Compromising Concealability: G17 vs G43

I just recently wrote a piece about the Pros & Cons of the Glock 19X. Near the end of it I mentioned how one shooter I know requested a Glock Model 17 sized but single stack 9mm handgun.  It occurred to me that the same comparison of pros and cons I made between the G19X and the Glock Model 19 Fifth Generation (G19-5) can be made between the Glock 17 Fourth Generation (G17-4) and the Glock Model 43.  That may seem quite outrageous because one is a full sized double stack 9mm handgun intended for duty wear and the other is a diminutive single stack 9mm handgun intended for concealed carry and strictly defensive purposes. As I considered them and my belief that overall height of the weapon has the greatest impact on concealability with slide assembly length and weapon thickness as secondary considerations, I realized that the G43 could certainly be customized in such a way as to be no more concealable than the G17-4. Let me explain…

When making the comparison between Glock’s about to be released 19X and the fifth generation of the Glock 19, what I concluded was that where concealability is concerned, it’s mostly about frame height which often / usually equates to ammo capacity. In essence I determined that the G19X really should have been a G17 called by a different identifier. The shorter slide assembly might help in concealment, but the full length grip frame and the addition of extended magazine floor plates takes away from ease of concealment. Given that both weapons are the same width, it truly is the length of the grip frame that most seriously impacts concealment.

Now, let’s take that thought process over to the G17-4 comparing it to the G43. In this case, the G43, in its original configuration of a single stack 6-round magazine, is far more concealable than the G17-4 with its 4.5” barrel and double stack 17 round capacity. The G43 is just about small enough to be dropped in a pocket (with the proper safety consideration of having a pocket holster). You can’t come close to doing that with a G17 of any generation unless you have some seriously large cargo pockets and don’t care how much it flaps around.

Capacity becomes the quick question in any conversation about whether or not the G43 is an adequate off-duty or concealed carry weapon. Given that some folks readily accepted the Glock 42 in .380ACP (and also carrying 6+1 rounds) as off-duty / concealed carry sufficient, then having a handgun just slightly larger and chambered for 9mm was easy to accept; even appreciate. I know some folks who feel that 6+1 just isn’t enough for a defensive weapon though so they either feel the need to carry a double stack weapon OR to add on extended magazine floorplates to the G43 magazines.

Now, I’ll share two thoughts on capacity: First, as a guy whose first off-duty gun was a Smith & Wesson Chief’s Special 5-shot .38Spl revolver, 6+1 seems fine. After all – if five was plenty back in the day, then 7 is plenty now. Back up ammo? Yep, I used to carry two speed-strips of five rounds each so I had a total of 15 rounds of .38 Special if I could do two reasonably quick reloads. With the G43 I can carry 7 in the gun and have one magazine for back up that gives me a total of 13 rounds if I only do one reload. If I carry two back up magazines then I have 19 rounds. Second, unless I carry a full sized duty gun off-duty, I’ll never have the same round count off-duty as I do on-duty and while I understand that having it might be desirable, I remain confused as to why it would be expected.

Off-duty means exactly that: Off-duty. As a guy who spent about 30 years as a police officer right outside our nation’s capital, I more than understand that off-duty can change to “have to take emergency action” in a heartbeat. I also understand the value of situational awareness and having a clear understanding of what I will and won’t get involved in. I understand that I can’t control circumstances nor criminality, but I will do all I can to avoid being in a situation that’s going to require me to have 50+ rounds of ammo on my person. Does that mean I intentionally settle for having 13-19 rounds? No.

One of the challenges (for me) of the G43 is the shortness of the grip frame. Unless I put an extension on the magazine, my pinky floats… and I dislike that. I’d rather feel the comfort of a full grip. So, for that reason alone, I’d put extensions on the magazine.  But while I’m extending them, why not add to the capacity of each as well? I received three magazines with the weapon but only one magazine extension and it did nothing to add capacity.  To resolve the issue I bought two +2 magazine extensions. For quite some time I carried the weapon with the 6-round magazine inserted (+1 in the chamber) and the two (now) 8-round magazines as backup.  Then I started to wonder why I was shorting myself the two rounds? Now I carry the weapon with an 8-round magazine inserted which gives me a total of 9 in the weapon. With another 8-round magazine for backup I have 17 rounds with the option of another magazine of 6 if I want for a total of 23. Do I need all that? Lord, let’s hope not. But what was the impact on concealability if any?

The answer is “not much.” That, however, is due to the slimness of the pistol combined with the shortness of the slide assembly. The grip, including the +2 floorplates, ended up just about as long as a standard grip length G17-4. (see photo) If concealability is truly a function of grip length, then the G43 with the added on capacity shouldn’t be any more concealable than the G17-4.  However, thanks to the fact that the G43 is a single stack weapon and the G17-4, as we all know, isn’t, the G43 has a much slimmer profile… or does it? Actual published measurements show the G43 is only .16” slimmer than the G17-4. That’s roughly 1/6^th of an inch. Does such a small amount make such a large difference? Or are we fooling ourselves?

The barrel/slide length difference is appreciable. The barrel on the G43 is a full 1.1” shorter than that of the G17-4. That’s noticeable and can have a recognized effect on how easy it is to carry and conceal the smaller handgun. Still, it’s not quite a pocket gun.

So what makes the G43, as I’ve configured mine with the magazine extensions, so much more comfortable and concealable?  MY PERCEPTION OF IT. It is certainly lighter and the weight, as I feel it, is higher on my belt than that of the G17-4. The combination of wider grip frame on the G17-4 and additional weight of the weapon makes my G43 far more comfortable to carry.  Am I willing to trade off capacity and accuracy for the comfort?  The answer so far is yes.

The capacity reduction I accepted long ago as a reality of more comfortable off-duty guns. As to the accuracy reduction: I go back to the fact that I can qualify just as easily with the G43 (albeit, with more reloading) as I do the G17-4. My scores might be a few percentage points off, but I’m not doing hostage rescue or precision competition work with the G43. I’m carrying it for protection, 24/7 any time I leave my house. I’m carrying it just in case I have to take police action requiring that level of use of force.

Now, I know guys who say that their EDC handgun is a Glock 17 (any generation with an accessory rail) customized with a fully compensated barrel, reflex optic, weapon mounted light/laser and +5 floorplates on every one of their magazines and they carry four spare magazines “just in case.” MY outlook is that isn’t a defensive EDC handgun. That’s a weapon system carried by combat troops into hostile arenas. My defensive handgun has to be a lot lighter, more comfortable to carry and more easily concealed than that. In the G43 with the +2 magazine extensions, I believe I’ve found it.