Thoughts on the new GLOCK 42?

philllll

philllll

Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
13,444
Saw a few posts elsewhere on this, it is supposed to be a single stack .380. What do you guys think? I'd like to at least give it a try.

Glock-32.jpg
 
If they would've went 9mm it would've been a "game changer". With a .380 it's going to be a flop other than the guys that HAVE to have a Glock. The M&P Shield and XDs are far better options simply because of their caliber options.
 
Not interested. ^^^Like the previous poster, if it was a 9mm, it would be a very different story.
 
I would have liked to see it in 9mm, too. I also saw rumors that the model G40 or G41 will be a long slide .45 like the G34 or G35.
 
I'm hoping this new smaller frame might could get beefed up and used for a 9mm in the future.
 
I didn't think Glock could legally import a .380.
There would be a market for it,many women love .380s and IMO it is not a bad round if using the right ammo. One of my favorite pistols is the Sig P232.
 
They have a plant here now.
Unless the frame is already designed for 9mm, don't hold your breath waiting.......
If it WAS ready for the 9mm, Glock should have brought it to market first.
They're only about 5 years behind the competition now, instead of 10.
I sold off my Glocks after trying the PPQ a couple years ago.
 
Not interested. If it were a single-stack 9mm I'd be interested.
 
Everyone who volunteers to be shot with a .380 hold up your hand. :rolleyes:


The 42 has to be made in the USA, because they are not allowed to import a .380
 
I'm more excited about the Remington r51 which is the same size as a Ruger LCP 9 mm, but allows for full house 9mm +P. It's a 7+1. Sure it looks a little funky, but the design pays homage to its predecessor, and the mechanism is not seen in any other firearm except its predecessor. MSRP is supposed to be 389. It's supposed to be available in late February. It's a single action, internal hammer fired gun with a trigger that moves straight back and does not pivot...like a 1911. It only has a grip safety. The barrel does not move, and the bore axis is as low as can be. It comes with an ambi mag release and two magazines. Aluminum frame, steel barrel and slide. The gun looks like a Walther PPK, HK P7, and HK4 all had a lovechild.

It will be available in 9mm +p first, but also .40 SW at a later date.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/01/remington-announces-r-51-pistol/

If you look carefully on the barrel, you will see "9mm Luger +P"
DSC00011.jpg


Video of the mechanism which is not a John Browning design. It's a Pederson delayed blowback.
[video=youtube;EOxeLEQZNxo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOxeLEQZNxo[/video]

Gunblast did a short preview of it when they were in Gunsite in AZ. You will see how flat it shoots.
[video=youtube;WgqtnA4t98U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgqtnA4t98U[/video]

Glock dropped the ball by offering a 9mm short (380 acp). Glock fans have been asking for a single stack 9mm for years if I'm not mistaken. They did not have the 9mm short in mind.
 
Last edited:
ROLEXrifleman said:
If it says Glock it will sell.
As for .380 vs 9mm, two words for you: SHOT PLACEMENT
Click to expand...

Sure. Shot placement. I'll place my shots with a 9mm luger or .40 over a midget 9mm short. Reliability concerns aside and assuming both (r51 and g42 are equally reliable; time will tell), the only thing the Glock 42 has going for it, IMO, is the physical dimensions are probably smaller. EDIT: The g42 is slightly less tall by a few tenths of an inch and slightly less wide by even less. Length is comparable. 5.9 versus 6 inches.
 
Last edited:
And for those that cant control 9mm or .40 in a package this small?
It might sound trivial but I have trained enough people, mostly women, that could not group worth a S$%^ with a subcompact or "micro" 9mm. Put a .380 in their hand and their control and confidence went up producing a better shot.
In the real world I believe you should carry the largest gun you can consistently shot well. in some cases all that may be is a .22
My point simply is that the .380 fills a need and the fact that if the G42 is a .380 it will sell. If not for what it does offer then simply on name alone
 
ROLEXrifleman said:
And for those that cant control 9mm or .40 in a package this small?
It might sound trivial but I have trained enough people, mostly women, that could not group worth a S$%^ with a subcompact or "micro" 9mm. Put a .380 in their hand and their control and confidence went up producing a better shot.
In the real world I believe you should carry the largest gun you can consistently shot well. in some cases all that may be is a .22
My point simply is that the .380 fills a need and the fact that if the G42 is a .380 it will sell. If not for what it does offer then simply on name alone
Click to expand...

Points taken. Though I don't necessarily agree with one r51 tester's views, he did mention that shooting 9mm standard pressure out of the r51 was akin to shooting a .22lr in terms of recoil. He mentioned the extremely low bore axis and high grip as resulting in such a reduced recoil. I will probably get one and write a review in the later part of the year. It will be interesting to see how both guns are received by consumers once both are available on the market.
 
I think its cute, and no doubt will be a dream to carry.... better the .380 you have on you than the .45 you leave at home. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top