Dual Caliber Glock Gen4 G22 .40/.357 SIG Quandary

[JonInWA]

As I've discussed here before, I have a later production (2015) Gen4 G22, for which I also have a Glock .357 SIG barrel (and 3 .357 SIG magazines, although those are probably unnecessary; by all accounts, including discussions with Glock Tech Support, the .40 G22 magazines will work fine with the G22; it's only when you move to the smaller platform G32 and G33 that the .357 SIG specific magazines are recommended). I'm running the gun with the Large Glock beavertail backstrap also.

It's a great two caliber combination, and while the Gen5 G22 is doubtlessly an improvement over it's Gen4 predecessor, particularly with the heavier slide and the other Gen5 palette of improvements, I think it's highly unlikely that Glock will come out with a corresponding Gen5 G31/G32/G33, so it I want to shoot .357 SIG in a Glock with a Glock barrel, it's pretty much a Gen 3 and Gen4 kinda world.

Last weekend, I shot an IDPA match with the G22 with the .357 SIG barrel (and the .357 SIG magazines). My sights on the gun are the standard height (for the Gen 3 and Gen4 G22) 6.5 mm Glock steels; Glock G31s come with the slightly higher 6.9 mm rear sight.

At close distance targets, using the standard heigh rear sight with .357 SIG presented no problems, but as the distances increased, using the standard center-hold sight picture resulted in low hits with the .357 SIG (which is precisely why Glock issues the .357 SIG chambered G31 with the higher 6.9mm rear sight).

So, my quandary is this: While I'll be predominantly (and vastly predominantly) shooting the G22 with the .40 barrel, occasionally/situationally I may choose to shoot/carry the G22 with the .357 SIG barrel. So my thoughts are:

1. I find out where and at what distance when using .357 SIG cartridges with the 6.5 mm rear sight that low hits become the norm, and compensate with appropriate "Yankee windage" (well, more like Yankee elevation) compensation;

2. Get a quality and durable adjustable rear sight (Dawson comes to mind,but I'm sure there are other decent choices to be had) and adjust per chambering

Interested to hear experiences, thoughts and recommendations.

Best, Jon

[fatdog]

Same problem with my USP/c 40/357, I simply sourced a second slide (Gunbusters on Gunbroker) for about $230, and set the sights up for each caliber on the different slides, it is a quick swap, same RSA for each.

I am betting you can find a used Gen 4 G22 slide for a fairly cheap price these days. I simply don't take well to holdovers or shooting elevated out of the notch to get the right zero in that 3-25 yard distance box.

[L-2]

When I shot the .357SIG caliber for awhile, I went with an entire G31gen3, rather than converting the G22gen3 I also owned.

For me, I wanted to have a complete gun with all mags marked with .357 all in one place (a large ammo box) and separated from another ammo box dedicated to .40. If I didn't do that, I'd have probably gone to the range or out the door with the wrong ammo in my mags to go with the gun I planned to use that day.

[CCT125US]

Would using a heavier bullet in .357 Sig be an option? Typically heavier bullets print higher. Typically.

[JonInWA]

Would using a heavier bullet in .357 Sig be an option? Typically heavier bullets print higher. Typically.

It might, but 125 gr is pretty much the gold standard for .357 SIG. I'll have to check if there is anything in .357n SIG other than 125 gr; it's a good thought.

Realistically, both Fatdog and L-2's solutions are probably the best. The problem is that (again realistically) I really not willing to dedicate myself significantly to .357 SIG to justify the $300-$400 cost of a new/used complete slide-which is actually fairly close to the cost of a complete new G31....

So, the lower cost alternatives seem to be:

1. A rugged, durable adjustable aftermarket sight set;

2. A replacement fixed iron sight setup with a (more) balanced regulation between .40 and .357 SIG (and I may talk to Scott Warren about his, as he cites the same height for both guns/chamberings as I recall, and I like his sights anyhow);

3. Suck it up, do a training session with both .40 and .357 SIG barrels, and mentally calibrate myself to self adjust the front sight position out of the notch when using .357 SIG.

So there you go-you guys give me your best advice and rationales, and I wander off on my own tangent....(But thanks, and much appreciated-keep it coming).

Best, Jon

[CCT125US]

I do know that Sellier and Bellot makes a 140gr FMJFP that shoots really well. No idea how easy they are to source currently.

[MandoWookie]

Slight tangent, but I recently got a Gen4 G22 slide for my Gen4 G17, couple of hundred rounds down range so far with no issues, haven't changed anything in the lower.

I was looking at getting a .357 Sig barrel as well, because why not?

Would a 9mm/40/ 357 be stacking too many tolerances? Is it a bad idea?

[fatdog]

Slight tangent, but I recently got a Gen4 G22 slide for my Gen4 G17, couple of hundred rounds down range so far with no issues, haven't changed anything in the lower.

I was looking at getting a .357 Sig barrel as well, because why not?

Would a 9mm/40/ 357 be stacking too many tolerances? Is it a bad idea?

If you just buy the .40/.357 ejector & trigger housing (cheap part) and swap it at the same time you change slides, and keep the correct RSA's in place in each slide, use the appropriate mag types, there would be no tolerance stacking at all....17 and 22 frames are identical...you have both slides

[MandoWookie]

If you just buy the .40/.357 ejector & trigger housing (cheap part) and swap it at the same time you change slides, and keep the correct RSA's in place in each slide, use the appropriate mag types, there would be no tolerance stacking at all....17 and 22 frames are identical...you have both slides

What are the possible issues with using a 9mm ejector with the .40 slide?

[fatdog]

What are the possible issues with using a 9mm ejector with the .40 slide?

I don't think there is much if any relevant to the slide itself, the problem which might raise its head is the 9mm ejector is angled inward when compared .40 ejector which is more or less perfectly straight. I would be very careful ejecting a live round when the .40 slide is in place let you get an "ejector fire" by that 9mm ejector striking the primer as you eject a live round. I am speculating it could happen...don't know how close it really is....

I don't have any idea how likely that could be but that ejector angle is the only difference in the lower.

Really, one of these, a simple swap and you have the factory .40 gun pretty much once you put that complete upper on it...