I had come to post a new topic, but I think my question fits here well.
I'm getting a new Glock for work (plain-clothes LE). I'm sold on Gen 5 MOS in 9mm, but stuck selecting a model. I currently carry a stock Gen 4 17. This new purchase will be specifically to upgrade to a red dot. Either acquired model will bear an X300U and a red dot (most likely a Holosun 507c) and will be carried on and off duty.
I borrowed a 19 and put a few hundred round into it, and I didn't care for it. The end of the grip and flared magwell presses too much into the meat of my palm (I have pretty big bear paws), and it was noticeably less controllable in strings of fire, especially out past 10 yards, compared to either the 45 loaner I was shooting or my 17. That limits me to the full-sized brethren. I was considering the 45 for the slight advantage in concealment, but it seems like any advantage gained in the shorter barrel will be negated by the light anyway. Then I thought I might as well go all the way and get a 34.
Guys who like the 34 usually see it as easier to shoot and better balanced. Guys who like the 45 usually see it as easier to shoot and better balanced. That makes me think this may be more of a preference issue? I've also seen theories that the lighter, shorter slide of the 45 allows for less felt recoil impulse and quicker reacquisition, then others suggesting that the heavier slide on the 34 slows down the reciprocation, making it feel less 'snappy' and getting you back on target quicker.
I'm starting to suspect that this really may come down to subjective perception issues. I got a loaner 34 and intend to go shoot it next to the 45 tomorrow, but I'm curious - if you have experience with both or either, what would you choose, and why?