G26 vs g27 vs g33

[jwalker497]

G26 vs g27 vs g33
Need to make a decision for a subcompact Glock. I just cannot make decision on which model to go for and I am desperatley hoping someone can make some sense of it all.
My hangup for making a decision is concerning the trade-off as it relates to Recoil vs followup shots/accuracy. One one hand, I agree with all the 9mm fans that shot placement is king and that quicker more accurate shots is what counts. If you're going to shoot once, you might as well shoot several times! On the other hand, I also agree compeltely with those who favor the increased stopping power of the 40sw in a self defense situation, why not opt for as much punch as possible especially considering you need the ones that hit to count.

This is a debate is a perpetual see-saw as I seem to go back and forth as each of these arguments make total sense!! Please dont say get both, that's not an option for and I do not have the ability to test any of these at a range, so I need to make this decision with logic and other's firsthand experience. Also, I am not interested in the caliber conversion options as well. I would love to hear form those who have first hand experience with these models and can provide a real comparison.

So - Which would you prefer from a Recoil and Followup shot perspective??

Again, Removing all the typical factors that people bring-up in these comparisons, like ammo cost, availability, capacity - which model would you prefer and why from a power vs recoil perspective?

[Nic]

The G27 (.40) was my first Glock. I liked it a lot, but recoil was a little snappy, especially with carry ammo. Not all of your fingers fit onto the grip, so my rapid follow up shots were definitely effected by the recoil (last finger tucks beneath the magazine base).

I now carry a Glock 26 (9mm) daily. Same grip, but much more manageable recoil, and follow up placement is great.

Hope that helps... good luck.

[24/7dude]

Glock 26. I don't think I'd ever get a Sub compact in anything but 9mm for faster follow up shots. Also you can use 33 round factory mags in it.

[Asmodeus6]

Glock 26. I don't think I'd ever get a Sub compact in anything but 9mm for faster follow up shots. Also you can use 33 round factory mags in it.

You sure can! And 17rd, and 15rd... and 10+2, or just 10. Or any other configuration you can think of.




(10rd, 10+2rd, 17rd, 33rd pictured)

I obviously voted 26.

[Exbiker]

If you`re gonna add a grip extension why not just go 19. For me the subs just felt too awkward and with the extension it was "what`s the point?"

[God's Country]

I don't find the G27 difficult to shoot. 155g or 165g carry ammo is quite manageable IMO.

[das]

Just my opinion but shooting a person with anything will work with a few exceptions. How many people have been taken out from a 22 revolver? Its accuracy that counts the most to me. Just my opinion. Good luck choosing. das

[ReconLdr]

I would go with the G33. I love the cartridge and I already have a G32 so it makes sense for me to choose the G33 from your list.

I don't mind the recoil of the 357 Sig. It is snappy but I find it to be very managable. I have never been a big fan of the .40 cal.

[Rule10b5]

Handguns, regardless of caliber, make lousy man-stoppers. Differences in "stopping power" based on caliber (to the extent "stopping power" even exists in a handgun) are largely bullshit.

Buy a gun that: (i) is 100% reliable; (ii) has decent sights and a decent trigger; and (iii) is chambered in a caliber that will allow enough penetration to hit vitals, and crack bones if possible. Anyone of your 3 choices is more than sufficient. Personally, I'd go for the G26. Ammo is cheaper, recoil is lighter, capacity is higher, and wear and tear on the gun is lower.

My shot to shot split times in 9mm v. .40 vary by less than .03-.04 seconds. Not enough to matter unless you're competing for score.

You really can't go wrong with any of them.

Then buy a ton of ammo, sign up for a real training course, and practice until you can't practice anymore.

I continue to be amazed by the number of avid shooters who still obsess over the idea of stopping power. Nobody has ever been able to prove, by any empirical method, that it exists. Every study, theory, or attempt to prove differences between handgun calibers has been horseshit ab initio (Hatcher) or suffered from such selection bias and statistical flaws as to be practically meaningless (Marshall/Sanow). The only idea I've seen on stopping power (that really isn't even stopping power) that's defensible from an analytical perspective is the idea that the best way to put someone down is to ensure that your bullet (assuming it hits) can penetrate enough to tear up something vital enough to physically halt the target (Fackler and the FBI).

Animals aren't people, and the plural of anecdote isn't data, but I'll leave you with this:

A couple of years ago I shot a small doe, maybe 80 lbs. or so. She was perfectly unaware of my present, relaxed, standing still and eating. Range was 20-25 yards. Firearm was a .50 cal. blackpowder muzzle loader, 400 grain or so soft lead hollowpoint. Muzzle velocity around 2000 fps. The shot was a perfect broadside. Completely blendered the lungs, heart, ribs, and left a softball sized exit wound, spraying blood, bone, and tissue a good six feet beyond her.

Want to know what she did?

She raised her head, made a "huh" sound, and then leisurely walked a good 75+ yards before looking vaguely puzzled and collapsing about 15-20 seconds after the shot.

Anyone who says 200 lbs. of psycho hell bent on killing you is going to drop to one handgun caliber, but shrug off another is full of it. He's probably going to do one of four things if you shoot him:

1) Drop right there or run because of a psychological reaction to being shot;
2) Drop right there because you got a head, spine, or support bone shot;
3) Continue to fight for 15-20 seconds before he bleeds out (assuming you hit a major blood vessel or organ); or
4) Continue to fight because you missed something major enough to cause sufficient blood loss.

Not one of the foregoing is going to turn on what handgun caliber you used, provided you had enough penetration to hit the good parts.

[johnpsu]

I have a Glock 26. Initially, I did not like the 26, until I put in an extended 10-round magazine. The gun fit like a glove. That fact (along with having a Glock 19, owning 9mm ammo, and a lower price than a comparable M&P) made me buy the Glock.

As mentioned before, reliability, ease of use, and ability conceal are all important. Likewise, training and practice are equally, if not more, important.

As my gun salesman mentioned, shoot what you know. I would go with a caliber that you already have ammo for.