Evening /k/ Wanted your collective opinion on something.

Stick with the 19. It is far more versatile than a G30S.

>Would you trust the performance of a .45 more than a 9mm?

Let's think about it.
>Glock 19
>much more shootable as it is a compact sized gun
>Glock 30S
>smaller sized pistol in .45 so in theory, it is less shootable
>holds less rounds than the 19
>just as heavy
>.45 Glocks are thicker than 9mm and .40 versions

Don't do it. You're on the right track having a Glock 19 as your one handgun. If you really want a smaller Glock, get the 26 but do not trade out your 19. The ballistic difference between 9mm and .45 is neglible. What will make you more effective is more practice and professional instruction, not a new caliber.

>>34403070
If you keep your Glock strictly for protection, then keep the 19. 9mm is cheaper to train with, and the extra rounds a 19 can hold in a flush mag will be a godsend in a worst case scenario. There is no noticeable difference in handgun caliber effectiveness (unless you jump into handcannon territory), so hot 9mm is a safe bet.

Don't trade it or sell it. If there's one gun to have, it's a G19. If there's a second, it's an AR. There is nothing 9mm can't do that a .45acp can.

File: IMG_0425.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>34403070
They are almost the same when the extendo magazine is in the 30. It's a bit thicker though. But you get some more stoppin powa.

File: IMG_20170630_023741_01.jpg (908KB, 1458x2592px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 1458x2592px

Op listen here disregard every other post.

My first Glock was a 30s this is when I was ignorant to ballistics n all dat good shit.

I was so sold on the 45 stopping power. Turns out .45 has shit penetration and less fps then 40/9

I don even care dat it was low cap 10 bullets is better then 6.

Recoil isn't bad either if u actually lift weights


Basically it's shit and only good for fun not serious defense.

I sold it and got a Glock 19 now.

And much more happier not because hi cap n less recoil only because 9mm is better ballistically then .45


I should've got a Glock 19 or Glock 22 instead of .45

40 is even better if u don't mind da recoil since it has more velocity then 9mm n slightly bigger flower expansion.

>>34403821
>can't afford to own 2 guns at once, had to trade away a perfectly fine .45 in sub/compact package
>all that justification in post, as if trying to make self feel good
>advocates for .40 unironically

Why not go 10mm? Better ballistics than all the others and recoil isn't that much more than the glock30.

File: MisterEd.jpg (37KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x376px

>>34403070
+1 guns is always better, because once you have more than just 1 gun, you can claim the title of Commodore (of guns).

/k/ logic is never wrong. Be like Mr. Ed, not fucking Frank.

File: fuckingfrank.jpg (14KB, 350x242px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 350x242px

>>34404645
pictured: fucking Frank

>>34404617
Your no guns is showing.

10mm will require a bigger frame which could be a problem for op esp since now every guy wears fit or tight clothes an recoil will be worse then 40 Cal which will be worse then .45

I doubt op will CC a Glock 20 inless his clothes are baggy like mines. N a Glock 29 will be like a ,357 mag in 2 inch barrel. Wats the point.

Fucking no guns.

19 is the gold standard for a reason.