H&K USP .40 S&W vs. Glock 22/23

[texagun]

Ok, I've done a search over the past year and cannot find a direct answer to my question. I am considering buying a H&K USP .40 S&W for concealed carry. How would this gun compare to the Glock 22 or 23 in terms of reliability, accuracy, weight, trigger pull, and carryability? Surely a lot of you have both guns....which do you like better and why??? How about the P2000...what makes it a better gun than the USP?

[-gunut-]

Originally posted by texagun
How would this gun compare to the Glock 22 or 23 in terms of reliability, accuracy, weight, trigger pull, and carryability?

The HK will be

-Just as reliable

-More accurate

-will weigh about .1~.2 LB more that Glock

-Trigger is around 5.3LB

-Both are carried well with a good belt and holster

You might want to look into the compacts as well

http://hkpro.com/usp40compa1.jpg

Edit: The P2000 is not necessarily "better." It is just different. It does not have a manual safety (which is why I choose the Compact) and has a de-cock on the back of the slide. They are about the same size and the USP Compact. They offer them in 9m,.357, and .40. The compact USP offers 9mm, .357, .40, and .45

[D25]

I will echo what gunut said and add a bit.

I am quite a bit more accurate with my USPc than a 22, 23, 27.

I prefer the USP trigger over the Glocks, although some don't.

The USP is slightly wider, but all are readily concielable with the right setup.

I prefer the "feel" of the USP.

I prefer DA/SA.

[-gunut-]

Originally posted by D25


I am quite a bit more accurate with my USPc than a 22, 23, 27.

I prefer the USP trigger over the Glocks, although some don't.

The USP is slightly wider, but all are readily concielable with the right setup.

I prefer the "feel" of the USP.

I prefer DA/SA.

I agree with all!

[BSaunders]

I also agree with the previous statements. What it really comes down to is personal preference. I have both and have carried both. If I had to choose between a Glock and an H&K, I would take the H&K. But keep in mind, this is just MY personal opinion. Both are excellent firearms.

[glockbob]

My first handgun was a USP compact .40, with the stainless slide. Love the feel of the gun, only complaint is that once in a while I hit the magazine release while shooting. I have owned a G23&19, but I prefer the size of my current G17&22. I shoot better with the glocks and as others have said they are lighter and the slide is thinner.

Never had reliability issues with either HK or Glock handguns. In my academy firearms training there were a few more malfunctions with the HK then with the Glocks. All the HK were the schools guns, and all the glocks were personally owned, so its not a totally fair comparision.

Go to a range and try either, see which one you like better. Only real advantage to the HK is the option of a factory safety. The HK is a little more pleasing to the eye, especially with the stainless slide.

For the money you can't beat the glock. HK is usually $200 more than comparable Glock.

[SoFlaDeputy]

I own both a G-23 3rd generation with Big Dot nite sights and a USP 40 fullsize variant #1. I carry the G-23 on duty but carry my fullsize USP 40 off duty and when I'm out of town. Both are great guns and will do what they have to when you need then to! The choice is personal and up to you because you and only you will be using it for ccw, duty or matches. :suntan:

[Chuck TX]

Wasn't the HK USP originally designed for the .40sw?

I've owned several of the .40sw Glocks and they were all great pieces, shot a HK USP .40 and it was very nice as well, possibly softer than the Glock .40 IMO. I've since liquidated all of my .40sw's, but were I to get another it'd probably be the HK. Actually I just wish they'd make a HK USP 10mm.

[SoFlaDeputy]

Yes Chuck TX. The original disign of the USP was built on the .40 S&W round. :thumbsup:

[-gunut-]

Originally posted by SoFlaDeputy
Yes Chuck TX. The original disign of the USP was built on the .40 S&W round. :thumbsup:

Unlike the Glock 22. :supergrin:

[viscid240]

USP .40F is my first handgun purchased and I have absolutely no regrets, except that i'm hooked and now am looking at a p2sk in .357.

I have never shot glocks but my brother-in-law is a glock fanatic and I let him shoot my .40s&w and he had said it was ok, just to find out he sold his glock .45 to purchase a USP .45 but were out at the time and settled for a xd. Most likely he'll sell that and eventually get the USP.45. That is another reason I chose the usp.40 is due to their build concept around the .40 as opposed to the 9mm or 10mm base, like "other manufactures".

[martinglock]

The Glock 22 has less recoil than the 23, but the 23 conceals better. I use my 22 for HD and my 23 for CCDW. Just buy them both and forget about the HK.

:banana:

[SlimlineGlock]

I own 3 Glocks and one H&K USP compact in .40.

I prefer the H&K. It fits better in my (smaller) hands and is more accurate.

[AGAF]

I own the P2000 .40 S&W. I absolutely love the gun. I have shot the G23 and I think it has more felt recoil than the HK. As others have stated, both HK & Glock are excellent firearms. As I have learned, it all comes down to personal preference. My HK P2000 just fits my hand very well. It is light, accurate, and utterly dependable. I have never had a failure to fire or misfeed. My P2000 is variant 3 DA/SA. I feel extremely safe carrying with a round chambered because there is no way this gun goes off in DA without the user being very intentional about pulling the trigger. Don't need the external safety like the USPs have. This is just my .02 worth.

[GlockNation]

Personally, I like the Glock best in a Glock 29 10mm. I have shot the HK USPc 40, the Glock 22C and the Walther 99 compact in a 40 as well as my PM40 Kahr. To me the HK was almost tied with the Glock Compensated for managable recoil. Although not as rough as my Kahr PM40, I would not want to shoot the Walther for very long. Here is what the Buffalo Bore website has to say about the Glock 40s. This combined with the superior recoil spring set up of the HK convinced me to buy a HK USP40c over a Glock 40:

>>>"SAFETY NOTICE

“Some pistols chambered for the 40 S&W cartridge may not provide complete support of the case head. If this condition exists, normal pressure loads such as those shown here can cause the case wall to bulge or rupture at the unsupported point. Contact your firearm manufacturer to determine if your pistol completely supports the case head, or ask a gunsmith to inspect your pistol before using it with ANY ammunition. It is the gun owners responsibility to know his firearm and its capabilities and limitations.”

40 S&W WARNING

“This data is intended for use in firearms which fully support the cartridge in the chamber. Use of this data in firearms which do not fully support the cartridge may result in bulged cases, ruptured cases, case head separation, or other conditions which may result in damage to the firearm and/or result in injury or death of the shooter or bystanders.”

Glock happens to chamber their 40 S&W pistols without a fully supported chamber and both of those above safety notices are likely aimed at Glock. I know of no other 40 S&W handguns being sold in the US that don’t have fully supported chambers. If you really want to shoot our 40S&W ammo in your Glock, have an after market barrel that uses a supported chamber, dropped into it. This is a fairly common practice and will give you the safety margin needed to fire our ammo in your Glock. It will also likely give you more velocity that the factory Glock barrel. I personally own two Glock Model 23’s. Both of mine are going to get after market barrels dropped in so that I can use this excellent ammo in them."<<<

Hope this helps.