cpty1 Posted November 12, 2001 Share Posted November 12, 2001 Aw shucks, SS. However, I must clarify, I haven't made master yet with the Glock, I just shoot one (or two) of them now. My M card was from a previous life with an open gun....once upon a time in a land far, far away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted November 12, 2001 Author Share Posted November 12, 2001 Chris, I watched the video from stage 4. You should have sent me home........ I hate to complain because those guys do a great job but...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpty1 Posted November 12, 2001 Share Posted November 12, 2001 SS...yeah, maybe....without having the luxury of video playback I'll just say it was close, hence the immediate warning. I was in position at a better angle to the 180 than the camera, so it might have looked worse on video than it was. As you know, had already had to DQ one guy a couple of stages previous. Had no choice at all there though. That was the first time I've seen a stage design like that at CGC. Not a good thing. I think you'll see some changes coming soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpty1 Posted November 13, 2001 Share Posted November 13, 2001 Went to the range yesterday to continue the 9 vs 40 "experiment" that SS and I started Saturday. I set three targets at ten yards with each target half covered with hardcover at various angles, i.e. horizontal, vertical right, vertical left. I figured this setup would mandate a good focus on the front sight. Each drill was six rounds and any run less than one point down was thrown out. I did two drills: two rounds on each target, and six rounds on one target. I compared the Glock 35 with 145 PF and 168 PF loads and a 34 with 127 PF loads. On average the best splits with the two 40 cal loads were with the 145 PF. Splits were about 2 to 3 tenths longer with the major loads. Groups on the six round/1 target string were tighter with the 145 load also. (Note to self: Forget my idiot rambling earlier about shooting one load and sticking with it for both LIM 10 and production). The 145 load was just more controllable than the major load. As for the 9mm..the split times were averaging 1-2 tenths longer with the 9 than the 145 PF 40 load. This could be due to the faster cycle time of the 145 40 load as I did sense the 40 cycle time as being quicker than the 9. Note to self: I still need to load 145 PF 9mm load to compare with 145 PF 40 load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted November 13, 2001 Author Share Posted November 13, 2001 Good stuff Chris. I have a hard time believing that you will find anything better in the 145pf 9mm load. Methinks I have a 9mm for sale....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precision40 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I've seen people do really well using the 17, 22, 24, 34 and 35. It seems to be more a personal preference as to which is the best Comparing the .40 to the 9mm is a mute point really. I finally gave in and just got a 9mm on a really good deal. Can't wait to work up a 130pf load for IDPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Alright, my $.02. I use the G35 in Production. I have thought about switching to the 9mm G34, but never seem to get over the fence. I started using 180gr loads, and they were really soft. But, they seemed to have a lot of muzzle rise. So I went to 155's. A touch more recoil, but hardly noticable, plus less muzzle rise. So I went to 135's. Snappier, but almost no muzzle rise. But I think they are too snappy, almost like a 9mm, so I will probably settle on the 155's. I have shot the G35 and the G17 back to back testing to see which is faster. With the tamest 9mm load, it wasn't even close. I could run rings around the G17 every time. (not a completely fair test, but that was as close as I could get) So, for me, I think .40 minor is the way to go. No snap, no recoil, easy to shoot. Plus, .40 takes down steel a lot easier than 9mm if you use the heavier (155+) bullets. Plus, think of all the times when shooting a 9mm you may have gotten an edger on a target that was a mike. If you shoot a .40, you are that much closer. (I've been saved by that a few times too!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Matt, What PF do you load your .40 minor loads to? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I guess I should have added that. I used to load to 131pf, but now I'm loading a little hotter at 135pf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precision40 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I have always been under the impression that a 9mm at 135pf actually knocks down steel better than a .40 at the same pf, simply because there is more "energy" with the higher velocity bullet. Is this correct? I used a G22 in IDPA a couple of years ago and loaded the 180's down to 140pf and it just felt sluggish. The slide cycled very slow and it just felt weird. So when I had the opportunity to by this 34, I jumped on it because a 9mm at 130pf is a bit more like a factory load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garfield Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 The "energy" used to knock down something is called kinetic pulse, which is the product of mass and velocity. So, of two bullets travelling at the same speed, the heavier one will have more "power" to knock down a plate. BTW: interesting topic. I am contemplating buying a G22 to use in (IPSC) SD, (IPSC) PD and some more things. Currently I shoot a G17 in PD, using factory ammo that gives me PF 147 - 150 (!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RH45 Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 I bought a G35 last year to shoot production in IPSC and stock service in IDPA. I'm kind of a cheapskate, and have tons of 9mm brass laying around, and 9mm bullets are less expensive than .40, so I ordered a 9mm drop-in barrel from KKM precision, and 4 9mm mags. I don't think I've put 100 rounds through it, experimenting with different handloads, and factory loads, and although it is a lot more accurate than my stock .40 barrel, you guys are right, it has a LOT more felt recoil than the .40. I thought that, if nothing else, I would use it for practice, on some of the weed-populated ranges I shoot at so if I lost my brass, I wouldn't care, but, it doesn't duplicate the feel of the .40. So, now the 9mm conversion just sits on the shelf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogiebb Posted February 17, 2004 Share Posted February 17, 2004 i like shooting my G35 for production because of the bigger holes that i could punch in the paper..especially the holes that break the scoring line..shooting .40 is soft and is not a disadvantage for USPSA.. for IPSC well thats a diff matter (round count) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 I’ve been experimenting with some .40 loads for Production. I worked up a 135 pf load with a 180 bullet, but it felt mushy and the slide seemed very sluggish. I bumped it up to a 141 pf and it seems like a great load that’s still much less snappy than my 115 9mm loads. I have some 155's I'll work up a load for as well. Any suggestions with the 155's and Titegroup? I tried 4.0 grains with the 155's and is was also mushy and sluggish. Maybe I'll bump it to 4.2-4.4. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted July 6, 2004 Share Posted July 6, 2004 Cy, when I loaded TG and 155's I think I used 3.8gr. But that also got me to 125.0pf at the Summer Blast, so you might want to load hotter. Also, I just got my G34 and the load squared away. I'm using 147gr. Stars, 3.6gr of TG at about 138pf or so. So far, I really like the way this load feels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 cant change caliber in production, heck you cant even pull that one off in limited....come on guys read the rules....9mm barrel in a 40 is stupid anyways If you get it to feed 100 percent what have you done? Not much... anyways if you shoot IPSC, not uspsa, the9mm will be the way to go...ya get two extra rounds in the mags. I dont see the 40 being as reliable as 9mm...you dont have to load 9 down to make it competitive.. 147s at 900 are plenty soft...i personally like a gun to be a little snappier than 135 pf 40s... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 I dont see the 40 being as reliable as 9mm In general? Or in a barrel swapped gun (which, as you say, isn't legal)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 I think that if you're feeding your Glock Production gun from TEN Round mags, that the 9 is more reliable than the .40, due to the pressure the ammo stack puts on the slide. If you're using pre-ban standard cap mags, I suspect the issue is moot..... Every 17/34 I see with ten rounders runs; every .40 with ten rounders I see has issues..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniper1Moore Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 I shoot a Glock 35 in IDPA SSP with downloaded rounds (3.5grn VV N320 180grn CSI FMJ ) with 10rnd mags and have never had a feed problem.The .40 has alot more room to play around with pf than the 9mm.Plus the .40 will make major if you choose later to shoot another game that requires 165 pf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Posted September 9, 2004 Share Posted September 9, 2004 In general? Or in a barrel swapped gun (which, as you say, isn't legal)? well i can imagine that anything can be made to work, i bet you will get some extraction problems with a 40 breech face, 9mm ammo, and mixed brass(some of the foreign stuff is a touch smaller at the rim) While it can be done, the 40 can be made to run reliably at 135 pf i dont think it will be as reliable as a gun that is being used as it was designed. It is my opinion(for what its worth) the 9mm is a better production gun than the 40 The 40 is more veristile, being able to get major power in limited and L10. If one were to only want one gun, the G35 is probably the best competition gun, production, limited, limited 10, open(if you feel like it) and it should work in two of the IDPA divisions. me, having more guns than brains, would use a 9mm for production, 45 or 40 for limited 10, 40 for limited, and whatever your dollar would buy for open. for all those that use a 40 for production, cool, im glad it works for ya. I have seen more than a couple 10+1 malfunctions with a lightly spring G35..my glock 34 runs and runs and runs...while some of the guys are clearing malfunctions, my glock is eatin paper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted September 9, 2004 Share Posted September 9, 2004 I think that if you're feeding your Glock Production gun from TEN Round mags, that the 9 is more reliable than the .40, due to the pressure the ammo stack puts on the slide. If you're using pre-ban standard cap mags, I suspect the issue is moot.....Every 17/34 I see with ten rounders runs; every .40 with ten rounders I see has issues..... I've not had reliablity problems with my .40 ten rounds mags, but some are hard as hell to seat with a round in the chamber. Hopefully, 10 rounds mags will be a thing of the past in a few days!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Moneypenny Posted September 9, 2004 Share Posted September 9, 2004 i never had any issues with my G22 and 10 round mags i think i ran a 15 pound recoil spring? seemed to work great for me. after shooting a friends 9mm load i don't know how anything could ever be any softer. VV 310 behind a 147 JHP Zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Posted September 9, 2004 Share Posted September 9, 2004 vv 310 and 147s are like rimfire,,, too bad vv is so hard to get around here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now