mousegun caliber question

Sorry if this is outside your parameters, but a lcp is almost as small as a double tap or bond derringer.

I would choose 7 in the lcp over 5 in the naa or 2 in a big bore derringer.

Agree with Cump: would go with a 6-8 round .380 over even a nine shot .22 revolver or two shot big bore: more tactical options and quicker reloads.
But the old truism still applies: carry as much gun as you can and a .22 in the pocket is better than a .44 in a drawer at home.

The NAA and Bond aren't very comparable, even putting aside caliber and capacity. The Bond Arms weighs nearly 3 times as much as the NAA. I wouldn't want either as my primary carry, but if you were greatly limited by the need to be ultra discrete the NAA has the advantage, as it weighs so little.

As mentioned already, at the weight and size of the Bond Arms, you could be carrying a pocket 9mm or 380. For just a bit more size, a 5 shot j frame is in play, and will weigh less than the Bond as well.

As far as 5 small rounds versus 2 large ones, I guess it depends on how many adversaries you are facing. 3 bad guys makes the Bond seem lacking, even with its much more effective chambering. If I had to choose, I think I'd take the NAA in 22 magnum.

Guns like derringers and NAA revolvers just don't make sense to me, given the price and availability of guns like the LCP, S&W shield, etc., but I guess people like them because they are still being made.

I would go with a Kel-tec P32 instead of either of the OPs choices (as a back up).
If I find myself headed to a rougher part of town (not often), I'll carry one hanging from a leather lace with an attached
nylon bore brush around my neck with the pistol hanging from the brush inserted into the barrel.

It is a popular carry method for the Casull or NAA mini revolvers, as well due in large part to it's light weight.
Another +1 for carrying a .380 or 9mm polymer over a derringer made of steel.

JT

If you can go to a range and test fire some of those pocket 380s. It really depends on your ability to get a good solid hold on one of these pistols, both for comfort and for reliable cycling.

I have a keltec p3at I bought when they first came out that works fine (now) but the trigger guard slams the bottom of my trigger finger when I fire it. 3 mags and I'm done with it. I'm seriously considering trying out the current crop (taurus tcp, ruger lcp, bodyguard, etc) to see if any of those work better.

Readyrod said:

So I've been checking mouseguns recently and I have a caliber question. Which do you all think would be better, relatively many small rounds, say 5x.22 in a NAA revolver, or a few larger rounds, like 2x45acp in a bonds arms derringer. I'm just wondering pros and cons. The situation is for self defense. If you want to mention the small 9mm's go ahead, though I'm more interested in the many small rounds vs a few larger ones topic.
Thanks.
And yea it's been a while since I posted but I have been lurking.

Click to expand...

I have a Kel-Tec P-32 that I bought before the P3-AT came out. It is mega light and flat. NAA also has small pistols and the one chambered in 32 NAA is interesting.

I'd probably never carry smaller than a .380 to be honest. You need a bullet that will do the job.

Also off topic but I'm not sure who can't conceal a single stack 9mm... I do find the question interesting just don't see how I'd ever ask it myself.

Theoretically I'd say I'd take 2 .45's over 5 .22 assuming I could shoot both fine... two .45's would take care of a mugger probably.

I have a PF9 and an XDs45. The XDs is a million times nicer in fit and finish, better sights, etc. but it's also thicker and weighs a lot more. So when I decide what to carry I decide based on the size and weight. Ironically, I don't worry about round count as an extra magazine or two is no biggie to me.

I got the PF9 due to its size and being a 9mm. I didn't want to go smaller than that at the time. And it was the smallest 9mm back then. I got the XDs 45 as like you I couldn't decide if bigger or smaller was better. In the two guns rounds carried are similar with 7 and 6 round mags.

I guess my view is that my carry gun is for protection. It's part of helping me if I'm ever trapped against a gunman again. I'm not going to use it to fight off a zombie horde, but if confronted and without other options it gives me a tool have a way out without waiting for the cops.

That said, seeing some of the craziness with mobs blocking traffic, and pulling people out of cars, maybe a full size 9mm with a couple of extra mags is a better choice.

The reality is only you can decide what works for you, just like I decide what works best for me. In my case the 45 is my EDC and the 9mm is when I need a smaller gun to go with my dress clothes. But I'm in a fairly safe place and don't expect rioting or angry mobs. When I go up north I'm getting more and more concerned so I'm actually starting to think a FS might be something to consider more seriously.

So I guess my view is carry as much firepower and ammo as you can when it makes sense. If you can't carry a big gun with Lots of ammo carry what you can.

Like many I consider 9mm the smallest I feel comfortable carrying. I'd reconsider 380 if I had to but since I don't it's easy. Also keep in mind that the ammo you carry plays into the equation. There are tons of choices there and it's not JHP vs FMJ.
Ammo also is part of the discussion beyond big vs small. And without narrowing it down to a few calibers could get into a massive messy discussion.

Readyrod said:

So I've been checking mouseguns recently and I have a caliber question. Which do you all think would be better, relatively many small rounds, say 5x.22 in a NAA revolver, or a few larger rounds, like 2x45acp in a bonds arms derringer. I'm just wondering pros and cons. The situation is for self defense. If you want to mention the small 9mm's go ahead, though I'm more interested in the many small rounds vs a few larger ones topic.
Thanks.
And yea it's been a while since I posted but I have been lurking.

Click to expand...

That's a choice between bad and worse. Like many others have said, there's a middle ground to be found here.

It's true that .380 pocket pistols are less than comfortable to shoot. From that perspective, .32 is attractive. I can't say .32 is adequate, but it does possess the ability to reliably penetrate far enough to reach vitals, unlike .25 and .22lr. Whether that happens in real life, I don't know. Statistically it's the worst round there is, but I put about as much stock in statistics as I do in campaign promises.

In any case, two rounds of anything is inadequate, and .22lr is inadequate no matter how many rounds you have.

Readyrod said:

...I'm more interested in the many small rounds vs a few larger ones topic.

Click to expand...

I think the only way to approach that angle of the topic is to ask whether five .22 LR's beat 2 .45 ACP's, rather in the way one might ask whether a straight beats a flush. Alas, I see no way to resolve the question. There is no Hoyle's to consult. What we know about stopping power is pretty vague, and filled with exceptions to any rule we propose.

I'd go with two .45's instead of five .22's, but I wouldn't like it a bit. Anywhere I could carry the Bond I think that could manage a pocket .380 instead, though of course the o/u derringer is very compact for the size of its cartridge. I wouldn't be altogether happy with the .380 either...but happier.

Readyrod said:

Thanks for the replies folks.
From what I see on the net the .380 is hard on the hands but the .32 is easier. How do they compare in kick and stopping power?

Click to expand...

If I'm remembering this correctly, recoil scales directly to throw weight times velocity, if the guns are the same weight. Round things off to one third less kick for the .32, but that does not hold true and exact across all loadings of both. The Federal Hydra-Shok in .32 ACP weighs 65 grains and leaves the gun at an alleged 925 fps, and the comparable .380 is ninety grains and claims 1000 fps. See:

.32 ACP ballistics: http://www.ballistics101.com/32_acp.php
.380 ACP ballistics: http://www.ballistics101.com/380_acp.php

I would try a 380 like an lcp2, if possible. I think the internet makes them seem worse than they are, and there are some low recoil ammo options to try.

I have always enjoyed shooting my 380s, especially my lcp2. My girfriend and daughter also shoot them on target and without complaint, but they've had practice with a variety of calibers...

Readyrod

The smallest caliber gun that I carry is a .380, a P3AT being the smallest size gun, while a SIG P238 and a Colt Mustang are the easiest and most comfortable to shoot. To answer your question I would definitely go with the higher capacity/smaller caliber versus the lower capacity/larger caliber gun.

When I was seeking a "deep-conceal" gun several years back, I certainly checked into the pocket-380 class. At that time, the three contenders were the Kel-Tec P3-AT, the Ruger LCP, and the Taurus PT738 (TCP.) Taurus and Kel-Tec were also making versions in .32ACP.

I was already carrying a PF9, and was well familiar with having a gun that could easily be run, but was downright unpleasant to try to enjoy.

The Kel-Tec P32 offered less muzzle flip and recoil, allowing for faster target re-acquisition. It also offered a last-shot slide-lock, and an additional round in capacity. On top of those, it was also a tick smaller and lighter than its .380 counterpart.

That's the gun I selected, and I've been pleased with it since. Later, I got one of the KT 10-round magazines for it, and the pistol, with 11 rounds on board, rides with me in a pocket of my uniform while traveling to and from my no-carry work site.

Earlier this year, I picked up a Taurus TCP (used, but in like-new condition, from 2016) at a LGS. It does like to snap my hand around some, especially in one-handed fire, but no worse than the PF9, and I can hit with it at the range. But, for the carry situation I just mentioned, I prefer eleven rounds of .32 to seven of .380, and those eleven rounds are a little easier for me to direct to their mark.

Oh, yeah, I do own a NAA in .22LR. It's more of a "hideout" gun than a "backup" gun, though, and never a "primary."

Readyrod said:

I guess the .380 guns have more rounds in the gun and it's easy to carry extra mags which beats the many small rounds vs a few large rounds argument. So what about the .380 vs .32 thing?

Click to expand...

As fond as I am of the .32 classics from the old days (Ppk, Ruby, Colt 1903, etc....), today it is kinda a dying round.....around here you can't even find it at the LGS, let alone the Wackmart- and when you can find it, the $ is exorbitant, which I would think would put a damper on training time. For the availability reason alone I would exclude .32 as a CCW option.
I've had many, many .380s and can't say I found the recoil an issue at all....but, for me, the king is the Colt Govt.380/Mustang/Sig P238/Kimber Micro Carry platform. All these guns are essentially the same weapon, use common magazines, and have quite a bit of parts interchangeability. They are available in steel, aluminium, and poly frame versions and any finish you can think of. Yes, they are single action, but the button-detent safety is very positive and easily thumbed off. The light, silky SA trigger also pays huge accuracy and rate of fire dividends.
I've carried a Mustang Pocketlite and P238 in a ankle holster for years and found them very unobtrusive. Lately, I've switched to a waistband holster and am packing the slightly heavier Govt. Model with its longer grip and extra round. All these are quite a bit more pricey than a LCP, but shoot one and you'll be hooked!

As already said, LCP 380 over anything smaller or less capacity.
Handguns are considered poor stoppers, makes little sense to intentionally select the lowest levels of them.
I don't envision 380 rounds quickly stopping a determined / drugged / psychotic attacker, a 32 nope.
I only carry a 380 (LCP) as a last resort / only option when wearing work clothes and can't conceal something larger.
can't =/= won't

More important than caliber is choosing a platform that you can reliably hit a target under pressure.

Readyrod said:

I guess the .380 guns have more rounds in the gun and it's easy to carry extra mags which beats the many small rounds vs a few large rounds argument. So what about the .380 vs .32 thing?

Click to expand...

Both are somewhat questionable, the .32 more so than the .380. I'm very choosy about ammo for either one, and for a .32 would always opt for FMJ, preferably solid copper. All I ask from any of my handguns is that if I place the shot well, that the bullet travels straight and penetrates deep enough to reach the vital I'm aiming for. I think both .32 and .380, given the right ammo, can reasonably achieve those ends. The .380 certainly gives you a greater margin, and is definitely going to perform much better if there's a barrier and/or heavy clothing involved.

If you opt for .380, do your research before picking ammo. Most .380 HPs only penetrate around 10'', whereas the FMJs overpenetrate. Finding a happy medium can be frustrating.

Recoil is a function of bullet mass and velocity against firearm mass. Translated to the common tongue, it depends.

Controllability - ease of shooting and hitting with a handgun - generally increases with size of grip (to fit the shooter's hand) which forces greater mass.

There's the problem: The criteria are counterbalancing. "Small" is easy to hide and hard to shoot. "Big" is hard to hide and easy to shoot. Somewhere, there's a compromise. Which is another problem.

My compromise is more than likely NOT your compromise. I doubt if anyone here - who all mean well and all have some degree of expertise - can determine your needs exactly to your criteria. Yeah, I'm the evil raven character.

A .32 ACP handgun can be useful in the hands of one who can make headshots all the time. (Usually involving a good deal of skill and more patience to wait until exactly the right moment.) A .44 Magnum or .45 ACP has more margin for error in shot delivery, but are usually harder to carry.

I suggest a smaller .38 Special revolver or 9x19mm pistol is probably the most likely compromise (or place to start thinking) on power versus shooter abuse. If you want to go smaller, you need to shoot a couple such things.

Readyrod,

I see that you are planning on moving to Canada from Japan. Insomuch as laws in the United States are different the Canada's our thoughts are mostly meaningless.

Post this question on some Canadian gun forums and report back to us what the replies. (Is conceal carry legal in Canada?) That way you can educate us and allow us to give you recommendations that are legal in Canada.

I have an LCP and don't find the recoil from .380 to be bad at all. But I did find that even with the LCP, I was sometimes wanting something even smaller, and I went with a NAA .22. I didn't even consider a derringer, as I don't think the size is much less than my LCP, and I'd take 5 shots of .22 over 2 shots of anything else any day of the week (in a handgun).

But now I find my LCP doesn't get much use anymore. If I can carry a LCP, I can typically also carry a .38sp j-frame which I'd rather have on me. The .22 mouse gun pretty much just stays in my pocket when I'm at home or when I'm swimming at a public pool.