Poll: What do you think about Glock's new G43 compact 9mm?

The title says it all.

What do you think about Glock's new injection molded plastic-framed & stamped sheet metal, striker-fired, compact, 9mm, 6+1, G43 pistol?

A. Perfection
B. 1 Yawn
C. 2 Yawns
D. 3 Yawns
E. Other


Dave

Short and fat, sounds like my ex, meh. The fundamental flaw is that the slide is still over an inch thick. I'd rather have a 19 and be done with it.

I heart Glock, but it is to little to late for me. 6+1 9mm? Heck, I get 7+1 45 ACP in a Colt Commander. I'm sure it will be a popular pistol, but the amount of...um....care that I don't have is epic.

I like single stack 9mms and would probably like the G43. Doubt Glock will get it on the Roster of Approved Handguns so at this point I don't care.

Hmm... I will have to go with E. "other" for the time being. I have a Glock 26 that has done very well for me, it is also the smallest 9mm pistol I would ever want to shoot without making mild reloads for it. Anything smaller just doesn't have enough grip or weight for me to shoot it well, and I'm a firm believer in carrying what you are comfortable with and shoot well. Now, the Glock 42 is the perfect size and weight for a .380, even with hotter ammo. So, the 43 doesn't at all change my plans to get a 42 at some point this year. Now, if I came across an outstanding deal on a 43 I may just take it home. If I didn't like it I could easily get my money back out of it.

I wonder if the 43 uses the same mechanical components as the other Glock 9mm pistols, or if they are miniaturized like those of the 42? I love having a common spare parts collection for my Glock 19 and 26, if the 43 used the same components that would be a huge plus in its favor. I do like how Glock decided not to put the useless finger bumps on the 42 and 43. I love the generation 4 grip minus those stupid bumps which I reduced to little hills on my pistols. I wonder if the slide is the same width on the 43 as the 26? If so then I will likely skip it, as I wouldn't be gaining anything over my 26 or the 42.

also E for other
glock woke up from their nap to find Ruger , Kahr and other manufactures making guns that are just easier to carry , the CCW market is booming in the past several years
they recognized the need , was it to late , I am sure some of the glock groupies will buy them.

I will still be carrying my LC9 , 7+1 same overall size , smoother edges for less printing , and pinky extension that isn't any harder to conceal but makes shooting it much easier.

funny how in the description I found any way glock weighs the gun and the mag separate and makes you do the math to find that it weighs more than the LC9 if you do the math the glock weighs the same with 6 rounds and a mag according to the spec I found as the LC9 does with 8 rounds of 124gr 9mm

but this does get them into the BUG gun class of IDPA

I think they need to get it down to compete witht he Kahr CW9 and Ruger LC9 in price right around 350.00 store price to pull out from behind in that class of guns these are the guns it is going to get compared to

Glock stuck with the brick design they know so well. A single stack sort of begs for something a bit more sleek. I have a S&W shield, glock is just way to late for the party unfortunately. Had they come out when everybody else was bringing them out be one thing, but now they have to try to catch up, and how many need several single stacks. I bought one to carry, I dont need 2 so I can accessorize.

The Kahr CW9 I used to have was in my opinion the absolute perfect size and weight for a CCW 9mm. I only sold it because I could never shoot it well due to the grip angle and trigger pull characteristics, could actually shoot my Kel-Tecs better. I often lamented that Glock should make a pistol of the exact dimensions of the CW9.

The problem I have is width and length. The barrel is too short and frame is too thick.
id love to see one about as thick as their 380 offering with a Glock 19 length slide.
I purchased the bersa bp9cc for the woman when they first came out.
My first thought was why the hell hasn't Glock done this?
This is my same problem with the long slide 10mm they are releasing, the Glock 41 got down to the slide width of the 17 but instead of using that slide width they went with the pants on head stupid idea of a 6" glock21 width slide. From what I can see they only did this to avoid springing the dang thing correctly and using existing stock of gen4 springs... Ugh.

Maybe they'll release a carbine (LOL), with the way things have been going though it'll probably be a 4728918 lb monstrosity like the lulzy Taurus carbine.

If Glock releases a pistol caliber carbine, it will be 8 years from now and take a different magazine than their pistols do.

C. My G27 gen 3 does what I need. Have 9MM and .357 Sig barrels for it when I wanna choot sumpthin different. Each their own. Glad the good Lord made us different, or we'd hafta fight over molds, .......but they'd all be the same one!!!!

Greg in West Mitten

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Love Life

If Glock releases a pistol caliber carbine, it will be 8 years from now and take a different magazine than their pistols do.

---

So long as the different magazine is an alternating feed design that magpul can immediately make a better stronger and cheaper version of in 10mm I'd still throw my money at it faster than a socialist congressmen to solve an imagined social problem.

I can't wait until Magpul starts making magazines for the Glock 21 and 20.

Geez me too.
I know it's probably dumb. But I really hope they make a reliable high capacity 10mm magazine in the 25-30 round range also. That's all that is holding me back from building a DI 10mm ar15.
(turns out that 6.8 spc and 10mm auto are both from 30 Remington parent. )
Useless and wonderful.

I'm at 3 yawns cause thats my reaction to Glock in general. Actually a single stack might fit my hand better, but why bother for 2 more rounds than my J frame?

I am definitely interested. For the sake of simplicity I limit myself to glock and 1911 now for auto pistols. With my *ahem* love handles *ahem* a slimmer gun would be appreciated. Especially if they made a glock 44 in 40. Like a modern 44-40 lol

2 yawns from me because they are way behind the game on this one.

I don't see a reason for any of the Glocks in 9mm, much less one that is single stack. I much prefer my CZ-75 Compact in 9mm and it is not that much larger than this new single stack Glock (well, to me at least).

CZ-75 Compact vs Glock 43
Length: 7.24" vs 6.26"
Height: 5.03" vs 4.25"
Width: 1.38" vs 1.02"

Still, it's better than having a .380 handgun, I guess...

I want glock to do a remake of the thompson , sorry I think its a match , bulky and clunky i still want the glock reliability , take anything you put in it and puke it out , the tommy gun well its a perfect match , and I think a remake is in order , as for the single stack 9mm , model 26 is better, not to thrilled with this version. Better things to make. heck remake the 1911 as that seems to be what same think the end result should be ... I think everyone is making 1911 today , they call it a 1911a1 in then ad and it is 1911 frame and hard to find if it is a 1911 or the series 80 . Different opinions at every gun shop , so not going to vote in this poll either , shoot em if you got em ..

I have to agree with GREENCOUNTYPETE in post #6 - Glock appears to be attempting to compete in the 9mm CCW market and doing it poorly. While I think the G19 is an outstanding gun and one of my favorites, it is not in the same class as a Kahr K9 or MK9. The G43 just does not have the correct dimensions to be seriously considered in that class.
I like Glocks for what they do but that doesn't mean I'll choose a Glock just because they put their name on something.

I've always liked the engineering and quality of the Kahr's and if Remington can get the kinks out of the R51, it has great potential. Glock needs to try harder or just concentrate on what they do well.