My thoughts on the new Glock 42…

So, if you were not completely disconnected from the gunnie-webs over¬† Christmas break then you have already heard the news of what the big reveal of the new Glock 42 will be. No, its not what went viral a few weeks back… The new Glock 42 is a single-stack .380…

Alternate Headline: Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational, meh.

I think Colion Noir (Don’t call me ‘Mr.‘) said it best when he called the Glock 42 “The Glock that nobody asked for“. He went on to so brilliantly add, “the Glock 42 is like your sexually conservative girlfriend unconvincingly trying to talk dirty to you for the first time. Just stick to what you know, or go big and take some pole dancing classes and really impress me with a single stack 9mm.

Glock 42

(More pics of the leaked photos at Colion’s site)

And thats it in a wonderfully snarky little nutshell… nobody wants a .380 Glock that is slightly smaller than a Glock 26. Nobody. Not many people want .380s anymore anyway – not since Ruger cornered the market on them – and they are certainly not going to want one that is not truly a micro, pocket-able .380 the likes of the LCP or the P3AT.

Go compare the specs on the two guns. While Glock did significantly reduce the weight of the Glock 42 from the 26, the dimensions are still about the same minus a half inch here or there. Its just not enough to matter.

Yet Glock is still billing the new Glock 42 as a pocket pistol. Its not. Its still too long (0.47″ shorter than Glock 26) and still to tall (0.04″ shorter than the Glock 26) to be considered for true pocket pistol use. Yes, a Glock 26 can be pocket carried, but its hardly a practical EDC method. The same will also ring true with the Glock 42. People are going to have to carry it in a traditional holster.

What Glock basically did was to produce a Ruger SR380 with a Glock pedigree that will be probably be a little bit better… Whoopideedoo! Its still going to cost $50-$100 more than the Ruger.

It sure would have made a great little gun if it were in 9mm. People have been begging Glock to make a single stack 9mm version of the Glock 26 for eons. But here they are underwhelming us all with a .380 version that only little old grandmas that poop their Depends at the thought of dealing with the recoil of a 9mm are going to think about buying. If its not a mouse gun then why in the world make it in a mouse gun caliber? Good grief! This makes about as much sense as tits on a bull… Bless their hearts.

*Full disclosure: I’m somebody that you could probably classify as being just north of being a Glock-Fanboy. Or at the very least a dyed in the wool Glock fan. I own several of them. I probably will be buying one more in the near future, but it wont be this one.¬† I would also put money on the new Glock 42 being one of those Glocks that all the fan-boys say that they will be going to go buy, but then conveniently never get around to it.

**Mark my words: Dead on arrival.

***Exit Question: Can we stop calling the Glock 26 the “Baby Glock” now?

  1. I’d like to add one to the testing kit for apples to apples 380 vs. 9mm tests. I never could bring myself to purchase a 9/380 pair of the Ruger LCs.

  2. Kinda sorta disagree. You’re thinking like an expert/pro/long-timer. I think in terms of the Glock marketing and branding machine and who *they* think their target market is: Seems to me they’ve decided to go after first timers and newbies. 380’s may or may not be “effective,” but they sure are *popular.* Now newbies, including – maybe especially – women, can have the same brand as cops in real life and the movies. Step back from your expertise: This is about marketing.

    1. I’m sure that probably was their reasoning, and thats probably why Ruger also brought out the .380 version of their SR9… I just dont think the sales numbers will be there to support this product. Those SR380s dont seem to me to be in very high demand, but I most certainly can be wrong.

      It just seems to me like Glock – who NEVER does anything new – really took an odd approach to breaking that mold. Its certainly not bold. Its certainly not the “it” item on the market right now. They could have gone big and brought out an AR15 or a 1911 with their label on it, or certainly answered the strong demands for a single stacked 9mm version of the Glock 26. I would think that the latter would also be much easier (read less costly) from an R&D standpoint.

      But oh well, time will tell.

  3. So, Eric, at least get the Ruger model #’s right, please? Its LC380 & LC9, not SR#. But, I EDC either Glock 26 or 30s, so I’m not likely to change that, but getting my wife onto a Glock 42 might be happening. Just saying…

  4. How about really surprising us with a 9mm carbine. Make a side folding polymer carbine with some rails and show Keltec hows its done.

  5. I agree, they should have made this much smaller if they’re going with the .380.

    Make it somewhat close to the Ruger LCP in size and it would be the go to gun for guys/gals looking for a true pocket .380 pistol.

    Yea, if Glock made a 9mm carbine…geez that would sell.

  6. Eric, I’m not sure if you are surmising that the world will reject the G42 because you compaired stats from one gun to another on a website or you’ve actually shot it.

    Well, I purchased the G42 today and ran 100 rounds through it.

    Yes, it is small enough to fit in a pair of 5.11 shorts in the front pocket with no printing. Easy enought to draw quickly, thanks to the rounded corners.

    Compaired to the LCP it’s a dream. I’m not trying to poop on your write up, but you should keep an open mind and give it a try, because I just found my new carry gun.

Comments are closed.