Author Topic: glock 20 vs glock 40  (Read 1233 times)

Ridgerunner665

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 225
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2017, 02:10:57 PM »
Yes it is...KKM... Money well spent.

200 grain bullets at 1,300 fps, using book data... And 100 yard accurate too, on an 8" target.

150-155 grain bullets at 1,500+ with well below max, easy on the brass, loads.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 02:17:07 PM by Ridgerunner665 »

G_man

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2017, 02:36:07 PM »
Thank you for all the load info. What was the reason for the longer tube (not that any of us need one), state hunting regs? Off the shelf barrel?
Keep your booger hook off the boom switch until you're ready to fire

Ridgerunner665

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 225
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #17 on: September 26, 2017, 02:43:32 PM »
I wanted all the power I could safely get (strictly published data for me)... Without getting too long and cumbersome to carry (LW offers a 9").

The G40 is purely a hunting pistol for me, mostly deer.

4" barrels are legal here in TN, I started out thinking I'd get a 41 mag, but then the 40 came out and I decided that was close enough for deer, then I stumbled across KKM's 7" barrels... And got a little closer to the 41 mag... I can get 750-800 ft. lbs. pretty easy.

I'm just not a revolver guy, never have been... The powerful ones get pretty heavy to carry.

The factory barrel shoots just fine, not quite as accurate as the KKM, but plenty enough for most uses.... Its a little harder to hit that 100 yard steel with, but it will hit it... I'm probably going to sell the factory barrel though, don't see me ever needing it.

I've had more fun with this pistol than any I've ever owned, the looks I get at the range when I start banging on the 100 and 150 yard steel are priceless.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 02:53:13 PM by Ridgerunner665 »

G_man

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #18 on: September 26, 2017, 02:48:27 PM »
Thanks again! Agreed, revolvers (single action Ruger Bisleys in my case) are too heavy for hiking. I don't put on too many miles hunting, so it's not much of an issue for me.
Keep your booger hook off the boom switch until you're ready to fire

my_old_glock

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 729
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #19 on: September 26, 2017, 06:10:34 PM »


Obvious facts:

1) The G40 has a longer slide/barrel and will give higher velocity and more power from a given cartridge.

2) The G40 has a longer sight radius unless you use a red-dot sight.

3) The G40 is heavier than the G20.

Possibilities

1) A G20, because it is lighter and has a shorter barrel and slide, may be able to be drawn faster than a G40. The faster you can draw the quicker you can end the threat.

2) A heavier G40 may give you a quicker second shot.

Other thoughts.

If a specific bullet requires (X) amount of energy/power to completely pass through a bear, there is little reason to shoot a bullet that gives you (X + some extra power). If a 200-grain solid bullet needs 600ft/lbs of energy to pass through a bear and that can be achieved with a G20, there is no reason to get the longer barreled G40 to increase the energy.

I did some tests in water with 210-grain bullets shot from my G20. (see post #43) http://10mm-firearms.com/reloading-10mm-ammo/41-magnum-bullets-in-a-10mm/30/

I shot a hollow point and a solid bullet of the same weight from a G20 @ ~1100 fps. The hollow point penetrated two twelve inch boxes and was found in the third. That means the bullets penetrated between 2 and 3 feet. The solid went through 5 feet of water and was lost. A rough comparison shows that the solid penetrated 2x the distance of a hollow point.

The average length of a Grizzly bear is 6.5 feet.  Skin, bones, and muscles are not the same as water, but there is a good chance the solid bullet I tried would also penetrate 5 feet in a bear.

I don't have to worry about grizzly bears in California. I carry a G20.


.




.

rattinox

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #20 on: September 27, 2017, 05:14:57 AM »
Points taken.

With my G20, I was shooting Hornady 200g FMJFP, with VV N105 powder. My 10mm handload equivalent to military ball ammo.

The backdrop was a low area of swamp muck. Those Hornady's plowed a huge furrow, so it was easy to find the slugs.

90% weren't even deformed, unless they hit a random rock. I mic'd them, and except for rifling engraving, they were still to spec.

I see Hornady discontinued the FMJFP.  Booger-eating Management  >:(
Ilmatyynyalukseni on täynnä ankeriaita
Min svävare är full med ål
My hovercraft is full of eels

G_man

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #21 on: September 27, 2017, 02:35:57 PM »

If a specific bullet requires (X) amount of energy/power to completely pass through a bear, there is little reason to shoot a bullet that gives you (X + some extra power). If a 200-grain solid bullet needs 600ft/lbs of energy to pass through a bear and that can be achieved with a G20, there is no reason to get the longer barreled G40 to increase the energy.


In a perfect world on a relaxed critter I'd say this is true. In the real world we all know stuff happens, so the X amount of energy required theory doesn't work. Hunters, as one example, everywhere have stories of the "perfect shot" that failed to achieve the desired result. Again stuff happens. To say I only need X amount of energy is silly, in my opinion. Most definitely, in many cases this theory is sound. I think it's fairly safe to say though, that most of us aren't armed because of the normal situations in every day life. We're armed for the, admittedly few (hopefully never!), occasions when things go south in a hurry. In those instances I bet there are very few who didn't wish for the biggest, baddest gun/load available. More, short of total overkill, IS better.
Keep your booger hook off the boom switch until you're ready to fire

rattinox

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #22 on: September 28, 2017, 09:35:02 AM »
In the early 70's, I saw pix in Guns & Ammo of a .45 longslide built from a standard Series 70 Colt; it was the coolest, sexiest pistol I'd ever seen.

Decades later I bought an AMT Hardballer Longslide in stainless, which was cool. The AMT just didn't have the level of quality I wanted, though, certainly not up to Colt's standards.

When the Glock 20 Gen One's hit the market, I grabbed one immediately. It was the kind of "Dark Horse" cartridge that suited my personality 100%. (I think it was Gary James of G&A who first quoted the "Dark Horse" phrase for the Ten).

So, when the G40 entered my field of vision, it was only a natural progression to buy one.......
Ilmatyynyalukseni on täynnä ankeriaita
Min svävare är full med ål
My hovercraft is full of eels

Gman45

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: glock 20 vs glock 40
« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2017, 10:34:39 AM »
with the 10mm being a good woods defense option im wondering what are your opinions  on the g20 and g40 as far as woods defense. will the longer barrel of the g40 give you more noticable penetetration and velocity that would make a difference in a situation where you may have to shoot a large animal such as a grizzly? using the same ammo in the g20 as the g40 what are your opinions?
thanks
Got rid of the 20 for the 40 I like the MOS , Shoots smoother, better sight radius, more velocity. Have the 29 for EDC


Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk