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.
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
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.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
Glock marketing has been busy:
http://youtu.be/2EVj5NOywSY
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
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?
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais