http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8C5Y4r5FDk
Reader DanRRZ sent this in with the following comment: “I’m not a Glock guy to begin with but I don’t get this in .380. Its marginally bigger that the Shield in a less potent defensive caliber.” I can’t say I disagree. You?
Not overwhelmed.
It’s bigger and heavier than my TCP .380.
Which should make it easier to control… It’s a niche gun for those who don’t want to wrestle a full blown nine in a CCW situation.
I have a Walther PPK/S and the felt recoil is a significant problem for newer shooters when compared to most of my mid or full sized 9mm handguns. An easily manageable pocket .380 would be a great option to have around.
Well someone had to show up and present a strawman defensive argument. I’m just glad it was you pwrserge
That was a statement, not a strawman argument. The Glock 42 should be more controllable than an LCP or Bodyguard. It still sucks, but it’ll be more controllable than those mouse guns.
I’ve gotta say, I’m underwhelmed.
Please explain how a preference for a low recoil CCW weapon is a straw man… I’m sure that a smaller bullet that hits is far preferable to a bigger bullet that misses. Shooting the Bull already proved that there are plenty of adequate loadings in .380, 9mm would be better, but not if you can’t control it. Not everybody has 200lbs of muscle and Popeye forearms to deal with a pocket 9mm or .45
Small guns are less reliable then larger guns, everything else being equal.
Everything with these semi-autos is a trade off between spring strength and slide mass. It’s like a cam shaft in the engine. These factors control how fast the gun operates and, in turn, directly relates to the reliability, durability, tolerance to dirt, and tolerance to wide variations in ammo strength. A small slide means a heavy spring has less time to do the same work as a large slide and a weaker spring. Less time to operate means more things to wrong as the tolerances for successful operation are much tighter.
I simply do not trust those super tiny 380s. They are just too small and I haven’t seen a single one from any manufacturer, even Sig or Ruger, that is as reliable and durable as other high quality ‘self defense’ guns that are larger.
So I understand WHY Glock made the 42 that large. They are trading size for reliability. I have no doubt that that Glock will be more reliable and more durable then the rest of the pocket 380s out on the market… I am not going to be buying it. I want a 9mm, dammit.
What it may be good for, however, is for people that want a light recoil gun in a small package. If people don’t want a pocket-able 9mm because the recoil sucks to much for them then I’d much rather see them get a bigger gun that is easier to shoot. However if they demand on a smaller gun because they won’t carry a large gun, then this Glock 42 is probably the one to get. Those tiny 380s are not any easier to shoot then a small 9mm. And, besides, a 380 in the pocket is a hell of a lot superior to a 9mm you left at home.
By that reasoning, the Glock 26 is unreliable since it is smaller than it should be for the 9×19 round. The 42 is nearly the same size!
Like the LC380… Why? WHY?!?
With a lower capacity, too,
Well, looks like a Glock brand Glock… Ugly. I don’t understand why a .380 version would have to be this big.
Me thinks Glock is putting this out in .380 so they can sell a bunch then release the 9mm version so all those fanboys will have to buy that one too. I think if they released the 9mm version at the same time they would not be selling any in .380!
That was my first thought. There’s going to be a 9 version next year.
Jeff nailed it. IMO
Yep. That was my first thought too.
It says “glock” on the side, and that’s all the fanboys care about.
Still wouldn’t hold candle to the 1911 guys…
It could be a thrown together hunk of crap assembled by unskilled, sweatshop labor in some squat hole in Philippines *Rock Island Armory* and dudes will still tout it’s the best gun ever made simply because it’s a 1911.
My RIA has *never* had a problem apart from a squib round (which, obviously, isn’t the guns fault).
The history of the 1911 speaks for itself.
Yes it does. A great gun 60 years ago. Low capacity, shoots a large slow round and average users have trouble with its recoil. Was replaced by the US military 30 years ago. Known to be high maintenance. Great for collectors and customer gun makers that want to milk their customers.
If a used Glock 17 and the nicest Kimber was sitting on a table and I could take one free the Kimber would still be sitting there.
My guns are tools, and I like the be useful and reliable.
I resemble that remark, good sir. My RIA is more accurate than a benchrest rifle, more reliable than the sunrise, and more attractive than several supermodels covered in BBQ sauce.
There haze been dozens of makers of 1911s vanish because of all kinds of reasons. There is no doubt the Glock design will sooner or later equal the reputation the 1911 has but remember that the 1911 is not patented…Glock design is….someday that patent will run out! Now THAT will be interesting!
Glock will not sell a lot of these….no matter as the demand for the other Glock Models far exceeds their capacity to make them. This will sell, but to a limited market…..now…let them come up with a double stack micro .380 and they will attain legend….wait.
Somebody already makes an improved clone. It’s called the XD series and comes in three flavors.
From what I understand RIA are all made on Colt machines, they feature a full length guide (Remington doesn’t) and come with a lifetime warranty. I’m picking mine up next week. I’m upgrading the sights.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, but the guns they create, are not.
Thank you for proving my point, gentlemen.
Wrong. As an official Glock fanboy, glock is missing the boat. I have zero desire to own one.
Glock “fan boys” exist because Glock manufactures a superior gun, by 3 country miles. No other company’s product comes close. That is why all LEOs in the world use Glock.
I dont get this singlestack 9mm trend. If you want something compact get a Ruger LCP, Makarov; PPK etc. If you want something subcompact get a CZ, G19, XDM etc.
Why take the worst aspects of the two into one, small capacity being the most important one. Protip if you want a thinner gun is to get/make thinner grips and rounding out the backstrap (with a file or a machinist friend).
MAC on The Bang Switch compared the specs with some other .380 pocket pistols and even a Khar 9mm and those were smaller and lighter than this thing.
Definitely not loving it.
“Potency” and “handguns” are words nominally not in the same sentence, and for good reason.Science and real life are in stunning agreement-pistols are a gamble, no matter what number is engraved on the slide.
Since we now have established that .380 and .45 ACP and all other handgun rounds not labelled “Magnum” are equally weak, we can now focus on what does matter-shot placement.
And here we come to the G42’s advantage.A handgun which is painful to shoot will soon find it’s way into The Land Before Time-AKA, the Back Of The Safe.A 9mm full size gun can get tiring to shoot when it’s loaded with +P and +p+ ammo, stuff marginally less likely to suck when the Ultimate S##t Sandwich has your name on it.
A compact the size of a G42 loaded as such would be taxing to shoot even for the pros, and unrepentantly punishing for an ordinary Joe with kids to feed and other things to do then “man up” at 1000 rounds a session at the range.
For people who shoot to build proficiency, a low recoiling gun is vital.And this .380 will be easy enough to shoot to encourage that kind of practice.Which, in my estimation, will win fights a lot more often then sticking an overpowered barrel onto a tiny, hard to shoot frame so as to impress the YouTube jockeys.
Which full size 9mm platforms are tiring to shoot? I’ve put 250 rds of +p loads through both my Glock 26 and HK P7 to verify reliability, in a single range session. Aside from the P7 getting very hot, there was nothing uncomfortable about that range trip.
.380 is more expensive, and often harder to find than 9mm, so from an economic standpoint, it is easier to practice with a 9mm.
I really like my 238, it is controllable, tiny, and has useable sights. That’s what I’d think most people would want in a .380. I don’t shoot it much anymore, as ammo cost is comparable to .45, a caliber I carry much more often.
I have a feeling that I’m not the only one thinking that Glock has missed the mark with this. There are readily available options that bests the G42 in just about every category. Aside from it being a Glock, I don’t see anything that sets it apart, let alone above many of the small pistols on the market.
Respectfully, you haven’t established that. A 180 grain .40 cal JHP at 1000 FPS hits a whole lots harder than a .355 cal 90 grain JHP at 900 FPS. That’s just a ballistic fact. Shot placement and caliber both matter, and I’d rather not be stuck with a mouse gun in a fight.
Handguns are for fighting your way to rifles and shotguns, but I’d rather fight with a bigger gun. Mouse guns are for concealability, and are better than carrying nothing.
Add to that good shot placement is not indpendent of caliber. More mass means a larger lethal zone that defines good shot placement.
How do you build proficiency with a caliber that is hard to find AND expensive? I like the points you’ve raised but I’m really turned off to .380ACP and it will stay that way until it’s as available as 9mm or 40s&w.
It’s not difficult to find and not all that pricey here in north Texas.
I find plenty on the shelf in many flavors with no purchase limit in both people poppers and paper poppers.
Hornady Critical Defense was $19 for 25 rounds with other brands of FMJ in the $20 range for 50 count boxes. There was more of it in stock than 9mm.
What you are really saying then is the Glock 26 is a bad gun because it’s too small for 9×19 and people should carry a Glock 17 instead.
It’ll sell because it says Glock on it, but I don’t really see the point. It’s barely smaller than my Shield and chambered in a weaker caliber. They should’ve gone smaller and made a true pocket pistol.
Price range please.
It’s a Glock, fachrisake. Just shut up and buy it.
It’s this type of thought process that hinders innovation… Glock can suck eggs as far as I’m concerned. Show at least an interest in making forward progress, and they’ll have my (and many other shooters) attention. For now? No thanks.
They did show a lot of forward progression…,que music. “It was 1980 somethin in the world I grew up in”
You all can laugh at me and whine it is not the perfect pocket Gun, but I like it. I also think it is going to be a great Gun for women and novice shooters just starting out.
I will not make fun of you, but I think full size 9mm with interchangeable grips make a better choice for new shooters.
Well, the solved the GCA ’68 import point issue just as I thought they would: Squirt the cheez-whiz into molds here in the US.
Hey, they’re making big $$$, and they’ve made some from you and I as well.
“It’s built because you guys wanted it.”
hmmm.
I never asked for this.
http://tinyurl.com/3svd49l
+1
Did anybody ask for a .380? I mean, anybody? I love my Glocks, but this company stopped innovating loooong time ago. And when they finally decide to introduce a new pistol, it’s not the one people have been asking for. They really couldn’t make this in 9 mm? The new Remington pistol is just a hair larger, in 9 mm and with larger capacity. Why would people buy this Glock over the Remmy?
A lot of old, infirm, and recoil-sensitive people have.
Why would they innovate when they have “Perfection?”
Yeah, that ‘perfection’ crap gets on my nerves. I like the reliability and all, but why does the gun have to look so damn cheap? I really like the size of a G19 or a G23, since the grip length is exactly right for me, but those guns ain’t perfect. My CZ 75 PCR is probably just as reliable but it looks and feels much better.
A lot of companies end up believing their own spin, to their ultimate detriment.
As a dealer, do you think Glock some owners have moved to other brands because they had to buy a Shield or XDs?
I don’t sell that many new guns. I’m a gunsmith, and I like to keep it that way. Retailing new guns is a whole ‘nuther set of issues to deal with, and I’d rather stick with what I know better: older guns.
Selling the “new hotness” has “issues,” as one can see from the comments here on TTAG about newly announced guns.
Seems pretty pointless. One less round than a Kahr P9 and in a substantially less effective cartridge.
So, any bets that the GLOCK 43 will be the same frame in 9mm?
THAT I might purchase. A Glock Nano. I really like my Beretta but a Glock version would be nice.
I’d be interested myself. The precedence is there already. Look at the G26 & 27, G29 & 30, etc, etc. Other companies employ this too; like the XDs 9 and 45 or, as already mentioned, with the LC9 & LC380. If that ends up being the case, I would wonder why they didn’t start with the 9mm.
It appears as if they skipped over numbers 40 and 41. I think it’s possible that the 40 will be the same thing in 9mm, and the 41 will be in 40. The numbering would then parallel their subcompact line.
Notice how they “soft focused” the pistol when he swept the camera operator ?
Chevy/Ford/Dodge…..I drive Fords now….long ago I drove Chevy’s. If you don’t want one…there will be others who will like this Glock and buy it. I have a 9mm Keltec PF9 with rough barrel and all and it hurts my fingers to break down for cleaning..but it works and I enjoy shooting the Keltec PF9. This Keltec cycles anything I feed it.
I have CZ 75B’s and Berreta 92’s and 96’s (And more than a few Glock’s), that means more than one of each! I simply despise the 1911’s of any flavor but that distain doesn’t take anything away from any 1911. You gotta like what you shoot and practice til you’re good and continue to practice til you get better…that’s all that matters. Don’t practice with that firearm then all you have is a paper weight no matter what firearm you have.
This 1911 fanboy gives you a +100
Wow, they need a new PR guy. This video looks like he was a hostage in Pakistan.
It puts the lotion on its skin, or else it gets the hose again!
Do I hear a tiny dog barking at the bottom of a well?
Nah… well, maybe…
“Would you muzzle me? I’d muzzle me…”
I thought it wasn’t done very well at all.
It showed the side view twice when he was presenting it for a frontal view.
You know there were cameras on several angles while it was being videoed.
Whoever edited the video did a poor job of doing so, the better parts were left on the cutting room floor.
Not very interested in it, I will stick to my ruger LCP for a .380. I am a fan of Glocks, own three of them, and would buy this if it was in 9mm. This single stack gives me hope that a similar one in 9mm is coming. The Glock 42 is not something I will buy.
Glock still only makes three handguns worth having. The model 17, 18, 19. The 42 may be their biggest disappointment/failure yet.
I’d say you’d have many a Glock 22 owner that would disagree…I have two Glock 22’s and use these more than any other of the Glock’s I have. Hell…more than any of the handguns I own. Too damned cold to get outside and practice but 500 to 600 rounds per week is a good average for my Glock 22’s.
Personal likes and dislikes.
If a 17 and 19 is worth while, and a 22 is worthwhile, surely the 23 is as well (though I personally own only the 22 off that list).
I will put in a word for the G20 as well; fifteen rounds of 10 mm ought to please any hostile crowd and one of them does night stand duty (complete with night sights and flashlight), should I ever decide, for some reason, to forego the shotgun.
I tend to think Glock jumped the shark with those micros, especially the G29, that are still a square cornered brick (thus harder to conceal), and thick as a brick as well, but obviously there are legions of people who will disagree with me. (The reason I went out of my way to pick on the G29 is that with that short a barrel, it might as well be a .40. Instead you get to spend more money on a big fireball muzzle blast.)
Never had the opportunity to run a Glock 20. The Glock 21 I have is enough beef to handle and at times I question why I have that 21…rarely run it. If I run a 100 rounds a month on that 21 I’m doing good.
I did some swapping for one of the 22’s I own….the trading involved a Springfield 1911 “Loaded” version…came standard with as much bells and whistles that you’d find on custom 1911’s. Handled well…smooth….but it just didn’t tickle my fancy and as noted…I simply do not care for 1911’s. It’s just a matter of shooting habits/style and the Glock’s simply rock for me.
To be more honest…it was a pain in the ace to break down that 1911 with guide rod and all….you know how easy a Glock is to breaked down and clean and change parts out if needed. Christ…..the barrel on a Glock can be out and cleaned and back up running before I’d get that 1911 apart to clean the barrel! I’m guessing it has to do some with the fact I run lead bullets and with lead in Glock barrels…I do not push the round numbers without cleaning the barrel/s after each 100 rounds….I can get that done in short order. With the cost of factory ammo….I cast and reload a box of 40’s for around $4.00….$3.50 for 9mm.s…gotta love it!
Guess I’m getting too practical maybe?
If they are manufacturing this entirely in the US, any chance that they are on purpose releasing a less popular model before putting out a mass market 9 mm? As popular as a single stack 9 mm from Glock would be, if there are manufacturing problems a 9mm recall would be a disaster.
The video said tested with all loads including the duty load. Is that a hint that 9mm may be the g40 or g41. Because what department is using 380.
The only thing I can think of are approved .380 loads for use in back up guns used on duty. The agency a family member works for only allows one load, and only a S&W as an approved .380 for duty carry.
I still want a Glock in .454 Casull.
Glock’s not going to make anything in those oddball calibers.
I know that. Sarcasm and ‘Oh holy shit’ were my objectives. Still though, Glocks only ‘Hand Cannon’ round is 10mm. Some of us want Glock to go bigger.
0:46 Who duty-loads a .380?
I’m serious, who?
LAPD and LASO as departmentally – approved backup guns – in the if Ruger LCPs and Bodyguards .380 with the external safety delete option. Hey, you asked.
Oops. Meant to say in their LCPs and BG .380s.
Wake me when they start selling the G29S, until then, I’m happy with my Shield.
You know… the Glock 42 probably isn’t going to be a bad gun. But I still don’t see how it’s worth all the hoop-la.
I agree…why would I wan’t something LARGER than a shield, with a worse trigger and in a “less powerful” caliber?
I would get the following single stack 9MM’s before the Glock 42
Remington R51
M&P Shield
LC9
XDS
The only hope this gun has of “catching on” would be if they can get some PD’s to list this as the only “approved” off duty weapons. Some PD’s , like the NYPD will list several guns specifically that may be carried by an Officer while off duty.
Let’s compare the Nano to the G42:
Height: The Nano is shorter
Length: The Nano is shorter
Width: The Nano is thinner
Weight: The Glock is lighter
Caliber: 9mm is more powerful
Tell me why you would buy this gun other than it’s a Glock?
This is the 2008 gun of the year!
Maybe within the next few years Glock will hear about the newfangled single stack 9s and start making some of those.
Glock doesn’t much care what the “other guys” are doing. “We are Glock, gun buyers want .380’s, here is our gun in that caliber”. And, at decision time while leaning against the gun shop glass counter, many of these will be chosen. In no instance will it be a horrible decision.
Glock grip angle, glock trigger, slim. Those are the pros, if you happen to like glocks. The list of cons is long and obvious.
I might get it because I do like the glock grip angle and trigger and am looking for a slimmer gun, but why oh why couldn’t they make this a 9mm?
I was expecting the individual in the video to have a bit more “camera presence” and public speaking ability. While he didn’t stumble on his words, it sure wasn’t a very great video.
JM Browning never took his orders from Marketing, sheep dogs do not take orders from sheep, apparently a lesson not taught at Glock Central Command
I’m glad glock came out with this. It tells me that my m&p shield really is a great gun.
I’ve got a G19, G23, and G27. I’d consider looking at this if it was 9-mm.
As it is… it’s bigger than the one .380 I own… a Colt Pony Pocketlite… with the same capacity. No thanks.
Just a few millimeters or so wider and I bet it could be a double stack mag. In which case I might actually be interested.
Glock isn’t known for their small-ness. From what I’ve seen, I’d recommend this to a Glock guy who needs a smaller gun. This would also probably be good for people who have recoil problems. For someone proficient with the Glock system, this’ll probably sell great. Plus if you want a newbie to carry, they’ll go to the smaller guns but they won’t want to practice with small mouse guns due to recoil. Big enough for recoil to be non existent while small enough for comfy carry. We can expect a 9mm, and a .40 next.
I’m disappointed, but might still get one. I wish it was either
A: Smaller
B: Had more capacity
C: Was in 9mm
That said, it might still be worth it for me. I like Glock triggers and grips, and the sights look better out of the box than the competition (and the options for replacement sights are always good for a Glock). It should be reliable and durable, and might also be a good option for my wife at times. The price doesn’t look bad and I’ve been thinking of consolidating all my carry options onto one platform.
Basically, I think it’s less than it could have been, but have hope it will be a reliable, accurate pocket pistol on a platform I like.
+1 Without doubt, the lack of a “tiny niney” has cost Glock market share as Shield and XDs buyers have sold their Glocks in pursuit of platform standardization. There’s a lot to be said for common grip angles, triggers and operation. The G42 in 380 won’t help with this. At all.
Ive never owned a Glock and this one isn’t going to replace my P238 anytime soon.
Now if it was a small 9 of which Ive never owned a 9mm anything.
I might be interested.
So far Im waiting for the new Remington.
That has my interests peeked a bit.
Ditto to the P238. I do own Glocks but my favorite handguns are 1911s.
Pulls gun out of pocket, covers muzzle with his hand. Cute.
I imagine it will fill a niche for some people, but I don’t imagine an unusually large .380 is going to set the world on fire.
It appears they skipped over model numbers 40 and 41. Perhaps because they plan to operate by analogy with their subcompacts, then 40 will be a 9mm (same body size) and 41 will be in .40 (again same body size). They probably won’t produce a 10mm, 357 sigma, or 45 GAP, and they already have a .45 single stack (the 36). Well OK maybe the 43 will be a single stack 357 sigma.
I could see myself buying a G40 if it turns out to be a single stack 9mm but I’ve already got a nano.
If it were a .40 S&W in the same size then I might buy one because it could be three calibers by swapping out the barrel, .40 S&W, .357 SIG or 9mm.
I still have no idea why people are whining so much about the caliber. As far as I’ve seen .380 is perfectly capable of perferating baddies.
It’s all about tradeoffs. This gun isn’t trying to be anyone else’s gun, which is nice, and I think the size will be of benefit. It’s the .380 LOTS of people have been asking for and it IS the smallest glock to date. There’s lots to like if people will give the gun a chance methinks. Though maybe it’s crap. Guess we won’t know until someone HAS ACTUALLY USED ONE. :p
My curiousity is piqued! Though Who knows if I’ll bother or not. My budget is small, so the number of guns I’ll be getting ever is low, haha.
As a long time marketing guy, a few observations:
This pistol strikes me as Glock arrogance, foisting what they think the market should want and buy. I’ve seen big successful companies in my own market do this, and they always fail. Sure Glock will sell some pistols – to the few who really want a “full size” 380, or newbies who feel safe buying the Glock brand.
It’s rather obvious that the big unmet market demand for Glock is the single stack (thin) sub compact carry pistol. Unless Glock quickly follows with a version in 9mm, the G42 may actually damage Glock’s brand – especially with first time buyers who feel they were done wrong by Glock for buying the G42 in 380.
I agree. I think this gun will be a marketing disaster. It should have been a nine. [I still wouldn’t buy one, but that’s just because I never liked the ergos or the unshielded trigger of the Glock. My first pistol was an XD, and one of the reasons I bought it was because of the grip safety.]
It could be a decent CC option for women or recoil sensitive shooters who are already familiar with the Glock platform. My wife doesn’t like shooting my 23, 27, or 35. I could see her trying one of these, since a 9mm like an LC9 would probably be too snappy for her as well. If she likes something else better, we’ll go with that.
Whatever she will carry is what I want to see her with.
(OK maybe you don’t care what I want to see when I see your wife but I hope my point is made.)
In all seriousness, perhaps a physically large 9mm or 45 might be the ticket for her, cutting down on perceived recoil.
Anticipointment.
Has it even been 100% confirmed the 42 is a. 380? Outside of that post from last week that only looks mostly convincing but could be fakd?
“I never asked for this.”
http://blog.daveg.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Adam_Jensen.jpg
Uhhh no. I’m pretty sure the majority did NOT ask for a 380…. a new 22LR pistol would’ve at least made somewhat more sense.
I currently sell guns for a living. There is definitely a market for this gun and it will be easy to sell, as there is a not-insubstantial portion of the gun-buying population who are new shooters who want a gun that’s reliable, concealable, and fun to shoot. Making this gun smaller, you lose “fun to shoot” and people will just buy an LCP instead at half the price. Make it a nine and you’ll have a gun with more recoil and a heavier recoil spring.
There are a lot of folks, primarily smaller women, the elderly, and those with physical disabilities who have genuine difficulty with racking the slide on an automatic pistol (though when shown proper technique, most women end up being able to do it without a problem) who would be better served by a pistol that’s chambered in a less effective caliber but that they can manipulate properly without struggling. There’s a reason why people buy Walther PK380s and Ruger LC380s, and just because I have no interest in either of those, or the G42, doesn’t mean that any of them are pointless.
I own a Walther PK380 and have run 517 rounds through it with 3 failures. One round that failed was a Speer Gold-Dot (expensive cartridge) which jammed the gun so bad (FTE) I had to take it to a gunsmith. No, I don’t own a vice. Had a misfire with a Winchester 85 gr silver tip HP and another misfire with a Remington UMC 88 gr JHP.
The tolerances on my PK380 seem remarkably ‘loose’ to me- So despite a less than 1% failure rate I’d be interested in determining if a Glock 380 is more reliable. I too suspect there’s a market for the ‘little’ Glock.
I’d still love to have one of those double stack 9X21’s from Europe.
I think this will make a decent pocket gun with the same trigger I’m used to in my 17, 27 and 20.
If you see the pistol size overlayed on top of the G27 you really have to ask WHY GLOCK WHY?!
Lets see… 9 rounds of 40sw or 8 rounds of 380.
By the specs the G27 is 0.47″ longer, 0.24″ wider, 0.04″ taller and weighs 8.13 oz more than the G42. Not much difference in size.
IF the G42 were a single stack version of the G27 and used the same barrel I might consider it being it could be three different calibers the same as the G27.
9mm for popping paper, .40 for popping people and .357 SIG for fishing in bear country when more penetration is needed if you happen to cross paths with an angry hungry bear that can run faster than you.
Actually, when it comes to ease of carrying, that is a significant difference in size.
Look into buffalo bore. Hard cast 380. Little bullet packs a wallop. Cycles just fine in my wife’s pk380, however, I wouldn’t run 50 rounds of it at a time, might beat the gun up..For a pocket gun I personally prefer the Smith bodyguard 38 with 158gr hard cast/buffalo bore….I wear it daily iwb, gets covered in sweat and muck daily.. Cleans up easy and has yet to fail to fire… My 17 yr old daughter runs plus p through it no problem… If needed make all 5 count..
I think they’re trolling and the SHOT show surprise will be that it’s actually chambered in 9mm, to compete with today’s market of subcompact 9mm offerings. Trying to compete with 2005’s .380acp (and doing it bigger and heavier) seems unbelievable to me.
Wow. I like Glocks but they completely shit the bed on this one.
While I am underwhelmed and in fact disappointed by the size, I would like to point out that the G42 is NOT, in fact, larger than the Shield. Each and every listed dimension is smaller than the Shield.
But it sure isn’t much smaller!
Second thing: for what it is worth, at least they did use the additional size to add some barrel length. The G42 has a 3.25″ barrel, as compared to the LCP’s 2.75″, so that additional half inch of barrel should result in a noticeable velocity increase over the tiny pocket pistol.
But still nothing compared to a real 9mm like the Shield or 938 or cm9 etc.
A GLOCK the size of the TCP? Shut up and take my money! Unfortunately that’s not what this is. Call me when the 9mm version is ready.
A GLOCK the size of the TCP? Shut up and take my money!
I agree, but while the anticipation was great and I attempted to refrain from another handgun purchase until the G42 was unveiled I fell short and purchased the TCP .380 last month thinking the G42 would be a single stack 9mm smaller than the G26.
If it had been I could justify the purchase of the G42 this month.
Being that’s not the case I’ll continue to sit on the cash in my wallet until the next great thing presents itself.
For all of those badmouthing the .380 caliber I have a suggestion: Don’t ever stand in front of one when it’s going off….
There are a lot of people out there of the older and female persuasions, those that need some kind of protection the most, that don’t tolerate recoil well, and find it hard to be accurate with larger handgun calibers. I have a saying, a .380 center mass will work 1000% better than a .40 in the woods. Calling a .380 a mousegun, wimpy or ineffective is doing a disservice to those people that need them the most and thus they might end up not carrying at all thinking that a .380 wont help them.
I favor 1911s, but my most shot range gun is a Glock 35 Gen 4. Why? Because I can run the snot out of it and not worry about it – plus it’s accurate and fun to shoot.
My take is that this new Glock will be fun to shoot as well, and it is going to sell faster than cold lemonade on an August afternoon in Texas..
Very disappointing, but it reflects a Glock corporation in turmoil.
Now that is just a really, really stupid remark.
Glock is going to sell these as fast as they can make them, just as they do every other model Glock they make.
In scanning the comments, I see I am the only person looking forward to this gun. I like pocket .380s. Easier to shoot than pocket 9mms.
You missed at least 2 or 3 people who are interested in it, haha.
In hot weather it’s the P238, nothing else does the trick.
If i wanted a larger than normal .380 I’d get a Beretta 84. 12+1 rounds of .380. All metal gun – low recoil. Its a Beretta and actually looks good!
They shoot good too.
As a former Glock fan I carried a super reliable but chunky 26 for a long time. I have recently converted to M&P and the G42 does nothing to change my mind. Build something that is at least as thin, light, and shootable as the Shield 9 with equal capacity and firepower. I might take a look then.
What a nice 9mm Glock came out with…….what…..a 380?
Like most of You I’m surprised Glock would release a 380 ACP pistol thats not all that compact. Its hard to believe this is what Glock thought the market wanted. I looked at most of the compact 9’s on the market and ended up with the Kahr CM9. I wish the Kahr had the same pedigree as the S&W or the Beretta, but none were as small or as light as the CM9. I”m not expecting anything game changing from Glock when they do release their slim 9. Maybe Glock thinks they are to late to the compact slim 9 party?
actually they are too late for the 380 party, the beer is all gone and the porch light is off
.
Good one!
Here’s a +1 looking forward to the release date. In fact, I’m totally stoked to hear so many of you say you won’t be buying this gun…just means it’ll be easier for me to pick one up when they drop. I’ve been wanting a .380 Glock, well, just because I like Glocks and I don’t yet own a handgun chambered in .380 and until now, you haven’t been able to get a .380 Glock unless you’re LE. And it’s not a “fan boy” thing…I just prefer to spend my hard-earned money on tools I know will work each and every time (straight out of the box) and that cost the same or less than many of the toys, I mean guns, mentioned earlier.
Ugly? Bring it on. Buy your beautiful CCW safe queen, spend a good deal more ’cause it’s purty and then never carry it because you don’t want it to get holster wear on the slide. It amazes me that when your life’s on the line, because let’s rehash, that’s why we carry concealed, you’re worried about what the gun looks like. And finally, tbh, whether you guys like the gun or not, Glock’s gonna sell a boat load of these little (ugly) beauties **Drops the mic and walks off stage**
Personally, I wish they would make one in a 9. but, honestly, they probably will..just like ruger did with the lcp, lc380, lc9. This just makes them more money. And another thing. an easier shooting defensive, super concealable gun, that has a better trigger than other 380’s its size?, sounds perfect for a woman’s market.. Smart move on Glock’s part. I bet you the 9 will come out in a yr or 2.
Nice knowing you glock,hello new friend remington R51
My Wife and I have shot everything last Summer looking for our CCW “Soul Mate” pistols. I have a G26 and Beretta Px4 I love. She cannot handle the 9mm pistols enough to practice with them and gain the proficiency she wants and needs. Teeny, tiny 9mm’s and .45’s are not the answer for her. Teeny tiny .380’s are no better – they kick too hard and cannot be handled well for fast follow up, The G42 is perfect. She wants one and I’m buying one for her…it’ll be perfect and it’ll solve the main problem which is: People who have less experience and less body mass (she’s 5′ and 115 lbs) are never gonna buy/shoot 9mm’s the size of the G42. There are tens of thousands out there just like her. The G42 is a perfect answer to a question that us big folks who have been shooting for decades never asked. It’ll sell like hotcakes.
I have the new G42. It was $399. It is so much easier to carry concealed then my 26. It needs the extended mags as I have large hands for a woman, yes, I’m a woman. It shoots smooth, but low left at 6″. Yes, hubby tested it, same thing. Trying to get through to Glock by phone. No luck yet. Here’s the truth, the gun stores are getting calls for this new Glock. There are many women, & yes some men too that realize a .380 can serve its purpose if it hits it’s target. I can shoot a 9mm & a full size 45. I have 2 Sig Sauer 238’s, of course with extended mags, & I love them. My fav gun is my Walther PPq M2 Navy, in a 9mm. But it’s too big for me to carry concealed. As for the Glocks, they aren’t pretty, but they are dependable, easy to take down, ect. I love to read all your opinions. As a woman I thought I needed to add mine.
Obviously we all would have preferred a 9mm. However, from a ballistic standpoint people are quick to pick on a 9 as well. Its too easy to complain. Caliber religion takes away from the better characteristics of this gun. 380 auto mixed with a gen4 spring and comfy grip makes a very soft shooter with opportunity for quick follow up shots. Ease of control and durability sold me on this (also bc it is MUCH smaller than my g19) machine even if the caliber isn’t too impressive.
Comments are closed.