Glock 47 MOS

[MTP]

Has a consensus been reached regarding the recoil characteristics of the G47 vs G17 ?

[GJM]

Interesting thing I noticed about the G47 is that its closer in weight to the G34 than the G45 or G17.

Weights without mag per Glock website:

G45 MOS: 616 grams

G17 MOS: 625 grams

G47 MOS: 658 grams

G34 MOS: 665 grams

There's hardly any difference (9 grams) weight difference between the G45 / G17. Thats about the weight difference of adding steel sights, for those who thought the G45 has less reciprocating mass.

Yet for some reason the G47, essentially a G17 slide on a G45 frame, is +33g/1.16oz heavier then the G17, and +42g/1.48oz over the G45.

It's only 7grams lighter than the G34.

Not sure what this means, if anything. But I'm curious whether this was Glock deliberately adding weight to the G47, or simply a byproduct of the long slide / short guide rod design?

Just weighed a new 47 slide and an older Gen 5 34 slide in the same condition -- no barrel or RSA, the slide without an optic plate or the cover, but with the OEM sights.

47 is 11.20 ounces



34 is 11.45 ounces



I don't have a bare 19 or 17 MOS to weigh.

[spyderco monkey]

Just weighed a new 47 slide and an older Gen 5 34 slide in the same condition -- no barrel or RSA, the slide without an optic plate or the cover, but with the OEM sights.

47 is 11.20 ounces



34 is 11.45 ounces



I don't have a bare 19 or 17 MOS to weigh.

Awesome, thanks man.

47 = 317.5g

34 = 324.6g

--> 7.1g difference in weight

So Glock was basically right on the money with their weight specs.

Quite surprising it's so close in weight to the G34.

I wonder how this effects recoil impulse or reliability vs the G17, if at all?

[TCB]

We haven’t really seen any reliability issues with ours…it’s only been a couple years now with them but I haven’t heard of anyone needing to swap one out because it isn’t working. One of my ATV guys had a heavy trigger at a Qual a few weeks ago, a drop of oil on the connector fixed it right up…there was…a lot of dirt and dust everywhere inside the gun. Shot just fine but…trigger was less than ideal.

[TheNewbie]

We haven’t really seen any reliability issues with ours…it’s only been a couple years now with them but I haven’t heard of anyone needing to swap one out because it isn’t working. One of my ATV guys had a heavy trigger at a Qual a few weeks ago, a drop of oil on the connector fixed it right up…there was…a lot of dirt and dust everywhere inside the gun. Shot just fine but…trigger was less than ideal.

How did the P2000 act under those same conditions?

[TCB]

They got just as dirty for sure but I wasn’t an FI when we had them so no frame of reference for seeing them daily being shot straight from the field. I never had an issue with my P2000 trigger but I’ve also not had an issue with my G47 trigger and have gotten both just as dirty. Our ATV guys gets stuff a whole other level of dusty though…Tokarev would have much more insight.

[GJM]

At the risk of imagining things, or being flat wrong, after some time shooting the Glock 47, I really like it.

What I have always liked about the Glock 34 is how soft it shoots. What I have not liked about the 34 is it seems more sensitive to ammo, needing higher power factor loads than the 17 and 19, and I have felt like the slide doesn't cycle as well as a 19. My favorite Glock was always a 19 with a carry comp as that gives you a soft shooting but flat cycling slide that fits into the slide length of a 17. Comparing the 19 with a comp to the 47, the 47 seems to shoot flat like a 19 but soft like a 34. This may be because of the extra mass in the 47 slide compared to a 17, nearly 34 weight, and maybe even something to do with the 19 length RSA. In any event, the 47 is easily my favorite shooting non-compensated 9mm Glock, and the Glock I would pick to shoot carry optics division with.

[TCB]

From my limited experience with Glocks (other than a Gen 2 G19 many years ago I’ve only been shooting Gen 5 Glocks since 2020), I’ve come to the same conclusion as GJM. That being said I’ve never had a G34, but I’ve had every other Gen 5 variant. There is something about the G47 that works…it shoots softer and flatter than any other one in my hands except for my Mayhem comped G45.

[ST911]

This may be because of the extra mass in the 47 slide compared to a 17, nearly 34 weight, and maybe even something to do with the 19 length RSA. In any event, the 47 is easily my favorite shooting non-compensated 9mm Glock, and the Glock I would pick to shoot carry optics division with.

There is something about the G47 that works…it shoots softer and flatter than any other one in my hands except for my Mayhem comped G45.

There is something about the 47 that defies description. It's not a 17, 45, or 19...something else.

Other thing I've noticed: Mine throw brass harder and farther than anything else, including others with the breechface cut.

[spyderco monkey]

At the risk of imagining things, or being flat wrong, after some time shooting the Glock 47, I really like it.

What I have always liked about the Glock 34 is how soft it shoots. What I have not liked about the 34 is it seems more sensitive to ammo, needing higher power factor loads than the 17 and 19, and I have felt like the slide doesn't cycle as well as a 19. My favorite Glock was always a 19 with a carry comp as that gives you a soft shooting but flat cycling slide that fits into the slide length of a 17. Comparing the 19 with a comp to the 47, the 47 seems to shoot flat like a 19 but soft like a 34. This may be because of the extra mass in the 47 slide compared to a 17, nearly 34 weight, and maybe even something to do with the 19 length RSA. In any event, the 47 is easily my favorite shooting non-compensated 9mm Glock, and the Glock I would pick to shoot carry optics division with.

In terms of weight and its effect on recoil, the weight increase of the G47 vs the G17/G45 is about the weight increase of a RMR.

Has anyone noticed any change in recoil characteristics for RMR/RDS VS Irons?