in praise of the Glock 48

I have a 48, I also have a few 19s, a 26, and a 43. The 48 really is a great pistol, as much as I like my 26 and 43, I've never come around to the pinkyless concept. I can make it work, but I do prefer having a full grip. The 48 I've found doesn't conceal much better than my 19s, but it's party trick is how much easier it is for me to get a comfortable grip (the 1911 esque thinness really is a lot more ergonomic for me), I just feel more confident with it, plus its 5oz lighter than a 19 which is significant IMO. Personally, for EDC, anything with a double digit 9mm round count is enough for me, and with that being said I currently choose the 48 over all others.
 
1911_Hardball said:
Sorry, but my mind just can't grasp a few fractions of an inch make all that much difference in concealability.
Grip length is a far bigger factor than width.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, but if I were to be more specific, I would say that what my 48 conceals more comfortably than my 19. Not an enormous difference, but for all-day carry it does make the 48 more attractive.
 
greentick said:
Was just looking at that yesterday. I was wondering about the price diff with the silver slide. Cerakoted. I'd like to see glock put out a black slide 48.
Click to expand...
They offered me that feature when I got mine but I would have had to wait a week to 10 days to get it done. They had other color options as well. I went with the sight upgrade instead. I paid $349 including tax with the LE discount.
 
Grip length is a far bigger factor than width.
Click to expand...

Depends on how you carry. When carrying IWB with grip forward at 4 or 5 o'clock, magazine length is of little consequence as it relates to concealment. The problems when carrying in this manner are barrel length and thickness and are related to comfort rather than concealment. Of course, that manner of carry isn't for everyone but it works for me.
 
Leaf said:
Depends on how you carry. When carrying IWB with grip forward at 4 or 5 o'clock, magazine length is of little consequence as it relates to concealment. The problems when carrying in this manner are barrel length and thickness and are related to comfort rather than concealment. Of course, that manner of carry isn't for everyone but it works for me.
Click to expand...
So if you were to draw, your hand would have to go between the grip and your body? Just trying to make sure I understand what you're saying.
 
Tallest said:
Perhaps the "hole" mentioned is in the modern, striker-fired, composite gun market. While the single stack 9mms have definitely been around a long time, have they ever been as concise and concealable?
Click to expand...
You mean like Shields, Walthers, Sigs, 9mm 1911s etc. etc.?

It looks like a Kahr, but a Kahr is thinner.
 
Last edited:
So if you were to draw, your hand would have to go between the grip and your body? Just trying to make sure I understand what you're saying.
Click to expand...

Yes, unless you have some kind of special flippers on the ends of your arms.
 
Leaf said:
Yes, unless you have some kind of special flippers on the ends of your arms.
Click to expand...
My point being that carry configurations don't normally require the hand to go between the gun and the body to draw. But based on your description, that is what I envisioned.
 
Tallest said:
My point being that carry configurations don't normally require the hand to go between the gun and the body to draw. But based on your description, that is what I envisioned.
Click to expand...
I think we're missing something obvious that is getting lost in the translation as it were. Please show what draw method does not require the hand to go between the gun and the body. Maybe that will clear up what is being said.
 
zincwarrior said:
I think we're missing something obvious that is getting lost in the translation as it were. Please show what draw method does not require the hand to go between the gun and the body. Maybe that will clear up what is being said.
Click to expand...
Normally the palm grasps the grip on the side facing away from the body, and only the finger tips are required to wrap into the confined space between the grip and the body. In the configuration Leaf described, the primary mass of the hand has to slide between the body and the grip.

To me, and this is just my opinion, that makes the draw a lot less reflexive and more prone to possible errors, tangles, snags, etc. But, as he stated, that configuration isn't for everyone. My original comments where only intended to make sure I understood correctly.
 
Before we got the 43X and the 48 we rented several different pistols in the same genre, including the P-365. I was totally unimpressed with it. My son ended up having the same opinion as much as he wanted to like it. (I had suggested he try it before he bought it.) He is very happy with the G43X that he ended up with.
 
I can see the attraction of the Glock. The mushy trigger, poor sights, larger size, and less capacity are very attractive selling points for many people.

:D
 
You're forgetting another category in which the Glock 48 is well behind. Reports of broken strikers. It just doesn't have that combat pedigree.

:D
 
Gee, in spite of the
:D

54 or so posts before somebody slammed this 'Glock', I'm impressed...usually the 'what I hate Glock' boys come out much sooner..

'Broken strikers'...now that's a hoot...not...Hopefully the 365 won't break when ya know, ya really need it??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr8sBtnOAIQ

1000 rounds? I had that thru my G43 in 3 weeks...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top