I think comparing the Glock 42 (G42) in .380 ACP and the S&W 442 in .38 Special is particularly relevant because they are not only identical in size and weight, the ammo they utilize performs practically identically as well. I have both of these handguns, albeit the 442 is relatively new to me compared to my G42. Here’s my take on these weapons.
Primary vs Backup: There‘s a great deal of talk that the average shooting lasts one to three rounds, and that something like 99% of all shootings are negated by the mere drawing of a weapon. That might be all well and good, but generally speaking, we carry handguns as insurance policies. I don’t know about you, but I prefer full coverage when I insure, hence in a handgun it stands to reason that I’d prefer greater ammo capacity and faster reloads. The G42 clearly wins.
But neither of these guns, the G42 with 6+1 rounds, or the 442 with its 5, are what I’d call ideal primary guns. What they are is light and convenient! And that’s why they are sometimes all we have, especially in summer when clothing gets light. And in the summer, I’d say the G42 has the upper hand. Sure superhero's can load and shoot a revolver as fast as a semi, but for the rest of us, I’d say the G42 is a clear winner when it comes to getting rounds on target as fast as possible.
Of course it only takes one and when it comes to winter, being able to just throw the 442 in your pocket and fire though it, well now that’s a distinct advantage! If I could only have one... my Glock would get the call. Marginally. 7 really does seem like a ton more than 5 when you’re unloading quickly into a target.
Convenience: So like I alluded to before, these are guns you carry because everything else is too big. Or because you are recoil sensitive. Many argue saying guns are supposed to be comforting, not comfortable, but what a load. I’m not a cop or a mall ninja. I carry to protect me and mine. I carry 7 days a week, 365. I prefer small and light. I can and have packed a G26 for years, but it was never as convenient or nearly as comfortable as either of these guns. To the point of detriment. But this is really where the 442 shines!
The 442 is crazy convenient. I mean only one of these handguns is a real pocket gun in my opinion, and that’s the 442. Even with an Apex Tactical aftermarket trigger, there is no way the 442 is going to go off unless you’re actively pulling on the trigger. You can literally throw the gun in your pocket and go (not that I’m advocating it). No way you can do that without a holster if you have one in the chamber with the G42.
The ability to be able to put the gun in your hoodie’s pocket sans holster making it a one handed affaire just can’t be understated! When it comes to convenient, my vote goes hands down to the S&W 442.
Only one of these handguns is “really“ a true pocket gun.
Which leads me to my final type of comparison between these two handguns - Piece of Mind. Or as some call it Reliability. I absolutely love my G42. I have a 43 as well. I have a lot of pistols. I think they are a better “fighting gun“ than revolvers, but if I was burying a million bucks and going to throw a handgun on top for later, it be the 442, not the Glock. I have no proof other than antidotal stories, but I’d be questioning if the mags would still push up the rounds after a decade of being loaded. Though I probably wouldn’t have to.
Moreover, I’ve had to change up all the springs in my G42. I shot the heck out of it, so thats what happens. It’ll happen eventually with the 442 too I’m guessing. But what sucks is, my carry ammo didn't feed reliably in the G42 afterword, and I had to find a new ammo... and now sit on hundreds in ammo I don’t know what to do with. That’ll never happen with a revolver.
Of course my G42 doesn’t shoot snake shot like my 442 does, and being I like shooting snake shot... so there is that too I guess.
Conclusion: It’s really hard to compare two guns that are so closely “related.” I find the 442 way more sexy, but function is, as function does, and that makes the 42 a pretty awesome gun too. If I could only have one, I think I’d pick the G42. But as a hip or shoulder holstered gun. If I had to have a pocket gun - the 442 no question.
Primary vs Backup: There‘s a great deal of talk that the average shooting lasts one to three rounds, and that something like 99% of all shootings are negated by the mere drawing of a weapon. That might be all well and good, but generally speaking, we carry handguns as insurance policies. I don’t know about you, but I prefer full coverage when I insure, hence in a handgun it stands to reason that I’d prefer greater ammo capacity and faster reloads. The G42 clearly wins.
But neither of these guns, the G42 with 6+1 rounds, or the 442 with its 5, are what I’d call ideal primary guns. What they are is light and convenient! And that’s why they are sometimes all we have, especially in summer when clothing gets light. And in the summer, I’d say the G42 has the upper hand. Sure superhero's can load and shoot a revolver as fast as a semi, but for the rest of us, I’d say the G42 is a clear winner when it comes to getting rounds on target as fast as possible.
Of course it only takes one and when it comes to winter, being able to just throw the 442 in your pocket and fire though it, well now that’s a distinct advantage! If I could only have one... my Glock would get the call. Marginally. 7 really does seem like a ton more than 5 when you’re unloading quickly into a target.
Convenience: So like I alluded to before, these are guns you carry because everything else is too big. Or because you are recoil sensitive. Many argue saying guns are supposed to be comforting, not comfortable, but what a load. I’m not a cop or a mall ninja. I carry to protect me and mine. I carry 7 days a week, 365. I prefer small and light. I can and have packed a G26 for years, but it was never as convenient or nearly as comfortable as either of these guns. To the point of detriment. But this is really where the 442 shines!
The 442 is crazy convenient. I mean only one of these handguns is a real pocket gun in my opinion, and that’s the 442. Even with an Apex Tactical aftermarket trigger, there is no way the 442 is going to go off unless you’re actively pulling on the trigger. You can literally throw the gun in your pocket and go (not that I’m advocating it). No way you can do that without a holster if you have one in the chamber with the G42.
The ability to be able to put the gun in your hoodie’s pocket sans holster making it a one handed affaire just can’t be understated! When it comes to convenient, my vote goes hands down to the S&W 442.
Only one of these handguns is “really“ a true pocket gun.
Which leads me to my final type of comparison between these two handguns - Piece of Mind. Or as some call it Reliability. I absolutely love my G42. I have a 43 as well. I have a lot of pistols. I think they are a better “fighting gun“ than revolvers, but if I was burying a million bucks and going to throw a handgun on top for later, it be the 442, not the Glock. I have no proof other than antidotal stories, but I’d be questioning if the mags would still push up the rounds after a decade of being loaded. Though I probably wouldn’t have to.
Moreover, I’ve had to change up all the springs in my G42. I shot the heck out of it, so thats what happens. It’ll happen eventually with the 442 too I’m guessing. But what sucks is, my carry ammo didn't feed reliably in the G42 afterword, and I had to find a new ammo... and now sit on hundreds in ammo I don’t know what to do with. That’ll never happen with a revolver.
Of course my G42 doesn’t shoot snake shot like my 442 does, and being I like shooting snake shot... so there is that too I guess.
Conclusion: It’s really hard to compare two guns that are so closely “related.” I find the 442 way more sexy, but function is, as function does, and that makes the 42 a pretty awesome gun too. If I could only have one, I think I’d pick the G42. But as a hip or shoulder holstered gun. If I had to have a pocket gun - the 442 no question.
Great review 
