Shooting the Glock 19: Part II
This report is intended to be read after “Shooting the Glock 19”. It is a follow-up or “addendum” sort of thing to it. Here’s the link to the previous article for those who might be interested:
The Glock 19 used in this segment of the saga is not the same one used for the initial report. It differs in having its original Glock night sights while the other Glock 19, which didn’t come with night sights, wore Arotek fixed sights. The sights were the only differences between these two 3rd generation Glocks. Both had Scherer plugs because I prefer them. Otherwise, both pistols are stock. If plugging versus not doing it is of importance to you, this might be of interest:
The purpose of this addition to the original subject was to satisfy my own curiosity on a few matters:
· Will the sights be “on” for this Glock 19 as they were for the other?
· Will the slightly thicker Glock sights affect accuracy out to about 15 yards? (I didn’t shoot at farther distance today because that is often about as far as many actually shoot and it was extremely windy.) The Glock front night sight measured 0.160” thick vs. 0.125” for the Arotek.
· Will the mechanical accuracy of this pistol be equivalent, better or worse than the previously used G19?
· Will this Glock 19 show adequate case support with +P+ ammunition?
If interested, there is a detailed report on 9mm Glock case support here:
Ammunition Used: Today’s shooting session was with five different 9mm loads, each having a different ogive. Only two used the same weight bullets.
Ammunition fired: (L to R) MFS 115-gr. FMJ, Federal 115-gr. JHP, Remington UMC 124-gr. FNEB (flat nose, enclosed base) FMJ, Winchester Ranger 127-gr. +P+ and Winchester 147-gr. STHP.
The number of rounds fired per target depended upon the amount of that particular ammunition I have available, but each group was fired with the magazine being “topped off” to its maximum capacity of 15 rounds with one in the chamber for a total of 16 cartridges. The reason was to check for any possible reliability issues which if present, rear their heads on fully-loaded magazines much of the time.
Shooting: Today, I only fired for maximum accuracy from a seated position using both hands with my wrists and forearms braced with sand bags. There was no effort at speed. As mentioned previously, my focus was whether these guns’ mechanical accuracy-levels were equivalent for at least a limited “test” of Glock’s production consistency. (I am aware that not enough “test samples” were used for this to be statistically valid but it is the best I can do right now.)
Traditional bullseye targets were used. The dark-colored bullseye measures 2” in diameter.
The first groups fired were with 115-gr. ammunition. The MFS (Hungarian manufacture) ball has grouped nicely in several 9mm pistols besides Glock should anyone find some at a decent price but unaware of its performance. It has worked well for me and I will buy more. On the right is a 115-gr. JHP touted for excellent accuracy in many 9mm service pistols. This load produced the best group of the day. Before saying that it actually groups better than the rest, I would have to shoot several more groups or have the loads fired from the pistol in some sort of machine rest. (Based on repeated past experiences, it would not surprise me in the least if it really does consistently group best!)
I failed to photograph a representative group using the Remington 124-gr. FNEB ammunition but it grouped very similarly to the MFS load, but had the least felt-recoil of any of the loads used today. Ten shots were fired and all were contained within the 2” bullseye.
Next up was Winchester’s law-enforcement-only 127-gr. JHP +P+ (left) designated by product number RA9TA. Ending the shooting session was Winchester’s 147-gr. Silvertip Hollow Point.
Conclusion: On these two Glock 19 pistols, built-in mechanical accuracy was equivalent and what I would rate “very good service accuracy.” The slight differences in sight thickness between the Glock and Arotek were insignificant out to 15 yards and the factory Glock night sights were well-regulated. POA matched POI for me with no adjustments whatsoever being needed. Fired cases in this Glock 19 showed no signs of insufficient case support. (Neither did cases fired in the other Glock 19.)
On the left is the (uncleaned) barrel of the Glock 19 used for this article. On the right is a case fired in it moments earlier. It is a Winchester RA9TA case and held +P+ pressures. Note that there is absolutely no indication of it having inadequate support; there are neither bulges nor any swollen area near the extractor groove. Based on what I saw in this shooting session as well as with another Glock 19 and comparisons made with the Glock 19’s case support and that of other autoloaders, I’m putting the “inadequate case support” 9mm complaints to bed. (I have not explored this complaint in other calibers.)
As was expected, primer-strikes were both centered and produced 100% reliable ignition. There were no failures of any kind with this pistol.
Some shooters favor Glocks and some do not; I believe that the company’s advertising “Glock Perfection” makes some revel in finding examples that are not. They are not my favorite 9mm pistols but as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I respect them. In my experience, reliability has been exceptionally high and consistent. Yes, I have seen some malfunctions over the years, but the vast majority has worked perfectly; I saw lots and lots of these as a police firearm instructor so I was not in the least surprised by today’s results.
I consider the Glock 19 as a serious defensive arm for concealed or open carry as well as home protection.
Rather than being “new and exciting”, today’s results were more of a reaffirmation of something “tried and true”.