In 2020, I acquired a Glock 44 .22LR for testing and evaluation. Well, after approaching 20k rounds it has finally become "unreliable" (not due to ammo). Failures to eject and stovepipes, mostly. Failure to feed has been a low-power ammo and needs-cleaning issue. So what's going on after no issues, other than not keeping it clean or weak/cheap ammo?
There is probably grit inside the slide or a spring has worn out after thousands upon thousands of rounds. I do a detail strip and thorough cleaning after every 2000 rounds or so and the gun functions well after. Remember that a lot of .22 is super dirty and will foul guns easily. Heck, I even wash my Glock in soap and water before thoroughly blow drying and oiling. I think there is probably gunk in the ejector spring channel or a spring is worn out. Springs are wear items, after all.
I continue to be happy with this rather reluctant purchase and think it is an excellent cost-effective training platform. Just keep it clean!
Now, despite wanting a Springfield Hellcat to replace my Glock 26/43, I bought a Sig P365 for evaluation. Hey Sig, I'd love T&E guns! The purpose for this test will be to see if it is a viable replacement for a Glock 26. The 10 round capacity vs. the single stack 6 round Glock 43 is no real test, but does the smaller size of the P365 (smallest on the market) make it more viable from a value standpoint than simply sticking with my slightly larger G26?
Hold them hand in hand, I'm not so sure. The Sig must balance different because it feels heavier than the Glock, which can't be true because the Sig is 3oz lighter. But of course, the weight is in the ammo. The weight of a 115 grain bullet 9mm cartridge is 185 grains (total cartridge weight) or 12 grams or .42 ounces. 10 rounds are therefore another 4.2 ounces, which will be the same for each gun. So:
Now the Sig P365 is smaller. It's barrel is a half-inch shorter, though in the three-inch class I'm not sure it matters that much. These are mugging distance guns. Overall, the Sig is over two-thirds (.69) of an inch shorter. Length is less of an issue for concealed carry since length is going down your pants (ha ha ha ha). I'm not thrilled about the height difference of two-tenths of an inch which seems to be because the Sig has a weird tilted toe. However, preliminary concealment tests haven't shown this to be much of an issue. We'll see. In some environments, this might mean gun or no gun. Width is clearly the Sig's strong suit at exactly an inch. No way the Glock can beat that.
So in the Sig P365's case, is it noticeably lighter and more concealable than a Glock 26 to make it worth the $600? We'll see. Watch this space.
Clayton E. Cramer
Gun Free Zone
The War on Guns
The View From Out West