Glock 17 or 34

[Danny M]

I have been shooting IDPA with a Beretta M9 and really enjoy it. It shoot's spot on and I don't have to worry about it's reliability

I am going to get a Glock and after seeing most everyone shoot the 34, I was wondering if I could be competitive with the 17.

I am not a stanger to shooting by any means and work the course's well. I see myself staying if the production class for now.

Any thoughts?

[J-Rob]

sure you can be with the 17, but the 34 is made for competition/ tactical use. I really think its a no brainer.

[Sarge]

If you can afford the small difference in price and you want it specifically for competition in production get the 34. You will, no doubt, see a post eventually that says you can still make GM with a 17(probably a GM saying it). Take that for what it's worth. If you are not yet a GM you might want every advantage you can get.

[Wik]

If you can afford the small difference in price and you want it specifically for competition in production get the 34. You will, no doubt, see a post eventually that says you can still make GM with a 17(probably a GM saying it). Take that for what it's worth. If you are not yet a GM you might want every advantage you can get.

Can you be competitive with a Glock 17? Of course! But the Glock 34 has a larger sight radius, a better factory trigger, and chances are you will do better with it over the 17, all things being equal. If you can scrounge up the small difference in price, I would. Glock 34's also hold their value a lot better. The market is saturated with used 17's.

[SA Friday]

I'm far from a 92 fan, but if it's working for you why switch? Switching to a Glock isn't going to get you further, faster, or more accurate. It might even hinder you as Glocks just don't fit everyone.

Invest in reloading equipment or ammo with the money and practice more.

[rvb]

I am going to get a Glock and after seeing most everyone shoot the 34,

I'm far from a 92 fan, but if it's working for you why switch?

I agree w/ SAF. If you're only reason is because it's what everyone else is doing, I'd say don't switch. If my Mom were replying she would ask "if a squad of uspsa shooters jumped off a bridge, would you?" If there is something specifically that you don't like about the 92/M9 where you think the glock might work better for you, go for it.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with seeing for yourself what color the grass is on the other side. You can always cross back over the fence. I've been thinking about this for a while myself.

-rvb

(fellow Beretta shooter)

[Duane Thomas]

I have posted back-to-back, essentially identical Master class scores on the IDPA classifier with both a Glock 17 and 34 too many times to believe there's any advantage to the 34 over the 17. The supposed advantage of greater accuracy at distance for the longer sight radius, as far as I've ever been able to tell from actuall shooting, is just that: supposed, not real.

Having said that, personally I just flat like the 34. It's been my daily carry gun as well as my match piece for years. I love its balance, its looks everything about it. But can I make a logical, factual case for it being any better than a 17 in actual shooting? No.

[Danny M]

Thanks for the information.

I am not looking at the Glock 34 because "everyone " has one, I would just like to try my hand with other weapons.

The Beretta is a very nice gun for me anyway!

I will be getting one to try out with other disciplines like USPSA.

[Jman]

I am going to get a Glock and after seeing most everyone shoot the 34, I was wondering if I could be competitive with the 17.

Tough to answer Danny because I haven't seen you shoot. But to try, the G17 itself will not hinder you in any way.

I am not a stanger to shooting by any means and work the course's well. I see myself staying if the production class for now.

Production is a Division, not a class.

Any thoughts?

Buy something and shoot till it melts.

[JonInWA]

I agree with Duane; (since he's a considerably better shot than I am, that endorsement probably has limited intrinsic value in and of itself...). I have both a G17 and G34, and like both, and have posted excellent times with both. From a balance standpoint, especially when shooting strong hand/weak hand, I prefer the G17, but not by a huge margin.

Coming from an M9, the G34's sight plane will be more compatible, at least at the onset-but your sight selection is probably more important on what you end up with as opposed to choosing a G34 because of the 1 inch greater sight plane distance.

If you're on a restricted budget (or at least to the point of where it comes into play in the selection between the G17 and G34), my recommendation would be to go with the G17 and spend the savings on sights (my preference is Warren Tacticals, but there are plenty of excellent options out there).

Other factors: 1) I like the Glock Extended Slide Stop/Release, which is standard equipment on the G34-if you want one for the G17, factor in about $20.00 for one; 2) Most (but not all) G34s come with the "-" connector and the coil trigger spring, providing about a 4.5 lb triggerpull. What I don't care for with this arraingement is that the shallower angle of the "-" connector makes the trigger reset point significantly less discernable. My changes have been to either switch out the coil trigger spring with for a NY1 unit (about $2-$5), which provvides about a 6-7 lb triggerpull, but with a short, but much more discernable reset point (and a constant triggerpull from initial start to break) or switch out the "-" connector with for the "standard" connector, yielding about a 5.5 lb triggerpull, with the Glock "2-stage" triggerpull characteristic. Standard connectors and coil triggersprings are very inexpensive and easily obtainable.

However, if you get your G34, particularly if its through a LEO dealer, or through the Glock Homeland Defender Program, check the box label, as I believe that a LEO oriented supplier is much more liklier to stock G34s with the "standard" 5.5 lb connector and the fixed polymer sights (as opposed to the Glock polymer adjustable rear sight present on most commercial marketplace G34s-but if you're replacing the sights anyhow, you'll save about $15-20 buy getting it with the less expensive fixed sights as OEM sights.

Another excellent sight alternative available from Glock is to get either gun with Trijicon night sights, which provide a very good day- and night-sight picture, as the Trijicon front sight blade is thinner than either the Glock polymer and/or Glock-branded Meprolite front sight blade.

Best, Jon

Edited July 26, 2010 by JonInWA

[Danny M]

I am going to get a Glock and after seeing most everyone shoot the 34, I was wondering if I could be competitive with the 17.

Tough to answer Danny because I haven't seen you shoot. But to try, the G17 itself will not hinder you in any way.

I am not a stanger to shooting by any means and work the course's well. I see myself staying if the production class for now.

Production is a Division, not a class. Very sorry about the mistake with class VS. division, I will be sure to make sure I use the term for the current discusion.Any thoughts?Buy something and shoot till it melts.

[HS101]

Don't forget to join GSSF for the discount.... Every little but helps!

[Duane Thomas]

You won't find very many good shooters who stick an extended slide stop on their Glock. Rather than saving money by going with the Glock 34 because you don't have to pay for an extended slide stop, I'd say you'll save money with a Glock 17 because you don't have to pull off an extended slide stop and buy a low-profile jobbie to replace it on a 34.

Jon is a very knowledge gun expert and a helluva nice guy. Having said that - and meaning every word of it - I have never understood this whole "4.5 pound connector makes the trigger reset less discernible" thing, which he's mentioned during many personal phone conversations. I've been fingering both 4.5 and 5.5 pound connectors for well over 20 years and I'm damned if I can tell any difference in how easy it is to feel the trigger reset between the two. They're both VERY discernible. And again, you're not going to find very many good shooters installing a New York Trigger or NY-1 in their Glock for the resultant heavier trigger pulls. God knows I want to like the New York Trigger/NY-1 since I respect their breakage-proof qualities, but in my testing, leaving everything on my G34 the same but switching out the trigger spring for a New York Trigger ADDS 10 seconds to my time on the IDPA classifier (which I tend to use as an acid test for any modification). Thank you, no.

[kevin c]

You might consider going to a commercial range and seeing if you can shoot a box of ammo through a Glock before you buy one and find that it doesn't suit you. Some folks don't care for the trigger and/or the grip angle.

That being said, Glocks are what I have been shooting these past three years, in USPSA Production Division (usually a 34, sometimes a downloaded 35) and IDPA SSP (17 or 34). The 34 gets me a bit more weight (not significant for competition, perhaps for carry), longer sight radius (which DT points out is probably not as important as fast acceptable sight alignment in our games of generous, fairly close targets taken at speed), more barrel with a bit more velocity for a given load (matters only if you hug the Power Facter threshold), and different trigger, slide stop, sights and mag release (which are swappable anyway).

Lots of 17's availble used, 34's are harder to find and more expensive.

Try 'em out first. If you find one or another model much more to your liking, then go that way. If not, pick either, unless you find that you just don't care for how they fit or shoot for you, then stay w/ your Beretta (I started with one, but actually it didn't fit me well). or look elsewhere.

Look luck!

Edited July 28, 2010 by kevin c

[Field]

sure you can be with the 17, but the 34 is made for competition/ tactical use. .

taktikal use?

[Sarge]

sure you can be with the 17, but the 34 is made for competition/ tactical use. .

taktikal use?

Lots of swat use the 35 in .40. The 34/35 is listed as practical/tactical.

[JonInWA]

You won't find very many good shooters who stick an extended slide stop on their Glock. Rather than saving money by going with the Glock 34 because you don't have to pay for an extended slide stop, I'd say you'll save money with a Glock 17 because you don't have to pull off an extended slide stop and buy a low-profile jobbie to replace it on a 34.

Jon is a very knowledge gun expert and a helluva nice guy. Having said that - and meaning every word of it - I have never understood this whole "4.5 pound connector makes the trigger reset less discernible" thing, which he's mentioned during many personal phone conversations. I've been fingering both 4.5 and 5.5 pound connectors for well over 20 years and I'm damned if I can tell any difference in how easy it is to feel the trigger reset between the two. They're both VERY discernible. And again, you're not going to find very many good shooters installing a New York Trigger or NY-1 in their Glock for the resultant heavier trigger pulls. God knows I want to like the New York Trigger/NY-1 since I respect their breakage-proof qualities, but in my testing, leaving everything on my G34 the same but switching out the trigger spring for a New York Trigger ADDS 10 seconds to my time on the IDPA classifier (which I tend to use as an acid test for any modification). Thank you, no.

Whether the Extended Slide Stop/Release works for you or not is dependant upon your thumb position. Mine doesn't interfere with the Extended component, so I prefer it, as I personally find using the Extended a quicker way to get from slidelock into battery-YMMV.

Duane and I go round-and-round over the connectors. For me, the "-" connector with the coil spring I find achieves the trigger reset point 1) very quickly/in a very short movement distance, and 2) has a less pronounced "click," which I beleive derives from the more acute angle of the "-" connector. Using the NY1 provides 1) a more perceptible/discernable reset "click," in the same short trigger movement distance, and 2) does so while adding some, but not a huge amount of triggerpull weight, upping it to about 6-7 lbs (which many consider to be more ideal in a tactical (as opposed to gaming) scenario, and 3)provides a single consistant triggerpull, from inception until break, as opposed to the two-stage feel (lighter initial take-up, harder pull weight near break point). The cons to the NY1 is that it's not as smooth a triggerpull, and it is heavier.

The durability advantages of the NY1 over the OEM coil spring are probably moot since Glock changed both the material composition and the visible finish of the coil spring from bright silver to its current muted battleship gray (and enlarged the spring anchoring holes in the triggerbar and the trigger housing mechanism). In my '08 Glock Armorers class, literally no one (primarily LEO armorers, a very experienced instructor {Dennis Tueller} and the Glock LE Regional Rep) could recall any coil spring breakages with the newer battleship gray component. Glock has further taken one more step on the new Gen4 triggerbars to even further reduce the possibility of metal fatigue/flexation on the coil spring by adapting a "dogleg" to the triggerbar where the spring hooks in.

In one sense the differences that Duane and I have is complimentary to Duane-I have no doubt that due to a combination of his skill and triggerfinger sensing/discerning capabilities (were talking about a guy who has his triggerpull poundage set at less than 3 lbs and does consistantly well with it) are a notch or so higher than mine-hence I feel a less discernable reset point with the "-" connector/coil spring set-up, and Duane goes "What the heck is Jon talking about?"

All I can say is that one of the beauties of the Glock modular design is that its very easy to play with (with a modicum of training and hand-eye coordination) and the parts are inexpensive; so there's some merit to trying out several of the configurations to ascertain what works best for you. The nice thing about the G34 is that it comes with the Glock "-" connector to start with (in most cases), which otherwise is a hard/relatively expensive part to get otherwise.

Since I'm currently concurrantly shooting both my G17 (which has a steller triggerpull with the standard connector and coil trigger spring) and my G34 in GSSF competition, I'm running them both with the identical connector (standard) and trigger spring (coil) set-up, but at some point I'll probably revert to the "-" connector /NY1 spring set-up in the G34.

Best, Jon

Edited July 27, 2010 by JonInWA

[Duane Thomas]

Under the "What the heck is Jon talking about" category , I have never felt the "consistent trigger stroke" aka "revolver-like" as some folks like to call it, all the way through the stroke with a New York Trigger. There is still a perceptible "link" between the takeup and the break. You take up the slack, hit the link, the trigger pull gets considerably heavier at that point. In other words, it feels just like a standard Glock trigger pull - just a LOT heavier.

By competition standards, my Glock trigger jobs, which have historically fallen into the 3 to 3.5 pound range, are actually fairly heavy trigger pulls.

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: Get the Glcok 34 and don't look back. I have owned a couple of each and like the balance and longer sight radius of the 34. I think there may not be much an advantage with the 34 over the 17 in IDPA because of the distances involved. In USPSA you will get the odd long tight shot that the 34 just works better. Most important thing with the Glocks is to get better sights. I use the plan Warren rear sight and the Dawson fiber front sight with green fiber installed. Thanks, Eric

[Paul Burtchell]

Hello: Get the Glcok 34 and don't look back. I have owned a couple of each and like the balance and longer sight radius of the 34. I think there may not be much an advantage with the 34 over the 17 in IDPA because of the distances involved. In USPSA you will get the odd long tight shot that the 34 just works better. Most important thing with the Glocks is to get better sights. I use the plan Warren rear sight and the Dawson fiber front sight with green fiber installed. Thanks, Eric

+1

Add a Charlie Vanek Classic Grandmaster Trigger Kit , 13# recoil spring, grip tape and be done !

Edited July 27, 2010 by Paul Burtchell

[Jman]

Here's yet another angle to ponder.

I have a G17 with a Jager upper and Docter dot optic I use to shoot Open major. It has a Vanek/Jager trigger and it's sick.

I fitted a complete OEM upper to the same G17 lower (less magwell) for carry.

My G35 beater is used to shoot virtually every other semi-auto division.

So..two point five Glocks = everything.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Jman

[ntphd]

Given all of the expert advice in this thread, I want to be clear: I'm only a C class Production shooter (and if they had a minus system in USPSA, mine would be C--). Just thought I'd throw in a different perspective.

A few months ago, I switched from a G17 with standard, out-of-the-box sights (only modification: a Ghost 3.5 connector) to a G34 with Warren Tactical sights. It seemed like a no brainer. It wasn't. I'm still trying to get back to the scores I was making with the standard 17.

I'm guessing a large part of my challenge is vision. I know everyone (except Armando Valdes) says that the Glock front sight is terrible. For me, however, it was *much* easier to see and work with than the lauded Warrens.

Picking up on what someone has already mentioned, used G17s abound and are pretty cheap. Given how easy and inexpensive it is to replace parts on a Glock, I wish I would have gone that route from the beginning: bought a used 17 from a reputable dealer, used a little of the saved cash to purchase the _Making Glocks Rock_ dvd, and gone from there.

Good luck with your decision. Between the two, you really can't make a bad choice.

[kevin c]

Given all of the expert advice in this thread, I want to be clear: I'm only a C class Production shooter (and if they had a minus system in USPSA, mine would be C--). Just thought I'd throw in a different perspective.

A few months ago, I switched from a G17 with standard, out-of-the-box sights (only modification: a Ghost 3.5 connector) to a G34 with Warren Tactical sights. It seemed like a no brainer. It wasn't. I'm still trying to get back to the scores I was making with the standard 17.

I'm guessing a large part of my challenge is vision. I know everyone (except Armando Valdes) says that the Glock front sight is terrible. For me, however, it was *much* easier to see and work with than the lauded Warrens.

Picking up on what someone has already mentioned, used G17s abound and are pretty cheap. Given how easy and inexpensive it is to replace parts on a Glock, I wish I would have gone that route from the beginning: bought a used 17 from a reputable dealer, used a little of the saved cash to purchase the _Making Glocks Rock_ dvd, and gone from there.

Good luck with your decision. Between the two, you really can't make a bad choice.

Did you get the plain black Warrens, or the fiber optic front sight version?

Just an off the cuff observation, but using the original white dot factory Glock FS might have you looking for something to pick up off the FS of the Warren. The plain FS won't give you the same visual prompt that the FO does nicely.

Another possibility is that the FS is narrower than the std, and that will be more evident with the longer sight radius of the 34. Until you get used to aligning that FS in the rear notch precisely, accuracy may suffer.

[JonInWA]

When I got the black Warren Tacticals for my G34, after shooting one match with them, I painted the back face of the front sight (which is the .125 wide) with white Liquid Paper as a base coat, and than with Testor's Neon Green. It made a quantum difference for me, providing some of the acquisition advantages of a fiber optic without the durability issue.

I have Trijicon sights on my G19, and Glock steel sights (which are identical to the Glock polymer sights, only steel) on my G17 and G21. Last year I posted my personal "best ever" score with the G17 using the Glock steel sights, but overall (and subsequently) I've found the Warren and Trijicon sights to be generally faster and a bit more ideal, as their front sight blade is thinner than that on the Glock, providing larger light bars, speeding up acquisition, and the standard .125 front and .150 U-configuration rear notch on the Warrens being quite nice.

Best, Jon

[Rob Tompkins]

Intro: I have used a G35 in IDPA SSP a lot (the G35 is same as G34 but in 40S&W) but now shooting a M&P Pro 9mm. I also shoot a G24 (like a G35 but w/ 6" barrel) in Limited USPSA.

If you would modify the 17 to make it like the 34, just get the 34.

If you plan / expect to modify either one more then just a tiny bit, consider a good USED 17 and modify till its right. It will work out cheaper.

4" vs 5" is all about balance and handling and a bit about recoil management. With the 9mm recoil is probably not going to be an issue, but you may feel more with the G17 compared to your '92. The G34 will likely seem closer to the 92.

Personally I like the longer barreled guns (to a point) as they have a better balance for me. The weight is not an issue, in fact it helps me move smoother. When/if I get to Master / GM a lighter gun may or may not make a difference.

Bottom line, get the one you feel balances better.