The Official M4C 9mm Single Stack Glock Thread

[Flankenstein]

Does anybody know if the MGW 42 adapter will work for the 43? I would think it wouldn't but have been told it would.

[Uprange41]

In some pretty deep debate over the 42 or the 43 or when the 26 or 19 won't cut it.

Part of me really likes the 42 more... Having shot both now, I gotta say, I'm more confident in getting good quick hits with the 42. I can't say I'm too caught up in 380 vs. 9mm for my particular application, either.

[krm375]

Still on the fence about getting one of these, but found a link for some mag base plates for +2

http://tarantacticalinnovations.com/...cPath=44_49_81

[punkey71]

Installed the Ghost connector in my 43.

OEM connector gave me a pretty consistent 9lb pull from the center of the trigger, pulling straight back. This is using a Brownells "fish scale" gauge.

Ghost is consistently 6lbs in the same spot.

Weights can be awkward (to me) to measure on Glocks. Two people can get different numbers by technique, pull location and direction of pull, it seems.

All I can say is keeping the same technique for ME yielded a real 3 lb difference using the Ghost.

Still a bit of a wall. Not a rolling break like a Ghost and extra power trigger spring achieves in my full size Glocks, for sure. Definitely lighter and slightly smoother though.

For $22.49 shipped to my door it was worth it (to me).

Best
Harold


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[DWood]

Although the grip of the 43 is only 1/8" narrower than a double stack model, the key measurement is the circumference. The 43 is almost 3/4" less than the doublestacks (measured between the finger bumps) and that is why it feels very small in hand. Here is my 43 compared to a 19. It's not very scientific, but illustrates the point.

G43
[IMG][/IMG]

G19
[IMG][/IMG]

[Flankenstein]

Does anybody know if the MGW 42 adapter will work for the 43? I would think it wouldn't but have been told it would.

Evidently the new ones will be shipping w/ a shim to work on the 43 for anyone else who may be interested.

[Flankenstein]

Although the grip of the 43 is only 1/8" narrower than a double stack model, the key measurement is the circumference. The 43 is almost 3/4" less than the doublestacks (measured between the finger bumps) and that is why it feels very small in hand. Here is my 43 compared to a 19. It's not very scientific, but illustrates the point.

Why would circumference from front to back be the key measurement on a carry gun?

[themonk]

I picked one up today from my LGS. The trigger is all GLOCK. It has a great reset and is easy to shoot. I am super happy with the 43. I was only able to but about 100 rounds of FMJ through it today and another 50 rounds of 147gr HST but she ate everything I gave it. I need to get some more mags as loading the 6 rounders is tedious. Sights as with all GLOCKs are atrocious!

[RS4]

I had the opportunity to fire a rental Glock 43 at a range today. I alternated between the 43 and my 19. Overall through the ~70 rounds I fired through it, the pistol handled quite well, and the recoil was not overly aggressive for the small frame. Informal accuracy testing at across the room distances (5-7 yards) yielded acceptable groups that were only a bit larger than the ones I was able to shoot with my 19. Granted groupings for both were not anything to brag about since I have astigmatism in my dominant eye and was shooting without my glasses (they went missing last week). As mentioned by others, the trigger is a bit firm, and a good candidate for the .25 trigger job, and/or a different connector. I did not encounter any brass to the face during my shooting, and the range partitions prevented me from observing the gun's ejection pattern.

A couple less than, or potentially less than positive things occurred while shooting the weapon without the magazine in place (the only magazine provided had the finger extension, so the magazine was removed to simulate the feel of firing with the flush fitting magazine). A few times while firing in this manner I noticed the spent casing was falling back through the weapon and dropping out of the bottom of the magazine well. Does anyone feel this is a reason for concern? One thing that definitely concerned me was that the weapon stove-piped when I fired a 124 grain +P Gold Dot round through it with the magazine removed.

The last thing that concerned me was the fact that when I disassembled the weapon, on reassembly I noticed the recoil spring assembly was loose, i.e the spring didn't have enough tension to hold the barrel in the gun when inverted. I'm pretty sure this rental gun has seen a ton of rounds in the 3-4 weeks it's been at the range (an stored with the slide retracted), but it still seems like it should still have enough spring tension to hold things in place.

Overall the gun seemed like a great candidate for summer carry, and with one in the chamber, and six in the mag it has a 40% round-count advantage over a .38 snubbie. I am interested in one.

The last item, that may be worth feedback is Blue Label Pricing on this item. The store, which I like, and feel is a very well run business, told me the Blue Label price was $379.99. I have seen folks indicate the Glock LE/Mil price is $358. Is there dealer discretion when applying Blue Label pricing, and if not, is there a tactful way to ask why it is not priced at $358? I'm thinking I may go back tomorrow regardless of the $22 difference and get one to try out.

[Psalms144.1]

$358 is the "distributor" Blue Label price. Add $22 to that for "retail" Blue Label price, and your store's price is in there.

Of course, since there are no workable LGS' near me, it's all through the nearest "distributor" for me, and I won't argue that paying less for the same is generally a good thing. Even with shipping & transfer, I'm still OTD less than the higher Blue Label price + tax...