Thoughts on the new GLOCK 42?

22-rimfire said:
My interest in the Glock 42 would be entirely based on the thickness as I have always felt Glocks a bit fat for a concealed carry gun for me. Since it is a Glock, I would expect it to function nearly flawlessly.
Click to expand...

Apparently, it does NOT like Hornady Critical Defense.

glock-42-g42-380-acp-pocket-pistol-new-gun-review-jams-400x116.jpg


Entire article is here: http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/glo...pistol-new-gun-review-shot-show-2014-preview/



Add a trigger pull of over 9 lbs... yes.... over 9 lbs! You can rule out the female market with that trigger pull, excepting the amazon's and big burly women of course (see female cop).

Why would anyone opt for a large frame .380 with double the trigger pull of a normal Glock? Not to mention the fact that 380 ammo is more expensive and more difficult to find than just about any other popular pistol caliber ammo.


This gun doesn't make sense to me.

.

.
 
Last edited:
One of the guys I work with bought one today. Feels good in the hand, doesn't point high for me like most Glocks do, nice trigger and typical Glock sights. I don't feel the need to rush out and buy one, but I think that they are going to sell a whole bunch of them.

medium800.jpg

xlarge.jpg

xlarge.jpg

xlarge.jpg
 
Thanks for the LCP comparison photos. Did you by any chance take a side by side top view?

Jeff
 
That is an LCP with a Houge Hybrid grip on it. I have a couple more comparison pics that I will post tomorrow after I edit them.
 
Last edited:
Revolvergeek said:
The is an LCP with a Houge Hybrid grip on it. I have a couple more comparison pics that I will post tomorrow after I edit them.
Click to expand...

thanks for the clarification! The 42 appears a bit smaller than I thought it would be. I wonder if any of the glock-doc stores have come up with a solution for the 9.5 lb trigger pull. It shouldn't take them long I wouldn't think. Disconnectors for other models probably wouldn't be the same size for this new model, but it would be cool if they were interchangeable.

.
 
I've owned PPK/s series, Beretta 84, Sig P230, Kel-Tec & AMT. Beretta was the only one to be reliable. Why? Larger platform, better balanced components, easier to keep a firm grip on, not as easily disrupted by lint or other filth in the gun, etc. etc.

Everyone that can't take a J-frame with stout loads will benefit from this gun.
First time shooters will benefit from this gun. "'Gee, it's easy to shoot, AND, I could even carry it, too!"
Everyone toting a Glock primary can now tote an identical BUG, in operation, controls, etc.
Everyone that packs a DAO (striker type) design can now tote a better BUG, (same reasons)
 
I got to play with one in the LGS this week. The thing is cute as all get out, light and thin, WAY thinner than the Kahr 9's, and just a hair thicker than the Kahr 380. The trigger feels just like any other standard Glock trigger, 5 pounds give or take. They'll sell a bunch.
 
Shot one on Monday at some 6" steel plates at about 7-9 yards. Shot it twice, mags loaded with 5 rounds. Rapid fire, was able to get 4 steel plates down pretty quick but seemed like the last one shot high

Would have been nice to put it on paper

Doesn't point like a regular glock, but that's not a bad thing

I still don't like glocks, but the little bugger is cute
 
Not interested in the G42; too little, too late.

The G42 is simply too big for a .380.

S&W and Springfield have several better options.
 
Bersa, Walther PK380, Walther PPK/PPKs, Sig P232, Ruger LC380

Large 380s still sell pretty well, some people are.....recoil sensitive....

Does the gun float my boat? No, it's a Glock. But people bashing it because it's too large for a 380? Ehh...there's other reasons to bash glocks



Now if it was chambered in 357 Sig, that might be cool. But, I'm still impressed that Glock came out with something that could be considered new
 
Just my opinion but a .380 is underpowered for self defense, it might be easier to conceal so go with what you feel is adequate.
 
Last edited:
Our freak winter ice storm prevented us from going shooting last weekend, but my buddy has shot his 42 and as you would expect he says it is very sweet shooting with good accuracy and minimal kick. The sun is out blasting ice now, so maybe this weekend I can light it up.
 
u812 said:
Looks like the 42 is still going to be a thick pistol for its size. If it is not a lot thinner than a 36 I think I would rather carry the 36.
That is if I were going to carry a subcompact Glock. I have tried them and my hand just does not like them. In a .380 I would go Sig 232 or Walther PPKS hands down.
Click to expand...

I just got hands-on w/one. VERY thin, much more so than a G36. The latter pistols were unreliable for me in multiple examples (w/JHP). Note, I mean after a week's worth of ankle-carry, then pulled out at the range and fired. Cleaned, and pristine out of the pistol case, no problem.


Revolvergeek said:
One of the guys I work with bought one today. Feels good in the hand, doesn't point high for me like most Glocks do, nice trigger and typical Glock sights..... I think that they are going to sell a whole bunch of them.
Click to expand...
I agree. One poster mentioned a 9lb trigger, and that MAY be in the ball-park for one I fondled. The last G-17 I had, I installed an NY1 spring, which gives firm resistance from teh start and an 8lb breaking point. Very similar. That's still far better than the average 10-14lb DA-snubbie trigger, with half-the trigger stroke to master. Not to mention better sights, easier loading, easier maintenance, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top