Glock 42 or other smaller .380 auto users out there?

[rawkguitarist]

This is my NPE option. My G42 with a Holosun 507k.

With modern modern ammo choices like loads using the Hornady 90gn XTP bullet, .380 is now able to get darn close to 9mm performance. Any other Glock 42 users out there? Or similar .380 platforms?

https://i.imgur.com/tFRRM3a.jpg

[4RNR]

I'm not seeing how Hornady 380 is getting close to 9mm.

And with that setup I may as well carry a 9. My 380 is throw it in the pocket to run outside. If I gotta holster, rds and extended mag then it's just 9mm

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

I'm looking at .380 but it's purely for a super lightweight/light recoil and pocketable option.

I do agree to some extent about .380 being close to 9mm penetration depending on the load, I'd lean towards the Honey Badger from Black Hills myself in this caliber.

To say it's EQUAL, not so much because it's got less mass and velocity than 9mm which matters in some ways.

[rawkguitarist]

I'm not seeing how Hornady 380 is getting close to 9mm.

And with that setup I may as well carry a 9. My 380 is throw it in the pocket to run outside. If I gotta holster, rds and extended mag then it's just 9mm

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

Have you by chance looked at ballistics testing on the Hornady 90 XTP or just speculating? Its testing well within the 12 - 18in ballistics gelatin in bare and denim. It doesn't expand great - about .40. But as I said "darn close" which isn't that accurate of a measurement. :cool:

The pic kinda distorts it, but this pistol is still actually pretty small and thin being Glock's smallest pistol. Or I wouldn't be carrying it NPE. Also, depending on the shirt I'm wearing I'll sometimes use the 6 round mag.

[TheNewbie]

I wish the G42 worked for me. It just didn’t, think it was that my grip and the gun didn’t mesh.


In theory a Glock 42x would be awesome. If it worked for me, which it wouldn’t.:p

[Totem Polar]

I’ve been doing a lot of trail hiking/biking with a G42 of late, because, light and lazy. I also have a new shooter friend who chose one for herself, so that played a roll in my getting back into the 42. Plus, I had a gadget for it; cognoscenti know that spare gadgets drive the Glock buy train.
:)

I don’t harbor any illusions that it’s the equal to a 9mm. What it is is a very light, reasonably compact, and incredibly easy shooting little piece. I like the G42, myself.

[4RNR]

Have you by chance looked at ballistics testing on the Hornady 90 XTP or just speculating? Its testing well within the 12 - 18in ballistics gelatin in bare and denim. It doesn't expand great - about .40. But as I said "darn close".

The pic kinda distorts it, but this pistol is still actually pretty small and thin being Glock's smallest pistol. Or I wouldn't be carrying it NPE. Also, depending on the shirt I'm wearing I'll sometimes use the 6 round mag.I don't know what NPE means

If it doesn't expand great why am I paying the premium? With 380 I stick to fmj for penetration.

For me this is the purpose of a 380. Small, light and can be carried for quick trips without a holster. Walk the dog, run to the store, answer the door... Anything else is 9mm with an actual grip for adult hands.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220428/f291422426829ef09a5041d1dd02b079.jpg

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[rawkguitarist]

I don't know what NPE means

If it doesn't expand great why am I paying the premium? With 380 I stick to fmj for penetration.

For me this is the purpose of a 380. Small, light and can be carried for quick trips without a holster. Walk the dog, run to the store, answer the door... Anything else is 9mm with an actual grip for adult hands.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220428/f291422426829ef09a5041d1dd02b079.jpg

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

NPE = Non-permissive environment.

.50 being the standard, .40 is still expansion. And again the XTP meets FBI protocols for penetration. I didn’t intend to get in a cartridge debate.

I carry a Glock 19 most of the time. But I have to carry discreetly often so I chose the smallest pistol I could get that still shoots well. So I really dig the 42. I have an LCP too and I’d expect that to come into this thread conversation. A really good pocket pistol.

[BillSWPA]

NPE = non-permissive environment. This is often used to mean carrying in a location where carrying is legal, but where it can result in loss of one's job. Given the consequences of getting caught, the acceptable risk of getting caught is significantly below 1%, although absolute zero risk is never possible to achieve. Keep in mind that when spending 40-60 hours/week around the same people, anything out of place will be noticed, particularly by the women, who will gossip about it until they figure out why it is out of place.

The absolute smallest and lightest reasonable gun is usually the correct choice for this type of carry. It must be carried in a manner that keeps it hidden perfectly regardless of the activities or position of the wearer.

With the above in mind, I do not see a .380 with a huge extended magazine and red dot carried in a standard IWB holster as a good choice. The first time the wearer sits, stands, or bends the wrong way, and the cover garment raises up or prints at the wrong time, the wearer is busted. Or, the first time the wearer is bumped by a co-worker in the wrong place, the wearer is busted. I would prefer a Ruger LCP or Kel-Tec P3AT or P-32 for this role, with a different carry method.

[TheNewbie]

NPE = non-permissive environment. This is often used to mean carrying in a location where carrying is legal, but where it can result in loss of one's job. Given the consequences of getting caught, the acceptable risk of getting caught is significantly below 1%, although absolute zero risk is never possible to achieve. Keep in mind that when spending 40-60 hours/week around the same people, anything out of place will be noticed, particularly by the women, who will gossip about it until they figure out why it is out of place.

The absolute smallest and lightest reasonable gun is usually the correct choice for this type of carry. It must be carried in a manner that keeps it hidden perfectly regardless of the activities or position of the wearer.

With the above in mind, I do not see a .380 with a huge extended magazine and red dot carried in a standard IWB holster as a good choice. The first time the wearer sits, stands, or bends the wrong way, and the cover garment raises up or prints at the wrong time, the wearer is busted. Or, the first time the wearer is bumped by a co-worker in the wrong place, the wearer is busted. I would prefer a Ruger LCP or Kel-Tec P3AT or P-32 for this role, with a different carry method.


KEL TEC has my P32. It was bought used so I’m not surprised it needed a trip to them.


It really is a great option for a small gun that doesn’t hurt to shoot.

[Clusterfrack]

I’m eating lunch at home, listening to the Fontaines DC, and this is what’s in my pocket anytime I’m wearing pants, unless I’m carrying a duty size gun or am barred from carrying a gun.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220428/b3fd029d5a8e1c0a72db14a000acd95c.jpg

[BehindBlueI's]

And again the XTP meets FBI protocols for penetration.

No, it doesn't. FBI protocols are a battery of tests, not just bare gel and denim, and unless there's been a very recent change there is no .380 cartridge that passes the battery.

.380 ball penetrates fine and will often over penetrate in soft tissue only strikes. It will break adult's bones but at a big reduction in penetration. It skips off skulls reasonably often. Expanding ammunition tends to either not expand through intermediate barriers, making it expensive ball, or over expand and not penetrate to standard.

.380 is a reasonable suicide caliber and is probably 'good enough' in self defense situations, but it is not in the same league as common duty calibers that actually pass the entirety of the FBI testing protocols.

[rawkguitarist]

NPE = non-permissive environment. This is often used to mean carrying in a location where carrying is legal, but where it can result in loss of one's job. Given the consequences of getting caught, the acceptable risk of getting caught is significantly below 1%, although absolute zero risk is never possible to achieve. Keep in mind that when spending 40-60 hours/week around the same people, anything out of place will be noticed, particularly by the women, who will gossip about it until they figure out why it is out of place.

The absolute smallest and lightest reasonable gun is usually the correct choice for this type of carry. It must be carried in a manner that keeps it hidden perfectly regardless of the activities or position of the wearer.

With the above in mind, I do not see a .380 with a huge extended magazine and red dot carried in a standard IWB holster as a good choice. The first time the wearer sits, stands, or bends the wrong way, and the cover garment raises up or prints at the wrong time, the wearer is busted. Or, the first time the wearer is bumped by a co-worker in the wrong place, the wearer is busted. I would prefer a Ruger LCP or Kel-Tec P3AT or P-32 for this role, with a different carry method.

Everyone has there own variables right? I’ve definitely run this through the risk/benefit/gun/carry method ringer.

#1 - I have to have an RDO. I cannot see iron sights well enough to responsibly rely on them. I’ve had cataract surgery and have lenses focused at distance. So...another reason I choose this gun.

#2 I wear lose casual clothes - usually hiking clothes. And I’m EXTREMELY cognizant of not allowing print by movement etc. and due to COVID there isn’t much face to face interaction. All meetings are Skype.

[the Schwartz]

Keep in mind that when spending 40-60 hours/week around the same people, anything out of place will be noticed, particularly by the women, who will gossip about it until they figure out why it is out of place.


They're nothing but trouble, I tell ya'! ;)

[rawkguitarist]

No, it doesn't. FBI protocols are a battery of tests, not just bare gel and denim, and unless there's been a very recent change there is no .380 cartridge that passes the battery.

.380 ball penetrates fine and will often over penetrate in soft tissue only strikes. It will break adult's bones but at a big reduction in penetration. It skips off skulls reasonably often. Expanding ammunition tends to either not expand through intermediate barriers, making it expensive ball, or over expand and not penetrate to standard.

.380 is a reasonable suicide caliber and is probably 'good enough' in self defense situations, but it is not in the same league as common duty calibers that actually pass the entirety of the FBI testing protocols.
Cool I’ll take your emphatic word for it. Thanks. My understanding has been the basic 12 - 18 and the McPherson Wound Trauma measurement (if I have that right off the top of my head).

[Clusterfrack]

Everyone has there own variables right? I’ve definitely run this through the risk/benefit/gun/carry method ringer.


For sure, and you've got enough knowledge and experience to make that decision carefully. I'm not going to try to talk you out of or into anything.

On my body, the thickness of the gun matters less than the length of the grip--and more recently--the height of the RDS. That's why I carry a compact duty-size gun (P-07) most of the time.

[rawkguitarist]

For sure, and you've got enough knowledge and experience to make that decision carefully. I'm not going to try to talk you out of or into anything.

On my body, the thickness of the gun matters less than the length of the grip--and more recently--the height of the RDS. That's why I carry a compact duty-size gun (P-07) most of the time.

Ah, I actually saw your thread I think about the 509t. I don’t have a lot of belly fat... but funny it’s enough to help conceal my RDO. Your thread got me thinking about it. Body types are another major factor too, right?

[TheNewbie]

Cool I’ll take your emphatic word for it. Thanks. My understanding has been the basic 12 - 18 and the McPherson Wound Trauma measurement (if I have that right off the top of my head).


BBI and I may disagree about a lot, but it’s clear he knows what he’s talking about when it comes to ballistics. Paying attention to what he writes in this regard will make you more knowledgeable.

PF is a great place and I looked at your podcast site and think you will fit in well here. Just be aware we all have our opinions but we have people who know what they are talking about. Not because they are experts, but because they are experienced and practiced.


My have quoted you prior to the edit. If I did never mind likely. lol

[camsdaddy]

I am not disregarding the effectiveness of the 380 cartridge. I will say there are other options for NPE such as SmartCarry or Philster. I do applaud you for wanting the most effective round as you can accurately place on target. I would think the 42 with the dot would soak up recoil and make for a great option.

[rawkguitarist]

BBI and I may disagree about a lot, but it’s clear he knows what he’s talking about when it comes to ballistics. Paying attention to what he writes in this regard will make you more knowledgeable.

PF is a great place and I looked at your podcast site and think you will fit in well here. Just be aware we all have our opinions but we have people who know what they are talking about. Not because they are experts, but because they are experienced and practiced.


My have quoted you prior to the edit. If I did never mind likely. lol
Thanks buddy. I’m certainly here to learn too. And yeah lots of knowledge in this place. Would be cool to get Doc Roberts up-to-date take on .380.

[rawkguitarist]

I am not disregarding the effectiveness of the 380 cartridge. I will say there are other options for NPE such as SmartCarry or Philster. I do applaud you for wanting the most effective round as you can accurately place on target. I would think the 42 with the dot would soak up recoil and make for a great option.

Yeah man, it’s a nice shooting pistol. G42’s can be finicky with ammo choices and very sensitive to grip.
I put a tungsten guide rod assembly with a slightly reduced recoil spring. Since I hadn’t seen ANY info on G42’s running a dot I was concerned about it cycling. I ran the best function tests I could think of using both range and my carry ammo. Including thumb pectoral index, strong hand only, support hand only, odd shooting angles with lose grips and even holding it out to my side with the most ridiculous limp grip I could muster. Didn’t have any malfunctions. I’m nearly positive my 19 would have choked in these grips.

And yeah, that Philster Enigma is brilliant. If my situation changes it’s on my radar.

[Clusterfrack]

Thanks buddy. I’m certainly here to learn too. And yeah lots of knowledge in this place. Would be cool to get Doc Roberts up-to-date take on .380.

Here's a 2-year old post:

Why would someone want to use a .380 as a BUG or for off-duty carry when they can use a similar size 9 mm like an S&W Shield or G43? I get that the G42 is easy to shoot--more so than a J-frame, but the 13 oz G42 holds only half the rounds compared to the more effective 21 oz G26 that is also easy to shoot; moving to an easily concealed, very capable compact handgun like a G48, G19, M&Pc, etc… is far superior to a .380 Auto in almost every respect. In addition, as a BUG, the G26 uses the same mags as a G34/17/19 primary pistol, much like running an M&Pc as a BUG to an M&P duty pistol--this has a LOT of advantages in a duty BUG role.

In general, friends don't let friends carry .380's...

But Rule 1 applies—having a .380 Auto beats not having a firearm. So if a sub-compact .380 is what you must go with due to size issues or limitations on limb function, so be it. Just make sure your .380 Auto handgun is reliable.

Most of our .380 and .38 sp testing has been done for LE agencies, so you will not find the data on the internet. The FBI has also done extensive testing and has come to the same conclusion--that no .380 loads meet the minimum penetration, expansion, and barrier requirements.

Again--there are NO .380 loads that meet the FBI BRF/IWBA/JSWB-IPT standard test protocols.

The .380 Auto tends to always wind up as a compromise, with the end-user having to choose the best option from a bunch of less than desirable choices. Obviously FMJ penetrates well, but offers no expansion (this includes the Lehigh Defense XP) and beware that some bulk FMJ offers suspect QC compared to duty ammo. With expanding designs, the best of the worst in .380 seem to be the Hornady 90 gr XTP (poor expansion), Federal 90 gr HydraShok (inconsistent expansion), and Speer 90 gr Gold Dot (a bit shallow on penetration) and all three are poor against intermediate barriers. Function is also an issue in some .380 pistols, with FMJ sometimes offering superior feeding reliability.

This cannot be emphasized enough--ensure your .380 Auto handgun is reliable with the carry ammo you select.

[TheNewbie]

Yeah man, it’s a nice shooting pistol. G42’s can be finicky with ammo choices and very sensitive to grip.
I put a tungsten guide rod assembly with a slightly reduced recoil spring. Since I hadn’t seen ANY info on G42’s running a dot I was concerned about it cycling. I ran the best function tests I could think of using both range and my carry ammo. Including thumb pectoral index, strong hand only, support hand only, odd shooting angles with lose grips and even holding it out to my side with the most ridiculous limp grip I could muster. Didn’t have any malfunctions. I’m nearly positive my 19 would have choked in these grips.

And yeah, that Philster Enigma is brilliant. If my situation changes it’s on my radar.


I had two G42s that had multiple failure to feeds. The second one was a replacement from Glock of the first one. This was 3-4 years ago.


My thought was thumb pressure on the slide might have been causing it, I don’t know. I’ve never had much luck with reliable .380s except for an LCP Gen 1.


If your failure at trying to get your 42s to choke is indicative of the G42 today, then I might consider one again. Really wish they would cram some more rounds into their .380.

[LockedBreech]

I pocket carry an LCP Max in a DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster as my smallest carry. Have for about six months after about 11.5 years of carrying a first-gen LCP. For me it carries a good bit smaller than even the Shield or G43 and 11 rounds with 12 in a reload isn’t bad at all. If I’m wearing a hoodie, jacket, loose button up etc. I switch to a Shield Plus which is my preferred / standard carry. I use Critical Defense or Gold Dot 90-grain. For years it was FMJ but I am not aware of an FMJ round or FMJ-like round for .380 that has higher quality control, nickel casings for low light checks, sealed primers, and low flash powders. I don’t expect it to meet the FBI protocol. I’ve considered the wisdom of at least having the last 2-3 rounds in each magazine be FMJ, but I’ve never been a fan of mixing ammo like that.

I don’t harbor illusions .380 matches a 9mm or even a .38 Special +P after discussing and carrying the cartridge for about 12 years now. It’s certainly not a bad round, but I figure I save myself from unrealistically overestimating my chances with it by mentally treating it exactly the same as when I pocket carried my dad’s old Beretta Bobcat .22LR at my sketchy hotel night clerk job in college, that mentality being: this probably won’t do much but it might buy me a few seconds to get out of trouble and escape.

Carried with that mentality, .380 goes from being marginal to being superb.

As a side note, for personal reasons I can’t talk about in detail for a good long while, I’ve become rudely recently aware of the importance of the FBI protocol. Someone very important to me was in an OIS. Bullet passed through assailant’s gun hand/forearm and its assorted tendons/bones before continuing through their clothing to inflict terminal damage. Duty round was Speer G2. I have nothing but gratitude to Glock, Speer, IWBA, the FBI, and all the professionals like Doc Roberts who contributed to duty rounds being so much better than they used to be. It’s easy to think all the data charts, gel, ballistics and barriers are just gun nerd and forum talk, but that field of science may well have saved me and others from unimaginable loss.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Cool I’ll take your emphatic word for it. Thanks. My understanding has been the basic 12 - 18 and the McPherson Wound Trauma measurement (if I have that right off the top of my head).

Penetration must be met in *each* of the standards, not just bare gel and heavy clothing, or a given cartridge does not actually pass the FBI protocols. No .380 passes auto glass that I am aware of. Auto glass, besides the obvious relevancy, is also a very good indicator of performance with a bone strike. For example, a bullet passing through a forearm bone and then into the chest, the bullet that passed auto glass will do better than the bullet that did not.

[psalms144.1]

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?51484-Is-ball-still-best-for-380-ACP-Ammo-for-mouse-guns

Plenty of information, some good, some bad, in that semi-epic thread. BLUF, the smart money for .380s is ball, preferably flat-tip to help penetrate bone.

[lwt16]

We have three or four G42s here. Once we got a few P365s in the stable, the G42s have become safe queens.

I am planning on a P365 in .380 soon as a NPE gun should ever the need arise.

Regards.

[psalms144.1]

On the question of the pistol in question, I briefly owned a G42. I found it to be incredibly soft shooting, but never once was able to hold it in such a manner as to NOT cause it to go forward on an empty magazine. I thought to keep it as a possible carry gun for my wife, but found that she had numerous malfunctions because she couldn't/wouldn't hold it firmly enough to let it work properly with the heavy double recoil spring in the pistol.

I'm currently without a 380, but, were I to need a real NPE pistol, I'd likely go with the LCP Max - due to smaller overall size and increased capacity.

[TheNewbie]

I actually like the Kel Tec P3AT more than the LCP handling wise. Can better thumb the hammer and just like it for whatever other reason.

Wish they would do a “plus” version of it with super reliability.

Doubt as they stopped making the regular version.

[Rex G]

No .380 is “close” to 9mm performance, if we mean 9mm Luger, 9x19, 9mm NATO, etc. The .380 ACP will make a hole, in people, preferably bad people, if we do our part. If an adversary is beyond/behind intervening cover, a true duty-level 9mm will be more likely to defeat the cover, and still be effective.

I am not meaning to have a negative “tone,” regarding .380 ACP. On occasion, the only firearm on my person might be a .32 ACP or .32 H&R. Any of these cartridges, of lesser power than 9mm/.38 Special, should be used with proper attention to their capabilities, especially if the barrel length is short.

[Blades]

Why not the P365? Looking at HandgunHero (https://www.handgunhero.com/compare/glock-g42-vs-sig-sauer-p365#compare-specs) it's only 4.4 ounces heavier(unloaded) and a smidgen wider. Just wondering.
I had a G42 but sold it and picked up a P365 instead. I use a Boresite Solutions grip to make the tiny little grip work for me.

[JCN]

This is my NPE option. My G42 with a Holosun 507k.

With modern modern ammo choices like loads using the Hornady 90gn XTP bullet, .380 is now able to get darn close to 9mm performance. Any other Glock 42 users out there? Or similar .380 platforms?

https://i.imgur.com/tFRRM3a.jpg

I did a bunch of G42 testing wanting it to be close to a 9mm.

+P Underwoods and the whole shebang.

But its not.

Bunch of tests here:

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/jcn-ballistic-and-random-testing-compilation-master-thread.1713742/

Including this stuff:


https://youtu.be/tsk6IY8lx84


https://youtu.be/c8m46HGEXQE

[rawkguitarist]

I did a bunch of G42 testing wanting it to be close to a 9mm.

+P Underwoods and the whole shebang.

But its not.

Bunch of tests here:

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/jcn-ballistic-and-random-testing-compilation-master-thread.1713742/

Including this stuff:


https://youtu.be/tsk6IY8lx84


https://youtu.be/c8m46HGEXQE

Thanks for the info. Shooting the Bull did some testing work with gelatin/and denim layers and gelatin. Several others have too. Some rounds did well in those tests. Did my best to get solid info. Including ignoring the bubba ballistics on YouTube. I’m no ballistics expert and have been enlightened in this thread on the additional testing in the FBI protocol. Although I’ve read a lot of Dr. Roberts writings.

That said, a lighter thinner pistol with 9 rounds in it that I can shoot quite well and it runs a RDO I’m quite comfortable with it for my “mission”.

[JCN]

Thanks for the info. Shooting the Bull did some testing work with gelatin/and denim layers and gelatin. Several others have too. Some rounds did well in those tests. Did my best to get solid info. Including ignoring the bubba ballistics on YouTube. I’m no ballistics expert and have been enlightened in this thread on the additional testing in the FBI protocol. Although I’ve read a lot of Dr. Roberts writings.

That said, a lighter thinner pistol with 9 rounds in it that I can shoot quite well and it runs a RDO I’m quite comfortable with it for my “mission”.

Nobody is debating the role of a pocket pistol or downgraded ballistic firearm for comfort. I carry a pocket 38 revolver.

But don’t fool yourself in thinking 380 is close to 9mm. It’s probably “good enough,” but it’s not close.

Gel and denim tests are very limited in scope as you don’t really get a good sense of wound cavity unless you dye the channel. Start testing in other media and it gets pretty clear how much difference.

[flux]

For my running and cycling, I use to carry a LCP. Found it not too easy to shoot well under stress and clearing malfunctions was a chore. Got a G42 and have not looked back. Not the ideal calibre yes, but for its intended role I understand its limitations. Primary will always be 9mmP. Have run an Ultra Marathon with it as well. Mine has been reliable with ball , Hornady XTP and Winchester rangers. I do carry XTP in it. Very comfortable to run and cycle with, reloads are a breeze, it handles like it's larger siblings.

[Bucky]

With the above in mind, I do not see a .380 with a huge extended magazine and red dot carried in a standard IWB holster as a good choice. The first time the wearer sits, stands, or bends the wrong way, and the cover garment raises up or prints at the wrong time, the wearer is busted. Or, the first time the wearer is bumped by a co-worker in the wrong place, the wearer is busted. I would prefer a Ruger LCP or Kel-Tec P3AT or P-32 for this role, with a different carry method.

This. I know this may be a matter of confidence and skill set, but I’d much rather take my chances with a G43 without a dot than a G42 with a dot.

[rawkguitarist]

This. I know this may be a matter of confidence and skill set, but I’d much rather take my chances with a G43 without a dot than a G42 with a dot.
Nothing to do with skill set. I would prefer irons on any smaller pistol. But I had early onset cataracts. Now I have synthetic lenses focused at distance. 20/15 vision past about 3 and a half feet. So irons are out on any firearm for me now.

[rawkguitarist]

For my running and cycling, I use to carry a LCP. Found it not too easy to shoot well under stress and clearing malfunctions was a chore. Got a G42 and have not looked back. Not the ideal calibre yes, but for its intended role I understand its limitations. Primary will always be 9mmP. Have run an Ultra Marathon with it as well. Mine has been reliable with ball , Hornady XTP and Winchester rangers. I do carry XTP in it. Very comfortable to run and cycle with, reloads are a breeze, it handles like it's larger siblings.
Yeah someone suggested I just get a Sig P365. Great suggestion, but even if I didn't need an RDO I stay in the same family of pistols. And like you said - one of my reasons for the G42 is that it really runs with a significant does of "shoots like a larger pistol". And its in the Glock family with my PREFERRED carry G19 and my main training/teaching/competition Gen 5 17.

Doesn't mean I won't step out... Soon I'm getting a Staccato and a LTT 92 when I've got the disposable/unencumbered chunk of cash. But I've been shooting primarily glocks for about 25 years.

[rawkguitarist]

Ok, so after my deserved beat down due to my “.380 darn close to 9mm” comment, I’m paying my penitence today. Carrying my wife’s G48 with 124gn HST. Wearing a decently baggy black T-shirt so concealment is good to go. Damn... this thing needs a grip job tho.

Back to the G42 on Monday. :cool:

https://i.imgur.com/053yJsn.jpg

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I'm not seeing adding more size to a G42, with no offense. For me, it exists as a very low profile gun that I can pocket carry when dress requires. I've belt carried it once or twice when my back went nuts and heavy things were unpleasant. I completely understand the 'stopping power' arguments and the compromises for carry ease. As far as shooting the gun - I've reported here before on shooting it in close range matches with the original dot and U Glock sights. I can do it decently and make a match head shot at a distance (not DA STREETZ). My eyes are with cataract implants and progressive lens.

RDS on my EDC Glocks are an experimental work in progress. My current EDC is a G26 with Trijicon night sights. I don't have trouble shooting a 26 acceptably. If the mag bans are ever lifted, might go to a RDS G19 if the RDS works out.

Any way, I don't see the additions to a 42. It's a size compromise, why undo it? The 365s might be fun if I was going to spend the bucks on a new carry gun but I don't see the need for it now.

[rawkguitarist]

Any way, I don't see the additions to a 42. It's a size compromise, why undo it? The 365s might be fun if I was going to spend the bucks on a new carry gun but I don't see the need for it now.

Glenn, I don’t fault you for maybe missing it. :cool: But I have the RDO because irons are nearly a complete blur to me. Mag extension is for when I can get away with it.

Again.... even in this state, it’s a pretty small pistol. It’s probably as small as a pistol can get and run a red dot.

Yeah, On getting any new pistols. I’d rather spend my money on ammo and training than any new pistols right now. Maybe someday I might grab a G43. But add the cost for milling and a RDO.

[Bucky]

Nothing to do with skill set. I would prefer irons on any smaller pistol. But I had early onset cataracts. Now I have synthetic lenses focused at distance. 20/15 vision past about 3 and a half feet. So irons are out on any firearm for me now.

I should have added physical limitations as well, and I apologize for that.

[rawkguitarist]

I should have added physical limitations as well, and I apologize for that.
No offense taken buddy!

[rawkguitarist]

In the you don't know what you don't know realm... I did some searches and see what a covered topic .380 pistols have been. And seems to be a decently contentious topic like "here we go again... the damn .380's." Then the debate begins about effectiveness. In the guitar forum world... it seems like starting a thread about Klon overdrive pedals or Dumble amps.

[TheNewbie]

In the you don't know what you don't know realm... I did some searches and see what a covered topic .380 pistols have been. And seems to be a decently contentious topic like "here we go again... the damn .380's." Then the debate begins about effectiveness. In the guitar forum world... it seems like starting a thread about Klon overdrive pedals or Dumble amps.



We do love to debate.

After shooting a Kel Tec P32, I like it even more than the mini 380s. Maybe I can ruffle some feathers by starting a thread that 32 rivals .357 magnum out of short barrels.


Obviously (I hope) joking....


A Kel Tec P32 Max would be cool. 10-12 rounds of .32 in a very shootable and concealable package. I’m under no illusion about .32 or 380, but they have a viable role. I had much rather shoot and practice with a P32 or 365 380 than something like a PF9.

[Wooosh]

I've been interested in a G42 for quite some time, but I could never get a hold of one to try out first. How easy is it to "limp-wrist" and induce a malfunction with the G42? That and reports of undersized chambers (probably from worn-out tooling) are the only serious issues with the G42 that I've heard about.

[Clusterfrack]

Nothing to do with skill set. I would prefer irons on any smaller pistol. But I had early onset cataracts. Now I have synthetic lenses focused at distance. 20/15 vision past about 3 and a half feet. So irons are out on any firearm for me now.

Can you see blurry sights when you are target focused? I ask because I've been shooting target focus with irons for nearly 5 years, and it was one of the biggest improvements I've had in my shooting career.

[lwt16]

102800

P365 in .380

Quite a bit lighter than the 9mm version. Easy to shoot, factory milled, reliable so far.

Regards.

[Vista461]

I've been interested in a G42 for quite some time, but I could never get a hold of one to try out first. How easy is it to "limp-wrist" and induce a malfunction with the G42? That and reports of undersized chambers (probably from worn-out tooling) are the only serious issues with the G42 that I've heard about.

Never had a malfunction with my old G42. I got a relatively early one in 2014 when a bunch of us got in when our department did an order. Ended up selling it to a coworker because I wasn’t carrying it as much. Kinda wish I still had it. One of the softest shooting center fires pistols I’ve shot.

[Totem Polar]

I've been interested in a G42 for quite some time, but I could never get a hold of one to try out first. How easy is it to "limp-wrist" and induce a malfunction with the G42? That and reports of undersized chambers (probably from worn-out tooling) are the only serious issues with the G42 that I've heard about.

I *think* that I’m on my 4th G42. :rolleyes:

My first was from the original MLK day ship right after the SHOT show intro (first 500 serial#). It was a *complete* POS, as were most early guns. I let the idea go for a few years while the bugs got worked out, then got my next one—which was awesome, in terms of shootability and reliability. My third one went to a friend here. I’ve learned my lesson: I won’t be flipping the one I have now. It’s also stone reliable, like guns #2 and #3, and in my mountain biking chest rig as I type. I’ve shot matches and an ECQC with the thing, with no malfs. No complaints. The current iterations are as good to go as any Glock, and serve a specific niche pretty well. JMO.

[TheNewbie]

The two G42s I had were not reliable. One was a replacement from glock.

Don't remember all of the issues going on, but some of it may have been due to my grip (slide drag). The gun and I didn't mesh.

Still, a Glock 42x with a wonderful manual safety (have to say it no matter how annoying it is to hear!) would tempt me. Even if you told me there was a 84% chance it would not work.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I'm still mixed on my 42. It's worked well on two match excursions. Does it give me more than my 432 for the pocket carry days. One more round, an easier reload - yeah. If carry frees in NYS, my EDC will return to being my G26 or maybe a 19 with a dot. I'm not going to replenish my ammo supply in 380, I have enough for some more matches. When it gets low, that will be a decision point.

[757_Magnum]

Mine has been flawless so far with about 500 rounds through it, and the only issue I had was a training one. While doing drills in a class, I would sometimes fail to move the heel of my palm enough to allow the mag to drop. I have medium size hands. I also found the Dawson Precision sights to be a worthwhile upgrade.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I've mentioned that mine was one of the first out. Jammed solid on the very first round. I couldn't clear it. Karl Rehn had the magic touch for me. Then it would jam. So I took it to the range to run rounds. The darling fired out of battery, about 1/4 open with fire and smoke and crap flaming out of the port. Scared me a bit. Back to Glock and works now. But ....

[HeavyDuty]

I've mentioned that mine was one of the first out. Jammed solid on the very first round. I couldn't clear it. Karl Rehn had the magic touch for me. Then it would jam. So I took it to the range to run rounds. The darling fired out of battery, about 1/4 open with fire and smoke and crap flaming out of the port. Scared me a bit. Back to Glock and works now. But ....

Wait - where does Clarence fit in here?

(I kid, I kid…)

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Haha! I guess I do get old on Supremo Clarence at times! I am old though and that's how we roll.

Back to G42s - when will USPSA have a tiny 380 division?

[TGS]

I've been interested in a G42 for quite some time, but I could never get a hold of one to try out first. How easy is it to "limp-wrist" and induce a malfunction with the G42? That and reports of undersized chambers (probably from worn-out tooling) are the only serious issues with the G42 that I've heard about.

I've only got a few hundred rounds through my G42 as it's a tertiary gun for me that I only carry a few times a year as an ankle gun or concealed under a tucked in shirt (less common since I've gotten an Enigma)......but, I like it. No stoppages within those few hundred rounds. Very fun and efficient to shoot. I think the 380 P365 is probably a better buy since it has 10 rounds instead of 6 for the same size, and has a better grip texture. The Glock 42's grip texture sucks balls, so plan on modifying the grip off the bat...grip tape, Hogue slip-on, stippling....whatever, it just needs something.

[Wooosh]

The two G42s I had were not reliable. One was a replacement from glock.

Don't remember all of the issues going on, but some of it may have been due to my grip (slide drag). The gun and I didn't mesh.

Still, a Glock 42x with a wonderful manual safety (have to say it no matter how annoying it is to hear!) would tempt me. Even if you told me there was a 84% chance it would not work.

I've been thinking about trying out a G42 with the 39324 NY1 trigger. Does anyone have any experience with a NY1-equipped slim Glock?


I've only got a few hundred rounds through my G42 as it's a tertiary gun for me that I only carry a few times a year as an ankle gun or concealed under a tucked in shirt (less common since I've gotten an Enigma)......but, I like it. No stoppages within those few hundred rounds. Very fun and efficient to shoot. I think the 380 P365 is probably a better buy since it has 10 rounds instead of 6 for the same size, and has a better grip texture. The Glock 42's grip texture sucks balls, so plan on modifying the grip off the bat...grip tape, Hogue slip-on, stippling....whatever, it just needs something.

Adding grip tape would be a good idea. The reason why I didn't go with the P365 380 is because of reports of teething problems, and I'm not particularly a fan of Nu-Sig or their ex-Kimber CEO.

[Spartan1980]

Mine has been flawless so far with about 500 rounds through it, and the only issue I had was a training one. While doing drills in a class, I would sometimes fail to move the heel of my palm enough to allow the mag to drop. I have medium size hands. I also found the Dawson Precision sights to be a worthwhile upgrade.

My hands are large enough that this is a problem for me too. I'm only shooting in GSSF matches so we aren't reloading on the clock. It would definitely be an issue in an IDPA BUG or outlaw practical match though. Otherwise the gun runs like a top and is accurate enough to shoot a perfect score in Pocket division with reloads stuffed with craptastic X-Treme plated bullets. With some HP rounds it's quite an accurate little blaster.

[Polecat]

I got a POS one, but livin in the ATL, I took it over to Glock and they updated it fixed it on the spot! Great service and was 100% since.

I hope they do a larger capacity 42, actually would prefer a .30 super carry!! Would also love to see a true “pocket Glock” like a 10 round pocket .32ACP.

I saw somewhere they were finally bringing the 25 and 28 out, why I don’t get, as they are big for what they are nowdays.

[TGS]

Adding grip tape would be a good idea. The reason why I didn't go with the P365 380 is because of reports of teething problems, and I'm not particularly a fan of Nu-Sig or their ex-Kimber CEO.

Well, the Glock 42 has had more teething problems than the P365....so that's not really a good reason to knock the P365 out of the running.

[Totem Polar]

Haha! I guess I do get old on Supremo Clarence at times! I am old though and that's how we roll.

Back to G42s - when will USPSA have a tiny 380 division?

Here you go: a pin apropos for old dinosaurs in a G42 thread:

[lwt16]

I have a very early G42 and a later one. My son has one from a year or so back. My early one has been flawless while my later one had some issues early on with weak ammo. My son’s copy is flawless.

I’ve had shooters come to me with G42s that “jam”. All were slowing the slide with support hands. Fail to lock back after the last round were all shooters trapping the slide stop.

Small guns are hard to run for some folks.

[HCM]

Small guns are hard to run for some folks.

Quoted for truth.

[jh9]

Are the teething issues with the .380 P365s actually worked out?

.380 with a magazine spacer in a 9mm length action is giving me "9mm 1911" feels.

[lwt16]

Are the teething issues with the .380 P365s actually worked out?

.380 with a magazine spacer in a 9mm length action is giving me "9mm 1911" feels.

Mine (sample of one) has ran 100% with WWB, Federal, Precision One XTP, Speer Lawman, Speer Gold Dots, etc. Ejection is positive as well as consistent.

I’ve even ran it with the fifteen round 9mm magazines and it gobbles them up. I’m estimating 500 rounds with one failure that was ammunition related. IIRC, it was a Precision one XTP round that had bullet seat-back on chambering.

Regards.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

https://blog.krtraining.com/small-gun-class-data-2019-2020/


Conclusions
It’s convenient to have a large and a small gun, used as weather and type of wardrobe dictates. It’s good to be able to shoot at least 70% on the 3SL test with both, better to be able to shoot 90% with both. Being able to shoot a 70% or a 90+% score with the primary gun and gear configuration does NOT guarantee that you’ll be able to do it with the small gun.

Small guns are harder to shoot fast and accurate, deep concealment carry methods slow down draw times — but violent attackers are not going to attack more slowly to compensate for the difficulties imposed by the gear you’ve chosen.

[feudist]

https://blog.krtraining.com/small-gun-class-data-2019-2020/

I'm going to shoot that drill this weekend with a couple of pocket pistols, probably my Kahr CM9 and my LCP2.
It looks interesting.

[No.6]

My hands are large enough that this is a problem for me too. I'm only shooting in GSSF matches so we aren't reloading on the clock. It would definitely be an issue in an IDPA BUG or outlaw practical match though. Otherwise the gun runs like a top and is accurate enough to shoot a perfect score in Pocket division with reloads stuffed with craptastic X-Treme plated bullets. With some HP rounds it's quite an accurate little blaster.

I have verified that the Pearce +1 mag extension (or their same one with +0) is permissable in GSSF per rule 40.30.3 (p.7) "Pearce Grip, Inc. grip extenders only on G26, G27, G29, G30, G33, G36, G39, G42 and G43
magazines" and the ones I've converted run seamlessly.

That little bit is enough that it may make the difference for you.

[TGS]

I'm going to shoot that drill this weekend with a couple of pocket pistols, probably my Kahr CM9 and my LCP2.
It looks interesting.

I'm curious to see your results. Due to the similarity of the trigger to my primary and secondary (Glock 19 and 26), and 380 locked breech action, I can shoot noticeably better on drills with my G42 than my PM9, which was one of the reasons I decided to carry it instead of the PM9 regardless of the step down in caliber.

With the addition of a Hogue "HandAll" grip sleeve it really is quite a fun and enjoyable gun to shoot, too.

[1Rangemaster]

I've been thinking about trying out a G42 with the 39324 NY1 trigger. Does anyone have any experience with a NY1-equipped slim Glock?

So, Claude Werner, the “Tactical Professor” is running a dry practice and shooting evaluation on his Patreon site, using .380s. He has the G42 amongst his pistols, and put a NY style trigger in his. I didn’t even know Glock made one for the Slimlines and ordered one for a personal 43 I’m running in the program. Only a couple of hundred rounds; Werner has reported no issues and I haven’t had any either.
It’s different; heavier, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised in the shooting portion. I think the heavier trigger actually is causing me to focus a bit more. Not going to win any matches perhaps but it makes sense for a sometime pocket gun. I should mention Werner is a proponent of dry practice and had a summer program last year for snub revolvers which I found rewarding.
I can’t see a downside unless you have to have lighter triggers for your shooting. In the grand scheme of things that may be risky in some situations. You would have to dry snap it to stay tuned, but that should be happening anyway, IMO.


Adding grip tape would be a good idea. The reason why I didn't go with the P365 380 is because of reports of teething problems, and I'm not particularly a fan of Nu-Sig or their ex-Kimber CEO.

I’ll just say I agree with your sentiments.

[Wooosh]

Well, the Glock 42 has had more teething problems than the P365....so that's not really a good reason to knock the P365 out of the running.

The G42 came out in 2014, which is nearly a decade ago. Glock eventually sorted out the most of the problems with the G42 by 2018 with exception to the occasional lemon. In contrast, the P365 380 is still relatively new since it came out last year. I'm sure with enough time, all of the reliability issues with will be sorted out, but I don't want to wait that long. Additionally, I'm not a fan of the manual safety ergonomics on the P365, and I want a small gun to have a heavier trigger or decent manuel safety. This is why I am interested in a G42 with the NY1 trigger.

[1Rangemaster]

The G42 came out in 2014, which is nearly a decade ago. Glock eventually sorted out the most of the problems with the G42 by 2018 with exception to the occasional lemon. In contrast, the P365 380 is still relatively new since it came out last year. I'm sure with enough time, all of the reliability issues with will be sorted out, but I don't want to wait that long. Additionally, I'm not a fan of the manual safety ergonomics on the P365, and I want a small gun to have a heavier trigger or decent manuel safety. This is why I am interested in a G42 with the NY1 trigger.

Well, you will get the heavier trigger with the NY spring setup. I would describe it as a noticeably heavier take up with a slight rolling break in my 43-certainly controllable from my perspective. I’ll reiterate dry snaps are important; front sight on a target, and watching it through the press.

[zaitcev]

I might've mentioned this on the forum, but I don't remember well nowadays. Anyway, one of my G42s threw me a little bubble.

In the years past I shot my G42s a lot, and they were quite reliable. I could count on a string of about 800 between FTF with ETS magazines and maybe a 1000 with OEM magazines (although I used +2 extensions on them heavily). And so, never a problem. I learned very early on that light bullets did not work well. Back then it was primarily so-called "Barnes" bullets, it was before the lightweight copper bullets became popular. If it were above 90gr, the guns ran basically 100%. I had several thousand rounds on my guns. One even managed to wear out the RSA. Good times!

Sorry for the long intro, now's the story: about a year ago I found that my carry G42 always jammed with a nosedive after the 1st shot.

After some experimentation, which took about a year, I found that the following conditions had to be satisfied:

1. I had to carry the gun without shooting it for a couple of months. In prior years it never happened, because I always had a class or a match.

2. It had to be loaded with Hornady FTX.

If a cartridge with a Hornady bullet sat in the magazine for a long time, it would misfeed. Guaranteed. However! After the cleared the malfunction, the gun always ran perfectly for the rest of the day, Hornady or not. Also, the gun had to be carried. If I just left it in the safe for a month, nothing happened.

For now, I changed the ammo for Gold Dots, which do not appear to exhibit the aforementioned problem.

[rawkguitarist]

Can you see blurry sights when you are target focused? I ask because I've been shooting target focus with irons for nearly 5 years, and it was one of the biggest improvements I've had in my shooting career.

With a decently wide rear notch I can run irons pretty well outside/any sunlight. And yup, when I do I use target focus. Turned my EPS off the other day on my new 19 to run my backups. Fairly accurate shooting.

I keep saying I’m going to shoot a match with irons for the hell of it.

When it comes down to why I have a dot on each gun, any lower light at all, I can’t see them well enough to be responsible in a lethal situation.

[APS-PF]

2. It had to be loaded with Hornady FTX.
.

Well this sucks, why do you think the FTX is causing the problem? I got my G42s during a time when the 380 hollow points were overly expensive and I stuck with the FTX due to the ball-ish profile. I have not had any issue yet and I deliberately limp wristed a few magazines.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Well this sucks, why do you think the FTX is causing the problem? I got my G42s during a time when the 380 hollow points were overly expensive and I stuck with the FTX due to the ball-ish profile. I have not had any issue yet and I deliberately limp wristed a few magazines.

Just off the top of my head....body heat combined with length of time carrying has the polymer tip sticking just a bit to the inside of the magazine. Once they start moving, though, they function normally?

[feudist]

As promised, today I ran 5 pocket pistols through this test. https://www.krtraining.com/IPSC/Information/ThreeSecondsOrLess.htm

Conditions:
Cloudy, warm and windy. Outdoor range, alone.
Target: 2 current USPSA cardboard targets, one for centerfire and the other for rimfire.
Ammo: 9mm-Norma 115 ball/.380- Maxx brass 90 gr. ball/ .22LR- Minimags 40 gr. solids.
All guns were clean and lubed and all functioned 100%.
All guns were drawn from wrangler cargo shorts using model specific Aholster kydex pocket holsters.

Procedure:
Before its run, draw and dryfire each pistol FS, SHO and WHO. Between pistols I would score the previous target, tape and record it. Then I'd take a couple of minutes, drink water and then dryfire and load magazines. I alternated between centerfire and rimfire.
Scoring used KR's current "5 or zero standard" (I did score the entire head as 5 points...)

Results:
Kahr CM9(stock): 18/20, all under par. Horrible yank on WHO resulted in a D, and barely cut cardboard on the second 7 yard headshot.
S&W 43C .22LR(Precision Gun Specialties grip): 19/20, all under par.
LCP2 .380(Hogue Handall): 19/20(1 very close C), all under par.
LCP2 .22LR(Hogue Handall): 17/20( 2 C and a WHO D.
Glock 42(SCD and Defoor sights): 18/20, 2 failed pars.

Notes:
All strings were completed under 2.5 seconds, except for 2 strings with the Glock 42. The issue is the reason why I don't pocket carry it: Occasionally the rear of the slide badly snags the pocket on the draw. Even with a lot of dry practice I never got it to 100%, and when it happens it turns a sub-second draw into a 3 second rushed shot with poor grip.
My WHO is poor. I simply don't practice it. SHO needs greater emphasis, especially past 5 yards.
My fastest draws were with both LCPs, and my fastest splits were with the .22 LCP and the Glock 42.
Tied for best overall run were the LCP .380 and the 43C, with fast draws, splits and good grouping/placement. There was one draw bobble with the 43C when the vertical front sight caught the pocket, but it didn't blow the string.
The CM9 is my newest pistol, and it showed. Splits were .35s vs .19-25 for all the others, I placed poorly on the head and shot a wide D WHO. It's a tad snaggy also, and on the verge of being too heavy at 20 oz loaded.

Drill comments:
This drill takes about 10 minutes to shoot and score. The mix of skills tested is thorough, especially when shot from the pocket.Using the A or Down Zero zone allows a good balance of accuracy vs speed, particularly at the 7 yard line. Overall a well balanced drill using only 20 rounds. The only tweak I would suggest(not for novices) is to start the WHO string with the gun in your strong hand. Then at the beep, transfer it to your weak hand and shoot.
Next time I will set a 2.5 second par and shoot it cold. I need to shoot my duty Glock too, to see what the delta is. When I get my head shots and WHO down, I'll only use the upper half of the A zone and the eye box as the 5 points area.

Pocket pistol wish list:
I want it to weigh under a pound loaded, to draw like the 45 degree slope backed LCP, have the 100% all grips/all positions reliability of the 43C, be a centerfire as easy to shoot as the Glock 42, hit like the CM9, and have 10 rounds like the .22 LCP2...:rolleyes:

Total time on the range was just under 90 minutes.

[zaitcev]

Pocket pistol wish list:
I want it to weigh under a pound loaded, to draw like the 45 degree slope backed LCP, have the 100% all grips/all positions reliability of the 43C, be a centerfire as easy to shoot as the Glock 42, hit like the CM9, and have 10 rounds like the .22 LCP2...:rolleyes:
Sounds like P365.

[willie]

Well, the Glock 42 has had more teething problems than the P365....so that's not really a good reason to knock the P365 out of the running.

P365's make up a high volume sale item at my lgs and never come back unless the owner detail disassembles it. I'm biased against Sig products for the usual reasons so it's difficult for me to brag on one.

[1Rangemaster]

feudist : thank you for your efforts, time and expense. I went to the trouble 3 years or so back to cobble together Rehn’s target. He has an interesting one, but I think, as you did, just holding to a tight standard is a very good thing. I will have to try it with my Smith 317 and see how that goes.
I had an outdoor session this morning with a local attorney who is getting serious about proficiency. Afterwards, I remembered your post and made a run with a 43 w/ a NY trigger spring testing some Underwood loads. I had typically carried Hornady “Critical Defense” 115s, but wanted to see how the boutique loads did. 5 rounds each of the 124+P flat nose fmj, the 68 grain penetrating “Defender” and the 147 coated lead flatnose. All fed and functioned, but I’ll stick with the heavier bullets for now. The 68 grain-rated @1700fps-just seems really quick. Subjective bit there it is…
I used Werner’s” Tactical Professor” [I]Angry Face[I] and heart&pistol images on a piece of printer paper. The “face” has a 5” circle for center. I’ll call it clean as all hits on papers, face shots in 5”. No problem with 3 seconds; IWB holster concealed under fleece vest.
Thanks again for bringing up a practical drill; I’ll work it some more with different guns, etc.. Pretty sure it would go well with a 42 out of a belt holster.
As a side note, I’m reminded how nice this site is with people contributing. The attorney is just beginning. We did no timing-I want good handling and hits first.

[feudist]

feudist : thank you for your efforts, time and expense. I went to the trouble 3 years or so back to cobble together Rehn’s target. He has an interesting one, but I think, as you did, just holding to a tight standard is a very good thing. I will have to try it with my Smith 317 and see how that goes.
I had an outdoor session this morning with a local attorney who is getting serious about proficiency. Afterwards, I remembered your post and made a run with a 43 w/ a NY trigger spring testing some Underwood loads. I had typically carried Hornady “Critical Defense” 115s, but wanted to see how the boutique loads did. 5 rounds each of the 124+P flat nose fmj, the 68 grain penetrating “Defender” and the 147 coated lead flatnose. All fed and functioned, but I’ll stick with the heavier bullets for now. The 68 grain-rated @1700fps-just seems really quick. Subjective bit there it is…
I used Werner’s” Tactical Professor” [I]Angry Face[I] and heart&pistol images on a piece of printer paper. The “face” has a 5” circle for center. I’ll call it clean as all hits on papers, face shots in 5”. No problem with 3 seconds; IWB holster concealed under fleece vest.
Thanks again for bringing up a practical drill; I’ll work it some more with different guns, etc.. Pretty sure it would go well with a 42 out of a belt holster.
As a side note, I’m reminded how nice this site is with people contributing. The attorney is just beginning. We did no timing-I want good handling and hits first.

I'm a long time fan of Claude.
I shot his "Baseline Drill" last week also. It's a very good 50 round accuracy/controllability drill shot from 3-15 yards.

https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2015/09/25/friday-fundamentals-01-establishing-your-baseline/

[1Rangemaster]

I'm a long time fan of Claude.
I shot his "Baseline Drill" last week also. It's a very good 50 round accuracy/controllability drill shot from 3-15 yards.

https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2015/09/25/friday-fundamentals-01-establishing-your-baseline/

Thanks for that too. I may very well put this into the mix with the attorney shooting(I know, he’s a lawyer, but a good guy who has been an asset to the local club).

[zaitcev]

Just off the top of my head....body heat combined with length of time carrying has the polymer tip sticking just a bit to the inside of the magazine. Once they start moving, though, they function normally?

This is a seductively plausible explanation, but at this stage I wish someone else confirmed my observations. I don't want to be sued by Hornady for defamation. I shot that ammunition ever since it appeared on the market, it always worked well, and the issue only cropped up a year and a half ago. Maybe my magazines accumulated dirt (of course I clean them, but maybe not enough).

[rehn]

[QUOTE=1Rangemaster;1464737]feudist : thank you for your efforts, time and expense. I went to the trouble 3 years or so back to cobble together Rehn’s target.

There shouldn't be any "cobbling together" to have my target. It's a PDF file you print on 11x17 paper and glue or staple to any backer.

The 3 Sec or less test uses the KRT-2. The KRT-1 is an 18x24 that you either have to order online from Action Target or make out of two 11x17 pieces, but it's not relevant to the 3 Seconds or Less target. The KRT-1 is my version of the Casino target Tom Givens uses, just designed to fit on an 18x24 format for us folks that have USPSA/IDPA wide target stands and never use 24" wide stands or cardboard targets for anything ever because those extra inches around the periphery are all unacceptable hits anyway.

The KRT-2 is intended to provide a more anatomically correct target and hold students to a higher accuracy standard, since our center zone is not an 8" circle but a 6 x 7 x 8 trapezoid more closely matching the shape of the heart/lung area. It also has a spinal strip going up into the head. The head box is basically the 9 ring of a B8 with a smaller USPSA style A zone box where the brain is.

If you want to get fancy with scoring, you use the white boxes as "X count" and the grey area as acceptable hit, so the best possible score is 20-20x if all your hits stay in the white boxes.

https://blog.krtraining.com/the-krt-target-series/

[TGS]

There shouldn't be any "cobbling together" to have my target. It's a PDF file you print on 11x17 paper and glue or staple to any backer.

The average person doesn't stock 11x17 paper. Not that I've ever conducted an exhaustive survey, but I quite literally cannot remember a single person I've known in life to have 11x17 paper in stock when I've asked to print something off at their house, and I've never seen someone using an 11x17 home printed target at the range.

Thus, the average person is going to "cobble together" a target in an otherwise very non-standard paper for home use, instead of purchasing that non-standard paper just to shoot a one-off drill.

[rehn]

The average person doesn't stock 11x17 paper. Not that I've ever conducted an exhaustive survey, but I quite literally cannot remember a single person I've known in life to have 11x17 paper in stock when I've asked to print something off at their house, and I've never seen someone using an 11x17 home printed target at the range.

Thus, the average person is going to "cobble together" a target in an otherwise very non-standard paper for home use, instead of purchasing that non-standard paper just to shoot a one-off drill.

The reason I went with 11x17 was that it made it possible for people to get them printed at Office Depot or Kinkos or use their office printer, and paper could be purchased at office supply places. That's simpler than having to order a custom printed target from an online vendor and pay shipping for a piece of paper. Many of my regular students print more than one target and use it as their primary practice target. Worst case scenario, it takes two 8.5x11 pages taped together or pasted on a backer. I've had students print it on 11x14 (FAST sized) and shoot the drill at 2 and 5 yards instead - and some shoot it using the 11x14 sized at 3 and 7.

For those that find that process "too hard" as you did, we provided guidance on how the drill could be shot using other more widely available target designs.
FAST, IDPA, USPSA for example. It could be shot using two B-8s, using the 8 ring for the body on one and the 9 ring (black center) of another, or a B-27 using the 9 ring as the body and the head as the head.

[TGS]

For those that find that process "too hard" as you did, we provided guidance on how the drill could be shot using other more widely available target designs.

I'm not sure what you're on about.

I haven't found it "too hard", because I haven't tried shooting your drill at all.