So it's basically the same size as the M&P Shield, but 6-round capacity .380 instead of 7-round capacity 9mm? No thanks. I won't complain though - having more options is never a bad thing. I will just echo what everyone else said: they need a 9mm version of the same thing. And perhaps figure out a way to stuff 1 or 2 more rounds into the same-sized magazine.
Agreed. I'll stick with my XDS!.... Well whenever I get it back from the voluntary recall. :/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I shot one two weeks ago, neat gun, nothing special. Kinda big IMHO as I have a Sig P238 which is a bit smaller. If you are a Glock Fan it might be for you. I did have a few issues with FTF and FTE's, but it might have been the ammo. Personally I'll stick with the Sig. And for complete disclosure, I have a G19 and had a G27. So I'm not anti glock
My local range is having Glock Days this weekend and you can test dive the 42 for $10 and get entered in a raffle for range bags, classes and other prizes. Soooo....went to check it out and all the fun stuff happened on Friday....203 testers ran 2030 rounds through 2 guns w/o a hitch. Today was a madhouse with everybody wanting to shoot everything but the 42 so it was a bit of a wait just to test but it was a fun little gun to shoot and much smaller than expected. My glasses kept fogging up, range was packed and hot as hell even though it was 20 degrees outside! It's snappier than I thought it would be but I'm used to the 17.
I purchases one two weeks ago. The first thing I noticed when handling this pistol is that it feels bigger than it's size belies. Most of the "pocket" pistols I've shot are small, but also feel very small in hand. My hands are not large, just medium. The next thing I noticed at the range, is this little 42 is a shooter. I was very impressed with how this small pistol performed. The trigger pull is near identical to the 23 I carry at work. The sights are very nice, nicer than I've seen on the "pocket" pistols I've used. Of course the .380 allows very quick (and accurate) follow up shots. It ate fmj and Gold Dots equally as well. While some think the slight extra dimensions on this vs other "pocket" pistols is a deal killer, I'd argue that the very slight upsize is a big plus. I think the more these are shot, the more they will sell
Out of pure ignorance... when someone talks about pocket carrying a Glock... I assume they have it in a sheath or holster inside their pocket, correct? Otherwise carrying a Glock in your jeans pocket is just begging for a trip to the ER, or worse.
I carry mine in a IWB holster I use the term "pocket" pistol generically for a small pistol as it seems it's popular, with at least writers
Desantis nemesis holster for my pocket rockets. Nothing else in that pocket, either. Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Not kidding. I took "Surefire guns" to mean firearms that are combat prove, uber reliable, I'd bet my life on it tools. In the handgun category, I can think of only two or three brands I would even consider in that role, and only one of those has the simple UI I think is preferable in a stressful situation. But, like carrying with an empty chamber, to each their own. Now, you could have meant something else when you used that term, so I asked.
Springfield Armory, H&K, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson, Beretta have all gone through the same sorts of rigorous trials Glock has survived, some with better results. I would bet my life on a Ruger SP101 as being a more reliable "Surefire" pistol than a Glock or many other automatic pistols. I just purchased a Bersa Thunder chambered in .380, it too has a sterling reputation as do small CC arms from Ruger, Kahr, Kel-Tec... A cursory search on YouTube with the words "Epic Fail" before just about any automatic pistol will yield results--the Gen 4 Glocks have been less than "Surefire" by any reliable measure not clouded by a devotion to that brand. It is what it is. I carry an XDm compact .45 that has had a few thousand rounds through it and has never had a FTF or FTE not related to someone other than me limp wristing it.
There are many makers of very reliable pistols out there, makers who put out a superior product, no question. There is also no question that Glock hangs its hat on the outright toughness and reliability of its pistols, I mean after all, they can't really brag on aesthetics or a fine trigger. I used to make fun of Glock fan boys and their "magic pistols", once read a statement that said an individual had put 15k rounds through one with no maintenance, with no functionality issues. I thought yeah right... I bought a trade in gen 2 Glock 19 in "good" condition, and decided to just see how tough it was. After 3,550 rounds with 2 stove pipes total I couldn't take it anymore and had to scrape the grunge out of it. All told my torture of it lasted almost a year and a half, involved one session of riding openly on my hip while I shredded a pasture (a dusty affair in Texas's summers) followed by 300 shots with no issues. Another string of 100 shots in a light drizzle with no issues. I started a strong skeptic, and finished believing it was a tool I could trust. I'm sure there are other models out now that could stand up to the abuse I put that little pistol through, frankly with today's ammo issues I don't see myself finding out first hand, but I'm thinking they aren't in the majority and I would be surprised if a 1911 style platform could.
Hassan, I am aware of the GEN4 problems, but so what? It has allegedly been fixed, and I still see new GEN3s for sale. Other than the one hiccup, what do you have? I'm sure that I can find glowing reviews of any firearm online from individuals, but I prefer to give far greater value to the reports of people that see thousands of guns every year and have observed far to many fail to perform satisfactorily. Plus, the sales numbers and market share to organizations that need a "working gun" speak for themselves. If you feel differently, great. Don't let me rain on your parade. I'm going to bet my life on a Kel-Tec- - good one.
I had to laugh as well. As I told our friend BubbaFett in his "Should I get a .45?" thread: Many guns can shoot a couple thousand rounds at the range with few problems. How many can make it through a course like Fighting Pistol without issue? I like my Steyr M40 a lot, but I'm still going back to a Glock 17 when finances allow. The several Glocks I have had years ago were all flawless. (Models were 17, 19, 20, 22 and 23, Gen 1 & 2 if memory serves as I got rid of them in 1994.) I've enjoyed shooting Sigs, HKs and S&Ws that were top performers and I'd bet my life on as well. Never met a Kel-Tec that I can say that about, unless I'm going to use it as a blunt force trauma device. Cheaply made 1911s are great for that as well. I'd love to shoot some of these reliable Kel-Tecs and other brands I hear about on the Internet, because the ones I see in person seem to be the lemons. That being said, use what works for you. I haven't had the opportunity to put enough of them through the wringer, just a few.
I was fully prepared to pass on this. I have a few other "small" pistols. (PM9, XDS45, Kimber Ultra Crimson Carry...) Walked into my local shop, and one of the guys behind the counter says, "I've got something to show you". I own and like/rely on a number of Glocks...I'm now on the waiting list for another one
