So all of the discussion on the net about the G43x and G48 got me thinking, why don't people seem to understand the appeal of thin guns?

There are roughly 365,385,937,999,268,312 comments on the net about the G48/G43x that can be summed up as: "lol, it's the exact same footprint as a G19 so it will be the same to conceal and hold 5 less rounds, how stupid, no thanks." Also, "grip length is what matters when CCW'ing, nothing else."

So it got me thinking, how can this be? I started to wonder how often folks carry their gun. I wake up, shower and put my CCW on. I don't take it off until the kids are in bed and I go downstairs to work out around 9:00 pm. I usually have my gun on me 15 or more hours a day, 7 days a week.

I find thin guns much easier to carry and conceal. The G43 is the same footprint as a G26, but those guns carry drastically different for me. A thin grip hugs tight to my body and easily conceals. Thicker guns tend to look like I have a tumor growing off the side of me if I choose to carry at 3:00. I typically carry appendix, so barrel length is far more important to me than grip length. It this a completely new concept to folks who say only grip length matters, not slide length?

So do people really find that the G26 and the G43 carry the exact same for them? They are the same footprint like the G48 and G19 after all. Do people not carry that many hours out of the day and thus don't appreciate the thin guns? Are thicker guns easier to conceal on "husky" folks (I am a trim guy so maybe I don't understand that)?

I understand we all carry differently and things conceal differently. If I'm strapping on a gun for a couple of hours, I agree, a G19/G26 with extended mag is great and not really worth the trade off of carrying a G43 with a +2 mag. But, after 15 hours, I find the difference to be huge!

So that leaves me with three Hypothesizes: 1) people who don't seem to get thin guns don't carry all day, 2) are husky and somehow thick guns absorb into their side fat, or 3) have some body type different than me that makes fat guns no harder to conceal than thin guns, but said body type difference somehow makes them mentally incapable of realizing other folks aren't like them when it comes to carry.

Thoughts? I'm genuinely curious about this phenomenon about folks not understanding thin guns. Side poll below about carry hours/day.

Question:
My first thought is, do these people even carry? Or if you go to a gym regularly, "Do you even carry bro?"

Choices:
Yes, I strap on my gun first thing in the morning and don't take it off until bed
Yes, but only when I leave the house
Yes, but not at work
Occasionally
Never

 

I’ve gone to carrying my Beretta Nano because it is small, thin and reliable. I carry it in a Georgia Snap holster from R Grizzle leather. I have the exact same holster for my G19. And while it is equally comfortable, I like the slim profile of the Nano and carry it daily.

I'm reading the comments on TFB now. I came across this comment too:

"So they don't take glock mags???? Fail!!!
Proprietary mags are a no go."

I mean this is the dumbest thing I've read. I've been seeing these types of comments too. Did folks bitch when the Sig 365 didn't accept 320 mags? Did they bitch when the G43 didn't accept G19 mags?

I just can't wrap my head around the bitching around these guns. I'm an M&P 2.0 fan boy, not a Glock fan boy. But geez o' Petes, what is wrong with folks? It's a new gun/grip size you jackasses, why would it use the same mags?

Another quote from those comments:

"full grip???? then just go glock 19...double stack glocks are not that thick for average male hand.... i dont see a reason to go single stack except for the very few with really small hands"

Bro, do you even carry? It isn't about the size of my hands.

Yeah, that's particularly stupid.

1911s don't take 2011 mags.

S&W 39XXs don't take 59XX mags.

Shields don't take M&P mags.

Single stack guns can't use double stack mags. Deal with it.

One of the issues I see is that for a single stack gun, they made it thicker than the 43. I can understand the appeal of a thinner gun, but at what point does it reach the point of diminishing returns. It's about 3/16th thinner than a Gen 4 19 (Glock porked up the width of the Gen 5 with the mag well.)

So how much thinner is thinner enough to matter?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BBMW,

quote:

So how much thinner is thinner enough to matter?

I'm right there with you sir. One of the things I really like about the P365 is that the grip is a little thicker than the G43 and thus give me a better grip on the gun.

Obviously it is different for all of our hands, but the 43 (even though I'm carrying one now) is a little too thin for me.

I don't find the 365 grip too thick, so I'm hoping that the little extra thickness on the G43X/G48 isn't an issue either. ADCO says they'll have a G43X and a G48 for me on the 21st. As soon as I get my hands on them, I'll put the calipers on their grips and the 365 grip and report on what I find. I'm guessing they'll be similar.

One of my favorite personal carry pistols was the P239, largely because it was thin for inside the waistband carry.

I find myself carrying my G43 quite a bit; it's easy to conceal in a pocket, thin, light.

The 1911, similarly.

That said, I really don't think the market for a large single stack pistol will be that great, today.

Glock's G36 is appreciated, I think, by many who have one, but has never been their biggest seller, and yes, the orphan mag is an issue. Among other things, I can use G21 mags in a G29, but not in a G36. It's thin, light, easy to carry and shoot, but limited, and limited in options, parts, etc, and in holster availability.

The P365 offered something in size, as did the G43; those benefits to me are lost once the pistol grows in every dimension but width.

I think it was a minor fail for Glock not to have the foresight to make the 43, 43X, and 48 all use the same mags. Otherwise, they are good carry options, especially in ban states. The thin-ness is a big part of what drew me to the K9 during the AWB. Since max capacity was 10, 7+1 in what was the thinnest 9mm at the time was a good option.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
One of the issue I see is that for a single stack gun, they made it thicker than the 43. I can understand the appeal of a thinner gun, but at what point does it reach the point of diminishing returns. It's about 3/16th thinner than a Gen 4 19

So how much thinner is thinner enough to matter?

I'll flip it around and ask how much ticker is thicker enough to matter?

You noted that the G43X is thicker than the G43. But the G43X is only 1mm thicker, and only in the grip area. That's just under 4/100 of an inch.

4/100 of an inch (0.0394") is certainly a drastically less significant difference that 3/16 of an inch (0.1875").

I don't believe you'll notice the thickness difference between the G43 and G43X, whereas the difference between the G19 and G43X will be noticeable. Especially considering the G19 is 3/16" thicker throughout, not just in the grip area.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:
I think it was a minor fail for Glock not to have the foresight to make the 43, 43X, and 48 all use the same mags.

And just how in the world would that work? G43 takes a single stack six shot magazine. You want a 10 shot magazine for that pistol? Fine, you can have it, but it's still going to be single stack and will protude (quite a bit) from the bottom of the grip. Hello??

Explain this to me, please. How would you would get magazine commonality among these three pistols? Simply saying that Glock should have done so won't cut it.

I'll save you some time- a common magazine among these three pistols is not possible.

And to people saying "Fail!" in the comments section of some website, let me tell you something- either they have no intention of buying one of these pistols, or they intend to buy one, and they're just bitching online.


Let's put on our thinking caps, gents.

So far, only 25% have answered that they carry from wake up until sleep. Only 16 people have answered the poll, but so far my first suspicion is taking form.

bro, you don't even carry . I can see why folks don't appreciate thin carry guns if they are only carrying a few hours a day.

To Strambo's comment, yes, it would be great if Glock knew three years ago that is this is how the Slim Line pistols would evolve. That way they would have had the 43 use the mag that the 43X/48 are now using, only shorter, and with an extra round or two to boot.

However, they were going for as thin as possible at the time. The 365 changed things, so I don't fault them for not going for a staggered mag right out of the gate.

I carry all day long, except when I have to go someplace where it's prohibited, like my workplace. For several months now my EDC has been a Beretta PX4 Compact, a double-stack 9mm. It's a little more work to carry than my previous EDC, a S&W 642-1 snubnose .38 Special revolver. But now that I seem to have settled on a holster/belt/mag pouch combo that works for me, it's not that difficult, at least with my clothing.

Having said that, if there was a single-stack version available I would've jumped on that. In fact, before the Sig P239 was discontinued it was my leading contender for a 9mm EDC gun.

Reliability and shoot-ability are first and foremost, but "thin" is my first ergonomic qualifier for a carry gun, even over weight. Like the OP, I always wished for a striker fired P9, as the size with a full grip was ideal in my mind.

I started with a 92F and quickly realized that size matters. I went to a P228 and was happy for a long time. I tried several other things: several Glocks, H&K's and others, but the constant guns on my hip over the last 12 years have all been single stack guns.

I found that thinner guns give me more flexibility to carry the same gun but in different positions by changing holsters, than changing guns when I wanted to carry in a different place on my body. For me it was a PM9 for a long time even though I disliked the trigger system and "too short for me" grip length. The last several years its been a PPS Classic that I shoot very well and it can ride almost anywhere on my body and stay concealed.

The thing I dislike about most thin pistols is they always seem to come with shortened grips. I wear a Large / X-large glove and have issues with short grips. While you can insert a mag with an extended base plate, it still leaves you with a short grip on mag changes. I find myself having to strip mags sometimes and pinching my palm upon hurried insertion. And while 10 round mags carry less ammo than a 15 round mag does, spares are much easier to carry and conceal. In fact, when I carried a hi-cap gun, I almost never carried a spare mag. But with my PPS, I always carry one, and often times 2 spares, giving me 24 rounds of 9mm.

In my opinion - for ME - Guns like the Glock 43X and 48 are EXACTLY the concept that I believe make perfect carry guns. And very soon, once I'm in a free state, I will be shooting both of these guns to see if I can take my drummel tool and carve out a comfortable gun to fit my hand.(Glock knuckle is an issue for me). I hope that other manufacturers follow suit and come out with competitive models. A thin M&P 2.0 3.6 with a 10 round mag? SIGN ME UP BABY!

This brings up the issue of shootability vs concealability. People buy subcompact single stack guns because they're easy to carry, and put up with the compromises this imposes on shootability, ammo capacity, round power, etc.. This is why, when I saw that the 43x was given up some size advantage, especially in height, but also at least slightly in width, I developed a degree of skepticism about it's level of advantage as a carry gun.

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:

quote:

So how much thinner is thinner enough to matter?

I'm right there with you sir. One of the things I really like about the P365 is that the grip is a little thicker than the G43 and thus give me a better grip on the gun.

Obviously it is different for all of our hands, but the 43 (even though I'm carrying one now) is a little too thin for me.

I don't find the 365 grip too thick, so I'm hoping that the little extra thickness on the G43X/G48 isn't an issue either. ADCO says they'll have a G43X and a G48 for me on the 21st. As soon as I get my hands on them, I'll put the calipers on their grips and the 365 grip and report on what I find. I'm guessing they'll be similar.

What I don't get is why the G43x is thicker than the G43 and mags don't interchange. IF they want to go slim, GO SLIM. True single stack mag. This is weird. The G43 is already wider than it needs to be.

I drop an NAA Mini-Mag .22M in my pajama pocket until I get dressed. Other guns are close by.

My wife and I both carry from the time we get dressed until we go to bed and our guns go the nightstands.

I usually conceal carry a 5" 1911 in either .45 ACP or 10mm with a spare magazine on my belt. I also pocket carry a Sig P938 9mm with a spare magazine. When I work out at the gym, I still have the Sig P938 in my pocket.

If I want more capacity, I swap the 1911 for either a Glock G35 .40 S&W or a Glock G40 10mm with two or more spare magazines. When I want more power, I swap the 1911 for an S&W 29-2 .44 magnum with two or more speed loaders.

quote:

Originally posted by 1KPerDay:
What I don't get is why the G43x is thicker than the G43 and mags don't interchange.

G43 magazine = 6 rounds

G43X magazine = 10 rounds

What am I missing here? Is it me? 'Cause somebody is missing something obvious. Is it me? WTF?

More choices means more things to complain about, I guess.

I'm guessing people want to be able to use the factory 10 rounders in their non-x 43s.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by 1KPerDay:
What I don't get is why the G43x is thicker than the G43 and mags don't interchange.

G43 magazine = 6 rounds

G43X magazine = 10 rounds

What am I missing here? Is it me? 'Cause somebody is missing something obvious. Is it me? WTF?

More choices means more things to complain about, I guess.

quote:

Originally posted by 1KPerDay:
What I don't get is why the G43x is thicker than the G43 and mags don't interchange. IF they want to go slim, GO SLIM. True single stack mag. This is weird. The G43 is already wider than it needs to be.

Yes, totally agree. It's like, why is a G19 mag wider than the mag on my Ruger 22/45? So annoying!

I appreciate and prefer to carry small, slim guns as opposed to bigger, thicker ones.
Started carrying 2 J frames when I was undercover. Graduated to Kahr's (P9 and PM9) for belt and ankle/pocket and while I liked them, I preferred the Glock trigger.
Been carrying a 43 for some time, sometimes a 42 as backup, and will definitely look at the 48 hard once the "newness" of it has worn off some. I think it would make a great belt gun, with the 43 as a backup or pocket/ankle supplement piece.
Lots of choices out there people, enjoy the ride!