G22 vs G17

My wife has put thousands of rounds through her Glock 22 without one failure of any kind. Dead reliable. The only thing about .40 cal. Glocks is that you should inspect the locking block pins every couple of thousand rounds as they will hammer out over time. My son just replaced his at about 6000 rounds.

I've always been a 1911 fan but have ordered a G22 due to the reliability and great deals available right now. Having thousands of cases and a tool head on my Dillon for .40 influenced me as well.
 
For the first you have to do the g17 it's a great start point and then go any way you like with either adding a new caliber or replacing the g17.

I assume if funds permit your like both but if you figure all options available and go with something other than a staple model you never know you may like that one best.

Coming from someone who never sold a firearm, I did return a sub standard one once but was quickly replaced.
 
The G17 would be my first choice. But here's another angle: the recoil impulse of the 180g 40 cal round is almost the same as the 200g 45acp. The only advantage of the 40 cal over the 45 would be using 155-165 grain 40 cal bullets. Given a Glock choice, because price isn't really an issue, I would opt for the G21SF or the G41 over the G22 every time.
 
Stick with the G17. It will be a better shooting handgun from a felt recoil perspective (my opinion), have cheaper, more available ammo, and the 9mm will be less harsh on the firearm itself.

I honestly think that .40 cal shouldn't exist. The majority of .40 cal handguns are 9mm handguns adapted to the larger caliber. The exception being the USP .40, which was initially designed around the .40 first, and then made for the other calibers.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but I have never heard of a Glock 9mm KABOOM.
While I truly like the power of the 40SW and enjoy the accuracy and reliability of my Ruger P91, I'll stick to the 9mm in Glocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom