# Difference between G22 and G23



## Zeek_in_NMI

What is the primary difference between the G22 .40 and the G23 .40 in? Looking at the two on the Glock web site the barrel length is different but not much else. I'm sure there is something I'm missing.


----------



## schyfy

size of grip. Same as the 17 and the 19. and obviously round capacity


----------



## shaolin

The Glock 23 will serve you better as it can be concealed and large enough for duty carry. The grip is shorter thus only 13 rds fit in the Magazine. I have both and the Glock 22 stays at home while the 23 gets to leave with me when I am in the Mountains and need protection from Black Bears and People.


----------



## Zeek_in_NMI

So the 22 is basically a larger format? I like the idea that the 23 would work as a carry piece but I also am looking for a "home" piece as well. I don't have anything against having an extra gun in the house.



shaolin said:


> The Glock 23 will serve you better as it can be concealed and large enough for duty carry. The grip is shorter thus only 13 rds fit in the Magazine. I have both and the Glock 22 stays at home while the 23 gets to leave with me when I am in the Mountains and need protection from Black Bears and People.


----------



## DJ Niner

Think of the G22 as a standard-size service pistol, and the G23 as having a half-inch sawed off the front and about the same removed from the bottom of the grip frame of the G22 (not exact, because the angles are a bit different). G22 holds 15 in the magazine, G23 holds 13, BUT, you can use the longer 15-shot G22 mag in the G23 if you'd like (it just hangs out the bottom a half-inch or so). The G22 is a challenge to conceal (it can usually be done, but not easily for most folks, and impossible for some), while the G23 is much easier to hide, usually needing only a decent holster and anything heavier than a t-shirt.

The reason for the popularity of the G19 (9mm), G32 (.357), and G23 in .40 is they are small enough to hide, while still being large enough to shoot and handle comfortably without feeling cramped or limited. Indeed, several of my compact Glocks will outshoot their bigger brothers with the right load, and many Glocks of that size range will outshoot the full-size guns of their competitors, with careful load selection and a well-trained shooter. Not always, but often enough that I no longer consider it a fluke when it happens; more the norm, in my experience.

I cropped this out of a larger group photo of some Glocks; the G17C on the left is the same size as a G22, and the G19C on the right is a dead ringer size-wise for a G23:


----------



## Zeek_in_NMI

Thanks DJ, 
Your explanation and the picture comparison is just what I needed. Also you mentioned the G32 .357. Is this .357 SIG or .35 MAG?



DJ Niner said:


> Think of the G22 as a standard-size service pistol, and the G23 as having a half-inch sawed off the front and about the same removed from the bottom of the grip frame of the G22 (not exact, because the angles are a bit different). G22 holds 15 in the magazine, G23 holds 13, BUT, you can use the longer 15-shot G22 mag in the G23 if you'd like (it just hangs out the bottom a half-inch or so). The G22 is a challenge to conceal (it can usually be done, but not easily for most folks, and impossible for some), while the G23 is much easier to hide, usually needing only a decent holster and anything heavier than a t-shirt.
> 
> The reason for the popularity of the G19 (9mm), G32 (.357), and G23 in .40 is they are small enough to hide, while still being large enough to shoot and handle comfortably without feeling cramped or limited. Indeed, several of my compact Glocks will outshoot their bigger brothers with the right load, and many Glocks of that size range will outshoot the full-size guns of their competitors, with careful load selection and a well-trained shooter. Not always, but often enough that I no longer consider it a fluke when it happens; more the norm, in my experience.
> 
> I cropped this out of a larger group photo of some Glocks; the G17C on the left is the same size as a G22, and the G19C on the right is a dead ringer size-wise for a G23:


----------



## SouthernBoy

I have both, in fact I have two gen3 G23's, one of which is my primary carry gun. Both are fine guns for their intended purposes. And others have already explained the differences between them. So as for taking a decision between the two, it really boils down to two factors in my opinion... well, actually three.

o Which one feels best in your hands (i.e., do you have large hands or pretty much normal sized hands)?
o How are you going to carry the gun (open or concealed or both)?
o Which one are you most likely to have on your person most of the time?
o How well do you shoot each one?
o What are your personal requirements (dress, comfort, car, your body size, etc.)?

Well okay, I listed five. But these are valid considerations and you should think of them as well as anything else that comes to mind. Perhaps the most important of these is which one are you most likely to have with you most or all of the time. Remember, the gun left behind is no gun at all.


----------



## Smitty79

I came back to shooting sports and self defense after a long hiatus. If I had to buy a first gun today and knew I could handle a 40 cal, I would buy a G23. The bigger gun is only helpful for certain shooting sports and then only at higher levels. If you decide you want to shoot 9mm, you can convert. Want more rounds in the gun, get longer magazines. G23 is most useful, flexible, reliable firearm out there. I have big hands and still like to shoot the compact Glocks. If a Glock is on your roadmap, only question is Gen 3 or Gen 4


----------



## SouthernBoy

Smitty79 said:


> I came back to shooting sports and self defense after a long hiatus. If I had to buy a first gun today and knew I could handle a 40 cal, I would buy a G23. The bigger gun is only helpful for certain shooting sports and then only at higher levels. If you decide you want to shoot 9mm, you can convert. Want more rounds in the gun, get longer magazines. G23 is most useful, flexible, reliable firearm out there. I have big hands and still like to shoot the compact Glocks. If a Glock is on your roadmap, only question is Gen 3 or Gen 4


A well known writer in the gun culture believes the G23 to be the best combat defense handgun made. He is pretty opinionated but his recommendations are worth noting and considering.


----------



## Zeek_in_NMI

Smitty, two questions on your post. 
1) Your statement "if I knew I could handle a 40 cal". I have never shot a .40 I do have a 9mm and feel I would like something a little more. I have had a .357 and sold it because it was just a little much, not to much, but just enough to make it hard to shoot a lot. Your thoughts on the .40 for someone that has never shot one.

2) "only question is Gen 3 or Gen 4" I've see negative reviews on the Gen 4, could just be people with cold feet or may be legitimate concerns. I really like the upgrades to the Gen 4 but tend to lean to adage that if it ain't broke don't fix it. Again, your thoughts? Maybe this debate is best for another thread.



Smitty79 said:


> I came back to shooting sports and self defense after a long hiatus. If I had to buy a first gun today and knew I could handle a 40 cal, I would buy a G23. The bigger gun is only helpful for certain shooting sports and then only at higher levels. If you decide you want to shoot 9mm, you can convert. Want more rounds in the gun, get longer magazines. G23 is most useful, flexible, reliable firearm out there. I have big hands and still like to shoot the compact Glocks. If a Glock is on your roadmap, only question is Gen 3 or Gen 4


----------



## Smitty79

If you can shoot a 9, i doubt you will have a problem with a 40. Rent a 40 somewhere if you can. If not, don't worry about it. 

Handle both gen3 and 4. I like 3s. A friend of mine tried both today and bought a gen4.


----------



## DJ Niner

Zeek_in_NMI said:


> Thanks DJ,
> Your explanation and the picture comparison is just what I needed. Also you mentioned the G32 .357. Is this .357 SIG or .35 MAG?


.357 SIG. It's pretty much a .40 case necked-down to hold a .355 (9mm) bullet (not exactly, but close enough). Both the .357 SIG and .40 S&W cartridges are a bit snappy in the recoil department, but nowhere near as obnoxious as a small .357 Magnum revolver with hot loads.



Zeek_in_NMI said:


> Smitty, two questions on your post.
> 1) Your statement "if I knew I could handle a 40 cal". I have never shot a .40 I do have a 9mm and feel I would like something a little more. I have had a .357 and sold it because it was just a little much, not to much, but just enough to make it hard to shoot a lot. Your thoughts on the .40 for someone that has never shot one.
> 
> 2) "only question is Gen 3 or Gen 4" I've see negative reviews on the Gen 4, could just be people with cold feet or may be legitimate concerns. I really like the upgrades to the Gen 4 but tend to lean to adage that if it ain't broke don't fix it. Again, your thoughts? Maybe this debate is best for another thread.


Most of the reported problems with Gen4 Glocks have been centered around the 9mm guns; the .40s work flawlessly. If the aggressively textured grip doesn't bother you, then the Gen4 Glock .40 models are probably the best way to go. Slightly less muzzle flip (new recoil spring assembly), interchangeable backstraps of different sizes, and a redesigned/larger mag release which is easier to use and reversible for left-handed users. And in the full size and compact models, Gen4 Glocks come with 3 magazines; Gen3 Glocks are only shipped with two mags.

I once owned a Gen3 G22, but I ran across a great deal on a lightly used Gen4 G22, so I bought it. I shot them both side-by-side with several different loads, and even though all my other Glocks were Gen3 or earlier, and I was very comfortable with the Gen3 design and feel, I kept the Gen4 G22 and sold the Gen3.


----------



## SouthernBoy

The .40S&W in the G23 gets some questionable comments with some folks, largely because they tend to define the recoil as "snappy". If you grip the gun and shoot it like you're supposed to then the recoil is pretty much a moot point. Sure it is more than a 9mm but not much at all more than a +P+ 9mm, such as the famed RA9TA Ranger load.

As for gen3 vs gen4... The gen4 has a great texture on the grip that really does aid in gaining a solid purchase on the gun. For me, I find that a very positive thing. As I mentioned, I own a new gen4 G22 and that new texture does help with one's grip. The only down side is internal.

The trigger bar has been altered on the gen4's. The part that was altered is the striker safety block cam. It now had a bump or protrusion on its outside that rubs against the slide's right rail. This creates a little drag effect in the trigger's first stage which in turn increases the trigger pull weight. You can do the 25 cent trigger job and polish the hell out of that bump and it will make a significant difference (this is what I did among a few other things). Or you can just replace the trigger assembly with a gen3 unit and be done with it.

The only reason I can see why Glock did this is for that bump to act as a guide for the cam to contact the striker safety block in the same spot every time. But hell, these guns have been on the market since the mid 80's and millions have been sold. Don't know of any problems that have popped up in this are before so I just can't imagine what Glock was thinking when they decided to put a bump on that cam. But it can be worked and improved upon so all is not a lost cause with it.


----------

