Breaking in a new gun....Glock 42

Out of curiosity, after reading this thread, I went back and looked at my Glock owners manual, and both the slingshot and magazine release are considered acceptable techniques.

At least for my GEN 3.

I don’t see why this pistol would be any different

I've read a lot of statements that the "proper" way to release the slide is always been the "slingshot" method. But the reality is that one isn't much different than the other.

I suppose that a lot of movie goers see the slide release method being used in Hollywood gunfights. So they gravitate to that.... Much like Bruce Willis in, "Last Man Standing". He ran around with 2, 1911's smacking the slide release, after dropping empty magazines all over the place.
 
I should have mentioned this earlier.

I’m a huge .380 fan and shoot it a ton.

You cannot expect any .380 pistol on the market to work 100% with all ammo types.

On a 9mm pistol, 98% of the ammo available will work in your gun. That’s because the ammo is more standardized and more powerful. The extra gunpowder goes a long way in mitigating bad habits, dirty/dry guns, etc. That is not the case with .380.

.380 for whatever reason, has different rim shapes, rim depths, and power levels. Probably becuase it’s sourced from all over the world. South America, Europe, Asia, North America, etc. Compare some American .380 to South American or European .380 and you might notice different shaped brass , different depths, etc if you bust out the micrometers.

Then, you have different powder charges with some powder puff loads having 780 fps and some in the 950 feet per second range.

I will go in record saying that there is a high likelihood that the Glock 42 is fine.

When you have issues in .380, you do a couple of things. First, you clean and lightly oil your gun. Second, you try several types of ammo. And hang ups while manually cycling the gun do not count. What does the gun do when actually fired? Does it work or not?

Looks at the lucky gunner ammo comparison. Find the HOT ammos that are faster. Buy those to break your gun in. I always break in new Glock pistols with hot ammo. Always. Your gun will run Gold Dots at 100%. Promise.

European ammo loaded to CIP standards is often times faster and hotter than American loads. For this reason I try to find Italian Fiocchi and Czech S&B ammo for range ammo in .380.


Don’t run the powder puff loads. Some doofus made a YouTube channel and recommend some off brand (Precision One) XTP bullets in .380 as “the best .380 he tested”. Those bullets were doing 780-800 feet per second. When actual defensive .380 should be in the 875-950 feet per second range. Low power ammo has barely enough power to cycle the slide. It is more likely to fail. And more likely to induce jams in a dirty or under lubricated. pocket gun.

So in conclusion, 1) try different ammo types 2) try hotter ammo to break in the gun 3) try hotter JHP types for carry.

You’ll find a practice and defensive load that will work. You cannot expect all .380 ammo to work. It’s just unreasonable.
 
Well, yesterday afternoon, I went out a ran 150 FMJ rounds though the gun, fairly quickly, and the gun was 100% with fmj, very smooth feed. I bought another box of Hornady Critical defense, as It would seem like it had the best chance of feeding. Although the gun cycles, it will not chamber the first round reliably using the slide lock, or racking the slide by hand.

So FMJ for me in this gun. For 380, I dont seen the same issues as a 9mm or 45.....so I am going to run with it.
 
Have you tried a few different magazines?
yep, six different ones.

I think the issue is either the feed ramp, or there is a slight difference in geometry in the frame, near the locking block, between mine and my wifes.

Here is the thing. How much money and time do I spend on this thing, trying to get it to run an ammo, that will, because of the caliber, be marginally "better" if at all ,than just regular FMJ?
 
I would keep it clean and well lubed, and continue running Ball through it. I would not hesitate to carry a dependable pistol loaded with .45 ACP Ball ammo for self defense. That load is responsible for putting a lot of Japanese and German military people in their graves.

It's big and heavy enough to tear up a lot of tissue, yet slow enough so as not to over penetrate.
 
.380 round ball punches above its weight class. It performs better than 9MM fmj becuase it is a stubby round that tumbles.

LAPD did a .380 study and they approved Speer 95 grain FMJ as their duty ammo in .380 backup guns because 1) it was reliable 2) it tumbled 3) it had decent ballistics performance. 4) it penetrated 12-18 inches in gel.

Flat face .380 (Winchester) does not tumble and should be avoided for carry.
 
Glock magazines, in general, are excellent. I don’t think you have a magazine problem.

This gun doesn’t like the HP bullet profile, which, again, surprises me, because my Glocks feed everything. In tens of thousands of rounds - I’ve had one Glock problem and that was last week, when my wife was shooting the G19.

The round didn’t fire - primer was hit - but it didn’t fire.

Not the gun’s fault.
 
Glock magazines, in general, are excellent. I don’t think you have a magazine problem.

This gun doesn’t like the HP bullet profile, which, again, surprises me, because my Glocks feed everything. In tens of thousands of rounds - I’ve had one Glock problem and that was last week, when my wife was shooting the G19.

The round didn’t fire - primer was hit - but it didn’t fire.

Not the gun’s fault.
I don't own a Glock...yet but I have several Glock magazines for my Ruger PC9. Most are Korean made aftermarket ones. They are excellent quality.
 
Couple things. First, I've grown somewhat more disenchanted with Glocks as of late. I think that they've gotten so big because of their popularity that some things get rushed for production sake. I've seen some stuff on guns that would have never made QC 10 years ago. Nothing that necessarily affects function, but fit/finish is not what it used to be. And being told that a gun needs to be "broken in" before it functions reliably is nonsense. It should not leave the factory unless it does. This not the same as a gun smoothing itself out the more you shoot it, that happens to all firearms. But it should not be an excuse for a gun that doesn't function reliably. If it doesn't, something is wrong with it and should be fixed.

Second, anyone claiming to be a Glock armorer that says they recommend slingshotting the slide vs. using the slide stop to overcome any deficiencies is full of crap. I was a certified armorer for decades in both of my depts. and have been to several Glock armorer schools, including advanced factory run training. Never have I been told that a Glock pistol is recommended to chamber a round one way or another. In fact, it was stressed that the gun should function properly either way the same. I have, however, seen where some departments are training folks to release the slide via slingshotting it vs. using the slide stop. Some shooters either don't have the dexterity, or finger strength to manipulate the slide stop and slingshotting, especially in a stressful situation, is more positive.

.380 is a very good round, and most pistols chambered for it's use are too. But, because it is primarily designed to be small and compact, it does come with some physical properties that are challenging to overcome. Overall length is one that seems to cause a pistol to be "finicky" with ammo. Ammo itself shouldn't really be all that much of the issue since all cartridges must meet the same dimensional criteria, but there are differences with bullet shape that can lend to difficulty in how the pistol must handle the round. Compactness means that more often than not, the feed ramp(s) are steeper than in a larger pistol. This can cause a misfeed due to making a short round climb a short, angular feed ramp, then pivot into the chamber as the slide comes into battery. Nothing wrong with either the gun or ammo per se, just the way the process can go awry. Training for how to react when this happens can be key to survival in a life altering moment. Also, goes without saying, make sure you can count on the ammo you choose for your gun.
 
First, I've grown somewhat more disenchanted with Glocks as of late
Sure. Glocks are excellent guns, but there was a time when it was Glock vs 1911 thing really, and Glock was the only one. I have two Service XD9 pistols that I would trust my like with. Likewise. my police trade 17, has never failed either.
anyone claiming to be a Glock armorer that says they recommend slingshotting the slide vs. using the slide stop to overcome any deficiencies is full of crap
I agree. The slide stop should give the proper slide velocity to chamber a round, les human involvement in the chambering process. Sure both can be used, but both should be 100%. In this case neither works 100%
Training for how to react when this happens can be key to survival in a life altering moment. Also, goes without saying, make sure you can count on the ammo you choose for your gun.
full agree
 
Couple things. First, I've grown somewhat more disenchanted with Glocks as of late. I think that they've gotten so big because of their popularity that some things get rushed for production sake. I've seen some stuff on guns that would have never made QC 10 years ago. Nothing that necessarily affects function, but fit/finish is not what it used to be. And being told that a gun needs to be "broken in" before it functions reliably is nonsense. It should not leave the factory unless it does. This not the same as a gun smoothing itself out the more you shoot it, that happens to all firearms. But it should not be an excuse for a gun that doesn't function reliably. If it doesn't, something is wrong with it and should be fixed.

Second, anyone claiming to be a Glock armorer that says they recommend slingshotting the slide vs. using the slide stop to overcome any deficiencies is full of crap. I was a certified armorer for decades in both of my depts. and have been to several Glock armorer schools, including advanced factory run training. Never have I been told that a Glock pistol is recommended to chamber a round one way or another. In fact, it was stressed that the gun should function properly either way the same. I have, however, seen where some departments are training folks to release the slide via slingshotting it vs. using the slide stop. Some shooters either don't have the dexterity, or finger strength to manipulate the slide stop and slingshotting, especially in a stressful situation, is more positive.

.380 is a very good round, and most pistols chambered for it's use are too. But, because it is primarily designed to be small and compact, it does come with some physical properties that are challenging to overcome. Overall length is one that seems to cause a pistol to be "finicky" with ammo. Ammo itself shouldn't really be all that much of the issue since all cartridges must meet the same dimensional criteria, but there are differences with bullet shape that can lend to difficulty in how the pistol must handle the round. Compactness means that more often than not, the feed ramp(s) are steeper than in a larger pistol. This can cause a misfeed due to making a short round climb a short, angular feed ramp, then pivot into the chamber as the slide comes into battery. Nothing wrong with either the gun or ammo per se, just the way the process can go awry. Training for how to react when this happens can be key to survival in a life altering moment. Also, goes without saying, make sure you can count on the ammo you choose for your gun.
Very well stated. Especially this: "And being told that a gun needs to be "broken in" before it functions reliably is nonsense. It should not leave the factory unless it does. This not the same as a gun smoothing itself out the more you shoot it, that happens to all firearms."

I'm currently torn between the purchase of two guns for two vastly different reasons.
A Ruger Security .380 as an EDC and/ or a Taurus TX22 because I have more .22 rounds than I have time left to shoot it all and a .22 9 shot revolver, a 10/22 even with several 25 round magazines and a Henry AR7 are not going to make much of a dent in my inventory.
The only viable solution I see is to buy both.
 
Very well stated. Especially this: "And being told that a gun needs to be "broken in" before it functions reliably is nonsense. It should not leave the factory unless it does. This not the same as a gun smoothing itself out the more you shoot it, that happens to all firearms."

I'm currently torn between the purchase of two guns for two vastly different reasons.
A Ruger Security .380 as an EDC and/ or a Taurus TX22 because I have more .22 rounds than I have time left to shoot it all and a .22 9 shot revolver, a 10/22 even with several 25 round magazines and a Henry AR7 are not going to make much of a dent in my inventory.
The only viable solution I see is to buy both.
I bought a TX22 a few years ago when Glock introduced the G44 and I wanted a .22 pistol. Compared the 2 and the Taurus ran circles around the Glock. G44 had so much trouble with the .22 cartridge for a myriad of mysterious reasons. A lot. Thats so frustrating when you are plinking away and have a rhythm going to stop and clear a malfunction. Very disheartening. The TX22, on the other hand, just ate everything in sight with no problems. Plus, even though the G44 is a more full sized pistol, the TX22 just feels/handles better to me. Spend the money if you want a really nice tack driver to reduce your stash (or send me some of your "inventory" to get rid of 😁).

I like the Ruger too, but would suggest getting your hands on/shooting a Bodyguard if at all possible and compare before laying down the duckets. I'm not merely saying this because I just got one and am still in the honeymoon/fanboi phase either. It really is a nicely made and solidly performing pistol. It feels and shoot way above it's size. I'm impressed.
 
I bought a TX22 a few years ago when Glock introduced the G44 and I wanted a .22 pistol. Compared the 2 and the Taurus ran circles around the Glock. G44 had so much trouble with the .22 cartridge for a myriad of mysterious reasons. A lot. Thats so frustrating when you are plinking away and have a rhythm going to stop and clear a malfunction. Very disheartening. The TX22, on the other hand, just ate everything in sight with no problems. Plus, even though the G44 is a more full sized pistol, the TX22 just feels/handles better to me. Spend the money if you want a really nice tack driver to reduce your stash (or send me some of your "inventory" to get rid of 😁).

I like the Ruger too, but would suggest getting your hands on/shooting a Bodyguard if at all possible and compare before laying down the duckets. I'm not merely saying this because I just got one and am still in the honeymoon/fanboi phase either. It really is a nicely made and solidly performing pistol. It feels and shoot way above it's size. I'm impressed.
Yeah. I read a guys post on the Taurus forum where he was saying his TX22 first generation literally shot every .22, even the cheapest Federal stuff that he put through it. I told him to post back when he went through a plastic bucket of Remington Thunderbolt .22, which in my experience is the worst rimfire ammunition made. Well maybe not the worst. I did some volunteer schlep work at my gun club...cleaning out and organizing this huge pole barn where they house tractors and mowers and such. They had stacks of crates of this Chinese .22. Guy told me it simply didn't cycle in any semi auto...rifle or pistol. He offered a bunch of us to help ourselves. I'm the only one that grabbed a box as I have a Taurus 94 revolver. I thought about it for 5 seconds and just put the box back.

I've been seeing the TX22 Toro version with an optic included and 3 magazines for $329 I think at KY Gun Co. But every time I check,,it's out of stock.
 
A neighbor bought the TX22 - his first gun - bit of a story there - and it’s great. Inexpensive, well-made, accurate and reliable. He’s let me try it out a couple of times at the range. I like it. If I was in the market for a .22 auto, for fun, for defense (don’t laugh, the gun you can shoot well matters) or general purposes, the TX22 would be on the short list, as would the Ruger SR22.

For target, the Ruger MK IV (with thanks to @wwillson for allowing me to shoot his excellent Ruger MK IV).

Back to my neighbor - not a gun guy. Not comfortable with the larger calibers. Can’t shoot a 9mm well, his hands are suffering from decades as a cabinetmaker and carpenter. Able to shoot the .22 well, and the ammo is affordable. So, the TX22 is about perfect for him as he learns to shoot. If he can’t hit anything with a 9mm, or a .380, then that isn’t the right gun for him.

Ammo, firearm, and shooter, they all three have to work together as a system.

The TX22 sure beats harsh language in a defensive situation.
 
A neighbor bought the TX22 - his first gun - bit of a story there - and it’s great. Inexpensive, well-made, accurate and reliable. He’s let me try it out a couple of times at the range. I like it. If I was in the market for a .22 auto, for fun, for defense (don’t laugh, the gun you can shoot well matters) or general purposes, the TX22 would be on the short list, as would the Ruger SR22.

For target, the Ruger MK IV (with thanks to @wwillson for allowing me to shoot his excellent Ruger MK IV).

Back to my neighbor - not a gun guy. Not comfortable with the larger calibers. Can’t shoot a 9mm well, his hands are suffering from decades as a cabinetmaker and carpenter. Able to shoot the .22 well, and the ammo is affordable. So, the TX22 is about perfect for him as he learns to shoot. If he can’t hit anything with a 9mm, or a .380, then that isn’t the right gun for him.

Ammo, firearm, and shooter, they all three have to work together as a system.

The TX22 sure beats harsh language in a defensive situation.
22 is better than nothing. I would not want to get hit by one.
 
It's actually a MK II, but they do look very similar. I probably have 100k rounds through this pistol and it's still all original and very accurate.
That is a bunch of rounds, but 22 barrels last nearly forever, so 100k does not surprise me. The Ruger Mark whatever is the best 22 pistol ever IMO.
 
Second, anyone claiming to be a Glock armorer that says they recommend slingshotting the slide vs. using the slide stop to overcome any deficiencies is full of crap.
True.

I was a certified armorer for decades in both of my depts. and have been to several Glock armorer schools, including advanced factory run training.
As was I; for the 25 years I was in service.

Never have I been told that a Glock pistol is recommended to chamber a round one way or another. In fact, it was stressed that the gun should function properly either way the same.
Completely agree.
But with one caveat ...
Never put a round in the chamber manually and then drop the slide on the round. This is a great risk which can result in chipping or breaking the extractor. A big no-no.
The proper method to get a round into the chamber is to use the mag and let it feed the round as the slide pushes it forward from the mag and up the ramp.

I have, however, seen where some departments are training folks to release the slide via slingshotting it vs. using the slide stop. Some shooters either don't have the dexterity, or finger strength to manipulate the slide stop and slingshotting, especially in a stressful situation, is more positive.
Agreement yet again. This is how we were trained. Grasping in the slingshot technique is a gross motor skill; it's easy to accomplish when tunnel vision and other awareness elements are collapsing around you. The thumbed slide-stop technique works well also, but it's a fine motor skill and can fail if your hands are wet (sweat; blood; etc) and it takes more "finesse" in a time when calm and clarity are flying out the window. In the end, I favor the slingshot technique, but I do occasionally practice the slide-stop method, because if my non-preferred hand ever is injured in the heat of the moment, I need to be reasonably proficient in a back-up technique. The real key is to practice both ways.

I was a departmental Glock and AR rifle armorer for my whole career. But I was not a firearms trainer. I recall several times the firearms staff (which often changed with each administration change) would tell us "Do this; it's the best ..."
- aim this way, not that way
- grip the pistol like this; not that
- reload that way, not this way
- drop mags; don't drop mags - instead do the exchange and save
- sling the rifle in front; no - sling it behind you
- etc

I was adamant that each officer should develop a technique that worked well for them as an individual; a system that was easily achieved and would be practiced with aplomb, so that muscle memory would prevail when the poo collided with the air mover.

I recall that one trainer flat insisted that we "exchange and save" the mags, and place the partially consumed mag in our front pockets so as to not confuse them with the full mags in our mag carriers. I said to him ... "Well, that's all fine and dandy, but what happens when I'm lying on the ground, and can't reach my opposite pocket to retrieve the mag I need because it's too far down in the pocket to be of any use?" He had no answer. This is because he was practicing the technique he favored on the range while wearing jeans, with no vest on, and standing up. But in full uniform, with a full vest carrier on, barrel-chested guys like me can't reach across the body, while lying in a ditch scrambling for cover, trying to access a deep-seeded mag in the bottom of a pocket which is side loaded (not top load like jeans). I told him "I'll save the mags in the manner which is the easiest for me in a time of duress and thank you but no thank you to storing mags in my pockets."

Practice may not make perfect, but it sure does make for good muscle memory. Do what feels right as long as it's not tactically stupid or dangerous. Everyone will have some things that they favor, and it may matter when milliseconds count.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom