Good info. I've heard people like Kyle Lamb espouse that Glock .40s are "unreliable" yet you still see gazillions of them in LEO hands. It is important for there to be a proper perspective in those statements. If it means that I my G22 is going to fail me at the 10,000 round mark (just making up a number) then that is different than saying that my brand new G22 may fail during the first magazine full of rounds. With that said, I did get rid of my G23 because I did have a few occasions of the slide "outrunning" the magazine when the mag springs got a little age on them. Just haven't had that issue with my G22 yet.
In me stating that I've shot over 1k rounds may not mean much to other shooters, but to most LEOs I know, that is a lifetime of shooting. For many I know, their sidearm is more likely to fail due to the lube drying out and/or lint accumulation rather to the "unreliability" of the design. They're just not avid shooters.
Not trying to defend Glock, just trying to understand the facts. Been a Beretta guy for many years and have heard all the horror stories of broken locking blocks. My M9 does have somewhere around 5k rounds, mainly +p loaded 124g, on it and the locking block shows no issues. However, I do routinely replace the RS.
In regards to holsters, I did own a Gen 5 G17 and it would not fit the Safariland holster the Gen 4 used when I attached the WML.
I do appreciate the .40 S&W and will be interested in the Gen5 version come this fall.