Review of the Glock 43X MOS--Initial Thoughts And Experience

Note: the grid lines are 1-inch apart

I have been looking at updating my main carry pistol over the past year. While I really like the Beretta 84 overall, the sights are small and the front sight is milled into the slide so I can't easily replace it. I had also been thinking of getting into a pistol optic due to certain vision issues that I won't get into here. I had been looking at the Glock slim-line models as well as the various P365 offerings and a couple other brands and models. My wife made the decision for me when she surprised me on our anniversary with a a Glock 43X MOS. Unfortunately, life happens, and I was only recently able to take the weapon for a test drive. 

Overview of the Glock 43X MOS

    Per Glock's website, the weapon weighs 16.26 oz (461 g) unloaded and 22.96 oz (651 g) loaded (with the included 10-round magazine), is 6.5 inches (165mm) in overall length, and 5.04 inches (128 mm) in height including the magazine. For a man of average size (i.e., someone with large hands as they measure gloves), this means that the pistol grip should be just the right size so you can get a full purchase with all of your fingers. The barrel length is 3.41 inches (87 mm), so long enough to still obtain some respectable velocity. 

    There is a short length of accessory rail allowing for mounting a light or laser, which can complicate the search for a holster even if you don't plan on mounting one. 

    The slide has been cut and milled to accept an optic using an RMSc footprint. This means that if you plan on using the most popular optics, you will also need to purchase an adaptor plate. No adapter plates come with the weapon.

    The pistol, no surprise, comes in a standard Glock padded hard case with the standard cable lock to secure the firearm from being used by anyone without the key, screwdriver, bolt cutters, or hacksaw. It also comes with a nylon brush for cleaning the bore and barrel, owner's manual, wrench for removing the slide plate covering the optic cut out, a plastic magazine loader, and two (2) 10-round magazines.

    The magazines on the Glock 43x, 43x MOS, and 48 are not single stack magazines, but are not true double stack, either. Rather, Glock used a staggered design. The consequence of this is that with thinner magazine walls--i.e., steel instead of the polymer used by Glock--it is possible to increase magazine capacity. Two companies have done this: Shield Arms and PSA with its micro-Dagger magazines. 

    Shield Arms' magazines use a steel body and hold 15 rounds. Unfortunately, the steel can damage the polymer magazine release used by Glock, requiring you to switch to a metal magazine release/catch. Also, the magazines seem to run at just over $45 per magazine, compared to around $30 MSRP for the factory magazines (and as low as $25 street price). There have also been reliability issues reported by some people and I would note that Shield Arms is now up to their third generation of design. 

    PSA's Micro-Dagger magazines also are 15 rounds and use a metal body, but they have applied a polymer coating to the front of the magazine allowing you to continue to use the standard polymer magazine release/catch. They are also prices much less than the Shield Arms magazines, running $29-$32 depending on the finish. The reviews I've seen of these magazines have generally been favorable, with the only issue I saw in the reviews being a few complaints of the slide not locking back after the last round. (I'm not so sure this is an issue with the magazines, as I describe below).

    I finally caught PSA at the right time when they had a few of their Micro-Dagger magazines in stock, so I've ordered a couple and will test them out after their arrival.

First Impressions

    What can I say? It is a Glock. This is a basic black on black model. It has the standard plastic Glock sights with the white squared off U for the rear sight and a white dot on the front sight that are acceptable but not my favorite. As with other Glocks I've owned, I anticipate that I will be replacing them with a three-dot set of night sights with a colored band around the front dot to improve visibility. However, they are larger and easier to see than what was on the Beretta 84 I've been using, so I can't complain.

    I disassembled the weapon to do a quick check and nothing seemed amiss. It appeared to be adequately oiled, so I didn't do any further cleaning or lubing at that time. I have to note that with the thinner cross section, it was easier to hold the disassembly tabs down than with the standard Glocks. I think being able to have my fingers closer together when pulling down gave me the extra leverage so that I didn't have one popping loose. 

    The trigger was standard Glock. I didn't have a trigger gauge to measure the weight, but it seemed like most every other Glock I've ever shot which means that it probably was about 5.5 lbs. 

    I like the texturing on the Gen 4 grips and this seems to be pretty much the same, albeit a little less aggressive. I don't see any reason to make any changes. 

    Although there seemed to be a lot of disappointment among shooters that the standard magazine capacity is 10-rounds, I don't mind. First, I don't consider 10-rounds to be undergunned: my standard carry pistol for nearly two decades was a 5-shot revolver, so 10+1 is a great improvement, not even taking into consideration that I have the option of a quick magazine change.

    Second, it keeps the overall weight down. You'll note from the weights given above that the addition of a fully loaded magazine added 6 ounces to the weight of the weapon, so another 5 rounds should add an additional 3 ounces. 

    As mentioned above, I have ordered a couple of the PSA magazines to give them a try, but if they don't work out, I'm not going to be that concerned about sticking with the 10-round magazines. 

First Shots

    I've put about 75 rounds through the weapon at this point. One of my sons and I travelled out to an area that is relatively easy to get to and set up a target about 7 yards out. All shooting was done free hand. 

    We started out with Federal 115-grain FMJ. The first magazine shot without any issues, but wasn't impacting where I wanted it.

 

    I knew that I was shooting it a bit faster than I should have been and probably pulled a few shots, but there was a definite bias to the left. Of course, almost every other Glock I've shot seems to shoot slightly left. Unfortunately, I hadn't brought any punches with me, but digging through my equipment I found a small piece of brass rod and I always bring a hammer, so I worked on the sight for a bit. Another set seemed to show we were on the right track.

We finished up the rest of the box of 50 with no issues other than a single failure to lock back at the end of a magazine. The distribution of hits from both of us indicated that the windage appeared to be about right, although shooting a bit low (but there is nothing I can do with that considering the fixed sights).

    While I didn't have any issues, my teenage son had problems manipulating the slide release. It is the standard Glock release made of a slick piece of metal with a few shallow lines on it to make you think there is some texture to it. But that was fine: my son now knows the sling-shot technique to release a slide.

    Next I decided to test some potential carry ammo. I decided to start with some Hornady Critical Duty. I was just using the standard pressure loads, which use a 135 grain bullet. I shot 5 rounds and got this:

Other than the flyer, that was a nice group. But was the one shot near the center the flyer and it was shooting to the left, or was the center the good shot and the group the result of me pulling the weapon? 

    I decided to try 5 rounds of Hornady Critical Defense I also had brought which is a standard pressure load using a 125-grain bullet. I got this:

Again, one flyer but otherwise that seemed to be about where I needed it. Perhaps I really had just pulled the shots, though .... I decided to try some more of the Critical Duty:

Even though I was trying to be more careful about my shot placement, I actually had a worse group. But it clearly was still to the left and low when using the Critical Duty. 

    It seems odd that one type of bullet would be so far off compared to the Critical Defense and plain jane FMJ rounds, but I have seen this before. Back in the 1990s, I was shooting with some extended family. A couple of us had Black Talon ammunition we decided to test. I believe the handgun I had at the time was a Ruger P-89 in 9 mm and I noticed that past 20 or 25 yards, I was striking to the right whereas at shorter distances I was "spot on"--i.e., hitting a normal distribution around the point of aim. One of my brothers-in-law also had some Black Talon in .45 ACP which he shot through a Ruger P90. The curve to the right was even more pronounced with his firearm no matter who shot it. 

    In addition to the foregoing, I also had a couple more failures of the slide to lock back when shooting the heavier Critical Duty rounds. 

    There are just some loads and bullet weights that don't work well with certain firearms. That appears to be the case with the Hornady Critical Duty and this Glock 43X MOS. I will be sticking to the Hornady Critical Defense for the time being until I have a chance to test some other defensive rounds.

    While I know a lot of people that suggest shooting a couple hundred rounds through a weapon to test its reliability, I'm old enough to remember where and why that rule came about: you would buy a new pistol and it would have various failures when you first started shooting it and it would take a couple hundred rounds through the weapon to wear everything in so that it would actually function. Generally it would take 100 or so for the weapon to start functioning reliably and then you would shoot some more just to be sure that it was working. Although I remember one handgun that took over 300 rounds before it started shooting reliably....

    This changed with Glocks because they were reliable out of the box and this fact pushed other firearms manufacturers to follow suit. At this point, most firearms from reputable manufacturers will shoot reliably out of the box and you just need to shoot enough to make sure that it works and test all your magazines. I'm satisfied after about 75 rounds that it will function as intended. I need to practice some more with the weapon to tighten my groups (actually, I just need to practice more, period, since this was the first time in several months that I have done any shooting). But I'm satisfied enough with these results with this weapon that I will start carrying it. 

    Holsters is another issue. I had ordered the Galco Classic Lite 2.0 shoulder holster system I have posted about (see here and here) to use with the Glock 43X, but found it to be cheaply made and unacceptable. So I'm on the search for an acceptable holster. As an interim holster I picked up a Fobus paddle holster which will have to do until I get something better.