i have a model 26 since 1994 and a model 42 since the fall, so no i dont see myself getting one. The 42 is just small enough to fit comfortably in my pocket. since its slightly bigger, the 43 wont. so if i have to go IWB or OWB with it. it would be redundant being that i have 26, which also requires that. if i didnt have a 26 i would be interested.
Are you excited for the Glock 43?
- Thread starter PurpleMountainOutdoors
- Start date
- Status
No, leaves me cold. Just like the G42. I already have a smaller, lighter, easier to conceal single stack 9mm for IWB, and pocket carry in some pants pockets. (Kahr CM9) Also a smaller, lighter, easier to conceal 380 that dissapears in any pants pocket. (Ruger LCP).
I have nothing against Glock, have a G17, and G20, but for me they missed the mark with these two single stack pistols.
I have nothing against Glock, have a G17, and G20, but for me they missed the mark with these two single stack pistols.
NMRevolverGuy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2014
- Messages
- 56
Meh. Still ugly. Still plastic. Still not interested.
leadcounsel
member
I would largely agree with this... but innovation isn't always everything it's cracked up to be. How many guns (or other products from car parts, airplane parts, computers/programs, phones, etc.) either don't work right, suffer poor performance, or breakdowns or worse - hurt people - due to "innovation for the sake of innovation?" I, for one, appreciate the solid reliable "same old boring" Glock that really does everything I demand in a gun. It's reliable, light, and accurate.
The limits have really been pushed on smaller, lighter, reliable, etc. Think of where we are today, versus just 3 decades ago, in light weight, reliable handgun selections! The innovations were astounding. But until metal can be replaced in the slide/barrel, we're at a relative standstill.
The problem isn't Glock, it's a fickle shooting public that wants new and shiney and forgets the fundamental reason for a carry gun. Smaller isn't always better, and there are rapid ergonomic and physics problems when you get too diminutive.
"Slow to market" - I read that as testing and ensuring it works so as to not have recalls. I recall that a few of the diminutive or compact pistol makers rushed to market with products that were later suffering from recalls. That harms the brand. Glock suffered a recall on it's Gen4 for an unnecessary spring/rod recall; Keltec recalled its P3AT; Caracal; Taurus; SW for its MP Shield; Springfield XDS; Sig P938; Ruger; Tanfoglio; etc. etc. etc.
Now, which would you rather have? A tried and true reliable and accurate design, or new frills that are prone to failure or recall?
As for this new Glock, for the right price I'd pick one up.
Last edited:
herrwalther
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,130
Nope. I have little interest in a single stack 9mm. If I do come into that market, I would get a PPS over a G43 any day.
PurpleMountainOutdoors
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2014
- Messages
- 154
Well said. I love glocks as tools, however I prefer the ergos and aesthetics of other guns (cz, sig, hk, walther, kahr) better.
Less than none. They totally missed the market by dumping out a 380 5 years late and now are later (and probably out customers that bought a 42) with the 9.
If I want a single stack 9, I want it for smallness but heft will be more important. Think a Kahr MK9 that still is metal to soak some kick. Small, light and caliber are not something I expect or desire.
If I want a single stack 9, I want it for smallness but heft will be more important. Think a Kahr MK9 that still is metal to soak some kick. Small, light and caliber are not something I expect or desire.
Crisisbill
Member
They are a little late to the party, I bought a S&W Shield and love it.
My Glock 27 has been moved to my nightstand from my hip.
My Glock 27 has been moved to my nightstand from my hip.
guyfromohio
Member
The smaller guns are tools to me, not collectors. My PPS fills that niche. Unless I can see a benefit over the PPS, I'll likely not buy one.
sappyg
Member
Not so excited as Ambivalent.
Not interested in beta testing a new gun and satisfied with the 42 as is. The Shield, while not a tack driver, works good enough for what it is at a better price. I might be a buyer at 4 bills or less just to give it a try.
Not interested in beta testing a new gun and satisfied with the 42 as is. The Shield, while not a tack driver, works good enough for what it is at a better price. I might be a buyer at 4 bills or less just to give it a try.
hamp sandwich
Member
Not feeling it, but I've never been a Glock fan. They just don't fit me..
Also, like many others, I'm not impressed by their late entry into the market with this one.
Also, like many others, I'm not impressed by their late entry into the market with this one.
urbaneruralite
Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2007
- Messages
- 473
They really should have done it before Walther debuted the PPS. Glock can't touch it. Even the Shield is sure to beat it.
pockets
Member
Not excited in the least.
Another Glock.....whoopee.
.
Another Glock.....whoopee.
.
Vodoun da Vinci
Member
I'm extremely excited and pre ordered mine already. I shot all the other makers 9mm single stacks and passed preferring my G26. Time will tell if the G43 replaces my G26 but if it is basically a G42 on a tiny bit of steroids as touted my Mas Ayoob I'm betting it is a permanent addition to my carry guns.
VooDoo
VooDoo
doubleh
Member
No and that goes for anything with the Glock name.
Sergei Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2011
- Messages
- 1,918
As a gun enthusiast and observer of the firearms industry I'm interested, but I'm not in the market for one.
Vodoun da Vinci
Member
I'm not a big fan of Kahr as all the guns I tested in a variety of calibers tended to be finicky about ammo (with some exceptions) and not as accurate from the get go for me as other guns. Which was what the evaluations 2 years ago were all about - find the guns that shot very well and fit me without a lot of compromise and futzing. Then when we found the inherent jewels to train up using an inherently preferred platform.
The Kahrs are great guns like so many others. For someone else. For me? The guns that wowed me right off the bat and worked flawlessly and hit whatever I looked at with uncanny and unerring consistency were the guns I kept. None of them were Kahrs - 2 were Glocks.
For me, in my hands, with the way I shoot and carry. I have small hands for a 6'3" 185ish male of 59 who has a moderately muscular build and is a former martial arts instructor of over 20 years. In the hands of a 20ish 240 lb male of the same size with large hands and a more robust build who carries in another way and shoots SD in a different style (I'm primarily a point shooter) I'm certain his choices would not be my choices. I didn't start out liking Glocks. They took a liking to me...and I use tools that work the best for me.
Regardless of politics or Internet Hype or personal opinions, price, size, "how cool/not cool they look" I always test via shooting and select guns for me that perform from the get go. There are too many great pistols out there to get mired in buying/carrying what someone else touts as The Best. The Kahrs I shot were like the Shields and Springers and Colts and Sigs and such I shot - very, very nice guns. But ultimately not quite for me as a G26, G42, Beretta Px4 SC and others.
VooDoo
W.E.G.
Member
I'm ecstatic.
I will read the over-paying new owners' complaints with delight.
Then, when prices and availability normalize, and the bugs are all fixed, I might actually buy one.
Until then, I'm rocking the G22.
Every day.
It's just NOT THAT BIG.
I will read the over-paying new owners' complaints with delight.
Then, when prices and availability normalize, and the bugs are all fixed, I might actually buy one.
Until then, I'm rocking the G22.
Every day.
It's just NOT THAT BIG.
- Status
Similar threads
