Glock 19 is best handgun ?

Glock, Colt, or Sig Sauer?

  • Glock

    Votes: 44 53.0%
  • Colt

    Votes: 5 6.0%
  • Sig Sauer

    Votes: 24 28.9%
  • All three

    Votes: 10 12.0%

  • Total voters
    83
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would rank my Gen3 19 up there with my Glock 19X, Sig P228, Sig M11-A1, Sig P6, Sig P239, HK P30, HK P2000, CZ P-01, my BHP’s and my Walther PPS-M2.

In other words there is no way to say that a Glock 19 is best unless there are some guidelines for intended use of the pistol.
 
Last edited:
IMHO THESE are the best :) Sig m11A1 and mk25
index.php

index.php
 
I love seeing all the opinions here but they all filter to one thing: There is no 'best' gun, as there's TOO many variables to really compare. "Is a handgun the best in it's caliber? Then what would the definitions be for the 'ideal' size for that caliber?"
The truth is, there's LOTS of great guns out there. Lot's of reliable platforms, well balanced pistols. So many that are perfectly acceptable for the one specific task of Self-Defense. Guess that's why we gun owners collect so much.. so many good guns to choose from soo why not have them all?
From my point of view, no gun invented a certain ideal role, the role already existed and needed to be filled. And so invention started to fill that role, and as advancement came, the material we have to fill that role started to be plentiful.


For the size? I think the Glock 19 is the perfect size , for a mid-caliber handgun. Note I didn't say 9mm handgun. There's plenty of different priorities to be requested for someone choosing a 9mm that we can't say there's a best one for that caliber. Does someone want a concealable, or a competition gun? They want a strong gun, or a fancy one? So for a more 'one size fits all' approach like Couguer1717 pointed out, it's best to be generic about the size of the caliber rather than be specific. Specifics come after a gun, not before it.

So anyway, after all has been said and agreed on, I like the Glock 19 for it's size alone, and for it's ultility. Is it the 'best' handgun? No. I couldn't ideally take a deer down with it. That's what my revolvers are for.
 
I love seeing all the opinions here but they all filter to one thing: There is no 'best' gun, as there's TOO many variables to really compare. "Is a handgun the best in it's caliber? Then what would the definitions be for the 'ideal' size for that caliber?"
The truth is, there's LOTS of great guns out there. Lot's of reliable platforms, well balanced pistols. So many that are perfectly acceptable for the one specific task of Self-Defense. Guess that's why we gun owners collect so much.. so many good guns to choose from soo why not have them all?
From my point of view, no gun invented a certain ideal role, the role already existed and needed to be filled. And so invention started to fill that role, and as advancement came, the material we have to fill that role started to be plentiful.


For the size? I think the Glock 19 is the perfect size , for a mid-caliber handgun. Note I didn't say 9mm handgun. There's plenty of different priorities to be requested for someone choosing a 9mm that we can't say there's a best one for that caliber. Does someone want a concealable, or a competition gun? They want a strong gun, or a fancy one? So for a more 'one size fits all' approach like Couguer1717 pointed out, it's best to be generic about the size of the caliber rather than be specific. Specifics come after a gun, not before it.

So anyway, after all has been said and agreed on, I like the Glock 19 for it's size alone, and for it's ultility. Is it the 'best' handgun? No. I couldn't ideally take a deer down with it. That's what my revolvers are for.


I keep going 'round and 'round with my revolvers and then back and forth with my semis ...

sorry, couldn't resist :D
 
If you could only own one gun the G19 may be the best.

On the other hand, I look at the G19 like the stand-up college defensive end who comes into the NFL as a "tweener". He's too small to play defensive end at the NFL level, and too slow and can't cover well enough to play linebacker.

As a duty gun the G19 is a little small, and as a concealment gun it is a little big. In spite of all the clamoring for S&W to release a G19 sized M&P (which they did with the 2.0 family), I always thought the S&W M&P sizes were better than the Glock sizes. The full size M&P is a better duty size than the G17 or G19 (note the arrival of the G19X and G45), and the (original) M&P Compact was a better concealment gun than the G19 and shooter than the G26.

Could not agree more!

I carried the M&P40c from 2007 to 2018. Sold it to a buddy who needed a carry pistol and was in a pinch. Replaced it with an XDS 40, but didn't like the lack of capacity. Added a G19 Gen 5 MOS and just found it a bit too big.

Heard great things about the 2.0 M&Ps, but when I realized that they were the same size as the G19, I passed.

Ended up buying two M&P40c pistols; one with night sights and no safety, and one with regular sights and a safety. Each was around $300 brand new. Combined the two to now have an M&P40c with a safety and night sights. Ten rounds of .40 S&W, or with an X-Grip adapter and the M&P40 full-size magazine, 15 rounds.

Shot plates with it on Friday side by side with my Glock 19 and an STI race gun and the M&P was the fastest for me.

BFzqyLcLRuedAZkG-2PeBA (1).jpg
 
The G19 size, weight, ammo capacity, and reliability make it appealing as the perfect all around handgun. And is my personal pick. At one time there wasn't a lot of competition, but today I'd rate a Sig320 compact and S&W M&P 2.0 Compact as equals. Maybe others, but those are the ones I have personal experience with.

As a duty gun the G19 is a little small,
Well maybe for some people. For duty use there are no downsides to a bigger gun. But at least with me I don't shoot a full size G17, Sig 320 or M&P a bit better than the compact versions of those 3. Given the choice of full size or compact with any of those I'd choose the compact and have the option of using either compact or full length magazines.to get a couple more rounds.
 
I am presently in a church security class, 8 weeks or so. Saturday we did the third week which was gun fighter class., too much to get into now. So the whole question of what's the best gun comes down to "for what purpose". The scenarios we went through showed ME that maybe my carry gun, which I carry 98% of the time,XDE 9mm, may not be best for defensive situations. The XDE is double/single action, the first shot is long and slows response to reacting to a bad guy. My Glock 19,striker fire, quicker follow up but harder to conceal, more rounds,etc. Most defensive situations happen in 3 ft.- 7yds. and like 6 rds or so and a couple of seconds. So what's best, you tell me. I'm rethinking my carry weapon, leaning towards an XD9 subcompact. For me too small is a problem. It was a real eye opener, one last thing was we didn't use any sights except for head shots. So all this putting night sights etc. is a waste you won't be lining up anything.
 
I don't own a 19 but, because of its popularity, it gets the most credit for inspiring the passionate Glock hatred that I find endlessly entertaining.
That makes it the best handgun I don't own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vba
There are so many nice firearms that I would say are equal to each other. Glock of course is a great gun, but so many others that are great as well. But what is great for YOU, the individual shooter? Does the gun fit your hand perfectly, do you like the way it handles?. Yesterday I took my LCR9mm and LCR22 to the indoor range. While I was there I saw they had the recent Glock 43X and had one for rental. So I rented the gun and put 150 rounds through it. I really liked the looks of the gun, has a great reputation etc. But my Gosh, the gun felt horrible in my hand, just did not feel comfortable at all. Recoil was manageable but not great and my finger kept riding the bottom of the trigger guard. In fact woke up this morning with a Blister.
My point is, there are so many nice guns, but it is essential to understand that every popular gun may not be for you. Nothing against the Glock, just was not a good fit. That said, I am sure there are thousands of folks that do find it fits well for them.
The great thing about America is the fact that we have the ability to choose and so many choices out there. Hopefully folks can actually try out a gun before purchase. I understand that is not always the case.
 
I am presently in a church security class, 8 weeks or so. Saturday we did the third week which was gun fighter class...Most defensive situations happen in 3 ft.- 7yds. and like 6 rds or so and a couple of seconds. So what's best, you tell me. I'm rethinking my carry weapon, leaning towards an XD9 subcompact. For me too small is a problem. It was a real eye opener, one last thing was we didn't use any sights except for head shots. So all this putting night sights etc. is a waste you won't be lining up anything.

I'm confused. You are in a security class that is supposedly training you for an active shooter situation in a church, which 90% of the time means you will be at much greater distances than "typical" self-defense situations.

My church is a smaller one, with maybe 500 on a Sunday. From where I sit near the back and in the middle, to where the pulpit is, is about 150'. From my seat to the main entrance into the worship hall is about 200'.

I don't see a scenario in which a shooter walks in and starts either shooting right away, or rushes the pulpit, or starts waving a gun around and threatening to open fire, and the distance between me and him is going to be less than 75'.

If your instructor is telling you that you need to only be prepared for point shooting from 3' to 7yds, then I don't think he is facing reality. Perhaps you should do some measuring of the actual distances in your church and make sure you are proficient at those ranges.

The idiotic argument that anything further than 7yds away is not self-defense is just that; idiotic.
 
I am presently in a church security class, 8 weeks or so. Saturday we did the third week which was gun fighter class.,... The XDE is double/single action, the first shot is long and slows response to reacting to a bad guy. My Glock 19,striker fire, quicker follow up but harder to conceal, more rounds,etc. Most defensive situations happen in 3 ft.- 7yds. and like 6 rds or so and a couple of seconds. ... one last thing was we didn't use any sights except for head shots.
I'm not trying to change your mind about whatever gun you choose, but thinking about "church security" I would assume puts you in a large open space with a whole bunch of people where the typical personal defense scenario of "3 ft. - 7 yards and 6 rounds in a couple of seconds", is likely to go out the window.

There is a certain advantage to a double action trigger pull when you're in a crowd of folks and you have to make a decision on 1) should I be shooting, and 2) who should I be shooting.

While I'm personally skeptical of the usefulness of night sights for the typical non-LE/non-mil user, good sights, whether night sights or not, would be invaluable to help you place your shots on the bad guy and avoid hitting all the good guys that are also in your church.
 
Last edited:
For me too small is a problem. It was a real eye opener, one last thing was we didn't use any sights except for head shots. So all this putting night sights etc. is a waste you won't be lining up anything.
I wouldnt go that far. Good sights are a necessity, even if they arent always used.

Night sights arent just for "night" either, and work 24 hours a day, and in any light. Something plain black, or those with some other type of markings on them, dont do.

A good bit of my practice is unsighted shooting, and while you arent "consciously" looking at the sights, and depending on how your presenting the gun, your brain still sees them in many cases, along with other cues, that it uses to allow you to make good hits.

I find three dot night sights are actually an aide in this type of shooting too, as, even when not traditionally aligned, they give a "arrow" of sorts, that, even when held fairly low, below the line of sight, give a perfect index/pointer to the target, that you instantly see, if and when you shift focus to them. When your eyes are focused on the target, your brain still sees that too, its not ignoring them, even if you are.

And head shots are included in that, and anymore, they are most of my focus, especially at closer range. If youre going to shoot, thats the fastest way to shut things down.

Every Glock I buy, gets a set of green, three dot Mepro's. I put them on pretty much anything I can too. Just wish all the others were as easy to swap out and as cheap as the Glocks.
 
Last edited:
Do you think a good set of sights like HD’s with its bright front sight or a fiber optic front sight might help you track your gun with your peripheral vision and in turn get you on target faster?
Not saying take all your sights off. Sights are needed at times and a bright one would help. It's just that the focus of aligning a sight takes too long. We were shooting at silhouettes keeping the gun level and going for the thoracic area sometimes on the move which you can't see your sights.
 
I'm confused. You are in a security class that is supposedly training you for an active shooter situation in a church, which 90% of the time means you will be at much greater distances than "typical" self-defense situations.

My church is a smaller one, with maybe 500 on a Sunday. From where I sit near the back and in the middle, to where the pulpit is, is about 150'. From my seat to the main entrance into the worship hall is about 200'.

I don't see a scenario in which a shooter walks in and starts either shooting right away, or rushes the pulpit, or starts waving a gun around and threatening to open fire, and the distance between me and him is going to be less than 75'.

If your instructor is telling you that you need to only be prepared for point shooting from 3' to 7yds, then I don't think he is facing reality. Perhaps you should do some measuring of the actual distances in your church and make sure you are proficient at those ranges.

The idiotic argument that anything further than 7yds away is not self-defense is just that; idiotic.
Yes there will be times to make longer shots but the scenarios were much closer. This was just one class but very informative. We have 4 more weeks to go.Never said that and didn't try to imply that. No we never got the impression that further distances are not self defence, yes they are.Any use of a gun to protect yourself or others is self defence. Also a little note here the aim of our instructor isn't gun first but last. A number of other means of intervention before deadly force. Of course long shots are needed just try to avoid them due to collateral damage.
 
Last edited:
"Is the Glock 19 the best handgun?" is just like asking if the Toyota Camry is the best car, polling with Honda Accord and Ford Fusion...

Can debate all night long and poll all you want, you'll have the guys with Toyota Land Cruisers, BMWs, or Bentleys slowly shaking their heads...
 
"Best" for WHAT?

I have one and really like it, but I wouldn't shoot a bullseye pistol match, or deer hunt with it.

"Best" for concealed carry? Maybe, in some circumstances, but when "car and knife jihad" came to Ohio, I switched to a Citadel 3 1/2" M1911, because I had more confidence in .45acp getting the attention of an ISIS wannabe.
 
I love car analogies. To me the Glock is the Old VW Beetle. Simple, reliable, easy to work on all look the same. Just not a good fit for everyone. I wish they still sold the Beetle, I would buy one in a second. Got Beetle Juice? Get a Glock.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top