Choosing between the Arex Delta Gen 1 and Gen 2 means deciding whether the Gen 2's feature upgrades justify potential price differences or if the Gen 1's simpler design meets your defensive needs adequately.
Both Arex Delta generations share the innovative SDA (stageable double-action) striker system that distinguishes Arex pistols from conventional striker-fired designs, but the Gen 2 incorporates substantial user-driven improvements affecting ergonomics, ambidextrous operation, and optics compatibility.
The Gen 1 Delta established Arex's foothold in the competitive compact 9mm market through reliable performance at budget-friendly pricing. The Gen 2 responds directly to user feedback by adding fully ambidextrous controls, factory optics, ready variants, more aggressive grip texturing, and flared magazine wells, upgrades that transform the platform from adequate to competitive with established mainstream alternatives.
At-a-Glance Comparison: Arex Delta Gen 1 vs Gen 2
| Specification | Arex Delta Gen 1 M | Arex Delta Gen 2 M |
|---|---|---|
| Caliber | 9x19mm | 9x19mm |
| Barrel Length | 4.0 inches | 4.0 inches |
| Overall Length | 7.0 inches | 7.0-7.1 inches |
| Height | ~5.0 inches | 4.7 inches (M) |
| Width | 1.18 inches | 1.09-1.18 inches |
| Weight (Unloaded) | 19-20 oz | 21.6 oz |
| Capacity | 15+1 or 17+1 | 15+1, 17+1, 19+1 (X/L) |
| Grip Texture | Moderate stippling | Aggressive wraparound texture |
| Ambidextrous Controls | Reversible mag release, single-side slide stop | Bilateral slide stop, ambi mag release |
| Optics Ready | No (iron sights only) | Yes (OR variants with plates) |
| Magazine Well | Minimal flare | Flared design |
| MSRP Range | $350-$450 (used market) | $380-$450 |
Critical Differences
Ambidextrous Controls: Gen 2 features fully bilateral slide stops and ambidextrous magazine release compared to Gen 1's reversible magazine release and single-side slide stop, significantly improving usability for left-handed shooters and off-hand manipulations.
Optics Ready System: Gen 2 introduces factory optics-ready variants with Arex Optics Ready footprint and polymer mounting plates for common micro red dots, while Gen 1 requires slide milling to add optics—a $100-200 expense plus potential downtime.
Grip Ergonomics: Gen 2 implements aggressive wraparound texturing described as "tactical sandpaper-like" with deeper undercut trigger guard and pronounced flared magazine well, improving recoil control and reload speed compared to Gen 1's more conservative stippling and minimal magazine well flare.
Frame Compatibility: Gen 2 frames accept Gen 1 slides but not vice versa, allowing Gen 1 owners to upgrade ergonomics through frame swaps while maintaining existing slides, though this doesn't add optics capability without separate milling work.
Both generations use identical SDA striker systems with only minor internal differences (slightly thinner striker leg on Gen 1), meaning trigger feel and basic function remain similar. The Gen 2's approximately 1.6-ounce weight increase stems from reinforced frame construction and additional controls rather than fundamental size changes.
What Makes the Arex Delta Gen 1 Unique?
Design Intent and Original Purpose
Arex engineered the Delta Gen 1 to provide a modern polymer striker-fired defensive pistol competing in the Glock 19 size class while offering something mechanically distinct—the SDA striker system.
This trigger design combines striker simplicity with a longer, stageable pull intended to provide safety margins for defensive carriers wary of ultra-light single-action striker triggers common on many competitors.
The Gen 1 solved a specific market problem: budget-conscious shooters wanted reliable defensive pistols with European build quality but couldn't afford premium pricing. Arex positioned the Delta Gen 1 as a value-oriented alternative to Glock, M&P, and CZ offerings while introducing their distinctive trigger system to the American market.
Evolutionary Position
Within Arex's lineup, the Gen 1 Delta represented the company's first serious polymer striker-fired platform complementing their metal-framed Zero series. It established Arex's ability to compete in the dominant polymer compact segment while maintaining their engineering identity through the innovative SDA trigger system.
The Gen 1 served as the foundation platform that Arex would refine based on user feedback, creating the evolutionary path toward Gen 2 improvements. Its market reception validated Arex's direction while highlighting specific areas—particularly ambidextrous controls and optics compatibility—requiring enhancement.
Market Gap It Fills
The Delta Gen 1 filled the gap for shooters seeking reliable defensive pistols at budget-to-midrange pricing from a European manufacturer. It targeted buyers wanting alternatives to ubiquitous mainstream options while avoiding the cheapest budget tier.
The SDA trigger specifically appealed to defensive carriers preferring longer, more deliberate trigger pulls over hair-trigger race gun feels.
For buyers prioritizing value over maximum features, the Gen 1 delivered solid reliability and accuracy at prices frequently $100-150 below comparable Glock or M&P options.
What Makes the Arex Delta Gen 2 Unique?
Design Intent and Original Purpose
Arex developed the Gen 2 by directly incorporating user feedback from Gen 1 owners and reviewers. American Rifleman explicitly states Arex listened to users and implemented ambidextrous controls, aggressive texturing, flared magazine wells, and optics-ready variants addressing the most common Gen 1 limitations.
The Gen 2 transforms the Delta from a budget alternative into a feature-competitive platform matching or exceeding mainstream offerings in ergonomics, controls, and modern accessory compatibility. It solves the problem of needing aftermarket modifications to bring Gen 1 pistols up to contemporary standards.
Evolutionary Position
The Gen 2 positions the Delta as a "best-in-class-features integrator" providing optics readiness, ambidextrous controls, flared magazine wells, and aggressive texturing while maintaining pricing under many competitors. Reviews consistently describe it as offering more features than its price suggests.
Through M (compact), X (compact slide with full grip), and L (long-slide) variants, Gen 2 extends the platform across concealed carry, duty, competition practice, and home defense roles—creating a family rather than a single model.
Market Gap It Fills
The Gen 2 fills the gap for shooters wanting modern features—particularly factory optics compatibility—without paying premium prices associated with established brands. It proves that budget-friendly pricing doesn't require sacrificing contemporary capabilities that serious defensive shooters expect.
The Gen 2 specifically appeals to buyers who would otherwise purchase Glock or M&P pistols but want equivalent or better features while saving $100-200 on the initial purchase.
How Do the Gen 1 and Gen 2 Compare for Shootability and Control?
Both the Arex Delta Gen 1 and Gen 2 deliver controllable recoil and practical accuracy through their shared SDA striker system and similar dimensions, but the Gen 2's improved grip ergonomics and texture provide noticeably better control during rapid fire and extended shooting sessions.
The fundamental shooting experience remains similar between generations, with differences emerging primarily in grip security and reload ergonomics rather than core trigger or recoil characteristics.
Recoil Characteristics with Frame Size Context
The Gen 1's 19-20 ounce unloaded weight produces manageable recoil for its compact size. Shooters describe the recoil impulse as typical for lightweight polymer compacts—present but controllable with proper technique. The moderate grip texture provides adequate purchase though some users report slight grip slippage during sweaty or high-volume shooting.
The Gen 2's slightly heavier 21.6-ounce weight adds minimal mass affecting recoil absorption. Reviews consistently describe recoil as "pretty light" and "rather tame" for the size class. Pew Pew Tactical's 450-round test noted the Gen 2 allows quick return to target, while Gun Mag Warehouse emphasizes that sub-8-second El Presidente drills are easily achievable with competent shooters reaching 6-7 seconds.
The Gen 2's aggressive wraparound texturing substantially improves grip security under recoil compared to Gen 1's more conservative stippling, particularly benefiting shooters with sweaty hands or those running high round counts.
Grip Ergonomics for Different Hand Sizes
The Gen 1 provides adequate ergonomics with interchangeable backstraps allowing circumference adjustment. The grip angle and beavertail produce natural pointing characteristics. However, the minimal undercut and basic texture provide less control surface than modern competitors.
The Gen 2's deeper trigger guard undercut allows higher hand positioning, improving bore axis alignment and recoil control. The aggressive texturing ensures secure purchase regardless of conditions.
The four included backstraps provide more granular fit customization. Gun University grades Gen 2 ergonomics as B+, noting the grip works well for various hand sizes though the texture may feel abrasive during extremely long sessions.
Measured at 1.18 inches width, both generations provide slim profiles suitable for smaller hands and easier concealment compared to double-stack competitors.
Trigger Comparison
Both generations use the SDA (stageable double-action) striker system where the striker is partially pre-cocked, requiring a longer pull that can be staged against a wall before breaking. This design provides defensive safety margins while maintaining striker reliability.
Gen 1 triggers work adequately after break-in, though some early users report initial grittiness requiring extensive dry fire practice to smooth. The fundamental SDA mechanics perform reliably once owners adapt to the staging technique.
Gen 2 triggers retain the SDA system with refinements in polish and consistency. Pew Pew Tactical and Gun University describe the Gen 2 trigger as predictable, stageable, and above-average for its price class.
The ability to stage the pull before break enables precise shot placement. Some shooters unaccustomed to SDA systems initially find the longer pull unusual compared to conventional striker pistols.
AR15.com users owning both generations report triggers feel similar with only minor differences in initial smoothness, confirming the core mechanism remains unchanged.
Sight Radius and Practical Accuracy
Both generations feature 4.0-inch barrels providing similar sight radii. The Gen 1 uses traditional three-dot steel sights providing adequate visibility for defensive work.
The Gen 2 maintains steel rear notch and front white dot sights, with optics-ready variants adding red dot capability. The optics-ready system using polymer mounting plates allows micro red dot installation, significantly extending practical accuracy potential at speed and in varied lighting.
Which Arex Delta Generation Offers Better Concealability and Carry Comfort?
The Gen 1 Delta provides marginally better concealability due to its 19-20 ounce unloaded weight compared to Gen 2's 21.6 ounces, though both generations occupy nearly identical physical dimensions making them equivalently concealable in practice.
The meaningful carry differences emerge from texture aggressiveness and control ergonomics rather than size variations.
Print Profile for Different Body Types
The Gen 1's 7.0-inch overall length and 1.18-inch width create a slim profile concealing easily under most clothing. The lighter weight reduces beltline sag during extended carry. The smoother texture proves less abrasive against bare skin, benefiting carriers in hot climates using minimal undershirts.
The Gen 2's virtually identical dimensions (7.0-7.1 inches length, similar width) produce comparable print profiles. Pew Pew Tactical describes the Gen 2 M as "compact and thin" with 4.7-inch height making it easy to conceal under T-shirts with proper holsters. The additional 1.6 ounces becomes noticeable only during very extended 12+ hour carry sessions.
The Gen 2's aggressive texture can irritate skin during direct contact carry in hot weather, though this same texture provides superior control when drawing under stress or with sweaty hands.
Holster Compatibility
Both generations benefit from growing holster support as Arex gains American market presence. Major manufacturers including several hybrid holster makers now offer dedicated Delta shells across IWB, OWB, and appendix configurations.
The Gen 2's optics-ready variants require holsters accommodating mounted red dots, slightly limiting selection compared to iron-sight-only Gen 1 models. However, the expanding Delta ecosystem means optics-compatible holsters increasingly available.
Some Glock 19 holsters can be adapted with variable fit quality, though dedicated Delta molds provide optimal retention and protection.
Weight Distribution During Extended Carry
The Gen 1's lighter 19-20 ounce weight distributes easily across quality gun belts. The polymer construction and slim profile make it viable for all-day concealed carry without excessive fatigue.
The Gen 2's 21.6-ounce weight remains well within comfortable carry ranges for most users. The improved grip texture and ergonomics may actually reduce perceived carry discomfort by enabling more confident, secure grip acquisition when needed.
Seasonal Carry Considerations
Winter carry in heavier clothing conceals both generations easily. Neither pistol's dimensions or weights pose challenges under jackets or multiple layers.
Summer carry with minimal clothing slightly favors the Gen 1's lighter weight and smoother texture. Tank tops, athletic wear, and direct skin contact make the Gen 1 more comfortable. The Gen 2's aggressive texture can abrade skin or clothing during summer carry, though this trades off against superior control when actually shooting.
How Does Magazine Capacity and Firepower Compare?
Both Arex Delta generations provide functionally identical firepower through shared magazine compatibility, with standard 15-round and 17-round options meeting or exceeding typical defensive requirements.
The Gen 2's flared magazine well and additional 19-round capacity options (in X/L variants) provide reload speed and capacity advantages for duty or competition contexts.
Standard vs Extended Magazine Options
The Gen 1 typically ships with 15-round and 17-round magazines providing 15+1 or 17+1 capacity. These magazines feed reliably through the platform's proven feed geometry.
The Gen 2 maintains 15 and 17-round magazine options while adding 19-round capacity in X and L variants. The broader range accommodates users wanting maximum capacity for home defense or competition while maintaining compact 15-round mags for concealed carry.
Magazine availability and pricing remain reasonable though not as ubiquitous as Glock alternatives. Factory Arex magazines cost more than Glock equivalents but less than many European imports.
Reload Speed Factors
The Gen 1's minimal magazine well flare requires more precision during reload insertions, particularly under stress or speed. The magazine release functions adequately though some users report requiring firmer presses than preferred.
The Gen 2's pronounced flared magazine well significantly improves reload speed and reliability. The funnel effect guides magazines during insertions, reducing fumbles. However, Pew Pew Tactical notes the deeply recessed ambidextrous magazine release requires deliberate pressing with full magazines, potentially slowing reloads until users adapt technique.
Gun Mag Warehouse testing confirms the Gen 2 supports fast reloads once shooters accommodate the magazine release depth, with sub-8-second El Presidente times readily achievable.
Real-World Capacity Needs by Use Case
For everyday concealed carry, both generations' 15+1 capacity vastly exceeds statistical defensive shooting requirements. The 15-round capacity provides substantial safety margin beyond likely needs.
For duty and home defense, 17-round magazines (both generations) or 19-round mags (Gen 2 X/L) provide professional-grade capacity without requiring extended magazines that protrude beyond grip length.
For competition, the Gen 2's 17 and 19-round options fit Production and Carry Optics divisions without capacity disadvantages compared to mainstream competitors.
Which Generation Offers Superior Modularity and Customization?
The Gen 2 dominates modularity through factory optics-ready variants, more refined ambidextrous controls, and improved ergonomic adjustability, while the Gen 1 provides basic backstrap interchangeability and accessory rail functionality without modern conveniences. The critical modularity advantage lies in the Gen 2's optics compatibility eliminating expensive slide milling requirements.
Optics Mounting Options
The Gen 1 requires slide milling services to add red dot optics, costing $100-200 plus shipping and potential 2-4 week turnaround. This expense and hassle deters many Gen 1 owners from adding optics despite the accuracy and speed advantages dots provide.
The Gen 2 optics-ready variants include Arex Optics Ready mounting systems with polymer plates fitting common micro red dot footprints. This allows immediate optics installation saving milling costs.
Gun University notes the polymer plates rather than aluminum as a minor concern, though testing shows them reliable. Aftermarket metal plates may eventually become available for shooters wanting ultimate durability.
The optics-ready capability represents the Gen 2's single most significant advantage for modern defensive and competitive shooters.
Aftermarket Support Ecosystem
Both generations share similarly developing aftermarket ecosystems. The Delta platform hasn't achieved Glock or M&P aftermarket depth, meaning fewer trigger upgrades, custom barrels, and specialty parts exist.
The Gen 2's growing market presence suggests stronger future aftermarket development as more shooters adopt the platform. Current ecosystem adequacy depends on user expectations—basic accessories and holsters exist, but custom builds requiring extensive parts selection remain limited.
Parts Interchangeability
The critical interchangeability discovery: Gen 2 frames accept Gen 1 slides but not vice versa. AR15.com users confirm Gen 1 owners can upgrade to Gen 2 frames while retaining existing slides, gaining improved ergonomics and controls without purchasing complete new pistols. However, this doesn't add optics capability to Gen 1 slides without separate milling.
Magazines interchange fully between generations. The SDA striker systems share most internal components with only minor striker leg thickness differences.
Total Cost of Customization Comparison
Gen 1 customization typically requires:
- Night sights: $75-100
- Slide milling for optics: $100-200
- Potential frame upgrade to Gen 2: $150-200
- Total: $325-500
Gen 2 customization typically requires:
- Night sights (if desired): $75-100
- Potential metal optics plate upgrade: $30-50 (if available)
- Total: $75-150
The Gen 2's lower customization requirements stem from factory features that would require aftermarket work on Gen 1 pistols.
Does the Gen 1 or Gen 2 Deliver Better Reliability and Durability?
Both Arex Delta generations demonstrate solid reliability through hundreds to thousands of rounds with minimal malfunctions, sharing nearly identical internal mechanisms and carbon steel slide/barrel construction rated for 9mm NATO pressures.
The Gen 2's refined frame and controls address minor Gen 1 issues while maintaining the proven core mechanics.
Round Count Longevity Expectations
The Gen 1 shows reliable performance through several hundred rounds in American Rifleman testing with no malfunctions reported. Owner reports on AR15.com indicate multi-hundred-round reliability with proper ammunition and maintenance.
The Gen 2 demonstrates excellent reliability through structured testing. Pew Pew Tactical's 450-round test using mixed FMJ and JHP ammunition recorded zero malfunctions.
Gun University testing similarly shows no failures with varied loads. AR15.com users report 1,100+ rounds through Gen 2 pistols maintaining reliability equivalent to their Gen 1 experiences.
One Reddit user reported quality issues around 600 rounds with a specific Gen 2 M, though other community members suggest this represents a quality control outlier rather than systemic design problems. The overwhelming majority of Gen 2 users report reliable function.
Environmental Tolerance
Both generations use carbon steel slides and barrels with nitride finish providing corrosion resistance and durability. The Reddit information post confirms Gen 2 is rated for 9mm NATO/+P ammunition, indicating robust construction tolerating high-pressure defensive loads.
Neither generation shows widespread environmental failure patterns. The polymer frames and weather-resistant finishes handle typical carry conditions including humidity, temperature variations, and moderate exposure.
Maintenance Requirements Comparison
Both generations follow standard striker-fired maintenance schedules. Recoil spring replacement every 5,000-8,000 rounds maintains cycling reliability. Magazine springs require inspection and potential replacement every 10,000-15,000 rounds depending on use intensity.
The Gen 2's improved controls may require less user adjustment and adaptation compared to Gen 1's more basic design, potentially reducing troubleshooting needs during break-in periods.
Reddit discussions in 2025 raise concerns about parts availability and customer service turnaround times for warranty work, suggesting potential long-term support challenges affecting both generations if Arex's American distribution faces difficulties.
How Does Practical Accuracy Compare at Defensive Distances?
Both Arex Delta generations deliver adequate defensive accuracy through shared barrel length, similar sight systems, and identical SDA trigger mechanisms, with the Gen 2 gaining substantial practical accuracy advantages through optics-ready capability extending precision at speed and in varied lighting.
The fundamental mechanical accuracy potential remains equivalent between generations.
Barrel Length Impact
Both generations use 4.0-inch barrels providing similar velocity and accuracy potential. The barrel length sits in the sweet spot for compact defensive pistols—long enough for reasonable sight radius and velocity while short enough for concealment.
The shared barrel design means neither generation holds inherent mechanical accuracy advantages over the other when using iron sights.
Sighting Systems Comparison
The Gen 1's three-dot steel sights provide traditional defensive sight picture. They function adequately for close-range defensive work though lack enhancement features like tritium night sight inserts or fiber optics found on premium competitors.
The Gen 2 maintains similar steel sights with white dot front, providing equivalent iron sight performance. The critical difference is optics-ready variants allowing red dot mounting. Micro red dots dramatically improve practical accuracy, especially at speed, in low light, and for shooters with aging eyes or vision challenges.
Accuracy at Common Defensive Distances
At 3-7 yards: Both generations exceed accuracy requirements for center-mass hits. Pew Pew Tactical's Gen 2 testing averaged approximately 2-inch five-shot groups at 7 yards, which they describe as adequate and improving with practice. Gen 1 accuracy at similar distances performs comparably based on user reports.
At 15 yards: Both pistols maintain practical defensive accuracy. The stageable SDA trigger enables precise shot placement once shooters master the staging technique. Gen 2 shooters using optics see improved hit percentages compared to iron-sight-only configurations.
At 25 yards: Gun University describes Gen 2 accuracy as "very capable at defensive distances and beyond, especially with optics." The combination of stable platform and red dot sights extends practical accuracy significantly. Gen 1 pistols remain adequate at this range with iron sights though require more shooter skill.
Competition-Relevant Precision
Gun Mag Warehouse testing demonstrates Gen 2 pistols support sub-8-second El Presidente drills easily, with good shooters achieving 6-7 seconds. This indicates sufficient practical accuracy for club-level competition work.
The Gen 1's lack of optics capability limits competitive potential compared to Gen 2 optics-ready variants increasingly expected in modern practical shooting divisions.
What's the Real Value Proposition and Total Ownership Cost?
The Gen 2 delivers superior value despite slightly higher initial pricing by including features requiring $200-300 in aftermarket modifications for Gen 1 pistols, particularly optics readiness and refined ambidextrous controls.
Total five-year ownership costs converge within $100-200 between generations when accounting for ammunition, magazines, and accessories.
Initial Purchase Cost vs Features Received
The Gen 1 costs $350-450 on the used market, appealing to budget-conscious buyers prioritizing basic defensive functionality. The lower entry price makes it accessible though leaves features on the table.
The Gen 2 typically retails $380-450 for standard models with optics-ready variants around $400-450. Reviews consistently describe this pricing as excellent value, with Warrior Poet Society calling it "possibly the best optic-ready pistol under $450" when factoring features and performance.
The Gen 2's $30-50 premium over Gen 1 pricing (when comparing new Gen 2 to used Gen 1) represents exceptional value given the optics capability, improved controls, and enhanced ergonomics that would cost significantly more as aftermarket additions.
Resale Value Patterns
Both generations face limited resale markets compared to Glock or M&P platforms due to lower brand recognition. Expect resale values of 60-70% of original purchase price for both generations.
The Gen 1's older design may see resale values compress toward $250-300 as Gen 2 availability increases. Gen 2 pistols should maintain stronger resale values as the current-generation offering.
5-Year Total Cost of Ownership
Gen 1 5-Year Breakdown:
- Firearm (used): $375
- Slide milling for optics: $150
- Magazines (3 additional): $90
- Holsters (IWB, OWB): $150
- Night sights: $100
- Optic: $250
- Weapon light: $100
- Ammunition (3,000 rounds): $900
- Maintenance: $75
- Total: $2,190
Gen 2 5-Year Breakdown:
- Firearm (OR): $425
- Magazines (3 additional): $90
- Holsters (IWB, OWB): $150
- Night sights: $100
- Optic: $250
- Weapon light: $100
- Ammunition (3,000 rounds): $900
- Maintenance: $75
- Total: $2,090
The Gen 2 actually costs approximately $100 less over five years despite higher initial purchase price due to eliminating slide milling expenses. Ammunition costs dominate long-term expenses for both generations.
Which Arex Delta Generation Works Best for Your Specific Use Case?
Your choice between Gen 1 and Gen 2 depends primarily on whether you value modern features like optics readiness and ambidextrous controls (favoring Gen 2) or prioritize absolute lowest initial cost accepting you'll lack contemporary conveniences (favoring Gen 1 used market purchases). For most modern defensive shooters, the Gen 2's feature set justifies its modest premium.
Optimal Use Cases for Gen 1
Primary Use: Budget-conscious concealed carry for shooters confident with iron sights and requiring basic defensive reliability without modern enhancements.
Shooter Profile: Right-handed shooters with average hand sizes who've trained extensively with iron sights and don't plan running red dot optics. Experienced shooters who can exploit a good trigger without requiring perfect ergonomics.
Lifestyle Fit: Tight budgets where every dollar matters. Carriers in climates where aggressive texture would irritate during summer carry. Users prioritizing simplicity over features.
Training Investment: Moderate practice volumes (1,000-2,000 rounds annually) focused on fundamental iron sight skills. Shooters willing to invest dry fire time smoothing initial trigger grittiness.
Optimal Use Cases for Gen 2
Primary Use: Modern defensive carry, duty applications, and competition shooting where optics compatibility and ambidextrous controls provide tactical advantages.
Shooter Profile: Left-handed shooters benefiting from bilateral controls. Shooters wanting red dot capability without slide milling expenses. Users with varying hand sizes appreciating refined grip customization.
Lifestyle Fit: Moderate budgets accepting slight premium for substantial feature improvements. Shooters prioritizing contemporary capabilities matching mainstream competitors. Users wanting ready-to-go pistols requiring minimal modification.
Training Investment: High practice volumes (2,000-4,000 rounds annually) where superior ergonomics reduce fatigue and improve performance. Competitive shooters requiring optics and fast reloads.
Head-to-Head Scenarios
If you can only own one handgun: Choose Gen 2 for its versatility, modern features, and lower long-term cost when accounting for optics capability. The Gen 2 remains relevant longer as defensive shooting continues embracing red dot sights.
For backup/secondary role: Choose Gen 1 for absolute lowest cost in a secondary pistol role where features matter less. Or choose Gen 2 if primary and backup pistols sharing magazines and similar controls streamlines training.
If upgrading from Glock 19 or M&P: Choose Gen 2 to maintain feature parity with your previous pistol while saving $100-200. The optics-ready capability and ambidextrous controls match or exceed what you're accustomed to.
What Do Actual Owners Report About Long-Term Experience?
Real-world feedback reveals both Delta generations earn consistent praise for reliability, value, and shootability while facing criticism for parts availability concerns, deeply recessed magazine releases, and developing aftermarket support. The Gen 2 receives stronger overall owner enthusiasm due to its refined features addressing most Gen 1 limitations.
Common Praises by User Segment
Gen 2 - Budget-Conscious Shooters: Reddit and AR15.com users consistently highlight exceptional value, with many calling it a "serious gun at low price" that competes well with Glock 19 for considerably less money. The optics-ready capability particularly impresses users avoiding $100-200 milling costs.
Gen 2 - Competitive Shooters: Warrior Poet Society and Gun Mag Warehouse reviewers emphasize good ergonomics, controllable recoil, and easy shooting especially with mounted dots. The ability to achieve sub-8-second El Presidente drills demonstrates adequate practical accuracy for club-level competition.
Gen 2 - High-Volume Trainers: Multiple sources report several hundred to 1,100+ rounds with no failures, describing the Gen 2 as trustworthy for concealed carry once personally vetted. The stageable trigger and good sights enable confidence-building accuracy during training.
Gen 1 - Value Seekers: Early adopters appreciate the Gen 1's solid reliability and basic competence at budget pricing. Users accepting its limitations value it as a working defensive tool without frills.
Common Complaints by User Segment
Gen 2 - Magazine Release Issues: Pew Pew Tactical and Gun University both note the deeply recessed ambidextrous magazine release requires firm pressing, especially with full magazines. Some users find this slows reloads until technique adapts, though others appreciate reduced accidental drop risk.
Gen 2 - Polymer Optics Plates: Gun University and Reddit users express concern about long-term polymer plate durability versus aluminum or steel alternatives. While no widespread failures emerge in testing, the perception of weakness exists. Aftermarket metal plates may address this if they become available.
Both Generations - Parts Support Concerns: Reddit discussions in 2025 raise concerns about importation consistency and parts availability. Some users report warranty turnaround delays, creating uncertainty about long-term support if Arex's American distribution faces challenges. This affects both generations equally.
Gen 1 - Lack of Modern Features: Owners recognize the Gen 1's limitations in optics capability and ambidextrous controls compared to contemporary competitors. Many Gen 1 owners on AR15.com express interest in upgrading to Gen 2 frames while keeping Gen 1 slides.
How Do the Holster and Accessory Ecosystems Compare?
Both Arex Delta generations benefit from growing holster availability as the platform gains American market recognition, with identical holster compatibility between generations for iron-sight configurations though Gen 2 optics-ready variants require specialized cuts. The descriptions below apply to both generations.
Cloak Tuck 3.5 IWB Holster
The Cloak Tuck 3.5 IWB holster accommodates both the Arex Delta Gen 2 through hybrid design featuring rigid shells with comfortable backing material for inside-the-waistband concealed carry.
OWB Paddle Holster
OWB paddle holsters offer tool-free attachment and removal for the Delta gen 2 using paddle-shaped anchors that slip inside waistbands. These holsters excel for range days, training courses, or situations requiring quick holster removal without belt manipulation for Gen 2 pistols.
Magazine and Accessory Costs
Magazine aftermarket remains limited for both generations—Arex OEM magazines cost more than Glock equivalents but remain reasonably priced at approximately $30-40 each. Both generations share magazine compatibility, simplifying parts inventory for multi-gun owners.
Optics compatibility costs differ significantly: Gen 1 requires $100-200 slide milling while Gen 2 includes mounting plates. Red dot optics themselves run $200-400 regardless of which generation they mount on, making the Gen 2's included mounting system a substantial value.
Weapon lights mount identically via Picatinny rails on both generations. Popular compact lights like Streamlight TLR-7 cost $100-150 fitting either generation equally.
Complete System Cost
Gen 1 Complete System:
- Firearm (used): $375
- Slide milling: $150
- Red dot: $300
- Weapon light: $125
- Three spare magazines: $105
- IWB holster: $75
- OWB holster: $65
- Magazine pouches: $50
- Gun belt: $100
- 500 rounds defensive ammo: $400
- 2,000 rounds training ammo: $600
- Total: $2,345
Gen 2 Complete System:
- Firearm (OR): $425
- Red dot: $300
- Weapon light: $125
- Three spare magazines: $105
- IWB holster: $75
- OWB holster: $65
- Magazine pouches: $50
- Gun belt: $100
- 500 rounds defensive ammo: $400
- 2,000 rounds training ammo: $600
- Total: $2,245
The Gen 2 complete system costs approximately $100 less despite higher initial firearm price, primarily through eliminating slide milling expenses.
Final Verdict Matrix
| Use Case | Winner | Why | Confidence Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| First-Time CCW | Gen 2 | Modern features including optics readiness and ambidextrous controls prepare new shooters for contemporary defensive standards | High |
| Competition USPSA Production | Gen 2 | Optics-ready capability and flared magazine well provide competitive advantages; sub-8-second El Pres times achievable | High |
| Duty/Professional | Gen 2 | Fully ambidextrous controls and optics capability meet contemporary duty standards; improved ergonomics aid extended carry | Medium |
| Backup Gun | Gen 1 | Lower used market pricing suits secondary role where features matter less; lighter weight reduces backup carry fatigue | Medium |
| Budget Priority | Gen 1 | Used market Gen 1 pistols offer lowest entry cost for basic defensive reliability without modern enhancements | High |
| Left-Handed Shooter | Gen 2 | Bilateral slide stops and ambidextrous magazine release dramatically improve usability versus Gen 1's limited ambi features | High |
| Optics Priority | Gen 2 | Factory optics-ready system eliminates $100-200 milling cost and weeks of downtime; polymer plates proven reliable in testing | High |
| Long-Term Value | Gen 2 | Lower total ownership cost despite higher initial price; features remain relevant as defensive shooting standards evolve | High |
The decision matrix reveals the Gen 2 wins most contemporary use cases through its refined features and lower long-term costs.
The Gen 1 remains viable for budget-constrained buyers and backup roles where basic reliability matters more than modern conveniences. For the majority of defensive shooters, the Gen 2's modest premium delivers substantial value through optics capability, ambidextrous controls, and improved ergonomics that would cost significantly more as aftermarket additions to Gen 1 pistols.