41 - no opinion
42 - hit for some, but not out of the park. Here's why: most people in the subcompact 380 market want deep conceal. If you don't care about that - odds are you go up to at least a 9mm. So small size / deep conceal is an issue. And the 42 is definitely bigger than the Kahr or Sig micro 380 offerings. Both of which are solid, reliable, well liked , etc. And then you have LCP's, etc. which are solid to be sure - and have a big following - and a trigger that makes them not too fun to shoot. Then further down the list are the KelTec's, Taurus, etc. in the same class.
Hit for some because they are willing to trade the size for the Glock trigger. For most? not sure.
For me, I only use the p380 when I need to DEEP conceal. Normally it would be my CM9. So I'm not really tempted by a SA 380. Even a Glock. If it was a 9mm, I might be tempted to give it a try and see where it fit in with the CM9. Especially since the size would be similar. For me - only if it was a 9, and it would be hard pressed to beat the CM9 / p380 combo. Same operation either way - completely familiar - just a change of size. And deadly reliable. Hard to beat that combination.
I don't have any interest.
It's only .5" shorter in slide length compared to a G26. And the length of a handgun slide is the easiest part to conceal. And I would assume that .5" is because it has a .5" shorter barrel than a G26. For me, it does not seem like a beneficial trade off.
It is the same height as a G26. So since the grip is the same height, not much of a difference in ease of concealment there.
It's only benefit is the width. It is 1/4" slimmer. That is such a small change that the thickness of your holster used could make up that difference compared to a G26. Example...thin Kydex holster vs. Thick leather holster.
And for the 1/4" savings...you loose 4 rounds. Again..IMHO...Not a worthwhile trade off.
Not to mention that you now have a proprietary magazine that will not work with any other Glock model.
So even if Glock comes out with a 9mm model...I don't see much of a benefit. At least that is my.
This gun is going to sell like bacon at an ingo gathering! 380's are hotter than almost anything on the market! Glock is late to the party, but it's still a party. It's size will be an advantage, cutting recoil somewhat. Plus, it's a glock so the kewl-aid drinkers will buy it just to complete their collection.
I won't buy it, because it's a glock and glocks suck. But this gun is going to sell faster than they can produce the things!
Because they're ugly. duh.Why do Glock's suck?
I like the 380 choice. I hear so many complaints about guns this size being too snappy in 9mm. Smaller 380s are also said to be too snappy and lots of complaints about the small grip. Lets just see what they sell it for. I'm not sure if it'll be that popular if it's the price of a regular Glock. I'm guessing $350?
Because they're ugly. duh.
41 - no opinion
42 - hit for some, but not out of the park. Here's why: most people in the subcompact 380 market want deep conceal. If you don't care about that - odds are you go up to at least a 9mm. So small size / deep conceal is an issue. And the 42 is definitely bigger than the Kahr or Sig micro 380 offerings. Both of which are solid, reliable, well liked , etc. And then you have LCP's, etc. which are solid to be sure - and have a big following - and a trigger that makes them not too fun to shoot. Then further down the list are the KelTec's, Taurus, etc. in the same class.
Hit for some because they are willing to trade the size for the Glock trigger. For most? not sure.
For me, I only use the p380 when I need to DEEP conceal. Normally it would be my CM9. So I'm not really tempted by a SA 380. Even a Glock. If it was a 9mm, I might be tempted to give it a try and see where it fit in with the CM9. Especially since the size would be similar. For me - only if it was a 9, and it would be hard pressed to beat the CM9 / p380 combo. Same operation either way - completely familiar - just a change of size. And deadly reliable. Hard to beat that combination.