GLOCK 42

I was finally able to get to the range today and shoot the new Glock 42. As all of you out there know, the Glock model 42 is a single stack .380 ACP. It created a bunch of negative feedback in the interwebs, not because of it's ability to shoot, but because of the chosen caliber. It has been much maligned by those who wish to stroke their own egos.



I have shot .380 ACP (.380 Kurtz) all of my life, starting with my father's Walther PPK/S, through a myriad of other pistols (Bersa, Makarov, CZ, Carpatti, Beretta, Ruger, and others) to this new Glock 42. It was the first round that I ever reloaded. My first carry piece was a .380 pistol. I like .380, and am not dissuaded to use it for EDC because it is ballistically inferior to many other cartridges out there. I'm not, however, carrying it into battle. I have other weapons for that.

My main concern, and the objective of this pistol, is for EDC in varied conditions. It has to be able to take my sweat, because it's going to be close to me. The Tennifer finish on all the other Glocks I ever carried had no problems with my perspiration, and I don't think this one will differ from that. It has to be thin, so it conceals easily. This pistol is thin! It has to have actual sights I can use. These sights are just like any other Glock sights.

The trigger on the model 42 feels just like every other unmodified Glock out there (other than the New York models). As a matter of fact, it feels just like every other Glock out there except it's really, really thin. For a comparison, I measured a Walther PPK/S with the model 42, and found they were almost identical in dimensions. I believe Glock must have used this iconic pistol as a base line for the length, width, and height. It is less than half the weight of the Walther.

This is where most of the people who had problems with the new Glock, saying it was too large for the caliber it was made for. Most were surprised Glock went with .380 instead of 9mm. Yes, there are other companies out there that make a 9mm the same size, or even smaller than the model 42. And yes, there are plenty of other .380's out there that are physically smaller.

That was the reason I sold my Ruger LCP, I didn't like the sights or the trigger. The pistol was a delight to carry, I just couldn't get over the fact that it's best features were what I didn't like about it- small sight radius and a lousy trigger. I was brought up shooting the PPK/S, and at 15 yards when one would yell out "left eye!" I would shoot a hole through one of two ping-pong balls glued to a piece of cardboard the size of a human head. The pistol was that good, and ruined me for other pistols ever since.

I compared the Glock 42 with my Kahr CM-9, to see how different a 9mm is to a .380. Although they are very similar in dimensions, the Glock is thinner, and the grip is easier to hold. This is due to the construction- the trigger guard is up higher on the grip than the Kahr. The receiver is also thinner, whereas the trigger is physically closer to the slide than the 9mm Kahr.



This is where I believe the problem lies for a compact 9mm. The receiver has to be a little higher to allow for the greater forces involved with 9mm. You can't cheat physics. The grip on the Kahr is much smaller and harder to grip than the model 42.

In comparison to the PPK/S, although they are the same width, you can get your hand further up the grip than a PPK/S. The recoil impulse generated by firing the Walther is much sharper- due to the blowback design. The Glock is a tilting barrel/Browning type design and was no harder to shoot than a .22lr pistol.

It was really comfortable to shoot. My biggest problem was loading the magazines; I am so used to loading three times the rounds into a regular Glock magazine, and was constantly trying to cram more than siz rounds into them. I wish I had more magazines, because I would have shot far more rounds this evening. I spent the majority of my time loading magazines.

The magazine baseplates are from Pearce Grips. I just received them this morning and put them on just before shooting this evening. It was a thirty second operation to swap out base plates, and they add so much practical functionality that it is worth the extra length they stick out.

I shot four types of .380 this evening; Federal 95gr ball, Winchester 95gr, ball, some reloaded Rainier Ballistics 95gr round TMJ, and lastly some Remington Golden Sabers loaded over 4.2 grains of Unique. The Rem GS were quite a handful with the PPK/S, and sadly this was the last of a batch of 1000 I loaded almost ten years ago.



There were no malfunctions during this test firing. I fired 120 rounds total of the four types of ammunition pictured above. All of the 95gr cartridges were smooth and very soft shooting. I did not shoot for accuracy, as it was getting late and I had to use a flashlight to finish up all the rounds I had with me. I will be shooting for groups later this weekend. I did shoot single-handed to try to induce a "limp wrist" but failed to jam the pistol.

The Golden sabers gave me fits wit a couple of other .380 pistols I shot in the past. They are a few thousandths of an inch longer and caused all sorts of feeding problems in the Ruger and Beretta. I was curious to see how they would fit in the Glock's magazine. There isn't much room to spare, but the pistol didn't show any signs of disliking the Rem GS other than a slight bulge in the primer of the spent cartridge.



There was one interesting downside to the .380 Glock, and that is it left a lot of unburned powder on my arm. I don't know if some of the Unique was left unburned and flew all over the place or for some other reason. I started to notice there was residue there before I started to shoot the Rem GS. At least it wasn't as bad as the Carpatti and the Beretta; they would shoot unburned powder back into your face and eyes when shooting.



So far, just shooting it to hear the bang and aiming for center mass of the target (a box lid just a little smaller than an IDPA target) actually achieved some good results. I was practicing drawing and know I flinched the first couple of rounds. I also know my timing was off for a few rounds while walking towards the target. The saturation of rounds in the bottom half of the target, and quite a few groups of scalloped holes gives me the impression that this is going to be an accurate pistol.



They do seem to be in the lower half, and slightly more in the left side than the right. I was shooting near dark and didn't have a Sharpie to make a crisp target in the middle. I could be anticipating a bit, when drawing from a low carry. I was just going for center of mass and squeezing until it popped.

I'll get more technical this weekend.

 

Here's another photo I took a little while ago, to compare the PPK/S to the Glock 42. Although the Walther is far more streamlined, the Glock is more compartmentalized. The grip and slide on the Glock are actually thinner. The widest points on the model 42 are the protrusions around the slide release and the thumb shelf.



There are companies making extended magazine releases for the model 42. I had no problems manipulating the magazine release button, so I don't really see a reason for them on an EDC pistol. I would like to see someone offer a grip reduction service (that actually looks good, not a cheesy soldering iron any idiot can do) and remove these protrusions.

Although a reduction may not be necessary, I think Glock might have done itself a slight disservice by making them so prominent. The pistol is already thin (did I mention that?) even with these protrusions. Without them, it would be even more sleek. Perhaps the thumb shelf is there to keep one from pressing the magazine release inadvertently.

This pistol is far and above the Walther PK380 I used to own, in every aspect. The PK380 was boxy with square or truncated corners, not rounded. It had an external manual safety that would continuously drop into safe without the owner realizing it. The PK380 was a much larger pistol, and yet you don't hear the internet pundants complain about it.

As a matter of fact, the Bersa is a larger pistol also. Of course, it carries more rounds, but it is still a slightly larger version of a Walther PPK/S. Although I never had any functional problems with the Bersa pistols (had three of them), I chose to carry something a little lighter after a few years of toting around a lump of metal in the small of the back. These days, as I get older, I choose thinner and lighter.

I wouldn't mind seeing somebody like Karma making extended magazines for it. I wouldn't carry it with them, but when at the range, six or seven rounds just starts to warm me up. The Bersa has a 22 round drum magazine available for it from Pro-Mag. I don't see why this couldn't be adapted for the Glock 42.



Glock 42
Subcompact slimline .380 ACP variant produced in the USA, which unlike the Glock 25 and 28 allows domestic sales in that market. Uses a staggered-stack magazine with a capacity of 6 rounds, plus one in the chamber. Introduced at the 2014 SHOT Show, the Glock 42 is an all-new locked-breech "slimline" (83 mm (3.3 in) barrel) design. The single-stack magazine is unique to this model, with a capacity of 6 rounds. It is Glock's smallest model ever made. The Glock 42 introduced several significant design changes relative to all prior Glock models:

• Redesigned firing pin safety - Wider non-rotating firing pin safety.
• Slide stop lever coil spring - Coil spring eases assembly, changes order of assembly and disassembly, eliminates possibility of misaligning slide stop lever spring.
• Reconfigured trigger return spring

 

Thanks for a great report.

 

Next gun on my short list. Thanks for the report. I have been trying to get hold of one (at a decent price) but each time I wonder by my best source they have been out!

Not a problem for they found me a 10mm Glock now discontinued, when I mentioned that all they had in the box was 10 round mags they aplogized and said it came from MARY LAND. So they dropped in the "Normal" mag as a bonus.

 

Cool beans!

I've been waiting for nine months to find one without my wallet getting anally raped. When I first saw the official adds and specs, I thought it would be interesting to own. After I handled it, I realized there was something different about this pistol. A lot like when holding a PPK/S. It has it's own magic, that of being much smaller than you think it should be just by looking at it.

I can see why some people really want one in 9mm. I think if they can keep it from getting too big when it is finally made, they will have another winner on their hands.

 

I was able to fire another 100 rounds this afternoon. Sorry, no pictures, as Mrs Gunbunny had the camera and was in another location. I fired 50 rounds of aluminum cased CCI 95gr fmj, while walking toward the target starting at 25 yards and ending after I finished my second magazine. I didn't get very close, as this combination only holds 13 rounds and I was empty around 15 yards. All shots (except for my mistimed flyers) stayed within the 12"x18" box lid I hung up.

I then fired 50 rounds of 90gr Hornady XTP loaded with 4.4gr of Unique in Starline cases. I didn't get any primer deformation like I did with the Rem Golden Sabers I loaded, they looked normal, with some of them having a slight firing pin drag on the side of the dimple. I may have to dial back the powder charge a little bit and see what happens.

As for accuracy, I was getting four inch groups at 25 yards with the XTP's. Not altogether bad for a pistol with a sight radius of 5". Try that with the Ruger LCP, and see what you get standing offhand. I am, however getting groups at a consistent 2" to the left of the point of aim. I may be squeezing, but I may have to adjust the sights. I want to shoot it for a few more hundred rounds before I fully commit to drifting the rear sights.

With the pistol so thin, I think I may be grasping it like any other Glock and pushing my finger too far into the triggerguard, pulling the trigger with my joint instead of the pad of fingertip. Practice will tell.

Another thing I realized is that I need more magazines. These little magazines are quite expensive, if you can find them. I did find a company making a spring and follower kit to replace the stock ones and gain an additional round, bringing the total to 7+1. That would be exactly like the Walther PPK/S that I am so used to.

Galloway Precision :: Glock™ 42 Performance :: MagGuts™ High Capacity Magazine Conversion for Glock™ G42 Pistols
They also make a +2 extension for the stock magazine that when combined with the follower from the MAG GUTS kit will net you 9+1 rounds. That would be an expensive magazine indeed. I think it is far cheaper to buy more stock magazines and learn to reload them faster.

When I said before that I was trying to cram a seventh round into the magazine, I was repeatedly trying it because ti was SO close to loading the seventh round but it just wouldn't fit. I wonder if it was intentional on Glock's part to limit them to 6 rounds in the magazine?

 

Thanks very much for the review!

 

Since I first made a report on the Glock 42, a few things have improved. Firstly, I was able to procure a few more magazines from Greg Cote, LLC and bought enough mag guts kits from Galloway Precision :: Glock™ 42 Performance to load ALL of my magazines to seven rounds. With 7+1 to start with, and quite a few 7 round magazines to keep going, range time has been quite a bit more fun.

I still hate trying to find the elusive 9mm Kurtz casings on the ground spread out through the leaf litter. I can never get them all back, no matter how hard I try. Brass is harder to procure for this caliber, because a lot more people are getting into it. I can see why, when I was reloading some 95gr Rainier Ballistics TMJ rounds for practice the other night, I realized I can load over 300 rounds with the amount of powder in my (LEE auto disk) powder measure's hopper.

The projectiles (when they are actually in stock) are less expensive than their 115gr (and higher) 9mm Para cousins. After a few thousand rounds, I actually had enough money to get another thousand projectiles, and still have enough powder left over to load one more batch. I need to chrony my next outing, though. The book says my velocity should be in the mid 900 fps range with the 90gr XTP's with the max loading (what I'm still using) of 4.5gr Unique.

A few things have changed since I bought the G42. I've been looking at a promising new projectile made by Lehigh Defense- Lehigh Defense Xtreme Penetrator Bullets and Ammunition called the Xtreme Penetrator. It promises to behave like a hollow point in soft targets, meanwhile staying together for penetrating solid objects well.

I've been following Lone Wolf Distributors on facebook, watching and waiting for them to release an extended and threaded barrel for the model 42. They say they are working on it, but it seems that progress is slow. I would expect this, as the Glock 42 is in no way like any of the previous models. Their jigs and pre-set tooling just won't work for this little gun, and they may not feel like using up too much of their time or resources for a one-off pistol like the G42.

Another thing I dredged up was a few articles on the .32 NAA cartridge. This is a .380 ACP cartridge necked down to accept a .32 caliber .311 or .312 diameter bullet in the 70 to 80 grain range. They squirt out in the 1100 fps range when loaded properly. The gel tests speak for themselves, as they are using a barrel that is almost an inch shorter than the Glock 42.

I would love to see LWD make a barrel chambered in the .32 NAA for the Glock 42. I think the extra length of the Glock's barrel over the Ruger LCP's barrel would definitely help increase the bullet speed. It would be a potent combination of gun and cartridge. I might be asking for too much, but an extended barrel with 4 inches of overall length combined with a small aluminum barrel end device to match the contours of the G42's slide would be nice.

Even better would be a G42 long slide conversion, for both calibers. Hell, if I'm wishing, why not ask Advantage Arms Secure Online Store: Conversion Kits to make a conversion kit to .22lr so we can have a trifecta? Or, even the next Glock 43 being a single stack, 10 round 4 1/8" barrel, full sized pistol just for the fun of it. If you think that's ridiculous, why is Bersa selling a bunch of Thunder and BP380CC pistols? Why is Walther selling the PK-380? They are actually far larger than the Glock 42. Could it be because the .380 is just plain FUN to shoot?

Why bother, you ask? It seems I'm not the only one who doesn't want to carry around a full size duty pistol all day. It also seems that a few other manufacturers are picking up on this. Enter Kahr arms; Kahr CT380 - Style # CT3833, Kahr Shop/ Pistols
making their new CT-380 with almost the identical dimensions as the G42, but coming stock with a 7 round magazine. At $100 less than the Glock, I think I might have bought the Glock a little too soon. If I were to have waited two months, I really might have gotten the Kahr instead.

I like Kahr arms; I've been shooting various models of their pistols for the last decade and a half. Originally, I seriously considered getting a Kahr CW380, but the small size close to the Ruger LCP put me off. I need sight radius, sorry. Kahr CW380 - Style # CW3833, Kahr Shop/ Pistols I may still get the CT380 just to play with it. The only downfall of the Kahr line of pistols is the lack of aftermarket parts for them. Advantage Arms would NEVER consider making a conversion unit for it, as there just isn't enough owners out there asking for it.

 

Get yourself a simple metal detector, and you will no longer lose your brass. You might even find some extra or coins while you are at it.

 

@HK_User, you said the Glock 10mm is now discontinued? Scared me at first since that will be my next purchase for when hiking in grizzly country. The G20 and G29 aren't discontinued. Are they?

GLOCK Pistols for Hunting | GLOCK USA
Glock 20 Gen4 | G20 Gen4 | 10mm Pistol | GLOCK USA
Glock 29 Gen4 | G29 Gen4 | 10mm Pistol | GLOCK USA

I looked it up, they are still in production.

 

The G20 C
"Compensated GLOCK "Is the Recoil-Tamers"
This compensated model has the same features as its counterpart non-compensated service pistol except for the addition of the barrel ports that face out and exhaust through two vents cut into the top of each slide.Glock 20C with its compensated barrel allows you to get back on target quicker for the critical follow-up shot."

Best I can say is that the G 20 C is out of stock and not listed.

They may make runs of this and of course you can purchase aftermarket compensators.

 

Thanks for the clarification: I plan on using this aftermarket compensator when I buy my G20 10mm: Lone Wolf Distributors - Product Detail - LWD Barrel M/20 10mm Extended 2 Port - $124.95 . It is made in lovely Priest River, Idaho in the American Redoubt. I like that Lone Wolf to dampen recoil on the G30 with 45 ACP. Will use it for the G20 as well.

 

No problem.

 

Great advice BT, thank you for your first hand knowledge. I've been wanting a lever action. Which 45-70 brand rifle do you recommend?

Someone told me Alaska Troopers and such carry Glock 20's since it the most powerful round available in a reliable semi-auto. Is the G20 popular in Alaska?

 

Ahh the .45-70. What a cartridge! It's been kicking butt since about 1873. Some things are tough to improve upon. In strong modern firearms with smokeless powder at moderate ranges it would be hard to beat, unless you're talking about cottontails.

Some years ago I talked to a former Alaskan resident. Said he always carried a .44 magnum for bears. But he was quick to acknowledge it was just to try to scare them off. It would probably work if the animal decided that it was ok to be scared off.

Otherwise...