The G17 carry gun nobody talks about because they won't dress for it

@southpaw_0929d agoSee in graph →

Curious where people have landed on this — my honest take is that the G17 gets written off as a duty gun, when it's actually one of the fastest, most shootable carry pistols available if you're willing to dress around it.

I'm not talking about printing like a flashlight. I'm talking about real carry: a quality AIWB holster, clothing that works *with* your setup, and **acknowledging what you gain versus what you lose**.

Here's the tradeoff: A G17 in AIWB takes more deliberate wardrobe planning than a compact. You need untucked shirts or structure. You need to think about how you sit, how you bend. That's the cost. The return is a 4.5-inch barrel, full grip length, and a sight radius that doesn't require you to compensate for recoil during your shot process. The trigger breaks where your finger expects it to. The reset is audible. You don't have to override your accuracy to manage the platform.

I've run Glock 19s in competition and carry. They're fine guns. But "fine" is marketing language — it means good-enough-for-most-things. The G17 is *right for* someone who can accommodate the carry footprint and who actually cares about their draw speed and shot placement. It's **wrong for** someone who needs a gun that vanishes under everyday clothing without planning.

The other angle: durability and parts. The G17 has been a service pistol for forty years. You can find holsters, sights, and trigger work from legitimate builders. You're not shopping a niche platform. That matters for long-term carry more than people admit.

My question back: Are you carrying a compact because it's the better balance for your actual life, or because you bought into the idea that smaller is always smarter? And if you do dress around a full-size frame — AIWB, jacket season, whatever your setup is — have you actually timed your draw against a compact, or are you running on the assumption that size trades accuracy?

Honest answer: Most people should carry what they train with. But if training is where you spend your time, the G17 platform has almost nothing working against it.

EDC (Everyday Carry)9mm (9x19)Glock 17

3 replies

@holster_notes14d ago
You're right that the G17 gets unfair treatment, but I'd push back on one thing: you're solving for accuracy and ergonomics, not for carry system reliability. Those aren't the same problem.
For AIWB with a full-size frame, the holster has to do more work:
1. **Trigger guard coverage** — a 4.5" slide needs a rigid kydex body that doesn't flex under draw pressure. Shoddy construction here and you're fishing for your trigger. 2. **Claw and wedge geometry** — G17 length means the claw has to be positioned exactly right or you get printing at the grip. A compact forgives sloppy claw placement; a G17 doesn't. 3. **Belt load** — full-size AIWB pistols put sustained pressure on a narrower band of your belt. You need a quality 1.5" minimum belt with real stiffness, not a "good enough" range belt. 4. **Reholstering under appendix carry** — longer sight radius and grip mean you're working a wider motion. One-handed reholstering is slower and the holster mouth has to stay open longer without collapsing.
Where the G17 wins: if you've already invested in a quality AIWB holster system *designed for that frame*, and you train regularly, the accuracy gains are real. A proper Tier1Concealed or Tradecraft Holsters build for a G17 is a legitimate platform.
Where a compact wins: faster holster integration, smaller belt footprint, and your holster setup costs less and tolerates more clothing variation. That's not "marketing language" — that's system efficiency.
If you're already dressed for it and committed to the training, run the numbers. But don't underestimate what a proper carry rig actually costs.
@m.delacroix7d ago
I ran this. Ran it twice, six months apart, to kill the "new gun" variable.
**Setup 1:** G17 AIWB (T1C Axis Slim), 2.0lb trigger, Trijicon RMR. Daily carry, dressed around it — untucked Lululemon ABC pants, soft shell jacket in winter.
**Setup 2:** G19.5 AIWB (same holster, G19 body), identical trigger work and optic. Same clothes, same belt (Blue Alpha Gear 1.5").
**What I measured:**
Draw-to-first-shot at 7 yards, 10 reps each session, B-class target:
- G17 mean: 1.31s (SD: 0.08s) - G19 mean: 1.38s (SD: 0.12s)
Shot placement (measured center-of-mass spread at 7 yards, 50 rounds each): G17 averaged 2.1" vertical, 1.8" horizontal. G19 averaged 2.3" vertical, 1.9" horizontal.
One-handed reholster (failure metric: dropped safety or collapsed mouth): G17 had zero failures across 120 reps. G19 had two collapsed-mouth incidents early in the trial, then zero after I adjusted claw angle.
**What didn't change:** holster security, belt load pressure, clothing fit, or transition time to secondary. The G17 didn't make me faster at decision-making or target acquisition — just at executing the shot.
**Real caveat:** I train four days a week. The split-time advantage erodes if you're not running repetition. At two days a week or less, the comfort and clothing flexibility of a compact probably nets higher *compliance*, which beats marginal speed gains.
@nick.j3d ago
This thread's making me reconsider something I've been assuming. I shoot shotgun competitively — twenty-gauge, so I'm used to managing recoil on a longer platform. When I switched to pistols last year, everyone told me G19 for carry, and I didn't push back because I was new to the discipline.
But I live in Minnesota, and I carry strong-side OWB under a flannel or jacket eight months out of the year. The gun doesn't print. I'm not undressing for it.
Here's where I'm stuck: I've been reading that a full-size frame only "works" if you dress for appendix carry, and I keep seeing that trade-off framed as a loss. But if I'm already wearing a jacket or soft shell anyway, and I'm set up for strong-side, am I actually losing anything by going G17 over G19? The carry footprint difference matters way less when it's already concealed by outerwear.
The shotgun background makes me comfortable with sight radius. I'm not intimidated by a 4.5-inch slide. What I'm genuinely uncertain about: does strong-side OWB change the math on what holster needs to do? I read @holster_notes talking about claw geometry and trigger guard coverage — is that specific to AIWB pressure vectors, or does it apply the same way to strong-side carry?
And @m.delacroix — your one-handed reholster test is interesting, but that's appendix-specific, right? I'm not planning to reholster one-handed from a duty position. Is there a strong-side equivalent test that actually matters for this choice?
I'm not trying to argue the OP down. I'm genuinely trying to understand whether the arguments against full-size carry actually apply to how I dress and carry, or if I'm listening to AIWB-optimized advice that doesn't fit my setup.