A Glock 42?

[jkurtz7]

If you wouldn't be interested in a single stack 9 the size of the 42, you probably aren't Glock's target market. Military Arms, again probably not Glock's market for a small .380.

I am frankly delighted by the 42. If it turns out great, we win. If it is a dog, it just costs Mr. Glock some money. Seems like a win/win to me.

Same analysis with the Remington 9mm, the new Sig, the HK striker --- the more the merrier as far as I am concerned.

I have a Shield, so I'm covered in the small single stack 9mm area.

[Nephrology]

I have a Shield, so I'm covered in the small single stack 9mm area.

Except the shield has a stupid liability, er, sorry, useless thumb safety...

[JHC]

If you wouldn't be interested in a single stack 9 the size of the 42, you probably aren't Glock's target market. Military Arms, again probably not Glock's market for a small .380.

I am frankly delighted by the 42. If it turns out great, we win. If it is a dog, it just costs Mr. Glock some money. Seems like a win/win to me.

Same analysis with the Remington 9mm, the new Sig, the HK striker --- the more the merrier as far as I am concerned.

+1 and if it's as pleasantly shootable as it might be; I know many less hard core types that could benefit from this.

[JHC]

I wish it had finger grooves.


There, I said it.

Nice! lol

[GardoneVT]

Cold fact-most folks, judging from my letter slot view in the Midwest, dont care about advanced proficiency with their carry guns. They shoot 50 rounds or so, make a pie plate at 7 yards, and call it good. Compared to those folks I look like a ninja ,and I'm a long way from being that good objectively .

Sure, WE don't have a need for a G42-but we're the gun world equivalent of BMW enthusiasts.Almost no one who rocks a unique M series BMW would willingly prefer to drive a Toyota Camry, but the boring midsize grocery fetcher stays in the top three domestic sales charts for a reason.The G42 will succeed on the same basis-the Average Joe who can't be bothered to care about the gun they're carrying will love it.

In a perfect world, every shooter would take responsibility for their performance or lack thereof and make rational decisions about their equipment accordingly.But we don't live there.

[tackleberry011]

First one out, the Glock 42, .380m ACP. Here it is for sale on gunbroker for $705 or roughly the cost of TWO Ruger LCP's. We beg for a single-stack subcompact in 9mm or .40 and Glock gives us a warmed over concept pioneered by Ruger at the 2008 SHOT show at twice the cost. My excitement has had a large bucket of ice water thrown all over it.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=386016836

[GJM]

Since it started at $449, and has been bid up over $700 in less than a day, with six days to run, I bet it gets mighty close to $1,000 before the auction ends.

[GJM]

Glock marketing has been busy:

http://youtu.be/2EVj5NOywSY

[JHC]

Glock marketing has been busy:

http://youtu.be/2EVj5NOywSY

"Tough enough for men!"
"But girls like it too!"

[JHC]

A lower recoiling .380 with a "good" Glock trigger might be totally rationale for some shooters vis a vis recoil and dimensions and shootability of other options.
"Good enough" was adjudicated here in TCinVA's thread last year right?