rauchman

Not sure what this means?

Totally agree with this. Although I don't carry, I've found Glocks to be more accurate than most give them credit for, extremely reliable, very simple to fully take down, easily found parts and relatively cheap and easy to maintain.

Totally understand your feelings about the Glock trigger. My 1st Glock was a Gen3 G22 bought new sometime in the mid 90's. I HATED it. Recoil was sharp and I wasn't anywhere near as accurate as I was on other platforms. I sold the G22. I read a lot about modern combat pistol shooting. The more I read, the more I was convinced that Glock was onto something w/ their more extreme angle on their grip, low bore axis, consistent shot to shot trigger, etc. A year or so later, I picked up a used Gen2 G19 expressly for the purpose of once and for all, becoming decent to good, on a Glock. The more I shot the G19, the more I liked it. I dry fired that pistol A LOT. I'd drive my wife batty w/ the click of the trigger and the rack of the slide to reset the trigger. I wore out 4 recoil spring assemblies & 3 trigger springs by dry firing alone. I dry fired that pistol so much w/out snap caps, I shattered the breach area of the slide where the firing pin pokes through. Glock replaced the slide w/ a Gen3 slide, making my Gen2 G19 kind of unique. Ultimately though, my groups got considerably better. On a good day, I could get 5 rounds into 1.5" at 15 yards. To summarize, I found the Glock trigger the hardest trigger to learn. Having somewhat learned it, I've become a fan. Since there will be someone who doubt's my claim of the Gen2 G19 w/ shattered breach... I respectfully disagree. Put in the time to learn the trigger w/ lots of dry fire (w/ snap caps). After you can get your groups down, then consider upgrades. The ONLY upgrades I do to my Glocks are G17 smooth faced triggers (vs. the serrated face G19 triggers) and polish all contact points. I've tried lightened connectors, heavier trigger springs (which makes for a lighter pull), NY trigger..... and always come back to a smooth faced trigger and polishing. Please see comment above. Totally understand your views on your preference for a metal gun. I have a few myself and do like them. However, I fully appreciate the attributes of polymer framed pistols as well. Regarding my Glock fetish, I have 6 Glocks, 4 of them 9mm, one of those is a Gen2 G17. I find that pistol's grip a little weird, and thus, my experimental desire to try a Gen4 G17 w/ the smaller grip frame front to back. Also, the Gen4's have gained a rep for having better accuracy than previous Gen's. I've seen multiple range reports of the Gen4 G17 having comparable accuracy to an HK or Sig 9mm, pistols that I hold in high regard w/ respect to accuracy. Also, my main pistol is a G19. I have a Gen2 (as mentioned above) and a Gen3 G19 for my HD, SHTF pistols. I'm a firm believer of 2 is 1 and 1 is none w/ respect to guns for social purposes. For this reason, a Gen4 G19 is also somewhere in the future. Understand your logic here. However, I have 2 G19's already. Also, I've found of any Glock, I shoot the G17 best. Recoil is smoother, muzzle flip is less noticable and I'm more accurate on this platform. I've toyed w/ the idea of chopping the G17 frame down to accept G19 mags. Also, I'm not ruling out a Gen4 G19 somewhere down the road as well. I'd consider swapping out my G26 for a Gen4 also. Old School, you and I have to meet at the range one day to trade Glock stories. Among the Glock faithful on this site, yours is among those opinions that I look forward to and respect.

Greetings, I've had a growing itch to get a Gen4 G17. I have a variety of Glocks already, among them a Gen4 G23 and G21. Really like the Gen4 attributes w/ the checkering, shorter grip frame, bigger mag release and better accuracy. OTOH, I've read countless threads on problematic Gen4 9mm's. What is your experience w/ a Gen4 9mm? Is it reliable? Do you like it? Do have a reference of comparison from Gen3's and previous? Thanks, Ken

Some recommendations for .40 As TukTuk mentioned, Sigs are excellent. I have an M&P40 that really abates the snappy recoil nicely. Also, HK's offerings are excellent as well. Personally, not really a huge fan of pre Gen4 Glock .40's.

A Beretta 96 Centurian (slightly shorter barrel) was the very 1st pistol I ever owned. At the same time, my wife bought a Beretta 92FS. While the gun was accurate and reliable, it felt like it was getting beat up from the .40. Recoil was snappy and noticeable. While I like the 9X series of pistols, I don't like them in .40. OTOH, I understand the Brigadere model was introduced sometime in the 90's w/ a beefier slide and this helped tame the recoil a bit. Don't know if that model is still made. If you do go this route, I can't recommend a "D" model hammer spring enough. I dropped one in my wife's 92FS and it greatly helps the DA and slightly lightens the SA. Thanks, Ken

Thanks!

+1! Really like the new checkering as my hands don't slip nearly as much as the Gen2/Gen3 textures.

Good point. I was think Glocks, as you have to pull the slide back a bit to reset the trigger.

I'm running these on 2 rifles. They replaced an ACE Entry and ACE Skeleton A1. I haven't gotten to the range yet, but so far in dry firing around the house, I'm liking the stock. I'm running a VLtor A5 setup in one and a carbine setup from Rainier Arms. BTW, the Rainier Arms carbine buffer receiver extension kit was a good piece of kit...they use 7075 aluminum and it comes w/ an H buffer and spring.

I guess first off, you need to define what you want your AR to do. HD, lightweight, precision, how accurate are you looking for it to be, etc..... How handy are you? Also, how do you define a build? Is it buying a "done" upper and mating it to a "done" lower? Is it getting a stripped upper and lower, stripped barrel, etc., and then drilling the barrel for the gas block, attaching barrel to upper, pinning muzzle device, etc....? I've pretty much done all armorer functions on an AR, minus drilling gas block to barrel. Having the correct tools is a must. While there is a certain satisfaction in building (which I define as buying all the parts and assembling yourself), you might be better off finding an upper that is preassembled and mating it to a lower w/ parts (trigger, stock, etc.) of your choice. Lots of great uppers already assembled in a variety of configurations already out there. This will get you a carbine that would meet your criteria w/out having the additional expense of some tools and will get you out to the range quicker. Also, you may not know what you parts you want on an AR w/out having had one for a while and doing some shooting with it. Experience is the best teacher. Do LOTS of research on quality parts. IF you decide you still want to build an AR from the ground up, you have already have a carbine you can use to dissemble / reassemble to practice on. If you decide to build, I believe the only thing to really take into consideration right off the bat is anything related to a barrel nut / gas block w/ a pinned muzzle brake. Once the brake is welded on, it will be very involved to have it removed to allow the barrel nut / gas block to then be removed. This really pertains to hand guard choices. Some hand guards use a proprietary barrel nut. Some require either removing a front sight base to be replaced w/ a gas block, or shaving down the front sight base to fit under the hand guard. After that, replacing any parts are considerably less of a hassle. You could a lot worse than a Daniel Defense. Good luck and keep us updated on what you do.

My buddy is really into Sig's. I believe he has 7 or so at last count. He's taken the armorer's course. I believe the recommended change out interval for the recoil spring is 5,000 cycles. I mention cycles and not rounds since when one dry fires, that counts as a cycle on the recoil spring. I wear out more recoil springs because of dry firing vs. actual firing.

Definitely agree!

Hi, I'm in Teaneck and have the "tools". Also have a used ACE Entry if you're interested. Let me know if you need help w/ anything. As other's have mentioned, for what you're doing, it's not hard. Go slow, check Youtube, and if you need additional help check here, AR15.com, M4carbine.net (IMHO, this is the best AR15 related site going). I'll PM you my cell # if you want to call for help.

No experience w/ Magnum Research, however I have a PPQ. It is VERY accurate w/ perhaps the nicest trigger to be found on a stock striker fired pistol. Mags are expensive. I have the paddle mag release and vastly prefer this style. Seriously wish there were more offerings w/ this type of mag release.

Same in width. Going from frontstrap to backstrap ... No backstrap = 2mm shorter than Gen3 Medium backstrap = Gen3 Big backstrap = 2mm longer than Gen3 or somewhere thereabouts...

Doofus me didn't read down far enough. Good choice and congrats!

I've owned and sold an XD9 Tactical and XD45 Tactical and shot various models of XD including a .40 or two. I own an M&P40 (also have an M&P9 barrel and mags) and an M&P45. XD - Both my XD's were bought new. I did not like the trigger, but, unlike the M&P, never investigated 3rd party options to make the trigger better. While the XD45 was accurate, the XD9 was NOT. I noticed that when I pulled the trigger very deliberately slowly, the rear of the slide would rise about 1mm. This is the 1st, and only, pistol I've ever seen do that. I whole heartedly believe this contributed to the bad accuracy that I saw. On a really good day when I practice a bit, I can put 5 rounds into 1" at 15 yards on a G17, Sig P226 (9mm), HK USP45 and a few others. Although, these days, it's more like 1.5". The best I was able to do w/ the XD9T was about 5". I found the slide very blocky and found it very hard to track the front sight during recoil as the slide tended to torque a bit and there was heavy muzzle flip, vs. the slight rise and straight back recoil of the M&P slide. The grip on the XD9 reminded me of a High Power, which is a good thing. I just couldn't get past the less than stellar accuracy during slow firing, and the feeling of fighting the pistol during a quicker pace of shooting. Some people make an issue out of the grip safety. It never bothered my one way or another. IIRC, you couldn't rack the slide w/ the grip safety being pushed in. M&P - Both my pistols, I bought used. IIRC, the M&P40 is from 2008 or so. When I bought the pistol, the trigger was horrible. I went the route of getting the Apex sear and polished the internals as outlined on Dave Burwell's site. This included a rounding the edges of the engagement area of the firing pin safety. Now the trigger is superb. I wish I could have this trigger on all my pistols. I also put the in the Apex sear on the M&P45, but didn't spend as much time polishing. The trigger, while better than stock, is not in the same league as the M&P40. One thing I don't like about the M&P is in order to access the firing pin safety, you have to remove the rear sight. On the M&P40, I've also slightly relieved the area under the trigger guard and flattened the front strap a little. Anyway, the M&P has some of the best recoil characteristics I've found of any pistol, especially in .40 (comparative pistols include 1911's, Walther (PPQ, P99, P5), Glock's, XD's, HK USP's, Sig P series & SigPro & Beretta 92 & 96 series). It tracks very nicely in recoil and is very easy to put out an accurate repeat shot. Bringing the pistol up to line of sight, the sights are always "right there". I think some of the parts used in the M&P could be better though. I've read repeated accounts of slide stops breaking, firing pins breaking (this happened to me...just be sure to get a current generation one if buying used as these are supposed to very tough) and less than stellar accuracy on the 9mm's. Just to be clear though, even with my lavish praise of the M&P, I still like Glocks better. Bottom line, between the XD and M&P, I'd easily go M&P.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I don't know if all .40 Glocks exhibit the buldge, but everyone that I've fired does. This would be about 10 various .40 Glocks. I don't reload (yet), so have no idea if there are any reloading issues w/ the bulged cases. I would venture to guess that the case would be weakened by the bulging though. I understand the bulging comes from the lack of case support in the feed ramp area of the barrel. I agree that the .40 Glocks are accurate. For me, I'm not as accurate on the 2nd shot vs. a 9mm. Regarding +P 9mm vs. .40, yes no question, +P ammo will recoil harder than standard pressure 9mm, but I still think it's easier (however slight) to get that 2nd shot on target w/ the 9mm.

Just some clarification here. The G26 and G27 of ALL generations come with the dual recoil spring. I believe the current Gen4 dual recoil spring setup in the compact and fullsize models, comes from the G26/27 design. I have a G26 that I like. My 1st experience w/ one was about 5 or so years ago. Was at Bullet Hole shooting a G19 and a couple of guys got the port next to me and were shooting shotgun patterns w/ the G26. I asked if they wouldn't mind if I took 5 rounds on it using my own ammo. They agreed and said the gun wasn't accurate. I put 5 rounds into about 1.5" at 10 yards or so. The look on the one guy's face was priceless. I got a laugh out of that. I digress...sorry. I like the G26, and mine happens to have the nicest Glock trigger I've ever felt.... and it's stock. I am not getting rid of it, but it barely gets shot. Very accurate pistol. I like the G19 considerably better. I don't carry, but I don't see that much of difference between a G19 and G26, but that's me. Personally, I wouldn't buy a G27. I've never shot one, but can't see it being all that pleasant to shoot. I have a Gen4 G23 that I tolerate, but am far from in love with. Considering selling it actually. I'd consider a Gen4 G22 or G35, but DO NOT like that every Glock .40 puts a bulge in the cartridge case. For .40's, I've moved over to the M&P platform as it handles the recoil better and doesn't put that stupid bulge in the case.

I have no experience w/ the clones, but have a CZ75SA in .40. I bought mine about 10 years ago at Bullet Hole for $425. Wow, these pistols have come up in price.

I got a couple of Magpul carbine fixed stocks, and AM LOVING THEM. They provide an LOP of just over 12". It's about 1.5 - 2" shorter than an A1, but not nearly as short as the ACE Entry that was replaced by the new stock. Also replaced an ACE A1 length stock. Also, MP sells a spacer that screws into the back of the stock for an additional 1/2" or so. Be aware that if you want a QD sling point, it is a separate attachment that must be purchased. Really digging the length of this stock though.

Mu guess would be, that this is not NJ legal since it says it accepts a variety of suppressors. I believe, the muzzle device can not be suppressor attachment friendly.

This! I have an M&P45 and an HK USP45F, along w/ a Gen4 G21. While the Wilson is a great 1911, it is VERY expensive. Sig's QC is not what it once was and wouldn't pay for a new one. I'd consider a used one though. The P220 is a VERY accurate pistol. The Jericho,....errr, ahhhh....... no. The M&P45 has really surprised me it's ergo's, 2nd shot controllability and accuracy. Very nice pistol for not a crazy amount of $. The HK's are, well they are excellent uber combat pistols that are not cheap. Excellent accuracy, durability and reliability. It doesn't get much better in a service type pistol.