.32acp vs. .380acp


PDA






SouthernYankee
October 18, 2012, 11:04 PM
Just looking for some opinions. Though I have previously owned guns that have shot both calibers in the past, I am again looking to a smaller frame pistol to carry in my pocket on little quick errands around town and around the "property." I know people make fun of .32, but I have always thought it to be quite sufficient and, as such I am leaning towards a Beretta. I didn't want to spend more than $400.00 and [U]refuse[B][U]to buy junk! Opinions please, and thank all of you for your consideration.

If you enjoyed reading about ".32acp vs. .380acp" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
primalmu
October 18, 2012, 11:09 PM
I'd probably go for a Kel-Tec. I've read numerous reports of some of the Beretta Tomcats cracking frames after very few rounds.

hso
October 18, 2012, 11:14 PM
I own the PF-9 and P3AT Kel Techs and have owned the P-32.

I have a very high opinion of all 3 firearms and have found them remarkably accurate and reliable having shot hundreds of rounds through them.

I sold both my and my wife's P-32s and bought the .380s in their place for when a larger handgun wasn't practical to carry in every situation. I pocket carry the P3AT in any pants/shorts (and I don't wear baggy cargo shorts). I carry the PF-9 in all but my light weight shorts.

In the price range it is difficult to find anything better.

56hawk
October 18, 2012, 11:27 PM
What Beretta are you thinking about? I have a Beretta 84, but don't carry it since I have 9mm's that are smaller.

If I had to choose between 32 and 380. I would go with 380 every time. The guns are the same size, but 380 is twice as powerful.

351 WINCHESTER
October 18, 2012, 11:37 PM
The Ruger lcp is tops in a .380 pocket pistol. In .32 I don't know of anything that beats the p32 k/t.

cfullgraf
October 19, 2012, 12:16 AM
Saw this article posted over on the CMP Forum. Interesting results that bullet or cartridge really does not matter on the success of a shooting.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866

So, like real estate, looks like it is location, location, location.

Anyway, I carry a 380 ACP with me for self defense. My Kel-Tec P3-AT has been very reliable but the DAO trigger is limiting for me. I like my Wather PPK for the double action on the first shot then single action there after. I feel more comfortable with that mode of carry although the first shot is a "gimme". But the PPK is bordering on the large side.

I have an early Sig P238 which is reasonable reliable now. The SAO trigger is a limiter for me for carry. Carrying cocked and locked would not be an issue when anarchy takes over but it is not for me under current conditions.

I have a Colt 1903 (32 ACP) which is fun to shoot and accurate. I am considering getting a modern pistol in 32 ACP to play with. The Colt, although not in great condition, is too valuable to consider a carry gun.

One of my requirements is to be able to discreetly carry the gun away should I have to leave my vehicle in an unsecured situation.

These are my idiosyncrasies and I do not expect many to agree with me.

sidheshooter
October 19, 2012, 02:04 AM
For similar to the OP's requirements, I personally chose a *very* lightly pre-owned Seecamp .32, LNIB. My idea of the ultimate pocket pistol. Any bigger, and I'd rather just go IWB with something punchier. They're out there for $400 inclusive, and they are most certainly not junk.

JMO.

usp9
October 19, 2012, 08:15 AM
I agree. For $400 the tiny, all steel Seecamp LWS is very hard to beat.

kokapelli
October 19, 2012, 09:31 AM
If you want to stay at or below $400 buy the Taurus TCP which is similar to the LCP and the P3AT, but with a better trigger and less felt recoil.

oneounceload
October 19, 2012, 10:49 AM
Another vote for the Seecamp - excellently made

MedWheeler
October 19, 2012, 10:57 AM
This was my first impression of the Kel-Tec P32, and it also explains my reason for choosing it over the P3-AT.. my range report from June of last year:

Due to the somewhat increasing frequency of occasions in which belt carrying of my PF-9 is not practical, I've decided to get a pocket-carry-capable piece. After much thought, I settled on the KT-P32. Though I considered the P-3AT, I went with this one for the following reason: less snappy (the recoil of my early Grendel P-10, a PPK/S I once owned, and of my PF-9 push my abilities for quick re-acquisition for follow-up shots), the presence of a slide-lock, and the addition of one round in capacity. Also, in a pinch, my wife, a rather petite lady, could be armed with it.
Today, I headed to an all-day-pay outdoor range with this gun, my other two carry guns (PF-9 and Bersa Thunder 380), and ammunition. For the P-32, I had only 100 rounds of WWB 71-grain FMJ-FN ammo (the last two WM had in stock.) These flat-tipped rounds have a shorter overall-length than typical FMJ round-nose ones do.
I arrived to find the range closed for a special event, and went instead to an hourly-pay indoor range. Because of the time constraints there, I was now not going to shoot the other guns I also had brought along (two revolvers, and two .22LR autos.)
Once posted on the line, I loaded up the new KT, and ran a casual-fire session on a silhouette target at a range of 21 feet (7 yards.)
I found the P-32 to be not entirely without snappish-ness, but it is easily handled. I might have had more issue with it at the outdoor range, as temperatures were well north of ninety degrees, and my hands would have been quite sweaty. I could feel the grip on this little scale-tickler wanting to work upward in my hand from time to time.
About half my shooting was done with one hand. I actually found that to be fairly easy to keep on target, something that I previously had a harder time with on my PF-9. All my rounds were easy to keep in an area suitable for defensive use during offhand fire, about the size of my closed fist if I tried, and the size of my open hand if I didn't.
I had one case of rimlock. This occurred at probably the 24th round or so (into the fourth magazine.) I've never experienced this before so, of course, the TRB drill didn't work. I removed the magazine, and still could not push the round forward. After manipulating the round downward some, and giving the magazine some firm slaps in my hand, the round was able to be freed. I shot out the rest of the mag, reloaded that round into it, chambered it, and fired it without further issue. The remainder of the session was finished without any other malfunctions.
I fired a total of 92 rounds, keeping eight left left over for carry use until I can stop back in somewhere and get a more suitable round. I was amazed at how fast I went through them. After searching here for "rimlock", I will likely go with a hot FMJ load such as the Fiocchi, or maybe a S&B one.
I found the gun to be quite a little delight to shoot, kind of reminding me of my old Jennings J-22 in handling, though I haven't shot that thing in maybe two decades. I had no trouble fully re-setting the trigger (never did on my PF-9, either), even in rapid-fire. I can see this piece being a viable carry option as a pocket-holster gun, and I do already have a PH for it. As with many new Kel-Tec pieces, it has some little burrs and other marks of "unfinishedness" about it, but nothing that hampered function or carry. My PF-9 is much more "finished", but I'm not the original owner of that, so someone may have done a F&B on it before.
So, that's that. The PF-9 will remain my first carry gun. It has done so since I proofed it more than a year ago when I got it, being on me pretty much any time I am out of bed. But, I am pleased that the P-32 will make an exceptional second option for "shirt-tucked-in" occasions, and maybe even as a BUG or "NY-reload" when the PF-9 is carried, such as during my once-per-week pizza delivery job.
I will source another magazine for it, though, as that is the fastest way to alleviate a rimlock situation (something I plan to insure doesn't happen again.)


Now, I've shot this thing many times since then, and carry it with two of those WWB flat-tipped FMJ rounds (chamber, and "next-up"), followed by six Fiocchi 73-grain FMJ. Keeping the shorter rounds in only the chamber and the top of the magazine assure no more cases of rimlock. I've had no further issues, and still find this little thing quite a bit of fun to shoot.

Striker
October 19, 2012, 11:17 AM
I'm partial to a Beretta Tomcat for a .32 ACP in the role you envison.

kokapelli
October 19, 2012, 11:18 AM
The Seecamp is a fine piece of workmanship, but it is a blowback action which produces a great deal of felt recoil and not much fun to shoot.

Most of the current pocket pistols now are locked breach action that really reduces felt recoil a lot which makes them much more pleasant to shoot when compared to a locked breach action like the Seecamp, NAA Guardian and the Micro Desert Eagle.

mavracer
October 19, 2012, 12:30 PM
If I had to choose between a 32 and 380 I'd probably get a LCP. I got rid of my LCP and later a Seecamp after buying my Kahr PM9. I found I just don't have any pants that the 9mm won't fit in.

chicharrones
October 19, 2012, 02:00 PM
Saw this article posted over on the CMP Forum. Interesting results that bullet or cartridge really does not matter on the success of a shooting.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866

So, like real estate, looks like it is location, location, location

It is interesting to note in that article the category "% of people who were not incapacitated". Going by that makes the .380 ACP look much better than the .32.

Yet, I have two guns in .32 ACP. :scrutiny:

chicharrones
October 19, 2012, 02:08 PM
The Seecamp is a fine piece of workmanship, but it is a blowback action which produces a great deal of felt recoil and not much fun to shoot.. . . NAA Guardian . . .

My NAA Guardian .32 ACP does feel much like a Ruger LCP .380 ACP in felt recoil when the two are fired side by side.

kokapelli
October 19, 2012, 03:59 PM
My NAA Guardian .32 ACP does feel much like a Ruger LCP .380 ACP in felt recoil when the two are fired side by side.
I had an NAA guardian and replaced it with a P32 because the felt recoil was so much more noticeable in the NAA and also because the NAA really tore my trigger finger up when firing multiple magazines at the range.

I also have a Micro Desert Eagle that is a blowback and it is a very punishing pistol to shoot extensively, but I won't sell it because it is utterly reliable with any brand of ammo.

After going through a bunch of pocket pistols I have ended up with a Sig P238 that IMO is the king of all 380 pocket pistols and I also frequently carry a TCP that IMO is second only to the P238 in pocket pistol shoot ability and has also been completely reliable.

I did recently finally have the opportunity to shoot a Seecamp 380 and am impressed with it's overall quality, but like other pocket blowbacks it is a punishing pistol to shoot.

Ken451
October 19, 2012, 05:14 PM
I have one of the very early Keltec P32s, back before they started making any other calibers. I don't have much faith in the .32 acp round but it's the only gun I have that fits into a pocket. "They" say that in most cases where a handgun is used for self defense, no shots are fired. If that's true, then most of the time, caliber doesn't matter although a big, bright shinny .45 would probably be more intimidating than the barely visible P32 ;-)

I probably should carry the P32 more often.

threefortyduster
October 19, 2012, 05:49 PM
Nothing wrong with either, but if you go to buy an LCP, make sure you can tolerate the trigger. IMO, it's the worst trigger on any of them.

My wife has a Taurus TCP732 that she loves and I like. I'm pondering getting a 738 for myself (or maybe a 732, just for common ammo). The trigger is smooth, not too heavy, and the gun is accurate. Made in USA helps.

jimbo555
October 19, 2012, 06:28 PM
Just bought a sig p238,reliable right out of the box,accurate like a much larger handgun.

Ehtereon11B
October 19, 2012, 06:43 PM
.380 ammo is much easier to find and has better ballistics. Only a few types of .32 handguns like the Seacamp are smaller than a comparable .380 handgun. Most modern .380s like the 238s, LCPs, handle recoil much better than older models like AMT.

The P3AT is one of the worst pistols I have ever used and I have handled HiPoints with less issue. A friend of mine recently had hers explode using standard pressure ammo giving her third degree burns on her hand and the firing pin lodged in her shoulder. Few months ago I sold mine.

Out of all the modern .380s I think the P238 is the best on the market since the trigger isn't long and heavy like the LCP, Bodyguard or other DA .380s.

JR47
October 19, 2012, 06:43 PM
If I had to choose between 32 and 380. I would go with 380 every time. The guns are the same size, but 380 is twice as powerful.


Really? Ballistics 101 lists the various rounds available. The .32 ACP, in JHP form, runs from 147 ft/lbs to 220 ft/lbs in ammo available today. The .380 ACP runs from less than 200 ft/lbs up to 288 ft/lbs in +P form. Many of these ultra high performers aren't readily available, and quite pricey. Your gun may not shoot them accurately, either.

So, twice the power? Not hardly.

For whatever reason, the .32 ACP seems to be more accurate than comparable .380 ACP guns and rounds. It also tends to carry that extra round, as well.

Pick a gun that you like first. Then, after you are sure that it's what you want, pick a caliber. Shot placement is still king, no matter the caliber.:)

browningguy
October 19, 2012, 07:57 PM
My .32's are KelTec and NAA, .380's are S&W, Browning and Bersa. I prefer the KT for a pocket gun, the trigger is much better than the NAA and S&W Bodyguard, and to be honest the .32 is easier to shoot in a mouse size package.

56hawk
October 19, 2012, 08:23 PM
Really? Ballistics 101 lists the various rounds available. The .32 ACP, in JHP form, runs from 147 ft/lbs to 220 ft/lbs in ammo available today. The .380 ACP runs from less than 200 ft/lbs up to 288 ft/lbs in +P form. Many of these ultra high performers aren't readily available, and quite pricey. Your gun may not shoot them accurately, either.

So, twice the power? Not hardly.

If you pick and choose what ammo you are comparing you can come up with whatever numbers you want. However comparing the two highest rated self defense rounds:

Federal Hydra-Shok 32ACP 123 ft-lbs, 380ACP 200 ft-lbs
Speer Gold Dot 32ACP 123 ft-lbs, 380ACP 216 ft-lbs

That puts the 32ACP at between 62% and 57% of the 380ACP. Close enough to half for me.

Ken451
October 19, 2012, 08:46 PM
If you pick and choose what ammo you are comparing you can come up with whatever numbers you want. However comparing the two highest rated self defense rounds:

Federal Hydra-Shok 32ACP 123 ft-lbs, 380ACP 200 ft-lbs
Speer Gold Dot 32ACP 123 ft-lbs, 380ACP 216 ft-lbs


"Highly rated" by whom? The selling industry and their magazine flacks?

If one is going to use a .32 or .380, I would not use hollow points. If they expand, they do not have nearly enough penetration. Expansion takes energy and also impedes penetration.

Look at the FBI Quantico Report on Wounding Ballistics (google it). It recommends a minimum of 12-14" penetration. Now look at Winchester's site on Ranger ammo penetration
http://www.winchester.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/flash-SWFs/law_bullit.swf
If a .380 expands, penetration is less than 8 inches. If it does not expand, they show 15" penetration. Why spend the money for premium ammo if expansion means inadequate penetration?

My .32 and .380 are loaded with FMJ. YMMV

Ken

56hawk
October 19, 2012, 09:02 PM
"Highly rated" by whom?

Way to go off topic. I don't feel like arguing about FMJ vs HP right now. But do tell, what ammo do you use to compare the power of the 32 to the 380?

Drail
October 19, 2012, 09:08 PM
.380 - big poodles. .32 - small poodles and rodents.

Deaf Smith
October 19, 2012, 10:31 PM
I've got both .32s and .380s (P32, P3AT, and TCP.)

I use FMJs in all three. And yes all three work well.

Few more bullets in the .32 and bit more power in the .380.

Neither of them is a 9mm or .357 but they do make good hideout guns.

Deaf

Byrd666
October 19, 2012, 10:45 PM
One more for the Kel-Tec. P3AT, is awesome. Normally carry a CZ 83 in. 380, but would not consider it to be a pocket pistol.

481
October 20, 2012, 01:15 AM
"Highly rated" by whom? The selling industry and their magazine flacks?

If one is going to use a .32 or .380, I would not use hollow points. If they expand, they do not have nearly enough penetration. Expansion takes energy and also impedes penetration.

Look at the FBI Quantico Report on Wounding Ballistics (google it). It recommends a minimum of 12-14" penetration. Now look at Winchester's site on Ranger ammo penetration
http://www.winchester.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/flash-SWFs/law_bullit.swf
If a .380 expands, penetration is less than 8 inches. If it does not expand, they show 15" penetration. Why spend the money for premium ammo if expansion means inadequate penetration?

My .32 and .380 are loaded with FMJ. YMMV

Ken

This is my thinking with the "mouse guns", too.

From 9mm on up, its JHPs.

wnycollector
October 20, 2012, 09:51 AM
My father-in-law is fond of reminding me that "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian" when it comes to self defense. I have settled upon .380. I carry a Ruger LCP in my pocket or a Beretta 84B IWB. I carry Buffalo Bore's 100gr hard cast in my Beretta and Magtech 95gr FMJ in the LCP. I shot the BB 100gr ammo over my chronograph from my Beretta and got a nice average of 1187FPS/313lbs of energy. .380's can get the job done with proper shot placement, which requires lots of range time for the carrier.

kokapelli
October 20, 2012, 09:57 AM
All this stuff about velocity and energy in a 380 is a waste of time. The only thing that counts is how deep the bullet penetrates and can you put it where it counts.

Lee D
October 20, 2012, 02:36 PM
with all the newer .380 pistols out there nowadays it seems that its easier to walk in a lgs and buy .380 ammo. ive bought 2 LCPs and a 238 in the past year and they all have been very reliable, but there is definitely much more felt recoil in the little Ruger....and the 238s sights make it a much easier pistol to shoot accurately. the groups i got with mine suprised the heck out of me.

as for the Berettas, wasnt it only the carbon steel ones that were experiencing the cracked frames?

chicharrones
October 20, 2012, 02:50 PM
My wife has a Taurus TCP732 that she loves and I like. I'm pondering getting a 738 for myself (or maybe a 732, just for common ammo). The trigger is smooth, not too heavy, and the gun is accurate. Made in USA helps.

I have a TCP732 as well. Compared to a .380 ACP TCP or LCP, the 732 is downright fun enough to shoot like a plinking pistol.

I even modded a magazine to take 7 rounds of .32 ACP in my TCP. It is a neat little pistola, indeed.

chicharrones
October 20, 2012, 02:58 PM
If you pick and choose what ammo you are comparing you can come up with whatever numbers you want. However comparing the two highest rated self defense rounds:

Federal Hydra-Shok 32ACP 123 ft-lbs, 380ACP 200 ft-lbs
Speer Gold Dot 32ACP 123 ft-lbs, 380ACP 216 ft-lbs

That puts the 32ACP at between 62% and 57% of the 380ACP. Close enough to half for me.

Not disputing the percentages, but those numbers seem to be out of longer barrels than LCP size mouse gun barrels.

EDIT: The links below show numbers from mouseguns.

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/32acp/gel32acp.htm

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/380acp/gel380acp.htm

kokapelli
October 20, 2012, 04:08 PM
Not disputing the percentages, but those numbers seem to be out of longer barrels than LCP size mouse gun barrels.

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/32acp/gel32acp.htm

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/380acp/gel380acp.htm
In the tests he clearly states the tests are done with 2.7" barreled KelTec pistols.

sidheshooter
October 20, 2012, 04:33 PM
The Seecamp is a fine piece of workmanship, but it is a blowback action which produces a great deal of felt recoil and not much fun to shoot.

Most of the current pocket pistols now are locked breach action that really reduces felt recoil a lot which makes them much more pleasant to shoot when compared to a locked breach action like the Seecamp, NAA Guardian and the Micro Desert Eagle.

I agree that, all else being equal, blowback=more felt energy to the shooter.

That said, the seecamp has a delayed blowback design (with expansion of the case into the chamber absorbing *some* of the energy). I don't really find the seecamp to be any more punishing than, say, my Sig P238 was. Both are fun little guns; both tear up my trigger finger in short order if I stay at it too long.

Of course, the 380 is more powerful, but also a lot bigger when compared to the seecamp. In all, my choice is the seecamp-again, any bigger and may as well just go IWB. Frankly, a 3" J-frame with a Barami grip and someone's "FBI" load will beat either pocket gun for raw power; it just boils down to choices. More choices is always better, too, can't have enough carry guns.

OMMV.

kokapelli
October 20, 2012, 04:39 PM
I agree that, all else being equal, blowback=more felt energy to the shooter.

That said, the seecamp has a delayed blowback design (with expansion of the case into the chamber absorbing *some* of the energy). I don't really find the seecamp to be any more punishing than, say, my Sig P238 was. Both are fun little guns; both tear up my trigger finger in short order if I stay at it too long.

Of course, the 380 is more powerful, but also a lot bigger when compared to the seecamp. In all, my choice is the seecamp-again, any bigger and may as well just go IWB. Frankly, a 3" J-frame with a Barami grip and someone's "FBI" load will beat either pocket gun for raw power; it just boils down to choices. More choices is always better, too, can't have enough carry guns.

OMMV.
Really! The Seecamp I shot was nowhere near as soft shooting as the P238!

I can shoot the P238 all day but the Seecamp, no way.

chicharrones
October 20, 2012, 04:52 PM
In the tests he clearly states the tests are done with 2.7" barreled KelTec pistols.

Yes, GoldenLoki tested with mouseguns. I was referring to the data I quoted above my text. Yet, I worded it unclearly. :)

chicharrones
October 20, 2012, 04:54 PM
More choices is always better, too, can't have enough carry guns.

I agree. :D

dirtengineer
October 20, 2012, 06:37 PM
Having owned both a Kel-Tec P32 and now a ruger LCP, I can say that the .380 is better in my opinion. The tradeoff for a more potency is one round - the two firearms are nearly identical in size. .380 is a little bit cheaper (although I roll my own exclusively at this point), and I also found that .32 had the occasional hang up due to the rim style on the cartridge.

orionengnr
October 20, 2012, 07:30 PM
I have owned four Kel-Tecs--a P32, two P3ATs (one each first and second Gen) and a P11. I bought all within a fairly short period of time, shortly after getting my CHL, and during my Search For The Ultimate Carry Pistol/Revolver.

I imagine if you did a search for my user id and "Kel-Tec" you could read some of my prior posts. But to make a long story short, I spent a lot of time on several K-T owner boards, a lot more time learning to F&B, a lot of money on various ammo types, and more money on new mags, etc., plus lots of time swapping out free parts supplied by Kel-Tec.

I cannot disparage K-T's Customer Support--they were great. However, the end result was that although I was able to significantly improve most of them, I ended up with zero pistols that were reliable enough to carry...and each was eventually sold at a loss with full disclosure.

Actually, I gave one away, to a friend who thought he could fix it. He has a 4'9", 90 lb wife who is very recoil shy, and the P32 was perfect for her...if he could actually get it to work reliably. Honestly, I doubt that either he or she has fired it since then...and it's been five or so years.

What was the most rewarding, though, was when I bought an LCP, and it would feed all of those ammo types that neither P3AT would, even after all that work and all those parts. Just to make it somewhat apples-to-apples, I have owned two LCPs as well as two P3ATs. Both LCPs worked from Round One, and continue to do so, to this day (a friend owns one, and I the other)...instark contrast to the two P3ATs. Anecdotal, yes...but the sample size (for me) was adequate to draw my conclusions.

As far as power goes...if you shoot a P32 and an LCP/P3AT back-to-back, and then go back and reacquaint yourself with Newton's Third Law, that should make the decision a simple one.

I still own the LCP, but carry it very infrequently.

I also own a Kahr PM9, which is only a bit larger/heavier, but the 9mm +P+ cartridge is a good bit more powerful than the .380. However, even with the more powerful rounds, the PM9 is easier to shoot than the LCP. Those few ounces and the better sights on the PM9 make all the difference.

"They" say that in most cases where a handgun is used for self defense, no shots are fired. If that's true, then most of the time, caliber doesn't matter although a big, bright shinny .45 would probably be more intimidating than the barely visible P32 ;-)Hmmmm..by that premise, I could carry a plastic cap gun and "probably" be A-OK under most any circumstances. It is possible that most home fires don't require the Fire Department to be called, and perhaps most auto accidents do not result in air bag deployment or an ambulance depolyed, but as someone once said...it's not the odds, it's the stakes.

I don't carry a handgun (or home insurance, or motorcycle/car insurance, or own fire extinguishers/smoke detectors, etc, etc, ...) for best-case scenarios.

jackblack86
October 21, 2012, 10:45 AM
own p32 and p11 both exceptional values wife decided she wanted the p32 so I bought me bodyguard 380 even know there not range guns I find the price of 380 allows me to practice more.

jimbo555
October 21, 2012, 01:54 PM
32 over 22,380 over 32,9mm over 380,45 over 9mm.

kokapelli
October 21, 2012, 02:04 PM
32 over 22,380 over 32,9mm over 380,45 over 9mm.
Yeah and 50 cal over 45 and shotgun over 50 cal and sub machinegun over shotgun and 20mm cannon over sub machinegun.

I thought this thread was about 32 vs 380!

Kachok
October 22, 2012, 12:56 AM
380 anyday over the 32, that said I would love a pocket pistol in 9mm.

R.W.Dale
October 22, 2012, 01:02 AM
For me both are FMJ only proposals and as such I differ to the faster followup shots and extra rounds you get with a 32







posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complaints about

rskent
October 22, 2012, 05:35 AM
The little Beretta Tomcat is a neat little gun. I have had mine for a long time. Itís a good little shooter.
I donít carry it very often anymore, but every now and thenÖ :)

heeler
October 22, 2012, 09:44 AM
I own two LCP's and carry it more than any other pistol.
That being said I also own a P32 and like it very much.
It is stone reliable and the recoil is so slight one can stay on target very easily.
I bought 500 rounds of Fiocchi fmj from Aim Surplus for $10.95 a box.
Pistol has never once malfunctioned.

mdauben
October 22, 2012, 01:52 PM
For me both are FMJ only proposals and as such I differ to the faster followup shots and extra rounds you get with a 32

Not sure about the .32 but I was looking at some .380 gel tests of a several different brands of ammo recently. While the JPH did come up short on penetration (~10 inches) the FMJ definitely over penetrated at 24+ inches (the tester ran out of gel and it ended up in the backing material). I was leaning towards using FMJ for .380 but this has me rethinking the choice.

Ken451
October 22, 2012, 01:59 PM
Not sure about the .32 but I was looking at some .380 gel tests of a several different brands of ammo recently. While the JPH did come up short on penetration (~10 inches) the FMJ definitely over penetrated at 24+ inches (the tester ran out of gel and it ended up in the backing material). I was leaning towards using FMJ but this has me rethinking the choice.

Why would that have you rethinking the choice?

From the FBI Quantico report I referenced earlier:

An issue that must be addressed is the fear of over penetration widely expressed on the part of law enforcement. The concern that a bullet would pass through the body of a subject and injure an innocent bystander is clearly exaggerated. Any review of law enforcement shootings will reveal that the great majority of shots fired by officers do not hit any subjects at all. It should be obvious that the relatively few shots that do hit a subject are not somehow more dangerous to bystanders than the shots that miss the subject entirely.

Also, a bullet that completely penetrates a subject will give up a great deal of energy doing so. The skin on the exit side of the body is tough and flexible. Experiments have shown that it has the same resistance to bullet passage as approximately four inches of muscle tissue.37

Choosing a bullet because of relatively shallow penetration will seriously compromise weapon effectiveness, and needlessly endanger the lives of the law enforcement officers using it. No law enforcement officer has lost his life because a bullet over penetrated his adversary, and virtually none have ever been sued for hitting an innocent bystander through an adversary. On the other hand, tragically large numbers of officers have been killed because their bullets did not penetrate deeply enough.

I highly recommend reading the entire report.

Ken

R.W.Dale
October 22, 2012, 01:59 PM
Not sure about the .32 but I was looking at some .380 gel tests of a several different brands of ammo recently. While the JPH did come up short on penetration (~10 inches) the FMJ definitely over penetrated at 24+ inches (the tester ran out of gel and it ended up in the backing material). I was leaning towards using FMJ but this has me rethinking the choice.

I wouldn't

You're far far more likely to overpenatrate from a sheer miss than you are from shooting your intended target.

Underpenatration can get you killed and its no insurance against rule number 4 wich still must apply




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complaints about

481
October 22, 2012, 02:06 PM
Not sure about the .32 but I was looking at some .380 gel tests of a several different brands of ammo recently. While the JPH did come up short on penetration (~10 inches) the FMJ definitely over penetrated at 24+ inches (the tester ran out of gel and it ended up in the backing material). I was leaning towards using FMJ for .380 but this has me rethinking the choice.
That's strange.

Every gel test of .380 FMJ that I've seen has produced less than 19" of penetration.

Gotta link to the tests where you are seeing 24"+ of penetration in gel by .380 FMJs?

mdauben
October 22, 2012, 02:21 PM
Any review of law enforcement shootings will reveal that the great majority of shots fired by officers do not hit any subjects at all.
Which oft quoted fact has nothing at all to do with the choice of FMJ vs JHP. I'm not even primarily worrying about bystander safety and overpenetration. I'm concerned over whether a .355 cal hole that goes through-and-through is more effective than a .70 cal hole that amost penetrates the FBI minimum.

I highly recommend reading the entire report.

I've read bits and pieces of it but I admit I have not read the entire document. The thing is, while I consider the documentation and theory presented very important and useful in choosing self defence ammo, I think some people... obsess over the recomendations of that report. I don't consider it holy writ, passed down from on high. Its just one more reference to consider when choosing my ammo.


Gotta link to the tests where you are seeing 24"+ of penetration in gel by .380 FMJs?
It was YouTube videos posted by TNOUTDOORS9, hes been doing home penetrations tests for several years and has dozens of videos posted with various calibers and manufacturers. He tested two different popular brands of FMJ and both went completly through his gel blocks (including 4 layers of denim). I admit his are the first .380 FMJ tests I have seen, so his results may be an anomoly?

481
October 22, 2012, 03:06 PM
It was YouTube videos posted by TNOUTDOORS9, hes been doing home penetrations tests for several years and has dozens of videos posted with various calibers and manufacturers. He tested two different popular brands of FMJ and both went completly through his gel blocks (including 4 layers of denim). I admit his are the first .380 FMJ tests I have seen, so his results may be an anomoly?

Might be an anomoly. I just checked out his video on youtube- at around 2:20 he indicates that the simtest block is 19" in length.

His test is interesting and poses more questions than it answers since there seems to be nothing in the way of research that corroborates the performance of simtest with ordnance gelatin- and believe me, I've looked!

I'd take what he does/says with a grain of salt.

Back on page 2 chicharrones posted a couple of links to the GoldenLoki tests and I'll update this post with some others by JE223 of brassfetcher fame. ;)

In addition, there are math-based bullet penetration models (there's one by Schwartz and one by MacPherson- different books) that show that .380 95 gr FMJs @ 950fps are unlikely to penetrate much deeper than 20 inches.

For a .380 95 gr FMJFP @ 950fps Schwartz says it'll go 20.1, MacPherson syas it'll go 20.76".

For a .380 95 gr FMJRN @ 950fps Schwartz says it'll go 19.33, MacPherson syas it'll go 20.6".

Given all of this and the agreement of the models I've cited, I am beginning to wonder just how close to ordnance gelatin that simtest stuff really is. :scrutiny:


ETA: This is the link for some of brassfetcher's testing with .380 FMJs using calibrated 10% gelatin

http://www.brassfetcher.com/380ACP%20ammunition%20performance%20in%20ballistic%20gelatin.pdf

Near the end of the PDF is some data on .380 FMJs that are the same as tested in tnoutdoors's videos. Much less penetration than tnoutdoors got- 16-21.8 inches depending on nose shape.

the_skunk
October 22, 2012, 05:41 PM
Buy a 32 Seecamp - Because it works and you will carry it. Naturally a 44 Auto Mag is better, but you won't carry it

jimbo555
October 22, 2012, 05:47 PM
When they used to use 7/8 pine boards to compare penetration,the 95gr 380 went thru 5.5 boards and the 45acp 230fmj went thru 6!

BLB68
October 24, 2012, 06:35 AM
Ignore the caliber question and buy the gun you shoot best with, and not slow fire. Whichever gun out of the ones you're considering you can put fast, accurate fire on the target with should be your choice.

stanmo
October 24, 2012, 08:34 AM
I have owned the Tomcat, Seecamp and P-32. The P-32 is only one I kept. The Tomcat and Seecamp are anchors in the pocket compared to the P-32. The P-32 is way easier on the shooting hand also.

JSNAPS
October 24, 2012, 08:37 PM
When I feel swell I reach for my ppk (.380) as my carry. Its chunky but if its good enough for James it's good enough for me!

CZguy
October 24, 2012, 10:35 PM
When I feel swell I reach for my ppk (.380) as my carry. Its chunky but if its good enough for James it's good enough for me!

I thought that James Bond carried a Beretta .25?

Anyone with a better memory?

CZ57
October 24, 2012, 11:01 PM
I believe it was Dr. No, but in one of the first flicks Bond gets his Beretta 6.35mm (.25 ACP) replaced by the Walther PPK in 7.65mm (.32 ACP). ;)

cfullgraf
October 24, 2012, 11:23 PM
I forget the exact Bond movie, but yes, Bond was forced to turn in his 25 ACP for a PPK. He almost got killed as a result of the 25.

It was one of the first films.

wlewisiii
October 25, 2012, 12:00 AM
I have a Mauser HSc in .32. Much more pleasant and accurate to shoot than any .380 I've used. As a result I carry it as my usual EDC with Prvi Partisan FMJ or BB hard cast +P and feel fine.

CZguy
October 25, 2012, 12:04 AM
Well my aging memory tells me that, he had to turn in the tiny Beretta, and was issued a PPK. But pretty quickly he showed up again in the film, with a tiny Beretta.

Ehtereon11B
October 25, 2012, 01:44 AM
It was the very first Bond film: Dr. No. Released in 1962 when received the PPK. But I digress.

Thanks to weapons like the NAA .32, Seacamp and quite a few other blowback steel pistols, .32 ammo is getting almost as popular as the .380 round. The only real benefit of the .32 over the .380 is recoil management.

golden
October 25, 2012, 01:52 AM
YANKEE,

I carry both the .32ACP and the .380ACP. My .32 is a BERETTA Tomcat, which I presume is the gun you are asking about.

I use the BERETTA Tomcat when my SIG 232 in .380ACP is too big for pocket carry. The SIG 232 is the 17 ounce blued gun with an aluminum frame and night sights. The SIG 232 is as accurate as my 9m.m. pistols and much easier to conceal. When I cannot conceal it, the BERETTA Tomcat takes its place.

I have found the Tomcat to be the most reliable of the mini .32's that I have tried. I have had two of them. My wife liked the first one so much, I ended up getting another one. The first one was finicky with ammo.

Skip over WINCHESTER fmj ammo, the flat tip ammo they sell can hang up on almost any gun. It has on both TOMCAT's, a BERETTA model 82, KEL-TEC, NAA Guardian and COLT 1903 Pocket Hammerless.

Using AGUILLA, FIOCCHI, FNH or S&B ball ammo, all of the above guns were 100% reliable except for the KEL-TEC, I do not recommend the KEL-TEC.

I tried FEDERAL Hydro Shok, but it was not 100% reliable in either Tomcat.
I use 1 Hydro Shok in the chamber, with a magazine full of COR BON Powerball ammo. The Powerball is the most reliable feeding hollow point ammo that I have tried.

The plus's for the Tomcat are:

1. The size of the grip, it is just large enough for my to get a good grip. Smaller guns leave my pinky finger holding onto nothing.

2. Good trigger. The double action trigger is smooth enough not to effect your shooting and the transition to single action has not been a problem for me.

3. Sights are just barely big enough. On the NAA Guardian, they are a joke. I may buy another Tomcat to get the version with the XS BIG DOT front sight. It is not listed on their website, but I have seen it in the gun stores.

4. Reliable, using the above named ball ammo, neither gun has ever jammed or misfed. I recommend that you use the COR BON Powerball for carry. I have also used the FIOCCHI jhp and it has been 100% reliable in the Tomcat, BERETTA model 82 and COLT 1903, with good accuracy. I am just not sure how much it will expand from a short barrel like the Tomcat.

5. RECOIL---do not underestimate it in small gun. I have shot 100 rounds at a time through the Tomcat without tiring, but 50 rounds through the NAA GUARDIAN IS WORK. The smaller the grip, the worse the recoil.

6. The tip up barrel is a really useful feature and not a gimmick. Try getting a good grip on some of these mini guns to rack the slide. Also, you cannot drop the hammer on the BERETTA Tomcat without pulling the trigger. On a loaded round, this is a recipe for an accidental discharge.
On the Tomcat, just pop up the barrel and drop a round into the chamber, lower the barrel and slide in a loaded magazine. Easy, safe and ready to go.

If possible, I prefer the greater power and accuracy of the SIG .380ACP, but I am willing to trade down to the Tomcat in order to be able to carry something with more power and control than a smaller gun.

Jim

kokapelli
October 25, 2012, 09:00 AM
I have never had Winchester truncated 380 hang up in any of my eight 380 pistols and as a matter of fact it has been the most reliable feeding 380 ammo I ever used.

JoeDorn
October 25, 2012, 09:47 AM
"Nothing wrong with either, but if you go to buy an LCP, make sure you can tolerate the trigger. IMO, it's the worst trigger on any of them. "

I must agree on this one; It is the worse trigger I have ever shot, especially for a new out of the box gun. I thought that the sun was going to come up tomorrow before the shear was released...

golden
October 25, 2012, 04:58 PM
KOKOPELI,

It is the .32ACP WINCHESTER White Box ammo that has hung up in the pistols mentioned. I have not had any problem with their .380ACP ammo.

Jim

kokapelli
October 25, 2012, 05:02 PM
KOKOPELI,

It is the .32ACP WINCHESTER White Box ammo that has hung up in the pistols mentioned. I have not had any problem with their .380ACP ammo.

Jim
Sorry I missunderstood. Rimlock can happen with any ammo in 32cal which is a very big negative for 32cal in my opinion.

golden
October 25, 2012, 10:12 PM
KOKAPELLI,

I have found that some .32ACP's are less likely to jam. The larger ones like the COLT 1903 and BERETTA model 82 worked great with the COR BON Powerball and FIOCCHI jhp, as well as ball ammo.

The Powerball has a hollowpoint plugged with a plastic ball that mimics the shape of ball ammo and feeds without any problems in the above pistols and as well in the BERETTA Tomcat. It also has worked very well in the NAA Guardian, though I have not fired it nearly as much as the BERETTA. That recoil is noticable.

I also found the the FIOCCHI hollow point feeds very well. In a large .32ACP, it should provide some expansion and good penetration, at least as well as a
.32ACP can provide. This ammo works well in the BERETTA Tomcat, but I think the Powerball is a safer bet.

I also have a BROWNING 1955 in .380ACP. This is just the BROWNING 1910 with a new name after World War II. I was suprised when I took it to the range a couple of weeks ago. It had fired several different brands of ball ammo including the WINCHESTER without a bouble. So I tried about 100 rounds of REMINGTON 88 grain jhp and it went through them without a hitch.

I do think their is some merrit in the arguement that really small guns a much more sensitive to ammo and the way they are handled.

Jim

Onward Allusion
October 26, 2012, 10:19 AM
P-32. One extra round, less recoil for quick follow-up, lightest and flattest semi-auto out there. The P3AT/LCP are a good second. One less round and a little more snap. Weight difference between the P-32 and them are negligible.

The NAA Guardian in 32ACP is a distance third. Smaller but thicker, straight blowback (i.e. more snap), one less round than the P-32, and quite a bit heavier than all three of the preceding.

Dead last is the NAA Guardian in .380ACP. Almost as heavy as a Glock 19 empty at less than half the capacity. Straight blowback that bites big time in a mouse caliber. I have two of 'em. One brand new unfired. There's a reason for that. . .

I own all of the above. . . so I do know what I am talking about. I was on a quest for the perfect sub-sub-compact in 32 or 380 and the P-32 won out.

I did not purchase the following but had done extensive research on them. The Seecamp is ammo finicky. I would not feel comfortable with a firearm where the manufacturer has a recommended list of ammo. The Masterpiece Arms MPA Protector series are also on the heavy side and will jam up if dry fired inadvertently.

kokapelli
October 26, 2012, 11:27 AM
P-32. One extra round, less recoil for quick follow-up, lightest and flattest semi-auto out there. The P3AT/LCP are a good second. One less round and a little more snap. Weight difference between the P-32 and them are negligible.

The NAA Guardian in 32ACP is a distance third. Smaller but thicker, straight blowback (i.e. more snap), one less round than the P-32, and quite a bit heavier than all three of the preceding.

Dead last is the NAA Guardian in .380ACP. Almost as heavy as a Glock 19 empty at less than half the capacity. Straight blowback that bites big time in a mouse caliber. I have two of 'em. One brand new unfired. There's a reason for that. . .

I own all of the above. . . so I do know what I am talking about. I was on a quest for the perfect sub-sub-compact in 32 or 380 and the P-32 won out.

I did not purchase the following but had done extensive research on them. The Seecamp is ammo finicky. I would not feel comfortable with a firearm where the manufacturer has a recommended list of ammo. The Masterpiece Arms MPA Protector series are also on the heavy side and will jam up if dry fired inadvertently.
I have owned or shot all the ones you list with the exception of the Masterpiece and went from the NAA to the P32 which was a huge improvement and then to the P3AT which I shoot better than the P32 and don't have the "Rim Lock" to worry about. Any of the Blowback pistols (Seecamp, NAA, Micro Desert Eagle, etc) are far less shooter friendly, but still nothing in the real pocket 32 and 380 pistols can compare to the Sig P238 in shoot ability.
The P238 is simply in a class by itself.

CZguy
October 27, 2012, 12:10 AM
The P238 is simply in a class by itself.

Yep, kind of like the Kahr P380.

But the Sig and Kahr are in a price class of their own also. But in my view, they are well worth it.

PaulKersey3
October 27, 2012, 12:30 AM
I've carried both calibers. Both are good for self defense. Both I used nothing but fmj. If you're hands are big, scratch the Beretta Tomcat. Better off with a good/great condition beretta 1934 (.380) 1935 (.32) or one of the rare 70-72 series. Kel Tecs are good for concealment, but feel like toys IMO, especially with big hands. Can't go wrong with Seecamp, but they can get up there in price. Look at other makers like Llama, Ruger, CZ and Makarov. For concealment it's all about what's most comfy, reliable and accurate for you.
My personal caliber choice out of the two is .32acp

sidheshooter
October 27, 2012, 02:45 AM
Better off with a good/great condition beretta 1934 (.380) 1935 (.32) or one of the rare 70-72 series.

I'm the proud owner of a great 1934, but I can't see carrying it due to design constraints. I'm not comfortable with the 1934 in condition 1, and I'm not comfortable with con 2 or 3 with anything.

How are you toting the '34, out of curiosity? Still a neat gun.

SouthernYankee
October 27, 2012, 08:55 AM
Whew! When I started this original post I never dreamed I would receive such an incredible response. Let me tell all of you where I am as a result of all these suggestions. In .32acp I am leaning towards the Beretta Tomcat (thanks Golden), and in .380acp the Sig p238. I like both guns but favor the slightly larger grip of the Beretta (sorry to Kel-tec fans, the grip is to small for me). I'm going to decide this week, and I'll post my final decision. To all who read I hope you have enjoyed the thoughts of so many enthusiasts and to those who responded, thanks for your time and wisdom. Any other thoughts?

MCgunner
October 27, 2012, 10:29 AM
Well, the .22 mag Hornady Critical Defense gets 100 ft lbs out of a 2" Black Widow, my fall back if I can't carry my subcompact 9mm, rare. I do carry the NAA every Sunday to church so I'll have SOMETHING on me at the restaurant after services.

My P11 Kel Tec is a little wider than my buddy's LCP, but not much larger otherwise. The P32 is a bit smaller than even the P3AT. What I'm trying to say is it kinda depends on your needs for compact size. If you'll never need anything smaller than the P3AT, go for the bigger round. I've chosen my pants for large pockets, too, big enough to swallow that P11 which holds 11 rounds of +P 115 JHP pushing 410 ft lobs. AND, now days, if you're willing to settle for less than half the firepower and you swallow the big bullet myth, there's the Springfield XDS. It's a neat lookin' pocket gun in .45ACP.

So, let's keep this in perspective, it's not so much the power of the round, but how much firearm you feel that you can carry concealed. OR, we might be talkin' back up. :D Even for a quick errand, I always have my P11 in my pocket unless I'm in the shower or in bed at night and even then, it's not far away. I don't often carry a belt gun, don't feel the need. I shoot that P11 quite well.

Walkalong
October 27, 2012, 03:57 PM
I vote .32 ACP. I shot my CZ Model 83 this morning. Shooting plates in double action at 7 yards was a breeze. $239 surplus police gun.

The ability to shoot well with the gun is more important than .32 vs .380.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=143422&stc=1&d=1307197472

kerreckt
October 27, 2012, 04:08 PM
No matter what you have it's no good if you don't have it when you need it. That's why I carry a Kel-Tec P3AT(.380). Fits perfectly in the front pocket of whatever I am wearing. I have plenty of other handguns but this is what is with me all the time. I am very familiar with it and there will be no fumbling around if it is ever needed. It is amazingly accurate for what it is...perfect for my purposes

PaulKersey3
October 27, 2012, 04:14 PM
I carry my Beretta 1935 in 7.65 browning either IWB or on my left ankle as backup to my G19. Chambered round, half cocked, safety on. I've read that German officers preferred the Beretta over the Walther, and more on topic, the 7.65 Browning (.32acp) over the 9mm Kurtz (.380acp)

golden
October 27, 2012, 10:58 PM
PAULK3

The problem with the BERETTA 1934 or the model 70 is that like they are to big when compared with a Tomcat.

I have shot the model 70 in .32ACP and it is a fun gun to shoot, but bulky. It is almost exactly the same weight and dimensions as my SIG 232, but a quarter inch shorter and lacks the SIG'S excellent double action and night sights.

Also, if carried in an inside the waist band holster, why not a compact 9m.m.?

I carry the SIG 232 and BERETTA Tomcat to avoid wearing a belt holster.

If that does not matter, then it is going to be a larger gun with stronger ammo and a larger magazine capacity.

I carry my SIG 232 in my pants pocket. In casual clothes, it works very well, but less so in dress clothes or in my uniform pocket.
I have ruled out ankle holsters for myself, as I think, if I need a gun when I am off duty, I want to be able to pull it out without giving a visible warning like dropping to one knee.
Also, the ankle holster can allow a lot of dirt to build up quickly. I have found that small auto's are less tolerant of dirt than the duty size guns.

Your own experience may have produced different results.

I think that the main reason German officers carried .32ACP in preference to the .380ACP round is that it did not matter to them which caliber they carried, but only which one they could get ammo for.
When the Germans took over a country, they usually took over the gun factories and grabbed everything they could get.
The German military issued BROWNING 1922 pistols made in Belgium in .32ACP and CZECH made CZ pistols, also in .32ACP, both of these guns were available in .380ACP and widely popular in that caliber.
The reason for this is that they already had .32ACP ammo in the supply line for the J.P. SAUER model 38, MAUSER HSc and WALTHER PP pistols made in Germany. These guns were being issued as a substitute standard for the P-38. Note that they kept the LUGER in production, despite its high cost and finicky nature.

I know that the primary caliber for the SAUER model 38 was .380ACP, but the German military wanted .32ACP as they were already using it.
Rumor has it that the CZECH model 27 was a preferred weapon for those difficult back of the head shots of a kneeling prisoner that the SS and Gestapo were so good at. Not much of a recommendation to me.

Jim

lefteyedom
October 28, 2012, 02:54 AM
I carry a P3AT Kel Techs (380) or a 1911. Guess which one gets carried %90 of the time?

With today's small size 380 and 9mm I can see no reason to carry a 32ACP or a 25ACP. Even James Bond gave up his Beretta for a ppk 380...

golden
October 30, 2012, 11:42 AM
Lefteyedom

Actually BOND'S BERETTA was taken away from him. In the movie, he was then given a WALTHER PPK .32ACP, which was then still popular in EUROPE for police use.
In the book, he was given the PPK and a S&W .38 Special as his BIG GUN.

In the movies, BOND then went to the WALTHER P-99 for about 4 films, before going back to the PPK. Now the movie guy has a .380ACP PPK.

In the books, he carried just about anything you can imagine, including a RUGER SUPER BLACKHAWK!

In the latest book, it is a WALTHER PPS.

Just trivia.

Jim

fatcpa
October 30, 2012, 12:15 PM
Over the last few years, I have bought and sold a bunch of pocket 380's. I now own a Kel Tec P3AT and a Sig Sauer P238. Obviously, for close to 3 times the price, the Sig should be a better gun, and it is. A few weeks ago, I bought some Buffalo Bore 100 gr lead flat point +P ammo for the 380's. After one shot witht he Kel Tec, I had all I wanted. You could feel the additional power when shooting the Sig, but it was not unconfortable at all. I won't diss the Kel Tec, mine has been very reliable, but I'll spend the extra money for the Sig any day.

PaulKersey3
October 30, 2012, 02:45 PM
Golden

I read the same thing regarding the SS and their penchant for executions. A grim time indeed. In terms of manufacture, I believe .32 was easier for them as they already had similar pistol calibers in that range (7.63 Mauser?)
Beretta was taken over by the Reich during the war and produced some very fine guns. I recently purchased an aftermarket mag for my 1935 and cut off the finger groove. The mags aren't cheap, but I have to say it made a noticeable difference in the pistol's carry profile. I find it quite comfortable, despite the weight. As far as the 70s-72 models go, they are a bit on the large side. I've always wanted one of those though. They're darn good guns!

golden
October 31, 2012, 12:40 AM
PAULK

The model 70's that I have shot are very nice and feel good in the hand. However, they are getting expensive as they have become minor collectors items. For the same price or less, you can pick up one of the BERETTA CHEETAH pistols in .32ACP.

The 81 is the 12 shot .32ACP version of the BERETTA 84. Magazines are available for this gun directly from BERETTA.
It feels, shoots and looks just like the early model 84's and like them, does not drop the hammer like the newer models.
The 82 is the single stack version, equivalent to the BERETTA model 85. Same features as above. I find the model 82 to shoot very well as it has almost no recoil.
Like the other CHEETAH models, it is large for caliber, which is probably why it works as well as it does.
The downside is that model 82 magazines are very hard to find.

I would eventually like to try the SIG 232 in .32ACP, as I love this gun in .380ACP and carry it constantly. It has proven to be one of the most accurate pocket guns I have ever used. Also, the night sights on my 232 make it a favorite of mine for carry.

The main reason I became interested in shooting .32ACP after I got the TOMCAT, I discovered during the OBAMASCARE ammo shortage that I could find .32ACP at reasonable prices, while .380ACP was nearly impossible to find.

I also discovered that the mild recoil of the .32ACP makes it a fun round to shoot.

On the 7.63 Mauser round, this is a huge, bottlenecked auto pistol round with near .357 SIG ballistics. The .32ACP or 7.65 Browning round became popular, I believe, because the first compact pistol, the BROWNING 1900, made by FN of BELGIUM was a world wide bestseller. Three years later, COLT brought out the POCKET HAMMERLES 1903, an excellent handling, slim and accurate pistol, also in .32ACP. After that, it seems many pistols from EUROPE started out in a .32ACP chambering. The European police liked it and some armies did as well.
With the low level of training on handguns that many of these agencies employed, the easy to shoot .32ACP was just what they were looking for.

Jim

PaulKersey3
October 31, 2012, 11:46 PM
Golden

I scratched the Beretta Tomcat itch several years ago. I found it to be too small as I have HUGE hands. I ended up giving it to my sister and she loves it as a purse gun.
I'm always on the hunt for a beretta 70-72. About 10 years ago I passed on one (in .22) with three different barrels of different lengths, one was threaded. Guy wanted 400, and at the time that was a little high for me. Makes me think of the CZ52s and other C&Rs going for $250+ nowadays. I'll also grab up a 418 .25acp if I ever get the chance.

charlie fox
November 3, 2012, 06:38 PM
I've carried a Keltec P32 since 2003 loaded with FMJ for two reasons; I can shoot it accurately and fast and it's 100% reliable. The reliability of a small weapon is of the utmost importance if you are to be able to fight with it.

R.W.Dale
November 3, 2012, 08:08 PM
I literally just got in from comparing side by side a p32 and p3at for a BUG-armed without holstering up gun.

I went with the p32 due to its thinness extra capacity. Operating under the assumption that both rounds are fmj only proposals in such small guns.




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complaints about

Cocked & Locked
November 4, 2012, 10:16 PM
This thread need more pics.

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/403777759.jpg

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/403777758.jpg

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/403339262.jpg

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/402945497.jpg

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/404226087.jpg

Walkalong
November 5, 2012, 05:45 PM
This thread need more pics.OK

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=150080&stc=1&d=1317422254
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=142230&stc=1&d=1305496541

Cocked & Locked
November 5, 2012, 06:21 PM
.32's

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/399682949.jpg

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6263277/375630501.jpg

http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2169/3082611/6259764/381649867.jpg

mavracer
November 5, 2012, 08:45 PM
C&L Both your collection and your pic. are great
here's one of my 32s
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii261/mavracer/IMG-20110422-00009.jpg

Cocked & Locked
November 5, 2012, 09:10 PM
Thank you Sir!

khegglie
November 5, 2012, 09:48 PM
The Pics were worth the waite guys!

Cocked & Locked
November 6, 2012, 08:11 AM
C&L Both your collection and your pic. are great
here's one of my 32s
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii261/mavracer/IMG-20110422-00009.jpg

Very nice looking Walther! Tell me about those grips...stocks, whatever one prefers to call them. I like them! :what:

Phantom Captain
November 6, 2012, 08:38 AM
Here's my favorite Walther .32 and .380.

PPK is a 1938 ZM .32

http://imageshack.us/a/img40/1867/ppk3v.jpg

PPK/s .380, 1970, Interarms W. German import with real ivory grips.

http://imageshack.us/a/img844/4241/ppks3.jpg

Cocked & Locked
November 6, 2012, 08:50 AM
Way too many nice looking little Walthers for me not to own one. And now one with Ivory! :banghead:

mavracer
November 6, 2012, 09:11 AM
The grips on my Walther are holly by Herret grips. I got them from CDNN a while back. I have a matching set on my BHP.

Cocked & Locked
November 6, 2012, 09:41 AM
Impressive...they really look nice. Thanks for the info!

bozzman3
November 6, 2012, 09:50 AM
http://i777.photobucket.com/albums/yy59/BOZZMAN3/2011-03-17_20-01-03_789-1.jpg

http://i777.photobucket.com/albums/yy59/BOZZMAN3/2011-03-19_18-32-24_436.jpg


My Seecamp in my wallet!

WoodchuckAssassin
November 6, 2012, 10:05 AM
Who needs to carry around credit cards and pictures of your kids in your wallet if there's already a Seacamp in it? Haha!

I would go with .380 in the Ruger LCP...or if you're a gentleman, a Seacamp :neener:

The reason I go with the .380 is because of ammo selection. There seems to be A LOT more choices out there.

deadeye dick
November 6, 2012, 10:18 AM
I love my KT P32 and have just installed a Laserlyte side mounted sight, under $100.00. Lots of fun to shoot. I also reload so I shoot it a lot in the backyard of my home in the woods.

Ken451
November 6, 2012, 10:37 AM
1908 Steyr, .32 acp

http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m610/ken45101/1908%20Steyr/IMG_1819.jpg

http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m610/ken45101/1908%20Steyr/IMG_1817.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about ".32acp vs. .380acp" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!