Contemplating being done with the G43

[HeavyDuty]

Please elaborate on your thought process on direct milling. The Glock MOS 43X/48 are direct milled for a RMSc, and the 365/365X are direct milled for the RMSc and 407k/507k. The MOS needs a plate for the 507k but can also be modified to use a 507k without a plate.

I’m not @Wise_A, but from my perspective none of the current crop of optics that use the RMSc footprint are acceptable *to me* for a serious pistol. I have a 26.5 at Battlewerx right now being direct milled for a RMRcc, and a 43 will follow that before much longer.

What we need is an Aimpoint or Trijicon RDS made to the RMSc format. I suspect we will get there eventually.

[M2CattleCo]

Capacity of a G26, size of a G19 reliability of a G43. Sort of the worst of all worlds IMO.

That’s what I finally concluded about the 48. Almost all the cons of a 19, but none of the goodness.

I have had better reliability out of the 43 than 26, but I have some more full boogie 9mm on the way to shake out the 26 I have now. If it proves itself to me, it will replace my 43 as I don’t see any meaningful difference in carrying between the two.

[Wise_A]

I'm thinking hard about an RMR or an RMRcc. I've not so much as seen an RMS in person (apparently the glass is supposed to be real nice?) so I may have to scam Bezos for a demo or something. I really don't want to mess around with plates (I have a G34 MOS). It would not bother me to have to bin a slide. The G26 served me pretty well for 15 years. If I factor in everything I have into it (holsters, upgrades, wear parts, magazines), that's something like $45-$50 a year, so investing a little up-front for things like slide work doesn't bother me. Neither does replacing a slide down the road.

I am not a Holosun fan. Sample size of one, but mine was just...disappointing? I mean, there was nothing functionally wrong with it. But the lens was glued in (badly), and the glass seemed very distorted at anything but right in the middle. It was on my R8, I might put it on my 1301 to try a shotgun optic. Otherwise I don't know what to do with it. And it was nearly the price of a nicer optic.

[Edster]

For me, the Glock 43 fills the niche of "least gun to have".

I sometimes am a little perplexed over some folks' disappointment in the Glock 43. When I read the details, though, I usually find they are comparing it to a Glock 26 or a Glock 19.

And they are right. The Glock 43 comes up short in that comparison.

I never tried to replace a Glock 19 with a Glock 43. I replaced a S&W 642 with a Glock 43.

I tried to get good with the J frame but the targets and timer didn't lie. I was significantly better with the 43 with less effort. For sure, the 642 wins in the non-standard carry mode department -- pocket, clipped in gym shorts. On the other hand, I get much better sights, faster reloads, and better ammo selection with the Glock.

I don't even compare it with a Glock 19. If I can carry a 19, I do. The 43 is for when I can't.

As far as similar models from other companies, the "little gun capacity race" doesn't sway me. Glocks are simple. I know how they work. The 43 still carries more rounds than the 5-shot snubby that has filled a similar role for decades.

[Doc_Glock]

An advantage that the 43X has over a 26, is it comes optics ready from the factory. If you carry a red dot, and want a factory red dot solution, the 26 is a non starter. Hopefully Glock rectifies that with a 26 MOS soon.

That is a good point and is another good reason for the product improved chopped grip G26.

I think I am going to stock up on G5G19MOS pistols as they are so flexible.

[Lost River]

First, I agree - I really don’t think my 41 carries much harder than a 1911, and the same for my 34.

Second, holy crap - can you palm a basketball? On first glance I thought that was one of the little Browning .380 1911 pattern guns.

Grin..

That is one of the reasons why in spite of trying multiple times, I just can't make the G26/27 work in the standard size, even with the old GAP plates. I cannot shoot them nearly as well as a G19. It would be nice if I could.

That G41 seems like a very cool model and it has tempted me numerous times, but having a decent stable of other .45s I just cannot justify it. But I still want one, especially one of the MOS models for hunting!

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I had a G27 for awhile. Snappy recoil and given the round didn't really add anything in 'stopping power', I ditched it. Had a PM9 also and it never ran and I didn't want to fool around with back to the shop, test it blah, blah, so that got ditched also.

[HeavyDuty]

I had a G27 for awhile. Snappy recoil and given the round didn't really add anything in 'stopping power', I ditched it. Had a PM9 also and it never ran and I didn't want to fool around with back to the shop, test it blah, blah, so that got ditched also.

If you still have interest in .40 like I do, the new 27.5 is easier shooting due to the heavier slide.

[Jim Watson]

If you say a Glock 26 or whatever is "better" than a G43, tell me if it will fit my pants pocket. Will a P365 or one of the others chasing the 10 shot hideout niche?

I have various serviceable holster guns but find myself with a small one in my pocket most days.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I never found the 26 to be comfortable. It would fit in cargo pants but was clunky. Might be a dinosaur on this one but I settled on the 432 for the pocket when circumstances dictate. I don't need to buy more guns nowadays. The current set is functional enough.