glock17/19..M&Pc/full-size etc

When it comes to having a compact version of a gun vs a fullsize version of the gun which is more beneficial? I know longer barrels create more velocity correct? But is it such an advantage over the compact?

Also how about recoil felt?

I know compacts better for conceal carry most the time but what about everything else?

Anybody got any pro's and cons for full size vs compact for me?

I'm almost finished building a glock 19 and was wondering if I wanted to sell the 2nd compact p80 lower for the full size version? I figured if I wanted a 357sig id like it to be in a full size frame.

Granted my first true compact gun will be a M&P 40c thanks to a good man here on md shooters but I wanted to know where I should go with the glock builds

Thanks any input would help.

Yes more velocity is a benefit but i think one of the biggest benefits is a longer site radius. The farther the sites are from each makes that sight picture more accurate. I think felt recoil is subjective and depends how you shoot. In real world yes i think a 19 will have more felt recoil than a 17 but not much. I've seen people shoot 19's flatter than some shooting a 34 so its up to you.

don't quote me cause i may be wrong but i thought i read somewhere somebody put a 17 slide on the p80 compact lower? I personally like the look of the compact lower but couldnt stand the full size. Just looks aweful in my opinion.

judah7 said:

When it comes to having a compact version of a gun vs a fullsize version of the gun which is more beneficial? I know longer barrels create more velocity correct? But is it such an advantage over the compact?

Click to expand...

The difference in muzzle velocity between the 4" barrel of a G19 and the 4.5" barrel of a G17 is only 40 FPS with 115 gr ammo. Certainly not a huge difference by any means.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC_pi_Z_DzU

The G17 & G19 are not good examples , since both of them fit within the larger envelope of " normal sized " or " duty sized " . Meaning lots of mfg's "normal sized" pistols will closely resemble ( the size of ) G19 .

In the abstract , a G17 will have slightly higher vels and slightly longer sight radius . But as noted above : Vels are only marginally lower than G17 . Vels from G19 are well within the design envelope for 9mm ammo .

I do personally prefer G17 over G19, but for a different reason . I have XXXL hands, and the slightly longer grip fits me better . For the other 97% of the population without Gorilla hands, they can be perfectly well served by G19 .

Size makes the biggest difference when you CC, and especially if you are a small guy like me. I can't conceal a G17 at all and a G19 only during cold days where I can wear heavier or layered clothing.

At the larger end there is little practical difference between them. But as the pistol gets smaller towards the G26 and G43 end, it gets harder to shoot well. It jumps around a lot more and between the tinier grip and the shorter sight radius it's not going to win you any marksmanship awards.

As others have said the G19 and G17 are nearly interchangeable for most tasks. If I was going for accuracy and speed, the slightly larger gun is just a *little* easier to shoot but it's pretty negligible. My .02 is sell the second frame and get a bigger one so you have both to play around with, but the G19 is pretty much the "just right" Goldilocks size.

Yeah that's why i said etc... Like all guns that have full size and then compact. Just was wondering if there were any significant pro's opting for a full size firearm. It doesn't have to be exclusive about glocks. The only full size gun I've owned and shot is a big ole hi point jhp45 and it was actually a sweet shooter with very very minimal recoil.

01m6ta said:

Yes more velocity is a benefit but i think one of the biggest benefits is a longer site radius. The farther the sites are from each makes that sight picture more accurate. I think felt recoil is subjective and depends how you shoot. In real world yes i think a 19 will have more felt recoil than a 17 but not much. I've seen people shoot 19's flatter than some shooting a 34 so its up to you.

don't quote me cause i may be wrong but i thought i read somewhere somebody put a 17 slide on the p80 compact lower? I personally like the look of the compact lower but couldnt stand the full size. Just looks aweful in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Long sight radius, I've never paid much attention to that aspect to know if it helps. But maybe I'll get to try it out one day.

KYtoMD said:

The difference in muzzle velocity between the 4" barrel of a G19 and the 4.5" barrel of a G17 is only 40 FPS with 115 gr ammo. Certainly not a huge difference by any means.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC_pi_Z_DzU

Click to expand...

So why do you think they make them different if it's a meaningless 40FPS?

judah7 said:

So why do you think they make them different if it's a meaningless 40FPS?

Click to expand...

Proportion for one. A 19 with a longer barrel would look strange, although it would work just fine as we all know.


I've seen several 19's with the grip cut down to accept the 26 mags. Easier to conceal but a longer sight radius when needed.

From personal experience I have never bought into the sight radius issue out to 25 yards in standard compact sized guns. The issue typically is one of sight quality and shootabilty of the pistol. Beyond that, yes, to a point. A good sight set is well defined. On a compact the rear sight is less out of focus due to shorter radius so more precision alignment results. I could shoot both my Ruger 6" and 2 3/4" magnum revolvers proficiently to 25 yards. Like wise on Commander sized 1911's. The shootabilty of the pistol comes into play when the smaller gun gets to twisting and squirming during barrel dwell time due to smaller shorter grip, less weight, more muzzle flip and so on.

Some defensive compact versions of full-sized pistols are known as having potential reliabilty problems. The 1911 5" gun is highly reliable vs the 3" 1911 Officers Model subcompact which is reknowned as a potential reliability issue. A proper 4.25" Commander is virtually as reliable as the 5" gun but nearly as large. Above all else a defensive fireearm must be reliable.

9mm Luger is a highly efficient cartridge and as others have indicated choosing the platform which works for you is the most important criteria.

All this is relative to the arm and ammo chosen. The 2 3/4" Ruger mentioned above is accurate and a great handler even with magnum loads. But, it is a fireball when discharged and that will compromise vision. So low flash, slightly lower powered 357 or heavier 38 loads accompany that revolver. Likewise, an FIE Titan 25 ACP wouldn't make a good 10 yard gun no matter what ammo one chose. If one chooses wide or V notch rear sights and dotted/tritium front sights precision is lost for the sighting speed acquired.

With any handgun design there are trade-offs, make it better at one thing, and it might become worse at another. A longer grip has more room for larger hands, and more room for ammo, but a shorter grip will be easier to conceal, and can handle a little quicker. Similar with slide/barrel lengths, the longer they are, the longer the sight radius, and the more precise they can be aligned on target, also more weight to fight muzzle flip, and more velocity. Shorter barrels do conceal better, but it isn't as big of a priority as a short grip when worn IWB. Shorter slide/barrels can reduce weight and bulk, which can help make it point quicker when moving around, or clear clothing easier when drawing or working around obstacles.

Most manufactures make a couple different sizes, GLOCK makes most in standard proportional configurations, sub, compact, full where the grip and slide are in proportion, as the vast majority of pistols are. It offers quick handling concealability on one end, a standard "full" sight radius, grip frame and capacity on the other. There are other combos though that are out of proportion, some can be pretty cool. Longslides are awesome for competition, like the 34 or 17L, they offer a much greater sight radius and velocity, reduced muzzle flip and recoil, good for precision shooting, and with lightweight poly frames the increase in weight is still manageable. Can build a "chopped" or tactical compact, full side slide on a compact frame, works out to conceal well, without giving up on sight radius or velocity, can even use full size mags with sleeves and get a "full" sized configuration. There are short slide designs with a full size grip and compact slide, makes them point a little quicker, and conceal OWB a bit easier at some expense to sight radius.

Personal prefference and it's intended purpose will help you choose, personally I like a proportional compact like the G19 for most things, it is just small enough to conceal, and point really quick, but just large enough to handle and make precise shots like a full size. If I want more precision and greater capacity, I'll opt for a longslide over a proportional full-size, offers a significant increase in sight radius over a proportional compact, or even a full size. Have tried a couple "tactical compact" configuration pistols, and they are cool, conceals just as easy as a subcompact, but is much easier to shoot with less muzzle flip. Would love to chop an 80% "G19" down to be G26 mag compatible, and top it with a G19 slide, would be an awesome concealed pistol, and with X-grip sleeved G19 mags could convert back to be essentially a proportional G19 with all the versatility it offers.

Biggfoot44 said:

The G17 & G19 are not good examples , since both of them fit within the larger envelope of " normal sized " or " duty sized " . Meaning lots of mfg's "normal sized" pistols will closely resemble ( the size of ) G19 .

In the abstract , a G17 will have slightly higher vels and slightly longer sight radius . But as noted above : Vels are only marginally lower than G17 . Vels from G19 are well within the design envelope for 9mm ammo .

I do personally prefer G17 over G19, but for a different reason . I have XXXL hands, and the slightly longer grip fits me better . For the other 97% of the population without Gorilla hands, they can be perfectly well served by G19 .

Click to expand...

Personally I find most compact and subcompact semiauto pistols quite uncomfortable and awkward to grip. I like full-size pistols better simply for the reason that my fingers aren't all mooshed together trying to firmly hold the darn thing.

The biggest battle for me is how a gun feels/fits me personally. Unlike bigfoot44 I have very small hands. Best example for me is the difference between the 9mm G17 and the .40 S&W Shield. When I got my g17 I got the gen 3 instead of gen 4 because it had a smaller grip. I love the g17 so when I got the .40 s&w shield I expected to shoot worse with it (shorter sight radius, more felt recoil, etc). I was pleasantly surprised though. Due solely, I believe, to it having a smaller grip which fits my hand more comfortably, I can control the gun better and therefore am naturally a better shot with it.


Haven't tried my 9mm Shield yet. The G17 might become a safe queen if it compares favorably like the .40

having both a 19 and 17 of the same generation (4), the differences are 1, sight radius (which for 10 yards and in isn't really that much different) and how the grip sits in your hands (well and making sure you don't try to stuff the 19 magazine in the 17, it doesn't work so well). the 19 fits in the palm of my hand, while the 17 sticks out below. other than that they feel the same when shooting them, and i am equally accurate with both of them, although the trigger pull seems slightly more crisp on the 19, however i think that has more to do with manufacturing variance than the 19 vs 17.

Think I'll go with one of you guy's said and just do the 17 for the 2nd one. Id at least have two compacts in the 19 and the M&P40c and then my full size 17. There is something about a (bigger gun) too me. I was just hoping there was also some performance advantage with it.

Thanks for the thoughts and advice as usual.

The G17 was designed that size on purpose to meet the specifications for Austrian millitary contract . Had the G19 come into the civillian ( non-Mil ) marketplace first, it would have been the huge hit, and people would question the need to have a G17 .

I dislike the 19 and love the 17. The reason is the size of the grip and placement of the finger grooves. I have larger than average hands and on the 19 my fingers land on the peaks and not the valleys of the finger grooves. It is very annoying, so I don't own a 19 but own several 17s and a 21. I use the medium grip on the 17 and 21 gen4s.

Fester60 said:

I dislike the 19 and love the 17. The reason is the size of the grip and placement of the finger grooves. I have larger than average hands and on the 19 my fingers land on the peaks and not the valleys of the finger grooves. It is very annoying, so I don't own a 19 but own several 17s and a 21. I use the medium grip on the 17 and 21 gen4s.

Click to expand...

This is one reason I prefer Gen 2, no finger grooves. I have two Gen 2 G19's, I carry them before I would carry my Gen 3 or Gen 4 G19's any day of the week.

Gen 2 G19 is my most often carried gun.

boundlessdyad said:

This is one reason I prefer Gen 2, no finger grooves. I have two Gen 2 G19's, I carry them before I would carry my Gen 3 or Gen 4 G19's any day of the week.

Gen 2 G19 is my most often carried gun.

Click to expand...

I too own several G17's, a G21 and many others.

Methinks someone posted, reclicked the thread saw someone else had posted and didn't realize they quoted themselves.

That or boundless is trying to get in the classifieds.