Thread: Thoughts on the Gen4 GLOCK 26?
6/01/2012 3:43am, #1
Thoughts on the Gen4 GLOCK 26?
I may have an opportunity to move this Autumn, and I've come to the conclusion that I must carry (i.e. I have no means of escaping a dangerous situation) if and when I settle in my new apartment.
My first thought was a Taurus 850 or similar J-frame revolver, but now I've come around to the Baby Glock due to ammo capacity: I could carry 31 rounds of 9mm Parabellum more easily than 15 rounds of .38 Special. Planned accessories include: a Desantis Nemesis pocket holster, Hornady Critical Duty 135gr ammo, and a pair of Bianchi Model 21 IWB magazine carriers.
Please give me all your relevant thoughts; I am not all that comfortable discussing concealed carry publicly, so PM if you want to talk details.
6/01/2012 5:21am, #2
My back-up weapon is a Glock 27. You can't go wrong with a Glock: they are dependable, relatively accurate, and completely idiot-proof (point and shoot). The 26 is a great piece, but I prefer the .40 S&W. I give up a couple of rounds in capacity, but the muzzle energy and one shot knock down numbers more than compensate for that. I prefer the Remington Golden Saber and Speer Gold-Dot for reliability and consistency.
CAL MFG / MOD Weight MV (fps) ME PEN (10% gel) OSKD
.40S&W Rem.Golden Saber 165gr.JHP 1150 485 12" 94%
9x19 Rem.Golden Saber+P 124gr.JHP 1180 384 12" 83%
6/01/2012 11:44am, #3
I carried the Gen 4 Glock 26 from 3/24/11 until 2/14/12 (Valentines Day) when I got my PPQ. I now carry the PPQ. The Glock 26 is easily the most comfy pistol I've carried in any size or shape. Super easy to carry. It also shoots very well for its small size. I recommend getting a Pearce Grip Extension on the mag. Doesn't take up much more room and feels a lot better in hand.
Honestly, I'm personally not a revolver fan when it comes to CCW. I love large framed revolvers, but if you compare a Glock 26 to a small .38 you get twice the capacity as well as more comfort (no rough edges on it).
As for the .40 vs 9mm debate, there are all sorts of statistics and studies that contradict each other. When it really comes down to it, whatever you're comfortable and can shoot well with is the best way to go. I used to be a .40 and .45 guy only and hated the 9mm, and then after shooting a lot more I came to appreciate the 9mm (especially in compact carry pistols). I still love the .40 and .45, but mostly in full sized handguns that I can land back on target quickly with (i.e. Glock 21). A pistol is always going to be a compromise of firepower, and I personally don't like to compromise ease of control and capacity for a bit more muzzle energy. But that's the point where we all differ and have to decide what is best for us. Police and Military worldwide rely on the 9mm, and the majority of shooting instructors I've either talked to or read/watched have recommended it first and foremost, so I'm pretty comfortable with it and I know I can shoot it well."Intelligence is nothing more than discussing things with others. Limitless wisdom comes of this." - 山本 常朝
6/01/2012 3:29pm, #4
Sorry, I forgot that I'm not necessarily immediately recognizable. My home defense gun is a full size M1911-A1 clone in .45ACP. I am very much in the "big, heavy, and slow" terminal ballistics camp; I don't give a damn about "one stop shot" percentages, and I am not under the delusion that hydrostatic shock can occur at common pistol velocities (none of this phrasing is meant as a contrasting insult).
My experience with a full size, all steel pistol in .45ACP tells me that I wouldn't like firing the same ammunition out of a more compact weapon. Besides, the increased recoil spring strength might well make me unable to perform an administrative load. While .40SW is interesting in general, 9mm Parabellum is as far is I'm willing to go in a compact platform.
I plan to visit the range soonish and fire 50 rounds through a rental Baby Glock after firing 50 rounds from my 1911 (NRA B-27E target at seven yards). Having gotten some sleep since posting this thread, I'm also considering the compact XD (I think I remember the XDM is current).
6/01/2012 3:40pm, #5
When I work my private gigs, I carry a Kimber Tactical Custom II; if I could marry a weapon, this would by my next broken heart.
I love the added features on the Springfield Armory XD series (cocking & chambered round indicators) They are everything the Glock should have been, but Glock is more universal with parts and accessories available.
Enjoy whichever one you end up with.
6/01/2012 3:48pm, #6
Maybe I'll get off my ass and send a few PMs.
6/01/2012 5:17pm, #7
I'm not sure how much of a parallel you can make between a Glock and a 1911. I've got a Colt M1991A1, I've had and sold two Springfield 1911s (Mil-Spec and Champion Operator) and I've had two Gen 4s now, both in 9mm (17 and 26) plus a Gen 3 and a Gen 2 in the past. There's really no comparison between them, though. They're both fantastic for different reasons."Intelligence is nothing more than discussing things with others. Limitless wisdom comes of this." - 山本 常朝
6/01/2012 6:07pm, #8
6/02/2012 12:15am, #9
I can land back on target a lot faster with a Glock. Even the .45 ACP Glocks seem to me to recoil less, probably because of all the weight in the slide."Intelligence is nothing more than discussing things with others. Limitless wisdom comes of this." - 山本 常朝
6/02/2012 4:20am, #10
Trigger (overall feel 1 to 5): 5 (short pull, crisp break, light without being too light)
Shooting (getting on target and recoil): 4 (natural aim with arched mainspring housing, and the "push" recoil is almost pleasant compared to "snap")
Follow-up Shots (trigger reset and getting back on target): 3 (unless I really work hard at it, I don't get back on target well)
This is a bit silly, I know, but I'd like to learn from the experience of someone who's made a similar transition.