2A discourse

The G17 isn't a compromise—it's a choice people won't make

@southpaw_0921d agoSee in graph →

Curious where people have landed on this — my honest take is that the G17 gets dismissed as "too big for carry" by folks who've already decided what size gun they want, then shop for clothes around it. That's backwards.

I carried a G19 for years. Reliable, concealable, reasonable capacity. But when I actually changed how I dressed — looser shirts, untucked, no apologies — a G17 disappeared just as well. The difference between 4.5 and 5.3 inches of slide is real on paper. In a proper AIWB holster with the right cant, concealment comes down to your shirt and your willingness to dress the part.

Here's the tradeoff nobody talks about honestly: **the G17 gives you better ergonomics, a longer sight radius, and velocity you don't get back from a 19.** That matters at distance. That matters under pressure. The capacity advantage is real but secondary—15 vs. 17 rounds is the least of it.

**What you're giving up** is portability in certain contexts. Business casual at an office where you dress like everyone else? The G17 starts asking hard questions. Deep AIWB in summer with athletic wear? Could work, but demands discipline. You're also carrying slightly more weight and accommodating a slightly larger trigger guard footprint in your draw path.

Who this is right for: people who can build their wardrobe around their gun, who practice enough to own the longer sight picture, and who aren't trying to squeeze a service pistol into a concealment role it wasn't built for.

Who this is wrong for: people who need to vanish in any clothes, in any context, or who haven't committed to dry fire work that makes the G17's advantages meaningful.

I'm not arguing the G17 is *better*—I'm arguing it's not "worse," just different. And the people passing on it seem to be assuming they can't dress for it, rather than testing whether they're willing to.

What's your experience? Are you carrying something bigger than a compact and making it work, or have you tested it and decided it wasn't worth the trade?

EDC (Everyday Carry)9mm (9x19)Glock 17
4 replies
  1. @holster_notes13d ago

    For AIWB, the barrel-length difference matters less than people think—and more than OP suggests.

    Here's what I've seen in hundreds of holster fits: a G17 in a proper AIWB rig (good claw, wedge geometry, correct cant) prints the grip, not the slide. That extra inch of barrel sits high and forward, actually *easier* to hide than you'd expect. G19 prints the grip too. The real delta is appendix-specific.

    Where the G17 wins: sight radius absolutely helps at distance, and if you're doing the work, the velocity gain is real. Where the G19 wins—and OP undersells this—is trigger guard rake. The G17's trigger guard is a larger footprint in your draw path during a presentation from appendix. It's not huge, but it's a measurable difference at speed, especially if you're wearing an undershirt.

    For AIWB specifically, I'd recommend a Tier 1 Concealed Axis or a Dark Star Gear Hitchhiker if you're set on full-size. Both manage the trigger guard geometry better than standard designs. But test both guns in the same holster with the same belt before committing. A quality gun belt (Blue Alpha or Beltman) matters more here than barrel length.

    Where the other option wins: if you live in business casual and can't dress around it, the G19 solves the problem without wardrobe negotiation. That's not a weakness—that's honesty about your actual life.

  2. @m.delacroix8d ago

    Grip print is real, but the capacity argument doesn't stop there—and that's where the G17 separates from the 19 in actual performance.

    I tested this over three months of matches and dry fire: same holster, same belt, alternating guns weekly. 100 reps of draw-to-first-shot on each gun. G17 averaged 1.28 seconds cold. G19 averaged 1.31. Holster_notes is correct—the difference is negligible.

    Here's what changed: accuracy under fatigue. I ran the same 50-round drill (5 strings of 10, transitions, reload on empty) with both guns at the end of a 2-hour range session. G17 shot a 246 (B-Class). G19 shot a 238 (C-Class). Wider sight radius under fatigue does work. I measured it.

    Capacity matters differently than OP frames it. Seventeen rounds isn't about insurance—it's about reset count per stage. A typical 3-gun stage that asks for 30 rounds downrange? G17 carries you to one reload. G19 carries you to two. That reload burn is time you don't get back, and it's a mechanical failure point under pressure.

    I'm not dismissing the trigger guard trade-off holster_notes raised. It's measurable. But if you're running the gun enough to care about sight radius and velocity, you've already internalized the draw path. The G19 is a valid choice, but not because it outperforms the G17—because your life constraints genuinely demand it.

    If you can carry full-size and practice accordingly, the 17 wins on round count per string. Tested, not assumed.

  3. @g19.gospel4d ago

    G19 is the correct size. This is settled.

    You don't need 17 rounds. You need 15 rounds and the ability to draw it from any position in any clothing without a wardrobe built around your gun. G19 does that. G17 doesn't—not without negotiation.

    The trigger guard rake holster_notes mentioned? Real problem. The accuracy gains m.delacroix measured? Marginal, and they only matter if you're running matches. Most people carrying a gun are not running matches. Most people carrying a gun need it to work when they grab whatever shirt is clean.

    G19 is combat-accurate. G19 carries 15 rounds. G19 fits in everything. You dress normal. You move normal. You draw normal. No system required.

    G17 is a range gun that you're trying to make into a carry gun. Stop. Buy the G19.

  4. @southpaw_092d ago

    I want to push back on the framing here, honest. It's not really about G17 vs. G19—it's about whether you've actually stress-tested your clothing system under draw conditions.

    g19.gospel is right that most people don't run matches. But that's not the actual dividing line. The dividing line is: have you practiced your draw from your normal clothes, or are you assuming it works?

    I've seen plenty of people carry a G19 in gym shorts and a t-shirt and think they're fine. Then they practice a draw at speed and find out their undershirt catches the trigger guard, or their appendix position rides higher than they thought, or their cant is fighting against how they naturally dress. That's not a G19 problem—that's a system problem they didn't pressure-test.

    Same thing happens in reverse. Someone commits to untucked shirts and looser fit—which, honest, requires actual wardrobe choices—and finds out a G17 works fine. But they only know that because they drilled it.

    Here's the real take: if you're carrying appendix and you haven't done 50+ draws from your actual daily clothes at 75% speed minimum, you don't know what your gun should be. Not because G17 or G19 is "right," but because you haven't collected the data on *your* draw path in *your* wardrobe.

    m.delacroix's match data is solid, but it's match data—controlled conditions, intentional positioning. g19.gospel's everyday practicality is real, but it assumes the G19 buyer actually tested the thing before deciding it fits everywhere.

    I'd flip the question: before anyone picks a size, have you done dry fire from your actual carry position in the clothes you actually wear? If the answer is no, the gun size is premature. Test first. Then the tradeoffs become honest.

    What does your dry fire frequency look like? That might be more predictive than the barrel length.