Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-28-2013, 20:43   #501
Mike Papa
Senior Member
 
Mike Papa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 817
Didn't a dealer(s) state early in the thread that correspondence they had received from Glock stated that the Model 42 was a .380???
__________________
DOUG
Military Police = MP = Mike Papa
Mike Papa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2013, 23:10   #502
Nakanokalronin
JMB & MTK
 
Nakanokalronin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Papa View Post
Didn't a dealer(s) state early in the thread that correspondence they had received from Glock stated that the Model 42 was a .380???
Yep, so lots of disappointment to come. That will not effect them flying off the shelves though.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Nakanokalronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2013, 00:21   #503
GlockFan7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 842
I'd have to do a hands-on, but I could definitely go for 9mm for carry or a .22 for plinking, but as someone said in another thread, the .22 needs to be the G40, since the G22 is a .40. I'd have to be really impressed with the .380 for it to displace one of my other .380's. The single-stack idea is beginning to catch on with me. We'll just have to see.
GlockFan7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2013, 00:52   #504
nraman
Senior Member
 
nraman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockFan7 View Post
I'd have to do a hands-on, but I could definitely go for 9mm for carry or a .22 for plinking, but as someone said in another thread, the .22 needs to be the G40, since the G22 is a .40. I'd have to be really impressed with the .380 for it to displace one of my other .380's. The single-stack idea is beginning to catch on with me. We'll just have to see.
It could create ammo problems.
I can see myself trying to use .22 in the G22 and .40 in the G40, in stead of .40 in the G22 and .22 in the G40.
Glocking can be confusing.
__________________
Μολών λαβέ
nraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2013, 18:13   #505
shawn mccarver
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
For those who think a Shield or a G26 is not a pocket pistol, I suggest making a note to yourself: "Buy properly fitting pants. Disco pants and too-tight Wal-Mart Jeans went out years ago."

As to a Glock G42 in .380: Thinking gun people will realize that there is no place for a G42 any more than there is a place for a Ruger LCP or S&W Bodyguard .380 now that there is the Ruger LC9 and the S&W Shield in 9mm.

That should leave quite a few of the new G42s available for everyone who buys pistols because they are "neat."

As to the G41: The world does NOT need a "Practical/Tactical .45 ACP" as much as the world needs a REAL single stack Glock in .45 ACP. Glock still doesn't get it, after all these years. What we need is a duty size G36 - same thickness but taller to hold 8 to 10 rounds in a single stack or only slightly staggered magazine with the slide and barrel stretched to the same length as the G17.

As to the idea that Glock would skip the G40: I cannot believe that Glock would buy into this. I mean, they didn't skip G22 because people might get confused and think they were buying a .22 LR. They did not name the G19 the G15 on the theory that people might get confused about the fact that a G19 did NOT have a 19 round magazine. I find the thought that its customers are so stupid as to be confused amusing, to say the least. I do not believe Glock customers would be confused if they introduced a G40.

Last edited by shawn mccarver; 11-29-2013 at 18:13..
shawn mccarver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2013, 18:55   #506
Boot Stomper
Senior Member
 
Boot Stomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Metro East of IL
Posts: 2,485
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by righteoushoot View Post
Do you think the boys at Glock are reading this thread and having a good chuckle over a glass of schnapps?
A Glock rep/armorer confirmed they do read GT. The rep stated he personally uses the thread on year of manufacture/serial number often. He also stated that the Glock employees are told not to be on GT commenting.
Boot Stomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 20:47   #507
Tech knight
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post
For those who think a Shield or a G26 is not a pocket pistol, I suggest making a note to yourself: "Buy properly fitting pants. Disco pants and too-tight Wal-Mart Jeans went out years ago."

As to a Glock G42 in .380: Thinking gun people will realize that there is no place for a G42 any more than there is a place for a Ruger LCP or S&W Bodyguard .380 now that there is the Ruger LC9 and the S&W Shield in 9mm.
You ever tried doing massage work in properly fitting khaki pants with full movement and having peoples limbs by your waist line while working at events you have people all around you in a thin white polo shirt?

Smart carry and the Bodyguard 380 is what goes with me. I'm interested in this new Glock.
Tech knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 21:50   #508
jasanch5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 117
^ ... and the G42 gets its first endorsement from the LMT community.
jasanch5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 22:10   #509
Tech knight
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasanch5 View Post
^ ... and the G42 gets its first endorsement from the LMT community.
It sure has. I'm interested to see if it's closer to the size of a Kahr PM9, LC9, XDS, Shield, or if it's smaller like the LCP, P3AT, or Bodyguard

Last edited by Tech knight; 11-30-2013 at 22:11..
Tech knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 22:13   #510
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasanch5 View Post
^ ... and the G42 gets its first endorsement from the LMT community.


Tiro Fijo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 22:25   #511
Tech knight
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 402
I may be a minority, but I'm sure there is a market out there for Glock. A glock 26 is simply not nearly small and thin enough.
Tech knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 22:38   #512
greenlion
Senior Member
 
greenlion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 929
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post
As to the G41: The world does NOT need a "Practical/Tactical .45 ACP" as much as the world needs a REAL single stack Glock in .45 ACP. Glock still doesn't get it, after all these years. What we need is a duty size G36 - same thickness but taller to hold 8 to 10 rounds in a single stack or only slightly staggered magazine with the slide and barrel stretched to the same length as the G17.
I think GLOCK does "get it". Law enforcement and militaries are not begging for lower capacity guns. If they do want a 45 with lower capacity and a smaller grip, GLOCK has the G37/G38 guns in their GAP cartridge. They would be competing against their own cartridge and begging bad reviews from people who would expect your single stack 45 to be like a 1911.
greenlion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 22:59   #513
GlockFan7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post
For those who think a Shield or a G26 is not a pocket pistol, I suggest making a note to yourself: "Buy properly fitting pants. Disco pants and too-tight Wal-Mart Jeans went out years ago."

As to a Glock G42 in .380: Thinking gun people will realize that there is no place for a G42 any more than there is a place for a Ruger LCP or S&W Bodyguard .380 now that there is the Ruger LC9 and the S&W Shield in 9mm.

That should leave quite a few of the new G42s available for everyone who buys pistols because they are "neat."

As to the G41: The world does NOT need a "Practical/Tactical .45 ACP" as much as the world needs a REAL single stack Glock in .45 ACP. Glock still doesn't get it, after all these years. What we need is a duty size G36 - same thickness but taller to hold 8 to 10 rounds in a single stack or only slightly staggered magazine with the slide and barrel stretched to the same length as the G17.

As to the idea that Glock would skip the G40: I cannot believe that Glock would buy into this. I mean, they didn't skip G22 because people might get confused and think they were buying a .22 LR. They did not name the G19 the G15 on the theory that people might get confused about the fact that a G19 did NOT have a 19 round magazine. I find the thought that its customers are so stupid as to be confused amusing, to say the least. I do not believe Glock customers would be confused if they introduced a G40.


You have some interesting comments here. It would be interesting to know what kind of pants you recommend. Are jeans from Sears less tight than those from Wal-Mart?


Actually, "thinking gun people" as you put it, are buying LCP's and Bodyguards by the thousands. By the way, the LC9 is much larger than the LCP in all dimensions.


Debating whether the G42 will have a place or not is really pretty funny as none of us really know what it will be. The same applies for the G40 and G41. There is a good reason that there is no Glock 15.


Finally, I would like to thank you for informing us on what we need. Heaven forbid we should try to make that decision for ourselves. My goodness, if I can't even dress myself, should I own a handgun?
GlockFan7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 23:01   #514
Lampshade
Senior Member
 
Lampshade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post
For those who think a Shield or a G26 is not a pocket pistol, I suggest making a note to yourself: "Buy properly fitting pants. Disco pants and too-tight Wal-Mart Jeans went out years ago."
Oh please.

Many shorts and pants simply do not have ample enough pockets to accommodate a pistol of that size and it has nothing to do with how tight the pants are.
Lampshade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 23:38   #515
nraman
Senior Member
 
nraman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,334
We know enough about the G41 to have some opinions.
All we know about the G42 is that it's a .380, most likely, shape close to a G26, larger than a zippo. Not much information.
We'll have to wait for more, hopefully in the next few days.
__________________
Μολών λαβέ
nraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 23:47   #516
nraman
Senior Member
 
nraman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post

As to a Glock G42 in .380: Thinking gun people will realize that there is no place for a G42 any more than there is a place for a Ruger LCP or S&W Bodyguard .380 now that there is the Ruger LC9 and the S&W Shield in 9mm.

That should leave quite a few of the new G42s available for everyone who buys pistols because they are "neat."

As to the G41: The world does NOT need a "Practical/Tactical .45 ACP" as much as the world needs a REAL single stack Glock in .45 ACP. Glock still doesn't get it, after all these years. What we need is a duty size G36 - same thickness but taller to hold 8 to 10 rounds in a single stack or only slightly staggered magazine with the slide and barrel stretched to the same length as the
The last thing I need is a single stack 45.
What I need is a tactical size 45 and a small .380.
If I didn't have a G21 that I really like, I'd wait for the G41.
I might be convinced to get the 41 just for kicks.
__________________
Μολών λαβέ
nraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 23:56   #517
Cokeman
G23
 
Cokeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,058
The 41 sounds like it be the .45 equivalent of the 34 and 35.
__________________
Glock 23 - CZ 452 ZKM Special
Walther P22 - LMT STD 16 - Mossberg 500A
Kahr P380 - Henry H001Y - Winchester 12
S&W M&P Shield - Mossberg 500B- Marlin 336Y
Cokeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 01:53   #518
VictorLouis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,108
Been wishing for many years for a G-36 'upscaled' in length and height to duty-size....and...

...a G-36 size pistol with 10rds+ 9mm/40.
VictorLouis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 02:18   #519
mrsurfboard
The Anti-Glock
 
mrsurfboard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampshade View Post
Oh please.

Many shorts and pants simply do not have ample enough pockets to accommodate a pistol of that size and it has nothing to do with how tight the pants are.
What are you, a 10 year old boy? Most pants and shorts, especially ones with cargo pockets can fit a small Glock. It's not optimal, but doable.
__________________
Sig P225/S&W 60, 66, M&P 45, M&P 9c, 1911SC/Glock G22 Gen4, G23 Gen4 & G36/Kimber Pro Tactical II/Ruger Mk II/H&K P30, 45c/Colt Defender
mrsurfboard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 02:30   #520
Cokeman
G23
 
Cokeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,058
Doable doesn't mean you can get the gun out quickly when you need it.
__________________
Glock 23 - CZ 452 ZKM Special
Walther P22 - LMT STD 16 - Mossberg 500A
Kahr P380 - Henry H001Y - Winchester 12
S&W M&P Shield - Mossberg 500B- Marlin 336Y
Cokeman is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply


Tags
glock 42, glock42
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:44.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,084
309 Members
775 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31