burrocrat
Well-known member
a glock 26 is a subcompact semiautomatic handgun for personal defense. it has no other purpose. there are many other firearms for many different tasks, and there are many other firearms for exactly just this task. so why a g26 then?
for 25 years my 'handy' gun was a 4" barrel stainless steel .357 revolver. excellent ballistics, such mechanical simplicity paired with decadent beauty, exceptional form and function, you can't break it if you tried, and it will fire everytime, underwater or anywhere else for that matter. but i recently decided the world had outgrown it's capabilities and traded it straight across for a new glock with additional accessories and extra ammo, no money out of pocket (never fear, with a ffl dealer above board for all the 40% of guns illegally sold at gun shows conspiracy theorists, the s/n#'s went in and out of the 'book').
semiauto's now offer: comparable reliabilty, 1/2 the weight, twice the capacity, and three times quicker reload, drop and swap not fumble with individual rounds or tricky speed loaders under stress. so which model to get?
glocks come in 3 sizes all comparable no matter the caliber, differing only in a couple rounds capacity and terminal ballistics. standard = 8" l x 5.5" h, compact = 7.3" l x 5.0" h, and subcompact = 6.5" l x 4.2" h.
i don't need jumbo size hip carry for instant battle any time any day. midsize preserves familiar ergonomics. i also don't negotiate the concrete jungle or see a need for a tiny boot gun. so compact it is for me. local climate does not favor bermuda shorts and flipflops so the little i lose in subcompact dimension does not affect concealability and results in loss of capacity. the ergonomics was the deciding factor. compact = 3 finger grip, while subcompact = 2 finger grip means i have to cup the bottom of the mag with pinky finger. reduced physical control was the deciding factor. better to handle it safe than buy an insurance policy i may not be able to make perform.i should mention caliber weighed heavy on the choice. i was not willing to sacrifice .357 v 9mm, so i went for .40sw, a reasonable compromise i think. if 9mm met my original needs then i'd probably conisider the baby glock.
now i want another one to save hassle of transfering from body to auto to home to outdoor stash. do i get another g23 to preserve familiarity? or go with g26 and introduce a whole different caliber with additional spare parts, ammo, and infrastructure needs?
a personal decision highly dependent on individual circumstance for sure. but either way i get a new glock! how can i lose?
any input or thoughts on the matter welcome, just don't call me crazy, or late for dinner. i've heard and had worse so it won't do no good.
for 25 years my 'handy' gun was a 4" barrel stainless steel .357 revolver. excellent ballistics, such mechanical simplicity paired with decadent beauty, exceptional form and function, you can't break it if you tried, and it will fire everytime, underwater or anywhere else for that matter. but i recently decided the world had outgrown it's capabilities and traded it straight across for a new glock with additional accessories and extra ammo, no money out of pocket (never fear, with a ffl dealer above board for all the 40% of guns illegally sold at gun shows conspiracy theorists, the s/n#'s went in and out of the 'book').
semiauto's now offer: comparable reliabilty, 1/2 the weight, twice the capacity, and three times quicker reload, drop and swap not fumble with individual rounds or tricky speed loaders under stress. so which model to get?
glocks come in 3 sizes all comparable no matter the caliber, differing only in a couple rounds capacity and terminal ballistics. standard = 8" l x 5.5" h, compact = 7.3" l x 5.0" h, and subcompact = 6.5" l x 4.2" h.
i don't need jumbo size hip carry for instant battle any time any day. midsize preserves familiar ergonomics. i also don't negotiate the concrete jungle or see a need for a tiny boot gun. so compact it is for me. local climate does not favor bermuda shorts and flipflops so the little i lose in subcompact dimension does not affect concealability and results in loss of capacity. the ergonomics was the deciding factor. compact = 3 finger grip, while subcompact = 2 finger grip means i have to cup the bottom of the mag with pinky finger. reduced physical control was the deciding factor. better to handle it safe than buy an insurance policy i may not be able to make perform.i should mention caliber weighed heavy on the choice. i was not willing to sacrifice .357 v 9mm, so i went for .40sw, a reasonable compromise i think. if 9mm met my original needs then i'd probably conisider the baby glock.
now i want another one to save hassle of transfering from body to auto to home to outdoor stash. do i get another g23 to preserve familiarity? or go with g26 and introduce a whole different caliber with additional spare parts, ammo, and infrastructure needs?
a personal decision highly dependent on individual circumstance for sure. but either way i get a new glock! how can i lose?
any input or thoughts on the matter welcome, just don't call me crazy, or late for dinner. i've heard and had worse so it won't do no good.
