i like mine...

 

380ACP
The best for the minimally acceptable round in a sub-compact pistol?
Why?
The G26 isn't that much bigger, has the ability to use G17/19 full capacity magazines for reloads, and it shoots 9mm not 380. Yeah the same diameter projectile but 380 is limited to 90 grains more or less.

 

380ACP
The best for the minimally acceptable round in a sub-compact pistol?
Why?
The G26 isn't that much bigger, has the ability to use G17/19 full capacity magazines for reloads, and it shoots 9mm not 380. Yeah the same diameter projectile but 380 is limited to 90 grains more or less.

At times, I've carried a G42.

The G26 is much larger and cannot be carried in some circumstances where a G42 can. It's a personal choice. I don't carry a G26 because to me it feels like a piece of crap. But that's my personal take on that model. If the circumstances allow me to carry a G26, I prefer to carry a G30 or G36.

That said, when all I can carry is a 380, my preferences is my Sig P238HD. It shoots heads and shoulders above my G42 and my Walthers in the PP, PPK/s, and PPK series.

But to answer the question, the G42 is a good gun. I've never had a problem with it functioning and as a SD weapon it works well enough.

 

It's a nice little gun. I have nothing against .380 for self defense. BUT, the 43 is just a hair bigger. More powerful ammo that costs almost half the price. The 42 is too big in the pocket and both are about the same on the belt anyways so I don't see the point. Might as well get a LCP if size is the issue.

 

I have a 42, a 43, a Ruger LCP and a Sig 238.
I do not carry 42, it is to big for pocket carry. If I have to use a holster I carry the 43.
I no longer carry the Sig for the same reasons as the 42.
If I have to pocket carry it is the Ruger that goes along.

 

Agreed, as far as function, accuracy, and shoot ability, it is a great gun. One that serves no purpose to me. Too large for true pocket carry, and if going to belt carry I'll go to a slightly larger more capable platform such as a 43 or 26.

I often carry a .380 when pocket carrying and for me that means something like a LCP or Smith Bodyguard. I've owned a original LCP for almost 13yrs now and have found it a reliable and comfortable little gun. It has impressed me every range trip. However I recently moved to the LCP Max, still truly pocketable with 11rds on board. Maybe not for everyone, but my choice for .380.

 

I 100% agree. I have a 42, 43, 26, Taurus 85 Total Titanium, and NAA .22 Mag mini-revolver for CCW.
If I pocket carry, it's the NAA. I actually forget I have that one in my pocket. I like the extra umph of the 43 and 26. You are completely correct in that the 43 is only slightly larger and heavier. If I had to choose between the 42 and 43 I would easily keep the 43. But as long as I have the 42 I will probably keep carrying it. I can tell the difference between carrying the 42 and 43. I think there's about a six ounce difference. I carry the 42 in a Fobus friction fit paddle holster and it is very comfortable. I have seriously considered the LCP Max.

 

I had one and sold it. Trying to find .380 wasn't easy and it cost more than 9mm.

 

I think Glock nailed their goal with the G42. Why?

Well, when I attended an armorer recert class after the 42 had been released, they told us that Glock had decided to make the 42 due to their marketing studies. Basically, in the 3 years prior to them deciding to make the 42, they'd seen that the .380ACP was the hottest selling non-LE caliber ... and that the largest market segment for it was women shooters. Thus, they designed a .380 that was small enough to be convenient, but large enough to mitigate felt recoil and allow smaller hands to achieve a good grasp.

Turned out they hit a home run. While some grumbling was heard among the LE armorers - and questions about why not a 9mm or .40 in the same size (of course ) - some of the guys who were initially skeptical of the 42 seemed to warm up to it. While it was chambered in an old pocket pistol caliber that was sometimes described as "marginally adequate", it was still a handy option, especially with some of the newer .380 JHp ammo on the market.

The only reason I didn't buy one from the local Glock LE dealer at the time was that it was still too large for what I was looking for in a diminutive pocket-holster pistol. I compared the S&W Bodyguard 380 and the LCP ... and opted for the LCP. Eventually, a pair of them. No regrets. If I want something with more bullet weight and 'punch' than the 95-102gr .380's, I simply slip one of my J-frames into a front pocket (holster). The LCP offers me the ability to carry one in the occasional shorter and tighter front jeans pocket, though.

It helps that I've found the LCP to be a surprisingly accurate and easy-to-shoot itty bitty .380 pistol. More enjoyable to shoot than my favored J's, comes to that (using +P in the J's). The S&W BG I tried on the range was just a bit too large, I didn't want/need the integral laser (first model didn't offer no-laser version), and the DAO trigger of the LCP offered a nicer stroke than the BG (especially the revised version of the original model). Almost made it feel "like cheating" compared to shooting my J's.

Bottom line, though? I think Glock sold a ton of the 42's, and it will continue to be a sleeper .... even if some guys don't want to admit they find it useful, practical for their concealed carry needs and decently accurate.

Now, if only something could be done about the cost of .380ACP.

 

I like mine, I carry it in an ankle holster. Mine seems to do better when well-lubed.

 

The 42 is Great

 

I have been shooting mine for six weeks now.
1. Very unGlock like break/in needed. After 250 rounds it has become good to go.
2. The little grip cried out for the Talons. Much better now.
3. It is great on the belt or in a pocket holster. (Cargo pants pockets.)

 

When I shopped for a pocketable, small handgun, the 42s larger size didn't justify it's 380 chamberimg

That LCP one is just so small, light and so easy to carry in the pocket.

The other consideration is that the LCP is hammer fired, with a revolver like trigger pull. Better choice for me.

 

I have a G42 and it has always functioned well. It's never failed in a GSSF match. My downside is smaller guns don't necessarily point as naturally or instinctively as larger ones. My G42 and Shields take a little more time to get on target than my G23 or G17. Despite the bad press, my best pointing .380 is my PPK/s but part of that might be the significant weight of the PPK/s,

EDIT: Actually I lied. Haven't shot my Sig P238HD in a long while and that is my best shooting 380.

 

I’m a big fan of the G42. If I can’t carry (or don’t want to carry) a G48, the 42 gets the nod.

 

While I am not a fan of the .380 it is effective. Generally, when a bg hears the sound they do not stick around to caliber check and if that caliber creates distance between me and the bg I am good!

 

It’s a nice little gun. A tad bit smaller/lighter than a 43 but not noticeable so. You can get light 9mm loads for a 43 and recoil is only slightly more than the 42 and you have a much better defensive round than any .380. Also, .380 ammunition, both self defense and practice costs about twice as much as 9mm. Just me, but I don’t see the point of a 42. And yes, I owned one for a short period of time and let it go.

 

The 3.25 inch barrel of the 42 increases the effectiveness of the hollow point ammo significantly.

 

Nice shooting gun. Had two. I found that I had to use the hotter rounds for 100% reliability. Weak rounds and limp wristing may cause issues. Both my guns were earlier models, so they may be better with lower powered rounds now.

 

I bought the G42 for my wife. She has small hands and the grip on the 42 fits her hands perfectly and she's happy with it. She also shoots it well with the reduced recoil. I enjoy the G19, but when we're out and about, I carry my old buddy Kahrl (KAHR PM9) on my hip concealed. He's a fine shooting micro 9mm.

 

Makes perfect sense, since were told in an armorer class that the company had designed the 42 with women shooters in mind. We were told the company had tracked commercial ammo sales for a 3 year period, and found that the fastest growing private shooter caliber in the US had been .380, and that women shooters made up the significant bulk of that private market. They wanted to tap into that market, and so designed the 42 for the American market.

 

I really liked the G42 when it came out. Still do. But, when I finally decided to buy a 380, I opted for the Sig P365 380. Niether of these two would work for me as a pocket pistol. (For that role I still use a KelTec P32) My thinking was that if I had to carry a 380 in some kind of a belt holster, then I'd opt for more capacity. With the Sig I get the additional capacity without any appreciable size difference.

I will say this, the G42 is more affordable than the Sig 380. By a good stretch.

 

I carry my 42 a lot in the summer.

 

 

I use mine as the backdoor 'hide-a-gun' -- got hide-a-guns all over the house.

 

They work, grip them tightly, I use Winchester FMJ when I shoot mine ( about once a year ).
I just don’t carry one now, its a range toy that lives in a safe.

 

G26 is my fav carry gun. The g42 is a little easier to conceal in some situations and unlike Ruger and the others listed, it is a Glock.