[buckshotshorty2]

I had the opportunity to bring both the G42 and the 365 380 to the range for a side by side test.
I loaded each gun with 5 rounds and fired alternately. The. Ammo used was a hand load of 100 gr. Plated bullet over a charge of Unique Powder.
I wasn’t really able to gauge accuracy because the target got obliterated pretty quickly, and at my range cease fire is called every 30 minutes. However, the G 42 was fired first and those 5 shots created a cluster of 3 dead center rounds with 2 more holes within an inch fired at 30 Ft. From target. 100 rounds in all were fired. The Sig fired about equally accurate but by that time I couldn’t tell which holes were which. Happily point of impact was identical.

RECOIL:
Initially I didn’t expect to be able to discern any difference between the two guns when it came to recoil, but I did so immediately. The Sig by far soaked up recoil much better than the Glock. So, for folks sensitive to recoil I would take that into consideration .

Finally, because the Sig has a softer recoil spring, I can rack the slide with my left hand while gripping the gun in my right. With the Glock, I have to switch hands to rack the slide; I can only rack with my strong hand.

all in all, I was very happy with the performance of both guns, I am glad to have both

 

[Rocks]

I came to the same conclusion on recoil between the two.

 

[RufDriver]

I had the opportunity to bring both the G42 and the 365 380 to the range for a side by side test.
I loaded each gun with 5 rounds and fired alternately. The. Ammo used was a hand load of 100 gr. Plated bullet over a charge of Unique Powder.
I wasn’t really able to gauge accuracy because the target got obliterated pretty quickly, and at my range cease fire is called every 30 minutes. However, the G 42 was fired first and those 5 shots created a cluster of 3 dead center rounds with 2 more holes within an inch fired at 30 Ft. From target. 100 rounds in all were fired. The Sig fired about equally accurate but by that time I couldn’t tell which holes were which. Happily point of impact was identical.

RECOIL:
Initially I didn’t expect to be able to discern any difference between the two guns when it came to recoil, but I did so immediately. The Sig by far soaked up recoil much better than the Glock. So, for folks sensitive to recoil I would take that into consideration .

Finally, because the Sig has a softer recoil spring, I can rack the slide with my left hand while gripping the gun in my right. With the Glock, I have to switch hands to rack the slide; I can only rack with my strong hand.

all in all, I was very happy with the performance of both guns, I am glad to have both

I thought -- according to MANY first-hand reports posted here on GT -- that the G42 shot like a .22? Does this mean that the Sig 365 .380 shoots like a .17???

 

[PTSdog]

I thought the G42 was a softer shooter, but yeah it’s harder to rack for sure. But I started to have the same malfunctions with the P365/380 as I did with the 9mm version, slide locking back when it wasn’t supposed to and mags dropping. Now theses are user induced, not fault of the Sig just me and how I have to grip the Sig. So Sig is gone and G42 is still here.

Another thing I noticed I was more accurate with the G42 and the G42 carried better for me.

My G42 and LCP are my two main summer carry now. Just to old dinosaurs carried by and old man I guess. LOL

 

[buckshotshorty2]

As for shooting like a 22 I have said that myself but of course that’s a bit of a Metaphor Like saying someone walks like a snail.

The 32 may actually have less recoil but the 32 is also propelling a lighter bullet at a slower speed.
Although I don’t have a chronograph the load a was shooting was 100 gr bullet moving at 850 to 900 fps.

 

[buckshotshorty2]

PTS dog I’m glad your 42 worked out better for you.

 

[Pluto57]

Some folks need to proofread.

 

[buckshotshorty2]

Pluto 57 yep that one got past me. Should have read “like saying someone walks like a snail” this forum does not allow me to edit my own reply

 

[Pluto57]

Pluto 57 yep that one got past me. Should have read “like saying someone walks like a snail” this forum does not allow me to edit my own reply

That wasn't what I was referring to, but it seems odd you can't edit your posts. OTH, it does put you in a pretty exclusive group.

 

[PTSdog]

I’m glad we have grammar checkers on here. Feel much safer now.

 

[buckshotshorty2]

I just opened the thee dots in the upper right corner and that has an edit choice…I guess I m not so exclusive after all!

 

[PTSdog]

PTS dog I’m glad your 42 worked out better for you.

We have so many good solid choices nowadays, it’s a good time to be alive and carrying.

 

[Hnadyman]

For two pistols that are almost the same size and capacity, I would get the 42 because it shoots better (ie less recoil) but I didn't think the sig was bad either. The 42 just didn't have the snap the 43 did. The 42 also conceals just a tad better. They both felt good when I fired them but how they feel to you might be totally different. I shoot small guns really well while some can't fit them in their hands.

 

[Glock Commander]

I would get a larger caliber than 9mm short & weak. Like I always say,
Why .45ACP?
Because I See Inmates Everyday Walking Around with 9mm Holes in them...

 

[PTSdog]

I would get a larger caliber than 9mm short & weak. Like I always say,
Why .45ACP?
Because I See Inmates Everyday Walking Around with 9mm Holes in them...

Worked in corrections for 30 years, saw inmates walking around with all different calibers from 45 to 000 Buck. Size makes no difference if all you hit is non vital areas.

 

[cadillacguns]

I have never fired a .380 Sig, but my G-42 has no felt recoil that I can feel.

 

[italianstallion]

I had the opportunity to bring both the G42 and the 365 380 to the range for a side by side test.
I loaded each gun with 5 rounds and fired alternately. The. Ammo used was a hand load of 100 gr. Plated bullet over a charge of Unique Powder.
I wasn’t really able to gauge accuracy because the target got obliterated pretty quickly, and at my range cease fire is called every 30 minutes. However, the G 42 was fired first and those 5 shots created a cluster of 3 dead center rounds with 2 more holes within an inch fired at 30 Ft. From target. 100 rounds in all were fired. The Sig fired about equally accurate but by that time I couldn’t tell which holes were which. Happily point of impact was identical.

RECOIL:
Initially I didn’t expect to be able to discern any difference between the two guns when it came to recoil, but I did so immediately. The Sig by far soaked up recoil much better than the Glock. So, for folks sensitive to recoil I would take that into consideration .

Finally, because the Sig has a softer recoil spring, I can rack the slide with my left hand while gripping the gun in my right. With the Glock, I have to switch hands to rack the slide; I can only rack with my strong hand.

all in all, I was very happy with the performance of both guns, I am glad to have both

I put my P320 XCompact against my G19.5MOS..... The Sig felt as if it had less recoil and faster recovery time.

I put my P365 against my G43....... The Sig felt as if it had less recoil and faster recovery time.

The FCU on the Sigs (being a sizeable chunk of stainless steel, as well as the slightly heavier slide and the metal guide rods that Sigs have compared to Glock) all help to absorb the recoil better on a Sig. Please don't buy into the high bore axis argument.

 

[PTSdog]

I put my P320 XCompact against my G19.5MOS..... The Sig felt as if it had less recoil and faster recovery time.

I put my P365 against my G43....... The Sig felt as if it had less recoil and faster recovery time.

The FCU on the Sigs (being a sizeable chunk of stainless steel, as well as the slightly heavier slide and the metal guide rods that Sigs have compared to Glock) all help to absorb the recoil better on a Sig. Please don't buy into the high bore axis argument.

Might be true in larger 9mm examples of Glock and Sigs…….but the topic is about the 380ACP versions of Glock and Sig. Not really the same, but glad you really like your Sigs!

Also, wouldn’t call the FCU of any Sig “a sizable chunk of stainless steel,” when it’s more like a pile of sheet metal pieces together. The 365’s FCU is better than the jumble pile that the 320’s have, but still nothing that would make anyone use the words “chunk” or “sizable”.

 

[italianstallion]

Might be true in larger 9mm examples of Glock and Sigs…….but the topic is about the 380ACP versions of Glock and Sig. Not really the same, but glad you really like your Sigs!

Also, wouldn’t call the FCU of any Sig “a sizable chunk of stainless steel,” when it’s more like a pile of sheet metal pieces together. The 365’s FCU is better than the jumble pile that the 320’s have, but still nothing that would make anyone use the words “chunk” or “sizable”.

I've also shot the G42 against the new 365 in .380...... same result, Sig feels milder recoiling and recovery time is faster.

It's not hard to understand, look at the 4 small frame rails on a Glock plus the locking block, those take a good amound of recoil forces vs. the P320/P365 that use a large one piece stainless steel with various metal pieces integrated in it, thus dissipating the forces. Watch a slow-mo video of a Glock firing, you'll see the frame and guide rod waving up and down because it's mostly polymer, in a 320/365 all the recoiling parts (barrel, slide, guide rod, FCU) are metal.... no significant flex there.... it just makes sense why an FCU setup recoils less than Glock.

 

[PTSdog]

I've also shot the G42 against the new 365 in .380...... same result, Sig feels milder recoiling and recovery time is faster.

It's not hard to understand, look at the 4 small frame rails on a Glock plus the locking block, those take a good amound of recoil forces vs. the P320/P365 that use a large one piece stainless steel with various metal pieces integrated in it, thus dissipating the forces. Watch a slow-mo video of a Glock firing, you'll see the frame and guide rod waving up and down because it's mostly polymer, in a 320/365 all the recoiling parts (barrel, slide, guide rod, FCU) are metal.... no significant flex there.... it just makes sense why an FCU setup recoils less than Glock.

Then you are one of the few. The G42 is almost universally known as the soft shooting 380ACP, even by fanboys of other brands. Even at Sig Talk, most are not pleased with the 380 version. There is really nothing wrong with it, just not enough difference between the 9mm version and 380 version to justify switching. We were all hoping for a softer shooting 380, like the G42, and in reality we didn’t. I went back to my 9mm version of the P365.

You “explanation” doesn’t make sense as the rails do not “dissipate the forces,” of the recoil. It’s pistols are Browning drop breach designed, so the action of dropping the barrel as the slide comes back dissipates most of the recoil of the lower powered 380ACP round. Rails do nothing but hold the slide to the frame and guide it rearward. If you are saying that the flexing of the Glock frame, the movement of the RSA and polymer guide rod waving up and down isn’t moving like that because they are not “soaking up” recoil energy; then what makes them move like that? It’s not fairies. All of that movement is caused by the energy of the recoil of the fired round and that recoil energy is being used up by those movements. Then that means lesser recoil rearward.