Would you rather: .460 Rowland 1911 or 10mm Glock?

[Oceanbob]

Glock 20SF gen 3 or Glock 20 Gen 4.

Yeah, get into reloading 10 to shoot more.

I own a lot of handguns and if I had to pick only one to take with me, hiking through East LA on foot after the Riots and looting started, it would be my Glock 20

It's a serious weapon that shoots (with practice) 1500 FPS slugs that will penetrate just about anything, including car doors. I own preban 15 round magazines and the firepower is unbelievable.

My 9 inch long slide is almost like a carbine. 1800 FPS and very accurate.

Have a green laser as well for night time fun.

I color code my prebans for easy identification. Orange means it's rebuilt with the latest followers and Wolff +10 % springs. 15 rounds can get heavy and that spring just works so well.

[boy&hisdogs]

I love both guns. Really the glock would be better for what you want to do with it. The,1911 is a great gun. For me it's best feel for my hands. Now you stated in the woods and the most dangerous animals shoot back. I would look at capacity and reliability. Both of those go to the glock. Plus if you do have to shoot an animal 2 legs or 4 you will have to give up that gun. With the 2 legs you most likely will never see that gun again. One more for the glock(better to lose 500$ vs 900$). Of you slip and fall in the dirt will the 1911 fire full of fine dust or sand?
Glock will jam at some point but I have not see the glock fail ever. My 1911 lost part of its 2 piece guide rod and didn't skip a beat. As a Marine I have seen a 1911 get some dust in it and not work.

Have you ever done the field strip on both guns? Glock one more time. What about .357 sig? I am not positive but I think it has better penetrating power

All good points, and I completely forgot about losing the gun in a SD situation. I'd much rather give up an on-roster Glock than an off-roster 1911.

Would they really take it for shooting a bear, hog or lion though? That seems a bit excessive...

Glock 20SF gen 3 or Glock 20 Gen 4.

Gen 3 SF.

[LAKA90034]

The Glock.

[451040]

.460 Rowland Glock

[boy&hisdogs]

So here's another question for you guys. To long slide or not to long slide?

I made a mistake with my math earlier and forgot a bunch of small stuff that nickle and dimed me into having second thoughts about building vs buying. It's going to be expensive. I could just about buy two used Glocks for what my planned build would cost. Things like sights, mags, finishes, etc really add up. I'm going to be over $900 (out the door, taxes, fees and all) into this gun by the time I actually get rounds down range.

So is the longer barrel worth it? And is the longer slide (the real money sink here) worth it? Sure, you get more velocity, but I'm having trouble nailing down just how much. Some people say it's 200+ more fps, some say it's only 40-50. Now, I'm not familiar enough with 10mm to know which loads are full power and which ones are weaksauce, but either way I'd be hand loading for hunting anyway.

If I really wanted to, I could just stick a $125 long barrel in the stock slide, but then I don't get the extended sight radius. I don't know just how much that's going to make a difference though, especially in the field vs on the range.

[deckhandmike]

No long slide. Spend the money on a red dot and that negates the need for a longer sight radius. Just extra weight. Is 50-100 fps going to make a huge difference on a poorly placed pistol shot? Nope. A 6" barrel I'd spring for though just cause you could then shoot cheap lead reloads.

[boy&hisdogs]

No long slide. Spend the money on a red dot and that negates the need for a longer sight radius. Just extra weight. Is 50-100 fps going to make a huge difference on a poorly placed pistol shot? Nope. A 6" barrel I'd spring for though just cause you could then shoot cheap lead reloads.

If I'm ditching the long slide then I have plenty of money left in the "fun budget" for a 40 or 9mm barrel for casual range time. Maybe I'll just get the 9" and a scope mount

[Oceanbob]

No long slide. Spend the money on a red dot and that negates the need for a longer sight radius. Just extra weight. Is 50-100 fps going to make a huge difference on a poorly placed pistol shot? Nope. A 6" barrel I'd spring for though just cause you could then shoot cheap lead reloads.

Mike nailed the reason for a six inch rifled barrel.

Lead for plinking or hunting makes sense. (Reloads of course)




I built a Glock 20 "Backpack Carbine" for a transportable SHTF gun. It was in 9X25, had 20 Round capacity, 6 inch 9X25 barrel, Red Dot scope and could hit (with my bad eyes) a 10 inch paper plate at 150 Yards all day long. I could also swap out barrels in 10MM, .40, 357 SIG if I wanted. A real versatile handgun.

Notice how Zippy 9X25 is.............like "Right Now" . Negligible bullet drop.



Close to 2000 FPS. Not much recoil but yeah, a flash happens....

[boy&hisdogs]

Dang, that thing looks pretty sweet.

I think I'll just get a regular 20sf, an aftermarket long barrel, and maybe a long slide if one pops up used for a good deal, though I'm not going to hold my breath.

[TheExiled]

G20 and be done with it

[BigPimping]

Glock is a more logical choice when all is considered. Also more reliable and likely will not require tinkering. Spend the balance on ammo and training.

[Sniper3142]

I fired a Glock in 10mm several years ago.

It was the worst handling firearm I've ever shot.

The recoil impulse wasn't straight back. It somehow imparted a twist when fired that caused the pistol to try and turn in my hand. I think the 10mm round was just too much for that pistol. During that same range session, I also fired a S&W 10mm. It was a heavy recoiling pistol but was totally controllable compared to the Glock.

At the time, I shot a lot (once or twice a week) and that didn't include my official range time on base (USMC, stationed at Camp Pendleton). I had no problem with any handgun from 22LR up to a 50AE. But that Glock felt horrible to me.

[boy&hisdogs]

I fired a Glock in 10mm several years ago.

It was the worst handling firearm I've ever shot.

The recoil impulse wasn't straight back. It somehow imparted a twist when fired that caused the pistol to try and turn in my hand. I think the 10mm round was just too much for that pistol. During that same range session, I also fired a S&W 10mm. It was a heavy recoiling pistol but was totally controllable compared to the Glock.

At the time, I shot a lot (once or twice a week) and that didn't include my official range time on base (USMC, stationed at Camp Pendleton). I had no problem with any handgun from 22LR up to a 50AE. But that Glock felt horrible to me.

Was it a regular 20 or SF? There's a noticeable difference in grip size. I bet it was a non-sf and you couldn't get a good grip on it.

[Fatcat]

My feeling is that in order to economically shoot the 10mm Auto in quantity, you need to reload for it. And if you are new to reloading, I would NOT recommend 10mm to start out with.

iMO, The Glock 20 is the most easily "packable" pistol for backwoods use. That being carrying on your person, all the time, for "just in case" situations. Tough to do with .44 mag revolver. Get yourself some bulk ammo to practice & high performance stuff for carry. Save your brass to be ready when you start to reload.

Thanks to OceanBob for that posting & PM's w/ his advice.