Tweet
I've had a Glock 21SF for a couple of years now, and it's been a great gun. Its ergonomics seem to work well for me, and I was able to ring 6" plates at 50yd on my first range trip without much trouble, something I could not do with my S&W1911. I've always felt that the grip was a little on the fat side though, even though it's much better than that of the original G21. Just recently I did a front strap reduction on my G21SF, and it seems to feel a bit nicer, although still sort of fat. So I decided to try out a small frame Glock and see if it would be an improvement. I picked up a G35, and have been spending a lot of time gripping it, pointing it, and dry firing it (haven't gotten to the range yet).
I noticed something rather surprising about the G35, which is the fact that the front-to-back length of the grip is about the same as that of my G21SF with front strap reduction, but the width of the grip was about 0.2" smaller. Therefore, it seems that when I grip the gun, I feel more pressure on the front and back straps, but my hand doesn't make as much contact with the side of the grip as it does when I'm holding my G21SF.
So here's my problem: when I dry fire the G35, I almost always see the front sight snap slightly to the right when the trigger breaks. It takes a lot of effort to prevent this, and I can't always stop it from happening. But with the G21SF, the front sight stays dead center with almost no effort at all. At this point, I'm thinking that the fullness of the large frame grip just fills out my hand better, and thus doesn't give the gun any room to move. I've always believed in the idea that it's better to practice and develop your skills than spend time nitpicking about your equipment. However, it really seems to me that having a grip that fills your hand properly really gives a significant advantage over a grip that does not.
Some other info:
-Both guns have stock triggers with "minus" disconnectors.
-I'm not flinching; this is dry fire.
-The G21SF has a front strap reduction, and thus has no finger grooves, whereas the G35 has the original grip with finger grooves.
What are your thoughts on all of this? Do I need to alter my technique and practice more? Should I get something to fatten the G35 grip like a Hogue rubber sleeve?
I noticed something rather surprising about the G35, which is the fact that the front-to-back length of the grip is about the same as that of my G21SF with front strap reduction, but the width of the grip was about 0.2" smaller. Therefore, it seems that when I grip the gun, I feel more pressure on the front and back straps, but my hand doesn't make as much contact with the side of the grip as it does when I'm holding my G21SF.
So here's my problem: when I dry fire the G35, I almost always see the front sight snap slightly to the right when the trigger breaks. It takes a lot of effort to prevent this, and I can't always stop it from happening. But with the G21SF, the front sight stays dead center with almost no effort at all. At this point, I'm thinking that the fullness of the large frame grip just fills out my hand better, and thus doesn't give the gun any room to move. I've always believed in the idea that it's better to practice and develop your skills than spend time nitpicking about your equipment. However, it really seems to me that having a grip that fills your hand properly really gives a significant advantage over a grip that does not.
Some other info:
-Both guns have stock triggers with "minus" disconnectors.
-I'm not flinching; this is dry fire.
-The G21SF has a front strap reduction, and thus has no finger grooves, whereas the G35 has the original grip with finger grooves.
What are your thoughts on all of this? Do I need to alter my technique and practice more? Should I get something to fatten the G35 grip like a Hogue rubber sleeve?
Comment