*THE* Gen 5 Glock thread: First Impressions, Reviews and Thoughts

[psalms144.1]

I have mixed feelings whether these large branches of the U.S. Government should be bothering with requiring these somewhat small variances in design & capability or just choosing from what's already being sold on the market. I mean we're talking 9mm handgun... I'm still trying to understand how this modularity will actually benefit the military or anyone.

I completely agree on the questionable utility of asking Glock to make a G26 with one extra round in the magazine, but, if that's what a large customer wants and Glock is willing to produce it, I feel "no harm, no foul." My biggest issue is there are a metric ass-ton of G26 mags on the market that WON'T, from what we can tell, fit in this new G26 - which sounds like a logistical nightmare in the long run.

On the modularity piece, I see it as a plus for an agency that wants a one-gun solution - procure a number of FCUs, outfit them with FS slides and grips for patrol (grip "size" determined by shooter and FI as far as S, M, or L module); Compact slides and grips for plain clothes (same drill on specific sizes); and SC slides/grip modules for back up - all feeding off a common magazine for reloads. For individual shooters, I think the modularity (outside of picking the grip size that "fits" best) is pretty minimal, based on the cost of the conversions...

[10mmfanboy]

I would like to see that G47 to come out. I can finally have a glock 19L without mutilating my frames. They also need to make the modular guns more cost effective as far as caliber and changing length of slide and barrel. I wanted to try a apx at these prices, but one of the main reasons was to grip chop a full size apx. The apx has different size palm swells though and have a bar in the back of the grip to hold them in place gggrrrgggiiieeesss. Sig is out of the question for me.

[EJO]

I completely agree on the questionable utility of asking Glock to make a G26 with one extra round in the magazine, but, if that's what a large customer wants and Glock is willing to produce it, I feel "no harm, no foul." My biggest issue is there are a metric ass-ton of G26 mags on the market that WON'T, from what we can tell, fit in this new G26 - which sounds like a logistical nightmare in the long run.

Keep in mind I’ve never seen one and I’m just speculating, could Glock have reduced the spring size in a standard 26 magazine to accommodate another round or did they actually make the magazine longer?

I know factory 26 magazines utilize the same spring as the factory 19 magazines. I always wondered if a 10 round magazine really needed the same spring as a 15 round magazine. Just a thought...

[Cool Breeze]

Replacement sights are identical (black rear, FO front). From the box, the G5 had a lower rear (6.1) but used the same height front as the G4. With the aftermarket sights, both shoot to the same POI with my range ammo. The sights were ordered to mimic the relationship between the OEM sights as the factory sets provided a good zero, but were harder for my eyes to see quickly. I had my local Glock armorer look at and shoot the guns so he could order and install sights for me, and he did a good job.

I still think the G5 to be better built in some ways but my experience with the G4 was a little surprising. FWIW, I only encountered a few BTF issues with the G4 during my first 400 rounds and I was shooting fairly mild 115gr ball at the time. Shifting to warmer 124gr ball, no issues yet. Am only at a little under 6k rounds with the G4 though.

When you say replacement sights are identical, are you saying that 0.165 height in front and 0.256 height in the rear will shoot poa/poi?

I'm assuming that the aftermarket manufacturers are selling gen5 versions (w/different heights) just in case a user doesn't change both at the same time?

[Padwan]

When you say replacement sights are identical, are you saying that 0.165 height in front and 0.256 height in the rear will shoot poa/poi?

I'm assuming that the aftermarket manufacturers are selling gen5 versions (w/different heights) just in case a user doesn't change both at the same time?

Cool Breeze,

My bad. I meant that the replacement sights installed were identical in terms of being black rear/fiber optic front from the same maker. Not sure if the rears are the same height but the fronts are (as far as my eyes can tell).

[flux]

My G26 G5 came with a fantastic stock trigger out of the box. Impulsively I added an OEM minus connector in place of the Dot connector. The trigger now seems to have a more pronounced wall and a bit of sponginess . Is it possibly an odd connector issue? I gave away the Dot connector so unsure if I should just get another dot connector or try another minus.

[thward89]

My G26 G5 came with a fantastic stock trigger out of the box. Impulsively I added an OEM minus connector in place of the Dot connector. The trigger now seems to have a more pronounced wall and a bit of sponginess. Is it possibly an odd connector issue? I gave away the Dot connector so unsure if I should just get another dot connector or try another minus.

That is how I would describe all of the factory minus connectors I have used. Adding after-market connectors (3.5) only made it more spongy. I tried Apex, Wilson Combat, TTI, Zev, factory oem minus, Vanek modified OEM minus and found that I shoot the dot connector best.

[RJ]

My G26 G5 came with a fantastic stock trigger out of the box. Impulsively I added an OEM minus connector in place of the Dot connector. The trigger now seems to have a more pronounced wall and a bit of sponginess . Is it possibly an odd connector issue? I gave away the Dot connector so unsure if I should just get another dot connector or try another minus.

Hmm...the dot connector is virtually the only part I have left alone in my Glock 19.5

Kidding (sort of).

Seems like an easy answer to just get another stock dot connector and re-install it?

[Artemas2]

My G26 G5 came with a fantastic stock trigger out of the box. Impulsively I added an OEM minus connector in place of the Dot connector. The trigger now seems to have a more pronounced wall and a bit of sponginess . Is it possibly an odd connector issue? I gave away the Dot connector so unsure if I should just get another dot connector or try another minus.

Ten different glocks with the "same" parts will give 10 different trigger pulls and 7 different weights. Generally the minus has less wall and is spongier. I say generally because I have had minus connectors ADD a 1/2# in some guns and as you found gave a wall.

[Chuck Whitlock]

On the modularity piece, I see it as a plus for an agency that wants a one-gun solution - procure a number of FCUs, outfit them with FS slides and grips for patrol (grip "size" determined by shooter and FI as far as S, M, or L module); Compact slides and grips for plain clothes (same drill on specific sizes); and SC slides/grip modules for back up - all feeding off a common magazine for reloads. For individual shooters, I think the modularity (outside of picking the grip size that "fits" best) is pretty minimal, based on the cost of the conversions...

The slides/barrels are the biggest chunks of steel in the guns....makes sense that they'd cost the most.

But, if you buy a compact w/ the 3.9" barrel, you can buy a Carry module and a subcompact module for $39 each from Sig. The magazines are more expensive.
And then you have the X-grips....