is now different between the G17gen4 and the G22/31gen4; and also the G19gen4 vs. the G23/32gen4 guns. The subcompact versions in those calibers stayed the same, however.