Glock 26 vs Glock 27

[baddarryl]

The 26 is a fantastic weapon.

[jsk]

I was planning to get a G26 but found a LNIB Gen 4 G27 at a very reasonable discount and got it instead, my first 40 S&W. While not exactly a creampuff, the 40 in the G27 is not bad at all. I bought a Storm Lake 9mm conversion barrel just for the convenience of being able to fire multiple calibers and while noticeable, the difference between 9 and 40 is not all that dramatic. Heck my 12 yr old can handle it. I'm thinking the difference in felt recoil might be due to differences between the Gen 4 grip and the earlier models. As far as advice goes, it's hard to knock the ability to fire 9, 40, and 357 Sig in one handgun. I advise to go for the 40 and spring for the conversion barrel and mags.

[Viper99]

Well if anyone is close to CT, I would trade you my G27 3rd generation with trijicon night sights, long wolf 9mm conversion barrel, +1 finger extention, 2 g27, 1 g26 mag for a mint condition G26 4th gen.

[Departed402]

Dashunde, my duty gun is a Glock 21 (in .45). I also used to be issued a Glock 30 for off-duty use, which was okay, but I found the 30 to be wider and heavier than I would have preferred. Thus the reason I am looking at the 26 and 27.

[Departed402]

Wow, what an obtuse way to start a caliber war...

You have my apologies, and I did try to look up other 9 vs 40 threads, but with my specifics I felt making a new thread would be best, instead of a general 9 vs 40 thread where cost of ammo, size of the gun, and intended use would be variabe.

[JohnKSa]

Here is a good read that helped me decide, i actually shoot 357 sig. It is long but very intersting.
http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal%20B...a%20morgue.htm

I've read that.

It is a long and interesting read that boils down to one man's inexpert opinion. In other words, his opinion is no better than the opinion of anyone who has access to penetration information on ammunition in spite of the way he tries to build it up initially.

Here's the short summary of why his claims need to be taken with a grain of salt.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost....&postcount=102

If you want to spend some time reading, here's the whole thread which contains, in the first post, a link to the Smith & Wesson forum where deadmeat2 originally posted his ideas.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=207527

[Vermonter]

27 gen 4 I dont feel a recoil difference. Also with conversion barrels this can be a. 357 sig and a 9mm.

[Dashunde]

It is a long and interesting read that boils down to one man's inexpert opinion. In other words, his opinion is no better than the opinion of anyone who has access to penetration information on ammunition

So who does have all of this acutely elusive wound/performance data?
I routinely hear about how 9mm is just a effective as the others... where is the bona fide FBI (or similar) info on the subject?

Inexpert or not, he is certainly closer to the end results than any of us, and I'm inclined to give his opinion more weight than most.

[BarryLee]

Get the 26

Easier to shoot
Cheaper ammo
One more round in the gun
Absolutely deadly

Yes, I went through the same process a few months back and picked the G26 after about 800 rounds I've never looked back.

[JohnKSa]

So who does have all of this acutely elusive wound/performance data?

Anyone.
Here's a good resource, there are others.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/

Some manufacturers publish penetration/expansion specs for their self-defense ammo, if not, you can generally find it reviewed in various publications or on other websites. Although I haven't made a practice of it (given the availability of the information on the web), I imagine that any reputable manufacturer would be willing to share the penetration specs if you called them about a particular loading.

As an example of what's readily available on the web, here's the Federal webpage for their 9mm HST 124gr JHP. If you click on the tabs at the bottom of the page you can view the penetration, weight retention and expansion results from the FBI testing protocol.

This particular loading expanded to 0.880" in bare gelatin.

http://le.atk.com/ammunition/federal...ls.aspx?id=579

Here's some information from Winchester.

http://winchesterle.com/SiteCollecti...20Protocol.pdf

I routinely hear about how 9mm is just a effective as the others... where is the bona fide FBI (or similar) info on the subject?

It's probably more worthwhile to ask the question the other way around. That is, where are the definitive test results supporting the claim that there is a significant difference in terms of self-defense effectiveness between the various common calibers in the service pistol class?

In other words, if it's possible to prove definitively that one will give you a better chance of surviving a shootout, why hasn't anyone done it by now?

[Dashunde]

Let me re-phrase....
What data was used when the secret service selected the 357Sig, for example.

In other words, if it's possible to prove definitively that one will give you a better chance of surviving a shootout, why hasn't anyone done it by now?

Probably because in the end it becomes opinion rather than science due to the many different ways the data could be interpreted. That, and no two examples are exactly the same....these are all things research scientists despise as it is a surefire way to spend years researching only to be discredited.

Gel is as good as it gets so far... and 9mm is simply not on par with 40, 357 & 45 in any gel test I've come across so far. The +'s run close, but of course so does the recoil.
Will it matter? No one really knows.

[scottycoyote]

i have a g27, girlfriend a g26. We shoot both side by side and honestly neither of us can tell a difference i recoil felt. Id buy whichever gun you could get the best deal on.

[dsa1115]

The G26 has less recoil and it's easier and more comfortable to shoot well. The G26 also accepts 10, 15, 17 or 33 round magazines, so in terms of shear size efficiency, I'm not sure if there is another gun on the market that offers more. Admittedly a .40 and 357sig are better stoppers, but if you can shoot the 9mm more accurately and faster, how much of an advantage is a bigger caliber? With some of the new defensive 9mm ammunition on the market today, the 9mm is more than an adequate stopper. Now if you were someone who already own a G22, I'd say get the G27. But if you don't own a Glock yet, or already own a G19 or G17, the choice is the G26.

[Stevie-Ray]

IMO, get the 26. I've loved mine since day one. Even makes a good range gun if that's what you want.

Doubt I'll ever have a .40 being a 10mm fan. Unless, of course the price of fodder drops to 9mm levels.

[droptrd]

I love my 27. I shoot it well. I dont own a 26 but I do own a 19 and 23 so Im familiar with the 9/40 comparison in like frames. What one I like better depends on the day of the week. Slight extra recoil in the 23 does not bother me at all. I have no problem controling my 27 as well.

[JohnKSa]

What data was used when the secret service selected the 357Sig, for example.

Almost certainly data just like the data in the manufacturer links I provided. The FBI protocol for ammunition testing seems to be the standard that LE in the U.S. relies on to compare ammunition.

Probably because in the end it becomes opinion rather than science due to the many different ways the data could be interpreted.

Which is to say that it's not proof, it's one person's interpretation of penetration and expansion data. And the debate rages on...

[bull bob]

I'm gonna throw a wise a-- remark in here, why not get a Glock 36. Same caliber as your duty weapon, lighter and a little thinner than a 30. And IMHO, if you need the power of a .40, then a .45 is even better.

[Dashunde]

And IMHO, if you need the power of a .40, then a .45 is even better.

While the 36 is a little thinner it is quite a bit bigger overall than the 26/27 and holds 6+1 of 45 where the smaller 27 manages 9+1 of 40.
The 36 is roughly the size of the 19 & 23.

I consider standard 40 and standard 45 to have about equal performance, with the 40 having a distinct advantage in capacity and a smaller pistol package.

[gregdry]

I had a 26 and then, after much looking and thinking, realized I could carry a 40 caliber in the same sized gun (a 27). My brother offered (out of the blue) to buy my 26, so I sold it to him - and bought a 27 (gen 3). I've read many who said: carry the biggest caliber you can carry; hence, the 27. Although now, I carry the Springfield XDS (45) for the same reason.

[Don P]

So it’s 9mm vs 40 S&W, which one is better at killing faster?

Neither one is worth a giant yellow patch in the snow IF YOU CAN"T/DON"T HIT what you aimed at. 22 lr will kill just as fast as any other round.

[Dashunde]

^ However.. IF you do hit what your aiming at, with all other things being equal, 40 will do more damage than 9mm.
It really is as simple as that... shot-for-shot the 40 will yield more damage.
Will it matter for you and your circumstances? Thats anyones guess. I'll personally hedge my bets on the 40.

[JohnKSa]

It really is as simple as that... shot-for-shot the 40 will yield more damage.

Yup, That's why caliber wars are so unpopular on discussion forums--because the topic is so simple. After one post, there's no point in continuing because everything that can be said on such a simple topic is already exhausted.

[johnwilliamson062]

It used to be you could buy a Glock 27 and a conversion barrel for 9mm @ $100. I doubt prices are anywhere close to that at present. Of course, you are probably paying big money for that Glock gun to begin with so may not care if you pay $200 for a barrel.
40 SW mags work with 9mm.