On Monday, I published the “Top 5 Reasons to Purchase the New Single Stack Glock 43” which, as the title of the article suggests, enumerated five reasons to go out and buy the highly anticipated subcompact pistol. Now, I’m going to do the opposite and give you the top five reasons NOT to pick up the Glock 43.
Yes, in case you are wondering, it feels morally wrong to write an article that lays out reasons why one shouldn’t purchase a firearm. That would be true whether it was a SIG, Springfield, Ruger, etc. But, as I said in the first installment, this is all in good fun. So, don’t take anything I say too seriously and if you are truly on the fence about buying one, I’d recommend that you read our full review of the G43. There’s insight and commentary in the full review that’s based on firsthand experience as our editor-in-chief David Higginbotham was one of the lucky few who got to go to Glock headquarters in Smyrna, GA and put the G43 through its paces.
With all that said, here are the top five reason NOT to purchase the Glock 43:
Aesthetically Challenged. Admittedly, this is a pretty weak reason not to purchase a firearm. You want one that works, not one that’s purdy (pretty). But still, the craftsman in me can’t help but to point out the obvious: Glocks are ugly. The G43 is no exception. It’s blocky, monochromatic and relatively uninspiring. It’s a Glock after all! Fan Boys will take umbrage with this criticism but deep down they know I’m right.
Limited Capacity. Yeah, it’s a single stack, so capacity is going to be a problem, especially for those used to toting a pistol with a 10-plus round magazine. But that’s what people asked for, a thinner, smaller Glock chambered in 9mm. Yet for me, when I think of 6+1, I’m almost tempted to ask, why not just sacrifice that one round and carry a hammerless wheel gun with a speedloader? Glocks are the pinnacle of reliability in the polymer pistol platform, yet in that (reliability) category they still don’t compete with a basic revolver. If I’m not worried about capacity, I think I might just forgo the G43 and grab a nice snubby.
Late to the Party. It’s been years since the gun community first vocalized a demand for the single stack 9mm. To say the G43’s release has been long overdue is an understatement. Meanwhile, many other firearm manufacturers got the memo that gun owners and prospective gun owners wanted a suitable subcompact for EDC and/or concealed carry. While Glock dithered, most gun makers did not and they released quality 9mm single stacks (Here’s a list of the top 10). Chances are if you were in the market for a single stack, you’ve already found one you like. If that’s the case, there may be no reason to take the plunge to purchase the Glock 43.
My G__ Works Just Fine. Even those of you who don’t really like Glocks, probably own a Glock. They’re everywhere and they’re hard to pass up when a good deal comes along. I’ve been on the record as saying, “A Glock is a Glock is a Glock.” Obviously, in terms of size, weight, caliber that doesn’t ring true but in terms of feel and the overall impression one gets while shooting a Glock, I believe it does. On some level, if you’ve fired one Glock, you’ve fired them all. So if you own a G26, G17, or G19, you might just say to yourself, “Do I really need another Glock”?
Price Point. I wrote in the first article that I thought an MSRP of $529 for the G43 was reasonable. I still think it is, especially when put in the context of the high demand and its potential resale value. That said, some of you politely disagreed with me. Maybe you’re right, maybe shelling out 500 bones is a bit much. Comparatively speaking, one can get a Springfield XD-S for around $460, a Bersa BP9 for around $400 or, at the lower end of the spectrum, a Kel-Tech PF-9 for around $330, among others. When it comes to the cost, I’ll let you be the final judge but I could see a case being made either way.