When to modify my Glock

Steven Cali

Regular Member
Quantified Performance
I'm not entirely certain this is the appropriate place to put this, but it seems as good as any, so here goes.

I recently acquired a Glock 22 gen 3, and other than installing an adjustable rear sight, 3.5 lb ghost connector, and some polishing, I haven't made any modifications. I eventually want to give it the full Roland treatment, with a red Dot and a kkm comped barrel, and a weaponlight, but with my current budget and skill level, I feel like I will see more improvement from spending my money on ammo and range time, rather than a dot and comped match barrel. My question is, what standards should I be able to meet to actually reap the benefits of the barrel and dot? (the weaponlight is an obvious benefit and I will be picking one up shortly)
Currently I am recovering from a shoulder injury, so I am shooting strong hand only, and I am struggling to hold my shots on a 6" bull at 10 yards, so I obviously need to work on my shooting, but how much does the software need to improve before I work on the hardware?
 

tylerw02

Regular Member
The red dot will accelerate your shooting.

I am not opposed to ALL new shooters learning with a dot. It takes the nuances of sighting out and lets the shooter focus on the fundamentals. Until you can master the fundamentals, things like comps don’t need to be a consideration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

JLL2013

Regular Member
I think you're well within the parameters of benefiting more from ammo and practice than improved equipment. Barrel quality definitely should be towards the bottom of your priorities.
If you can shoot above an 80 or so on a B8, slow fire, 25yds I think you can see improvement from barrel, etc.
The red dot is always an improvement.
There is also no downside to the improved weapon.
Some good stuff in this modcast:
 

Steven Cali

Regular Member
Quantified Performance
Thanks for the responses!

I'm not opposed to getting the dot soon, it's just that with my current finances I would have to decide between a dot and ammo for the next few months, hence the question. If I had the money, I would just make the modifications and not worry about it, but given the circumstances, I am going to have to choose.
 

chrisp2493

Amateur
The dot helped my shooting a lot this year. But that could also have been from the 4-5k rounds that went a long with it over the summer as well. The dot isn’t an absolute have to have right now kinda thing. Spend some money on ammo to keep proficient and save some on the side to pick up the dot when you can. Nothing wrong with having to budget. I would hold off till you can buy a quality one rather then buying cheap and upgrading later. I’m much happier with my RMR over the vortex venom I had first.
 

ggammell

Does not pass up an opportunity to criticize P&S.
A .40 might eat your optics for lunch. Especially with a gen 3 recoil system. I may differ from some but if you’re looking at an optic, I would consider a good 40-9 conversion barrel. Save your optic and get a better barrel (not a comped barrel).
 

Steven Cali

Regular Member
Quantified Performance
A .40 might eat your optics for lunch. Especially with a gen 3 recoil system. I may differ from some but if you’re looking at an optic, I would consider a good 40-9 conversion barrel. Save your optic and get a better barrel (not a comped barrel).
I get why .40 is punishing, but what is it about a gen 3 that will make it eat optics faster? And why wouldn't I want a comp? Wouldn't a comp make things a little easier on the optic?
 

Steven Cali

Regular Member
Quantified Performance
The dot helped my shooting a lot this year. But that could also have been from the 4-5k rounds that went a long with it over the summer as well. The dot isn’t an absolute have to have right now kinda thing. Spend some money on ammo to keep proficient and save some on the side to pick up the dot when you can. Nothing wrong with having to budget. I would hold off till you can buy a quality one rather then buying cheap and upgrading later. I’m much happier with my RMR over the vortex venom I had first.
That's basically what I'm planning to do.
I'm inclined towards the holosun 507c due to the reticle, and the reviews it gets around here.
 

ggammell

Does not pass up an opportunity to criticize P&S.
I get why .40 is punishing, but what is it about a gen 3 that will make it eat optics faster? And why wouldn't I want a comp? Wouldn't a comp make things a little easier on the optic?

I think the dual recoil spring in the Gen 4/5 is better than the Gen 3.

If you stay .40 then go for the comp. If you go 9, I personally don’t think it’s necessary. It is nice. But not necessary.
 

Steven Cali

Regular Member
Quantified Performance
I think the dual recoil spring in the Gen 4/5 is better than the Gen 3.

If you stay .40 then go for the comp. If you go 9, I personally don’t think it’s necessary. It is nice. But not necessary.

I'm probably going to stick with .40 for the foreseeable future, so comp it is.
This is probably just me being ridiculous, but how feasible would it be to stick a gen 4/5 dual spring in a gen 3?
 

JLL2013

Regular Member
There is no way to convert a Gen 3 to a Gen4/5 recoil system. You’re not going to see any benefits regardless, the recoil force of the .40 is what it is and the impact of slide closing is an issue for these optics as well. Most optics are designed to withstand recoil in one direction, not two.

The Aimpoint ACRO was specifically tested with a .40; it’s also expensive and largely out of stock. The Aimpoint Micro series has done well with .40, but it will eventually die somewhere around 10k rounds. The RMR does well but again, it has a finite life span. Holosun is developing a good reputation and seem to warranty their products well. Just don’t throw a garbage optic on it and you’ll be fine. When it breaks, it will be repaired or replaced.

I had an RMR go down during a class with graded evolutions. That’s just my shitty luck. I replaced it with a spare and drove on. Trijicon got my broken optic in the mail last week, I expect to get a new one without issue.

I put a Vortex Crossfire in a Balor mount on a KKM comped G22 as proof of concept. It killed the Crossfire within 200rds. The Aimpoint H1 that replaced it is going strong and I expect it to last the full 10k or more. The point here is that quality costs more for a reason.


I'm probably going to stick with .40 for the foreseeable future, so comp it is.
This is probably just me being ridiculous, but how feasible would it be to stick a gen 4/5 dual spring in a gen 3?
 

Steven Cali

Regular Member
Quantified Performance
There is no way to convert a Gen 3 to a Gen4/5 recoil system. You’re not going to see any benefits regardless, the recoil force of the .40 is what it is and the impact of slide closing is an issue for these optics as well. Most optics are designed to withstand recoil in one direction, not two.

The Aimpoint ACRO was specifically tested with a .40; it’s also expensive and largely out of stock. The Aimpoint Micro series has done well with .40, but it will eventually die somewhere around 10k rounds. The RMR does well but again, it has a finite life span. Holosun is developing a good reputation and seem to warranty their products well. Just don’t throw a garbage optic on it and you’ll be fine. When it breaks, it will be repaired or replaced.

I had an RMR go down during a class with graded evolutions. That’s just my shitty luck. I replaced it with a spare and drove on. Trijicon got my broken optic in the mail last week, I expect to get a new one without issue.

I put a Vortex Crossfire in a Balor mount on a KKM comped G22 as proof of concept. It killed the Crossfire within 200rds. The Aimpoint H1 that replaced it is going strong and I expect it to last the full 10k or more. The point here is that quality costs more for a reason.
Cool, that confirms my suspicion that I am being ridiculous. Pretty normal state for me.
Thanks for all the info on the various optics, it's always good to have more data.
 
Top