TexasCHLforum.com

I did get a chance to shoot it last week and overall it's a pretty nice gun. We put about a hundred rounds through it of cheap remington ammo and the only issue was a FTE on the first shot. I'll chalk that up to it being new.

The frame is very light but it's recoil is really not that bad. The higher grip does really seem to help re-acquire your target and follow up shots. For me I could have used a pinky extension to grip it better but it wasn't horrible.

Here are a couple pics, sorry for the poor quality I just used my phone. We shot the ruger, glock and the xds to compare. My girlfriend had her beretta nano too but I just didn't take a pic of it or anything else we shot for that matter.

The target shot is actually her 5 round grouping with the glock at 5 yards. I think she intimidated my friend a bit, lol. Overall, it shot well, functioned just fine, and felt nice in your hand. If i was in the market for a pocket gun or if it was a 9mm I'd buy one.

jmra wrote:

Murindo wrote:I like Glock's but why a .380 when the competition is fielding reliable accurate mini 9 mm's?

See previous post

M&P has both the M&Pc and the Shield

Beretta has the Storm Subcompact and the Nano

Ruger has the SR9 and the LC9

Springfield XDM in both double and single column

Sig has the same. heck they have a subcompact and two different types of single column 9mm.

Those are off the top of my head. I'm having difficulty thinking of a major pistol maker that makes 9mms, and doesn't have both a double column and a single column, besides Glock of course.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Murindo wrote:I like Glock's but why a .380 when the competition is fielding reliable accurate mini 9 mm's?

See previous post

M&P has both the M&Pc and the Shield

Beretta has the Storm Subcompact and the Nano

Ruger has the SR9 and the LC9

Springfield XDM in both double and single column

Sig has the same. heck they have a subcompact and two different types of single column 9mm.

Those are off the top of my head. I'm having difficulty thinking of a major pistol maker that makes 9mms, and doesn't have both a double column and a single column, besides Glock of course.

If I understood the question correctly, he was asking why Glock chose to make the G42 a .380 instead of a 9mm. I believe the answer is obvious. They didn't have a .380 on the US market and sales on the G26 are still going strong. No reason to disrupt the sales numbers on the G26.
When/if sales drop on the G26 they will release a G42 sized 9mm. At this point they obviously don't believe it is in their best interest to do so.
Glocks lowest market share is among women. This is mostly due to the fact that women in general (this forum may be an exception) go for softer shooting guns. By introducing the G42 I believe Glock is aiming at the female customer base.

jmra wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Murindo wrote:I like Glock's but why a .380 when the competition is fielding reliable accurate mini 9 mm's?

See previous post

M&P has both the M&Pc and the Shield

Beretta has the Storm Subcompact and the Nano

Ruger has the SR9 and the LC9

Springfield XDM in both double and single column

Sig has the same. heck they have a subcompact and two different types of single column 9mm.

Those are off the top of my head. I'm having difficulty thinking of a major pistol maker that makes 9mms, and doesn't have both a double column and a single column, besides Glock of course.

If I understood the question correctly, he was asking why Glock chose to make the G42 a .380 instead of a 9mm. I believe the answer is obvious. They didn't have a .380 on the US market and sales on the G26 are still going strong. No reason to disrupt the sales numbers on the G26.
When/if sales drop on the G26 they will release a G42 sized 9mm. At this point they obviously don't believe it is in their best interest to do so.
Glocks lowest market share is among women. This is mostly due to the fact that women in general (this forum may be an exception) go for softer shooting guns. By introducing the G42 I believe Glock is aiming at the female customer base.

I agree with the idea that Glock is going after women shooters, they are an undeserved and rapidly growing segment of the market. Having a small (but not tiny) .380 offers reduced recoil and much less force to actuate the slide, both stumbling blocks for many new and/or women shooters.

As for stealing market share from the 26, I wonder if there is something else going on here. There are plenty of reports of people being able to cause failures to feed with a G26 by holding it VERY loosely, but so far they have avoided the "reliability" problems associated with all the sub 20 oz 9mm's. My small 9mm have generally poor reliability when run by new shooters, but they magically run very well for me...

So what if Glock puts out a ~15 oz 9mm that is snatched up by inexperienced new shooters who limp wrist it then complain about poor reliability? I think they learned from the gen 4 recoil spring overreaction that they need to maintain their reputation for reliability over all else.

Crossfire wrote:Waiting now for number 3. sigh...

That is good stuff right there! Well, not a good story for you, but a good story for us.

jmra wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Murindo wrote:I like Glock's but why a .380 when the competition is fielding reliable accurate mini 9 mm's?

See previous post

M&P has both the M&Pc and the Shield

Beretta has the Storm Subcompact and the Nano

Ruger has the SR9 and the LC9

Springfield XDM in both double and single column

Sig has the same. heck they have a subcompact and two different types of single column 9mm.

Those are off the top of my head. I'm having difficulty thinking of a major pistol maker that makes 9mms, and doesn't have both a double column and a single column, besides Glock of course.

If I understood the question correctly, he was asking why Glock chose to make the G42 a .380 instead of a 9mm. I believe the answer is obvious. They didn't have a .380 on the US market and sales on the G26 are still going strong. No reason to disrupt the sales numbers on the G26.

Except all those manufacturers make both small double column and single column pistols. Frankly the 9mm has captured this market away from .380s. .380s are now primarily in the "tiny" category. Glock is about six years late to the party. Its cool and all, and I am not a Glock hata, but Beretta, Ruger, S&W, Sig Sauer, Walther, Bersa, and Colt all have excellent .380s from middle sized down to right tiny. Plus there are others like Rorhbaugh and a host of others that compete with micro pistols as well.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Murindo wrote:I like Glock's but why a .380 when the competition is fielding reliable accurate mini 9 mm's?

See previous post

M&P has both the M&Pc and the Shield

Beretta has the Storm Subcompact and the Nano

Ruger has the SR9 and the LC9

Springfield XDM in both double and single column

Sig has the same. heck they have a subcompact and two different types of single column 9mm.

Those are off the top of my head. I'm having difficulty thinking of a major pistol maker that makes 9mms, and doesn't have both a double column and a single column, besides Glock of course.

If I understood the question correctly, he was asking why Glock chose to make the G42 a .380 instead of a 9mm. I believe the answer is obvious. They didn't have a .380 on the US market and sales on the G26 are still going strong. No reason to disrupt the sales numbers on the G26.

Except all those manufacturers make both small double column and single column pistols. Frankly the 9mm has captured this market away from .380s. .380s are now primarily in the "tiny" category. Glock is about six years late to the party. Its cool and all, and I am not a Glock hata, but Beretta, Ruger, S&W, Sig Sauer, Walther, Bersa, and Colt all have excellent .380s from middle sized down to right tiny. Plus there are others like Rorhbaugh and a host of others that compete with micro pistols as well.

Yep, I'm surprised Glock is still in business.

Crossfire

Does the 42 look like it would actually handle a +P or even a +P+ loading? I have only one 380 (LCP) for times when concealed means no place to hide, yet I'm not entirely happy with the current crop of 380 defense rounds. What do you think?

jmra wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

jmra wrote:

Murindo wrote:I like Glock's but why a .380 when the competition is fielding reliable accurate mini 9 mm's?

See previous post

M&P has both the M&Pc and the Shield

Beretta has the Storm Subcompact and the Nano

Ruger has the SR9 and the LC9

Springfield XDM in both double and single column

Sig has the same. heck they have a subcompact and two different types of single column 9mm.

Those are off the top of my head. I'm having difficulty thinking of a major pistol maker that makes 9mms, and doesn't have both a double column and a single column, besides Glock of course.

If I understood the question correctly, he was asking why Glock chose to make the G42 a .380 instead of a 9mm. I believe the answer is obvious. They didn't have a .380 on the US market and sales on the G26 are still going strong. No reason to disrupt the sales numbers on the G26.

Except all those manufacturers make both small double column and single column pistols. Frankly the 9mm has captured this market away from .380s. .380s are now primarily in the "tiny" category. Glock is about six years late to the party. Its cool and all, and I am not a Glock hata, but Beretta, Ruger, S&W, Sig Sauer, Walther, Bersa, and Colt all have excellent .380s from middle sized down to right tiny. Plus there are others like Rorhbaugh and a host of others that compete with micro pistols as well.

Yep, I'm surprised Glock is still in business.

LOL

I agree with his comments though. They are late. But it's never too late to do the right thing. I think they should have introduced this pistol at some point. And now they did. They also need to introduce a single stack 9mm soon (or yesterday), but like you've pointed out there are other choices until they do. Would they have got more of my business if they had a single stack 9mm when I picked a Shield? Maybe, but only if it were thinner than the G36. That's a gun that needs a new generation - thinner please. I think the Shield and the XDs line are the ones Glock needs to focus on beating. But it's not my company so... carry on.

I think the G42 would be an excellent choice for some people. My wife is interested, my cousin is interested... If not those, then maybe the Walther PK380. That's the main one I think this gun competes with for my attention (although i'm not really interested in this sized 380 at all).

My .02

ShootDontTalk wrote:Crossfire

Does the 42 look like it would actually handle a +P or even a +P+ loading? I have only one 380 (LCP) for times when concealed means no place to hide, yet I'm not entirely happy with the current crop of 380 defense rounds. What do you think?

Yup. Its a Glock. I loaded mine up with Barnes Tac-XPD.

It would be a nice BUG.

Javier730 wrote:It would be a nice BUG.

If I didn't already have a .380 bug I might spring for one but since I do, I'll wait and see if they release a 9mm version.

jmra wrote:

Javier730 wrote:It would be a nice BUG.

If I didn't already have a .380 bug I might spring for one but since I do, I'll wait and see if they release a 9mm version.

Yes it would make a nice BUG. For me, there are times I feel woefully undergunned when carrying the LCP. Before I retired, one of the sergeants, who is a great shot and really beyond "expert", ran the qualification course with his LCP. Qualified easily (for him) so he said. Me? Not quite that easy.

I got my wife a S&W Shield 9mm and I am impressed at how well it shoots. For a gun that is about the same size as the 42 it handles and shoots very acceptably. I don't think a small, single stack 9 would cut into the 26 sales all that much, but that is just my opinion.

I bought one for my wife. We've had it to the range now twice for about 150 rounds. My wife likes it very much, and so do I.
It's a Glock. Reliable, very accurate, and it's a really soft shooter. Looking now for some holster options for her.

I'm also wondering why Glock hasn't offered a single-stack 9MM as of yet. When I was looking for a carry pistol, I like Glocks myself, and I had the 26 on my list to check out. I thought it was a nice piece, but the extra-slim factor of pistols like the XD-s and Shield just make them that much more concealable. If the 42 had been a 9MM, it would have been a VERY tough decision between it and the XD-s.

Maybe if the 42 sells the way Glock wants it to, there'll be a similar 9MM model in the future.