Breaking in a new gun....Glock 42

[burbguy82]

Generally speaking, a gun that you carry should be:

1.) Reliable
2.) You can shoot well
3.) In a caliber adequate for the application

Beyond those two factors, not much else matters...... preference, not requirements.

I had a terrible experience with my Sig 238. Several issues with the gun and magazines led me to get rid of the gun about 2/2.5 years ago. Originally, I had bought it for my wife, but I quickly removed it from her a replaced it with something a bit more user friendly, and reliable. A Robin Egg Blue, Glock 42. The odd color for increased visibility whilst in a purse....

Anyway, I finally got around to getting a Glock 42 recently. I have been wanting a small gun again for a while, but I normally carry a USP45, which is on the polar opposite side of the scale.

I suggest when buying a new gun, no matter the brand or model.......to validate the gun with the ammo you intend to use in it. A few hundred rounds, of target ammo, typically FMJ., then a few boxes of the service ammo.

This cost should be factored in when buying a new gun, IMO. I know that ammo is stupid high, but the implications of carrying a gun with a flaw is much more expensive.

Every round went through the barrel as pictured. Within 45 minutes. 300 rounds or so.

All ammo worked well, EXCEPT for the Federal Low Recoil Hydrashock, as IMO the face of the bullet is TOO BIG, and not conical enough to feed reliably, 50% roughly would not feed at all. I would not recommend these for the GLOCK 42.

The Winchester white box, with the flat nose was most snappy, and smoky, landing about 3 inches highers than the others.

Accuracy wise, the HST and the Hornady were most consistent.

For carry ammo, in 380, I suggest a bonded HP, or just regular FMJ. The is a lot of internet BS regarding the power of 380, which I would not like to get into.

Not pictured was some Underwood penetrator ammo, which I forgot I had, and it was maybe slightly more accurate than the HST and Hornady.

Point being, validate your new gun, and if you have not validated an old gun, you should.

 

[Cropduster172]

Generally speaking, a gun that you carry should be:

1.) Reliable
2.) You can shoot well
3.) In a caliber adequate for the application

Beyond those two factors, not much else matters...... preference, not requirements.

I had a terrible experience with my Sig 238. Several issues with the gun and magazines led me to get rid of the gun about 2/2.5 years ago. Originally, I had bought it for my wife, but I quickly removed it from her a replaced it with something a bit more user friendly, and reliable. A Robin Egg Blue, Glock 42. The odd color for increased visibility whilst in a purse....

Anyway, I finally got around to getting a Glock 42 recently. I have been wanting a small gun again for a while, but I normally carry a USP45, which is on the polar opposite side of the scale.

I suggest when buying a new gun, no matter the brand or model.......to validate the gun with the ammo you intend to use in it. A few hundred rounds, of target ammo, typically FMJ., then a few boxes of the service ammo.

This cost should be factored in when buying a new gun, IMO. I know that ammo is stupid high, but the implications of carrying a gun with a flaw is much more expensive.

View attachment 266627


Every round went through the barrel as pictured. Within 45 minutes. 300 rounds or so.

All ammo worked well, EXCEPT for the Federal Low Recoil Hydrashock, as IMO the face of the bullet is TOO BIG, and not conical enough to feed reliably, 50% roughly would not feed at all. I would not recommend these for the GLOCK 42.

The Winchester white box, with the flat nose was most snappy, and smoky, landing about 3 inches highers than the others.

Accuracy wise, the HST and the Hornady were most consistent.

For carry ammo, in 380, I suggest a bonded HP, or just regular FMJ. The is a lot of internet BS regarding the power of 380, which I would not like to get into.

Not pictured was some Underwood penetrator ammo, which I forgot I had, and it was maybe slightly more accurate than the HST and Hornady.

Point being, validate your new gun, and if you have not validated an old gun, you should.

Good information.
I wanted a .380 for possible carry. My go-to has always been a .38 2".
Originally my old off duty gun, a Colt Detectives Special and for the last 10 years or so, a Taurus 85UL.
I also carried my Taurus PT111 G2, but it's fairly bulky by comparison.
So about 8 years ago I bought a Bersa Thunder .380. Total junk. Twice to 2 different gunsmiths, still routinely FTE. But it's a gun that's value is limited as they're roughly the same price they were 10 years ago so not even desirable for trade in. But I'm not giving up. I'm going to get the Ruger Security .380. I will put it through the paces you described so well above.

 

[burbguy82]

Good information.
I wanted a .380 for possible carry. My go-to has always been a .38 2".
Originally my old off duty gun, a Colt Detectives Special and for the last 10 years or so, a Taurus 85UL.
I also carried my Taurus PT111 G2, but it's fairly bulky by comparison.
So about 8 years ago I bought a Bersa Thunder .380. Total junk. Twice to 2 different gunsmiths, still routinely FTE. But it's a gun that's value is limited as they're roughly the same price they were 10 years ago so not even desirable for trade in. But I'm not giving up. I'm going to get the Ruger Security .380. I will put it through the paces you described so well above.

Yeah, finding out that, in my case, the Hydrashok would not feed well is a piece of information that would be priceless, in a time where it would have to work. Not a bad gun, or bad ammo, just a bad combo.

I think that smaller guns, need this validation more than most. Small guns, typically need tighter springs to accomodate a light slide. In other words, they can be more ammo picky.

 

[shortyb]

You forgot 4.) Comfortable enough to carry ALL the time and have available at the moment of truth.

A lot of people poo poo the .380, but some of the latest offerings make it tactically sound for it's size. Obviously shot placement is a tad more critical but any one of those defensive rounds taken in the neck should do the job.

 

[Urshurak776]

Looking for a .380 for my wife. Was considering the S&W models, but will look at this also. Thanks for the review!

 

[shortyb]

Looking for a .380 for my wife. Was considering the S&W models, but will look at this also. Thanks for the review!

Had a 42, and have tried the S&W. Not being fan boi but go Glock here. Also, remember that the .380 is a pretty snappy round in the smaller guns that are tailored for it and may be harder to handle for novices and those not able to handle the recoil. In these cases a 43 or a S&W Shield may be a better option IMHO.

 

[burbguy82]

You forgot 4.) Comfortable enough to carry ALL the time and have available at the moment of truth.

True. For me, I care less about comfortability. Maybe carrying a gun for the last 30 years in one way or the other has an effect on that opinion. I change the wardrobe to fit the gun. Luckily, I am of a build that it really does not matter, short of a Desert Eagle, unless I am in exercise clothes, in which case this gun fits nice. This was really not about concealed carry, as opposed to the function of the gun. With that said, the Glock 42 is one of the biggest small pistols out there, which can easily be carried.

Size comes with diminishing returns, too small can mean to tight. I think the 42 is a really nice mesh between size and shootability, especially for the inexperienced shooter.

 

[AZjeff]

@burbguy82 How do you define accuracy?

You forgot 4.) Comfortable enough to carry ALL the time and have available at the moment of truth.

A lot of people poo poo the .380, but some of the latest offering make it tactically sound for it's size. Obviously shot placement is a tad more critical but any one of those taken in the neck should do the job.

The number of normal people who can make a neck shot with a compact pistol in the only life or death shooting situation they've ever been in is very close to zero. If I had to use a .380 I'd train to be able to do double or triple taps to center mass reliably at 10 yards.

 

[burbguy82]

Looking for a .380 for my wife. Was considering the S&W models, but will look at this also. Thanks for the review!

Your welcome. 380 is I think the smallest caliber one should carry for defense. Many Glock haters out there, I used to be one of them. For this caliber, I highly suggest at least letting her hold one. They do have some nice "HI-VIZ" models with nice scroll work, in nice colors like blue and purple.....anything to get women into shooting, I am down for.

 

[Fa24wrx]

Yep. Bought a SW shield plus in January. First two trips to the range, I could not figure out why it shot low relative to my sight picture. Sent to SW and they agreed and changed the barrel. Was MUCH better after that. Recently zeroed my red dot I put on it too. Ive already put just under 1000 rounds through it.

 

[shortyb]

@burbguy82 How do you define accuracy?

The number of normal people who can make a neck shot with a compact pistol in the only life or death shooting situation they've ever been in is very close to zero. If I had to use a .380 I'd train to be able to do double or triple taps to center mass reliably at 10 yards.

Yes, but I was alluding more to making your shots count than to absolute accuracy in a life or death situation. I've seen countless after shoot investigations with police officer involved shootings where shots went all over. And all are usually trained to aim (and qualify) at center mass.

 

[burbguy82]

@burbguy82 How do you define accuracy?

The number of normal people who can make a neck shot with a compact pistol in the only life or death shooting situation they've ever been in is very close to zero. If I had to use a .380 I'd train to be able to do double or triple taps to center mass reliably at 10 yards.

In the context of this thread, I would define accuracy as the amount of critical shots one can make in the shortest amount of time.......in other words, combat accuracy. These things are not made for groups, but that said they can do it. A standard might be 10 ft, 10 inch plate, as fast a possible.....100% hits. I think if someone can do that, they are on the right track.

I agree with your characterization about the normal shooter about accuracy, but a "neck shot" is not really required with this caliber.

I really didnt want to get into "man stopping power" of 380 though.

I would also argue that most who have been in a situation that needed this type of gun, where likely not all that worried about a pinpoint shot.

This is a perfect Bill Drill gun for sure.

I did get a Pierce +1 pinky extension. Forgot to include that.

 

[Astro14]

I completely agree with your point. You should always validate the function of that gun, with that particular magazine, and your chosen ammunition, in the hands of that shooter before putting the gun in service.

I’ve recommended putting 100 rounds of your chosen defensive ammo through the gun, and gotten a lot of blowback on the cost. Well, I tend to buy defensive ammo by the case, precisely so that I can validate the function of the gun.

In several threads, I’ve mentioned my wife’s Walther CCP. It is an interesting gun with a gas piston that mitigates recoil.

But that gas piston, recoil mitigation, system means that it does not like +P ammunition. The higher pressure effectively gives it a stronger recoil spring, which can sometimes induce malfunctions.

So, I validated that the gun works flawlessly with Federal HST124 grain regular pressure ammunition.

I’ve also mentioned the Glock 42 in previous threads. I have no problem with 380 ACP, and the gun is certainly compact.

My former neighbor had purchased a Glock 42, or, more accurately, her husband had purchased her a Glock 42. The gun was really unreliable, she didn’t like it much.

We went to the range one day, and I shot the gun. 100 rounds, her ammunition, all flawless.

Turns out that that small frame Glock, in her hands, with her grip, was unreliable because frankly she was “limp wristing” the pistol.

We worked on our grip. We worked on our shooting technique. The gun got better as she got better. But I think she would’ve been better off with a gun that she could shoot well out of the box. She had no problem with my Glock 19, for example.

So, absolutely, validate the function of that gun, with that magazine, with your chosen ammo, in the hands of the intended shooter.

You are taking too many chances otherwise

 

[burbguy82]

And all are usually trained to aim (and qualify) at center mass.

back to basics baby!

 

[AZjeff]

Yes, but I was alluding more to making your shots count than to absolute accuracy in a life or death situation. I've seen countless after shoot investigations with police officer involved shootings where shots went all over. And all are usually trained to aim (and qualify) at center mass.

Exactly and the LEOs are using duty weapons with hi cap mags. The average guy or gal will be lucky to put 1 shot on target I bet and they've only got 7 shots to do it not 15 like a Glock 22. BTW is seems like alluding to a neck shot because weak caliber is alluding to accuracy of shooter and/or weapon?

 

[Fa24wrx]

Exactly and the LEOs are using duty weapons with hi cap mags. The average guy or gal will be lucky to put 1 shot on target I bet and they've only got 7 shots to do it not 15 like a Glock 22. BTW is seems like alluding to a neck shot because weak caliber is alluding to accuracy of shooter and/or weapon?

Why 7 shots?

 

[AZjeff]

Why 7 shots?

The subject of this thread is a Glock 42 with a 6 round mag capacity. +1 in the chamber = 7.


The bigger concern as illustrated by A14's example is most people just don't train enough to get good enough with whatever handgun they have. And if there's something about the handgun that just makes it difficult for the shooter it's the wrong gun. Odds are she'd limp wrist it under pressure.

 

[Fa24wrx]

The subject of this thread is a Glock 42 with a 6 round mag capacity. +1 in the chamber = 7.


The bigger concern as illustrated by A14's example is most people just don't train enough to get good enough with whatever handgun they have. And if there's something about the handgun that just makes it difficult for the shooter it's the wrong gun. Odds are she'd limp wrist it under pressure.

Ah okay. I'm not familiar with that firearm or its capacity. Thanks

 

[nomas]

Aiming to center of mass gives you greatest odds of making a hit on a vital organ .

 

[burbguy82]

Exactly and the LEOs are using duty weapons with hi cap mags.

The more rounds you have, the more you will fire, for sure. That has been proven by after actions reviews by police depts after most went to semi autos, as I am sure @shortyb will a test to, of maybe even @dnewton3 .....I think the average police shooting with revolers was 6 rounds fired, now Ill bet it is more like 15+.

most people just don't train enough

100%