With the advent of the Generation 4 Glock, I sold off most of my Generation 3 stuff. I like the Gen4 better from several standpoints. The dual recoil system, the addition of the texture on the grips, and the larger mag release. I like everything about it. I’ve lost count at the amount of 9mm and .40 caliber ammunition that I have sent down range since the Gen4 came out. I convinced myself that the Gen4 shot softer, and that everything about it was better.
But is it?
Recently I took an afternoon and went to the range with a Gen4 Glock 22 and a Gen3 Glock 22. I also took along a case of Federal 180 grain American Eagle, a couple of boxes of 175 Grain Hornady Critical Duty, and a timer. I shot some standard drills at 7, 15 and 25. I even shot some steel at 50 and 100 for extended distance work. I did not run a light on either gun. (I know that some Gen3 guns have issues with WMLs). The holster I used was an Ozarks Holster Company Range Holster.
What I found was there was little deviation between draw times and split times between the generations. Some of the time there was no difference observed.
I am really starting to think that for a skilled shooter there is really no difference, only preference. I am also starting to believe that all of the Ford versus Chevy debates we have between Glocks versus M&Ps, DA/SA versus 1911s, or wheel guns versus semi-autos is not very relevant. I think that a skilled shooter can shoot about anything you hand them well if it has usable sights, is reliable, and the trigger is usable. The rest is simply preference for the world we live in.