Gonna be testing within the next week, and ik the slide catch is not installed I lost the spring

  • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    19 days ago

    I don’t like how fat they are because of the double stack glock uses.

    Fun little shooter though, at least 380 shouldn’t have too much kick for that small grip.

    I’ve shot one at a range in 9mm. Not awful, but wouldn’t want to run too many rounds through it.

    • MR.BLICCY :)@forum.guncadindex.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      19 days ago

      The 42 isn’t fat at all actually it’s reallyyyy smal, pocket pistol timing, and the mag is short 6rd with no extension, haven’t shot it yet

      • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        It’s still a standard glock doublestack , so it’ll be fat compared to single stacks like a Seecamp LWS, which is something like 1/4 thinner for the same round (but carries fewer rounds). (Been a while since I compared them, don’t recall actual specs).

        Nothing against it - there’s a logic to the thicker grip Glock uses - it makes it more comfortable for certain people. I like it in general, find their guns more comfortable to run a bunch of rounds through.

        A friend has a Walther in .22, and I’d rather shoot his 40 Glock - the thinner Walther steel grip isn’t as comfortable and you feel the recoil more than in a Glock. Another friend has the same Glock as yours in 9mm. Again it’s comfortable to shoot, just a little wider than other pocket guns.

        Edit: great website for comparing gun specs. https://www.handgunhero.com/compare/lw-seecamp-lws-380-vs-glock-g26