It should be no surprise to our audience that I don’t place Glock on the same pedestal as most of the shooting population.  It’s not that I think Glocks are bad guns, I think the opposite.  They are great guns with a great pedigree.  They just don’t fit my physiology.

Having said that, today I had the opportunity to shoot the Glock 41 Gen 4 in .45acp and the Glock 42 in .380.

Glock 41 Gen 4

Honestly it reminds me a lot of the Glock 34 with the only difference being that is chambered in .45acp.  In fact the distance between sights is almost identical to the 34.  It felt like a Glock and shot like a Glock.  They aren’t breaking any new ground here.  Notably, it does carry 13+1 rounds of .45.

Glock 42

Let me just say right up front that I liked the way this gun felt in my hands.  The mini-Glock was smooth, it was slim and it was a tiny bit sexy.  It showed me that it’s not necessarily the grip angle of Glocks that doesn’t agree with me, but rather the thickness and width of the grip.  A capacity of 6+1 is about what you would expect for a small frame gun.

Now, having said so much positive about the 42, let me harp on about what I didn’t like.  The caliber.  I honestly don’t get it.  There are likely thousands of articles talking about .380 as a defensive round and that is an argument for another day, but it really seems wasted on the Glock 42.

Glock’s marketing materials claim that years of requests from all market segments drove the design of this firearm but everyone I have spoken too agrees that this gun is great as it is but as a 9mm it might be amazing.  I’m not sure who exactly wants the Glock .380 but I will just assume that they know their target audience better than me.