Glock 42

[Trooper Joe]

Just wondering if anyone can document where a .380 has failed to stop a bad guy during an incident. Lot's of horror stories of how bad a .380 is but I haven't seen any documentation.

As a retired LEO, I find that I really like carrying a .380 (even carried one on duty for years during a special assignment in plain clothes),

I just bought my second Ruger LCP but plan on buying the first Glock 42 I see that is at or just under MSRP.

I have some nice 9mm's and larger caliber guns, but they usually ride in the console of my truck with the .380 in my pocket.

Trooper Joe

 

[Tactical Jackalope]

I don't like small guns, no secret there. Someone came into the shop looking for a holster to one. Told him to bring it in unloaded, no magazine and with the slide back. I held it.. I liked it. O_O

What I don't like, it's cartridge.

 

[Gaerek]

I love Glocks, anyone who's seen my posts in the past knows this. If this were a 9mm, it'd be my next gun. Being a .380? I can get smaller guns in .380, and guns about the same size in 9mm. I'm sure Glock has a single stack 9mm in the works. I'll wait for that.

 

[thedudeabides]

a) I hate small guns
b) I hate .380 ACP
c) 500-600 is too much for a gun that should cost 350-400 at most
d) Gun magazines have had failures with the guns Glock sent them--they tried to blame it on ammo
e) it's not even that small
f) it's not a 9mm

 

[Tactical Jackalope]

^ Oh man. I can do that same thing with a list of handguns I personally don't like too.

 

[ATW525]

The Glock 30S .45acp sub-compact seemed to be design with limited interest either.

I don't know. Swapping a Glock 36 slide on a Glock 30 frame has been something people have done for at least a few years now. The main downside was it required buying two guns and the left over pieces combined to make the horrendous combination of a Glock 30 slide on a Glock 36 frame.

 

[Officer's Match]

Great, the 42 is a 9 GAP - great..

Substantially larger and heavier than a LCP or Kahr P380. Not particularly impressed here...

 

[LockedBreech]

As has been pointed out, the LC380 and Bersa Thunder - larger .380s - have sold extremely well. The online shooting community may be lukewarm on a larger .380, but it's easy to forget we are an itty bitty sliver of the overall civilian market.

I have a smaller female friend who loves her LC380. Others might scoff at the "paltry" cartridge (which was a mainstay European police cartridge for a very long time, as was the .32) in the "too-big" package, but she can rack the slide easily and put a small group together comfortably and accurately.

 

[Gaerek]

By pure chance today, I actually had the opportunity to put a few rounds through a 42. Although I'm still not a fan of .380, this little gun is actually much nicer than most other .380's Ive shot before.

It's about the same size as an LC380 or similar (didn't have anything nearby to check against), but the sights are MUCH better (though they use a slightly smaller version of Glock's "U" rear sight), as well as the trigger. There is very little felt recoil. Reminded me of a G17 shooting regular pressure ammo. I have large hands and could still get two fingers wrapped comfortably around the grip. It shot straight

For those that say they should have made it in 9mm. After seeing the gun, I don't think that would have been feasible with the frame and slide on this gun. It is tiny compared to any other Glock you've ever seen. Will I buy one? I just don't know yet. Locally, I saw one for sale last week for $415. But I'm not sure I want a .380. In a gun about that size, I'd really like a 9mm. But the distinct lack of recoil is really an amazing plus to this gun.

So who is this gun for?

Well, this ad ought to tell you that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c1_ajGMp3mk

I'm not sexist or anything, but I think this gun would make an excellent purse carry gun, especially for those that might be a bit recoil sensitive. A smaller .380 is no fun to shoot (even for me who doesn't really mind recoil much). LCP, I'm looking at you! Basically, if you're a Glock person looking for a sub compact single stack for CC, that has low recoil, this might be the gun for you.

I'm more impressed with the gun than I thought I would be, but that round is still a turn off. I personally don't feel like investing in yet another caliber. I don't currently own a sub compact single stack anything, but I am certainly in the market as I'd like a "church" gun (one that is easy to conceal in my church clothes). As much as it pains me to say it as a Glock guy, I think I'd be more interested in an XDS in 9mm (especially with that 4" barrel) than the G42. Now, if they release a G43 single stack 9mm, I'll be all over that.

And to those mentioning the Glock 30S. Limited in appeal, maybe. But I want one still. I have yet to find one for sale locally, (with the exception of a LEO only "Blue Label" one I saw last February). I've been moving more towards the .45 end of the spectrum with my firearms, but am still carrying a G19 most of the time. If I could pick up a 30S, I think it'd be my next main carry gun...G19 would become a range queen.

 

[lee n. field]

It's about the same size as an LC380 or similar (didn't have anything nearby to check against), but the sights are MUCH better (though they use a slightly smaller version of Glock's "U" rear sight), as well as the trigger. There is very little felt recoil. Reminded me of a G17 shooting regular pressure ammo. I have large hands and could still get two fingers wrapped comfortably around the grip. It shot straight

Hickock45 has a YouTube video on the 42. He has close ups, comparing the Glock 42 with the LCP. The 42 is as tall as the LCP with the finger extension base plate, a bit wider, and about a half inch (it looks like) longer.

The 42 intrigues me. I've had an LCP for a couple years, and just can't shoot it well.

 

[Departed402]

I wasn't impressed by the G42 until I held it at a recent gun show. It was thin, light, and comfortable. I have to admit my resolve weakened a bit, but I'll stick to my G26. Price was $499.

 

[Deaf Smith]

I've now heard from those who use it that it needs a break in period.

Users at GlockTalk say 300+ rounds if you intend to use standard pressure FMJ stuff.

That underwhelms me.

Yea I'll keep packing my Glock 26/33 combo for the winter and SYW 640-1 for the summer.

BUT, if they make it in 9mm I might change my mind.

Deaf

 

[Trooper Joe]

".....I've now heard from those who use it that it needs a break in period.Users at GlockTalk say 300+ rounds if you intend to use standard pressure FMJ stuff....."

Not true. My friend just bought a G42, and it is good to go right out of the box.

That 300 round BS was probably posted by the same guy who says you need 2,000 round to break in a Kahr CM9 (wow!, by that time he says you need a new recoil spring and now you can start the break in all over again).

I know of some "non gun hobby" people, who buy cheap auto loaders, load them, and carry them without ever shooting them first. I don't do that, but the new Glock 42 would be the only one I would if I had to.

Trooper Joe

 

[AndyWest]

Great, the 42 is a 9 GAP - great..

Don't give Glock any ideas!

Anyway, I wanted to want a 42 but after watching Hickok45's video, I kinda don't. I like that it works the same as any Glock, but that's about it. After fitting Hogue grips and a heavier spring to my LCP, it shoots MUCH softer and is actually fun.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

So I wonder if magazine availability will be tight for a bit. If I had one, I would want more than two mags.

I have a friend who wants to shoot his Sig 938 in IDPA and the hold up is mags.

 

[btmj]

So the question has been asked a couple of times, but I have not heard the answer... Is it a straight blowback (fixed barrel), or is a delayed blowback with tilting barrel ?

 

[Gaerek]

It's a miniature Glock in almost every way. It has a delayed blowback design just like every other Glock every made. Some of the internal parts are different, or so I've been told, but it fires and works just like a Glock.

 

[carguychris]

Great, the 42 is a 9 GAP - great..

Don't give Glock any ideas!

They've already implemented it. The 9 GAP cartridge is 9mm caliber, but with a 17mm-long case with straight walls, an OAL of 0.984", and 85-100gr bullets, loaded to a max pressure of 21,500 psi.

Substantially larger and heavier than a LCP or Kahr P380. Not particularly impressed here...

It is, however, about the same width and only a smidgeon taller. Methinks Glock did not intend it to be a true pocket gun; rather, it's meant to be a very easy-carrying IWB holster gun.

So the question has been asked a couple of times, but I have not heard the answer... Is it a straight blowback (fixed barrel), or is a delayed blowback with tilting barrel ?

It uses Browning short-recoil, locked-breech, tilting barrel operation like a conventional Glock. (FWIW I've generally only read the term "delayed blowback" applied to fixed-barrel pistols with a separate internal breechblock that momentarily holds the breech closed- e.g. Remington Model 51, Benelli B76.)

[EDIT: I see that Gaerek beat me to the answer during my leisurely writing process. ]

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I saw my first one today. Here's the take. It is a little on the big side for a drop in the pocket and forget it gun. The LCP is more along that line. It's trigger - dry fire is better than the long LCP pull.

The dealer wanted $525 - obviously a new gun price for first users. With LCPs in the 300s and a new G17 4th with 3 mags for 539, I can't see that price. I think about 400 might be ok.

I did see another interesting little 380 - that was the Colt XSP but at 635 bucks, not in my budget.

A just for grins pocket gun was a 'tactical' black Bond 45 ACP derringer. It would be a bear to shoot but it was cool looking for a retro tech gun. Looking down those two barrels would be scary.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Seems like a cool gun. I might be interested in buying or trading for one.