Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Glock Gen 5 GBU

(Good, Bad and Ugly).

I'm going out this weekend and try once more to like a Glock 17 or 19. I've done a little reading on the Gen 5, mostly Glock's advertising but what are the opinionated opinions of the fire members? From what I understand they have gone to standard rifling, but what do y'all think of the other changes - the beveled and half moon cutout magazine well and whatever else they did. Do the replaceable backstrap inserts really change the grip angle that much - which is really the main bad I've always had with the Glocks, they point too high for me.

Anyway, actual experience, opinions of the guy your sister's husband's college roommate works with, wild fantasies or prejudices, let'r'rip, I'm all ears...

I own a 19/3, 20SF/3, 29/3 and a 40/4 and have also owned a 21/3 and 35/3.... In addition I have shot just about all the others other than the .45 GAP, 41 and maybe one other.

The only one I really "like" is the 19/3.

The Glock grip is already too big for most hands and I wear an extra large glove so the replaceable backstraps are for the most part useless. I do however happen to like the frontstrap finger grooves of the Gen3 as they just happen to fit me.

I also do not care for the Gen4 stippling or the enlarged magazine release....which is why when I just in the last few weeks bought 10mms I looked for mint Gen3 20s and 29s...

Good luck in your quest...Bob

Umm, what? The gen4 and 5 Glock small frame grip size is one of the smallest out there. Maybe you're talking about the gen 3 large frame (45/10mm) guns but that's not what the OP asked about.

Jim - the backstrap insert's purpose is to change grip size, not angle. Angle is all about what you're used to, with no real wrong or right. If you want to like the Glock, practice with it a bunch and it'll feel as natural as anything else.

As to the gen 5 stuff - I like the bevel on the front of the slide, but don't really care for the flared magwell. I could take or leave the rest of it.

The only real substantive difference in the Gen 5 pistols is the ambidextrous slide lock and the enhanced magazine well. The absence of finger-grooves, the magazine cutout and the tapered slide are pretty subjective changes. I haven't heard anyone say the new barrel rifling is anything to necessarily crow about.

Not sure it's any better now than the Gen 4. I think it's a bunch of gimmicks to stimulate new sales to those who need to have the latest and greatest version of everything. The new barrel is supposed to be somehow superior, but I don't have any trouble hitting the target using the Gen 4 barrels. The absence of finger groves might be welcomed by those who hated the feel of the finger grooves, but I'm not sure how large a group that is. Some claim the cutout in the mag well is ill conceived since the more natural way to grab a mag is from the narrow sides rather than front and back, and the way it is causes some people to feel a pinch in their pinky finger under recoil. The flared mag well is an OK feature, I guess, but I've never had any problem popping a new on in with the Gen 4. The rounded front of the slide is nice, but is essentially wasted effort on their part since they didn't round the front of the frame to match.

Mostly hype, I think. They need people to want the latest and greatest to stimulate sales, and I think that's mainly what it's about.

Bingo. There were hardly truer words ever spoken.

I'm confused - are you talking about the Gen5 or the Gen2?

They're gonna have to buckle down if they want t catch the iPhone.

I don't like the 19 Gen 5.

Gen 4 or 3 or 2 or even the rare 1 are fine.

The cutout in front for the mag just doesn't feel good at all to me. The 17 is fine, however.

Went and looked at the 17 Gen 5 and liked it.

The differences in feel between that and the Gen 4 are slight, actually the radius at the front of the G4 grip is slightly smaller or more curved but overall the 5 felt better in my hand. Either my hands changed or I've learned how to point better but I did my normal drill of picking the pistol up from the counter or holding it at a ready and the while looking at a precise spot on the wall quickly pointing at it, then lowering my head slightly while holding the pistol steady to see where the sights were lined up. Each time they were lined up exactly on the point I was looking at and that's the number one biggest selling point to me. FWIW, I looked at a couple of Sigs and with that same drill they were pointing down and way off to the right every time. The only other number one biggest selling point to me is reliability and whatever else folks think about Glocks I've never heard anyone say they don't go bang reliably.

The rest of the features are really non-issues to me either way although as a left hander I do like the ambidextrous slide release.

Found some on line for $525 with free shipping so I may finally go over to the glark side here pretty soon. First I have to pay for two rifles and a scope I recently bought...

A built in shot counter and timer that syncs via bluetooth to an iPhone app would be a huge hit with the techies. It would be like a gun fitbit. Of course, Glock can't even do a .22 LR or a carbine, so Gaston is going to have move along before that will ever happen.

Users are reporting improved mechanical accuracy via the new barrel, and easier to shoot well due to the improved trigger.
Most seem to like the flared mag well. lefty's will benefit from the ambi slide release.

Its about 50/50 like or hate the returned crescent cut on the front strap but this only applies to the shorter grip 19.

If you are going to buy a new Glock in 9mm it makes sense to get the GEN 5 but no major reason to give up a proven GEN 3 or GEN 4 for one IMO.

I decided to beta test a Gen 5 Glock 19 with the Ameriglo 3 dot night sights. I only have one range session in, but I thought I would post. The only reason I bought it is that the trigger felt different when dry firing in stores. The Gen 4 and Gen 3 have a more pronounced wall. I thought that, perhaps, the more traditional pull-through of the Gen 5 could make a difference in terms of accuracy, especially in rapid fire.

I did not and do not like the ambidextrous slide release. It interferes with my strong side trigger finger when I hold the finger alongside the gun. It also presents an issue for some holsters. While it works fine with my Sparks Criterion and a Blade Tech Classic Eclipse holster, it would not work with two Safariland ALS holsters. I don’t think my Dremel tool could fix the problem with the Safarilands.

I thought the crescent cutout in the front might be a problem but I noticed no difference between the Gen 4 and the Gen 5.. Similarly, the absence of finger grooves made no difference between my Gen 4 and Gen 5.

The flared magazine well may help with reloads, but it adds .2 inch to the width at a critical print point. I have not carried it concealed or tested reload times, so I do not have an opinion on this yet.

I do like the Ameriglo 3 dot night sights, but I am not sure that I prefer them to the Ameriglo I Dot pros that I have on my Gen 4 19 and 26. It appears that the 3 dot sights have a bigger front dot than on the I Dot. The rear sights have smaller vials than many 3 dot sights, which I really like because they do not draw attention during the day or overpower the front sight in the dark like some night sights.

I did not notice a difference in accuracy between the Gen 5 and the Gen 4. I was shooting indoors at 21-50 feet. I really cannot definitively comment on this until I can test it at 50-100 yards. Last month, kneeling with an improvised rest, I was having no trouble consistently hitting a steel “upper half” IDPA type target at 100 yards with my Gen 4. For somebody who isn’t going to shoot beyond 25 yards, it probably does not make a difference at all. Only further evaluation will tell whether it will make a difference to me at longer distances.

Here is one practical consideration. I shoot other Glocks that all have the trigger pulls with the “wall.” If I spend the time to learn the Gen 5 trigger and then switch out to different guns for different applications, I am giving up some trigger consistency. Add to this the fact that the new design eliminates the locking block pin, which, unless Glock did something else to beef up the design, makes it unsuitable for use in .40, .45, .357 Sig and 10mm. So, it could make less sense for a person with a bunch of different type Glocks to want this version, at least at this time.

There are some definite improvements. The use of the coil spring in place of the leaf spring for the slide stop is good, and the changing of the trigger spring appears to be an improvement. One feature that does not appear to get much print and cyberspace mention is that Glock beefed up the front of the slide where the RSA fits. Supposedly that is to make it less likely that dropping the slide on a hard surface (during cleaning or inspection) will bend that area and render the gun inoperable.

All in all, the Gen 5 is ok but not life changing for me. I will have to play with it some more.

Thanks, that's a good, thorough analysis. You bring up some things I never would have thought of, like the flair right where most pistol butts will print the most. Maybe not a huge deal but it's there. I liked the Gen 5 grip a tad bit more than the grooved Gen 4 but reckon that's a totally subjective decision anyway. I appreciate you writing a first hand comparison like this.

I went to the range again today and ran more side by side tests with the Gen 4 and Gen 5 19. I still can't get to the outside range for long distance testing. However, I am pretty certain that Glock's advertising (at least for right handed shooters) is really just hype about this version. I still shoot my Gen 4 better and quicker. While I may be able to do the same with the Gen 5 after a lot of exclusive trigger time, it isn't worth the investment of time or ammo to me. It basically is going to the back of the safe as a backup or down the road unless something changes. If I knew what I know today before I bought the Gen 5, I would not have spent the money.

I do see some people on other forums talking about the vast improvement in accuracy with the Gen 5. All I can figure is that they are really bad shooters, really good shooters, or more accustomed to a different platform with a trigger closer to the Gen 5.

I also see some Internet gripes about the chamber on the Gen 5 being shorter than prior generations, and some compatability issues with 147 grain HSTs because of the bullet seating. That may or may not prove to be correct, but I suspect that it will get ironed out at the ammo or manufacturer level if it really is an issue. It is not an issue for me.

As with most products, you see a lot of guys who get their ego wrapped up in the purchase, so they can't help but claim it's better, because it's what THEY chose so it must be the best choice.
In contrast, thanks for your review, which was very informative and unbiased.