32ACP autoloaders

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hard to believe 20 posts until someone mentioned the PPK which would be my choice. Like a 1903 it's a pistol that you won't lose money on and the cool factor is through the roof. The Seecamp is expensive and many of them have issues. A Kel Tec 32 while tiny is not particularly interesting or fun to shoot. The Beretta 81 is one of the best pistol bargains ever to hit the surplus market and a no brainer IMO. While it isn't a pocket pistol it's a great intro gun for the caliber. Even though they are surplus they are often in minty condition.
Interestingly I own both a PP and a PPK/s as well as a few other more experienced Walthers but I consider the Walther PP series the least enjoyable and by far the least carried of all of the German 32acp pistols created leading up to the war.

medium800.jpg

I also have a Walther model 4 (it actually has the ejection port on the Port side) and find even it gets far more WalkAbout time than either the PP or PPK/s.

standard.jpg
 
This was my first pistol, a Bernardelli 49 .32ACP made in 1954 (pic not mine). It's a striker-fired pistol. The trigger was very good when dry firing but for some reason (probably due to the magazine disconnect safety) the trigger became very heavy during live fire. Sold after 200 rounds. It was slim but being all steel it was also heavy. Very snag free. The sights are a channel in the slide with a little, little front sight in the middle. Probably if I had removed the magazine disconnect safety it have been a good little shooting .32.
View attachment 958727
Bernardelli had two versions of that handgun, the striker fired version like your image but also a hammer fired Model 60 version.

standard.jpg
standard.jpg

Of the two I personally prefer the striker version.
 
Nice Bernardelli duo you have!
Do you have the heavy trigger issue I experienced with the striker fired one?

I'll add that the .32ACP striker-fired Bernardelli, while it has no name on the slide, is known as model 48 or 49 or 48/49.
 
Last edited:
Nice Bernardelli duo you have!
Do you have the heavy trigger issue I experienced?
Not that I have noticed but I grew up shooting double action revolvers so I've never had a noticeable issue with any "heavy" single action semi-automatic trigger. Even all my HiPower & clones still have their magazine disconnects. I've found a few with too light a trigger for my comfort level.
 
A NAA Guardian was my first .32 ACP pistol. I bought it when the Ruger LCP got introduced and .380 ammo was only available if you just bought a.380 pistol and the LGSs would sell you up to one box of ammo with the gun.

.32 ACP ammo was everywhere at the time, the forgotten little bastid child of a cartridge that it is in the USA.

Anyway, I loved the size of the Guardian and the DOA trigger/hammer. I didn't like shooting it though. That little blowback gun would sometimes slip in my hand during firing, which would cause a limp wrist related jam. I installed fat grips from NAA, which helped in reliability, but that made the gun as fat as my Beretta 21A.

While I still have two other .32 ACP pistols, I sold off my Guardian earlier this year and I don't miss it one bit.
 
Last edited:
I will second that NOT ENJOYING the NAA Guardian when shooting it. It is a tiny pistol, but the recoil is harder than I expected. Worse than a KEL TEC .32ACP or BERETTA Tomcat 3032.

My choice in a .32ACP to carry is a pre-war WALTHER PPK in .32ACP because I have it and it is just large enough to shoot well and very reliable. I have also carried the BERETTA Tomcat, which is as small a gun that I can comfortably shoot in .32ACP.

Jim
 
Not that I have noticed but I grew up shooting double action revolvers so I've never had a noticeable issue with any "heavy" single action semi-automatic trigger. Even all my HiPower & clones still have their magazine disconnects. I've found a few with too light a trigger for my comfort level.
I sold it to buy a S&W 686+ that I shot only double action, go figure. I also had a Ruger SP101 DAO and other revolvers, shooting 99% the time double action, so I can manage an heavy trigger.
That's why I think there was a problem on mine because, as I said, during dry fire the trigger was nice. During live fire it was sometimes almost impossible to pull the trigger. I had not much experience at that time but thinking today at it there was something interferring with the trigger pull and I bet it was the little magazine disconnect safety behind the trigger. Or something wrong with the reset or the way the striker re-engaged the part that released it when pulling the trigger during live fire. Unfortunately I never tried to check the reset during dry fire.
 
Last edited:
The original Seecamps were designed for 32acp. As mentioned by others, hollowpoints work fine but ball ammo. Is too long for the magazine. I've never had an issue with mine. I also have a 1903, for today's clothing, it's hardly suitable as a pocket gun, but a fun shooting pistol.
 
PocketAutoComparisonPg1_aug14.png

for a truly pocket .32 you have three choices: NAA .32acp Guardian, LWS .32acp, or Kel-tec P32 .32acp. my gripes about the Beretta Tomcat .32acp are, it is very wide compared to other guns of this caliber, and the frame cracking problem that they tried to solved by using an even wider heavier slide to slow down its momentum and frame battering.
 
Last edited:
If it's just a collection gun, I'd go for something like the NAA Guardian. Horribly impractical given its size and weight and trigger and recoil, but it looks purdy and is made of shiny steel so yeah. Not exactly a historic classic based on a Browning design, but when you consider how few options we had in the 90s for small .32 semi autos, it's got some history.

Even new the NAA semi's are super pricey either.
 
a truly pocket .32 you have three choices: NAA .32acp Guardian, LWS .32acp, or Kel-tec P32 .32acp

I am completely surprised at the Seecamp is only three ounces heavier than the Keltec, and surprised again the NAA is three more ounces heavier than the Seecamp. I may have to look more closely at the stainless wonder.:)
 
Unless it was a historic/heirloom piece destined for safe-queendom, I would have no use for a 32 ACP.
 
I am completely surprised at the Seecamp is only three ounces heavier than the Keltec, and surprised again the NAA is three more ounces heavier than the Seecamp. I may have to look more closely at the stainless wonder.:)
Seecamp with ammo.jpg Kel-tec with ammo.jpg

to be fair, the P32 has the metal recoil spring guide rod and the metal belt clip. coupled along with one more round of ammunition.
 
The original Seecamps were designed for 32acp. As mentioned by others, hollowpoints work fine but ball ammo. Is too long for the magazine. I've never had an issue with mine. I also have a 1903, for today's clothing, it's hardly suitable as a pocket gun, but a fun shooting pistol.

there is a spacer in the magazine that prevents longer ammunition from being loaded into it. some have bought extra magazines and removed the spacer (it is part of the locking floor plate) so they can shoot longer FMJ ammo. the wwb 71gr. FMJ is a flat point and can fit in the magazine without modification. many including myself have had success with using this FMJ as cheap target practice loads; some even preferring to carry it instead.
 
there is a spacer in the magazine that prevents longer ammunition from being loaded into it. some have bought extra magazines and removed the spacer (it is part of the locking floor plate) so they can shoot longer FMJ ammo. the wwb 71gr. FMJ is a flat point and can fit in the magazine without modification. many including myself have had success with using this FMJ as cheap target practice loads; some even preferring to carry it instead.
I will have to check mine out. Mine is a 2nd year production. I carry it as a backup all the time.
 
So, if I'm seeing this right, I can cut the spacer down and just retain the bottom plate of the spacer to keep the baseplate held in place?

I think so. I have not modified mine so I don't know if the folks that have just replaced the locking plate with the 380 version or if they actually cut the spacer down.
 
Before anyone starts cutting on Seecamp .32 magazines, I seem to remember that the LWS-32 mags being manufactured for shorter cartridges has the effect of eliminating the risk of rim-lock malfunctions, so, this mod may allow rim-lock to occur. I cannot site a source, and have never modified LWS-32 magazines to allow accepting longer OAL cartridges, so cannot verify any of this, based upon personal experience. There is, however, plenty of written mention of rim-lock with .32 autos, on forums, and in books and magazines.

One thing I can say, is that Seecamps FEED reliably, when one uses the recommended ammo, which is all that I have tried. If I were to modify a magazine, to accept longer-OAL cartridges, I would ONLY use that mag for training, with cheaper ammo. One advantage, for me, is that Seecamp pistols fit my hands so well, and point “naturally” for me, at least for windage, so, my usual training with long-stroke DA revolvers provides the necessary live-fire practice.

Most pocket autos require me to hold my trigger finger “just so,” in a manner unique to the particular weapon, and so require plenty of practice with live ammo, but the Seecamp’s trigger pivot point is so far forward, it feels, to me, like pulling the trigger of a mid-sized revolver.

I have owned two Seecamp LWS-32 pistols long-term, the first of which I stupidly sold. Both were bought new. I recently added two more, pre-owned, this year, which I have yet to test-fire. All are Milford guns, so, hand-made. I would like to try one of the newer CNC guns, too, sooner or later.
 
Before anyone starts cutting on Seecamp .32 magazines, I seem to remember that the LWS-32 mags being manufactured for shorter cartridges has the effect of eliminating the risk of rim-lock malfunctions, so, this mod may allow rim-lock to occur. I cannot site a source, and have never modified LWS-32 magazines to allow accepting longer OAL cartridges, so cannot verify any of this, based upon personal experience. There is, however, plenty of written mention of rim-lock with .32 autos, on forums, and in books and magazines.

One thing I can say, is that Seecamps FEED reliably, when one uses the recommended ammo, which is all that I have tried. If I were to modify a magazine, to accept longer-OAL cartridges, I would ONLY use that mag for training, with cheaper ammo. One advantage, for me, is that Seecamp pistols fit my hands so well, and point “naturally” for me, at least for windage, so, my usual training with long-stroke DA revolvers provides the necessary live-fire practice.

Most pocket autos require me to hold my trigger finger “just so,” in a manner unique to the particular weapon, and so require plenty of practice with live ammo, but the Seecamp’s trigger pivot point is so far forward, it feels, to me, like pulling the trigger of a mid-sized revolver.

I have owned two Seecamp LWS-32 pistols long-term, the first of which I stupidly sold. Both were bought new. I recently added two more, pre-owned, this year, which I have yet to test-fire. All are Milford guns, so, hand-made. I would like to try one of the newer CNC guns, too, sooner or later.

correct, the removal of the spacer allows for longer FMJ rounds like all other .32acp guns. the rim-lock issue is not a Seecamp phenomenon. It can occur whenever shorter rounds i.e. hollow points, move in the magazine and their rims interlock. this can happen in any .32acp gun. for this reason I recommend only standard length FMJ in any .32acp gun without a spacer in the magazine. The LWS32 used the spacer because at the time of its design the Win STHP was the only "self defense" .32acp game in town, and Larry chose to limit the gun to this round by use of the magazine spacer. had he not done so, people would have complained about rim-lock in his gun.

*** if you want to use FMJ in your LWS32 try the wwb version (has the flat nose). the shorter OAL fits the standard LWS32 magazines.
 
there is a spacer in the magazine that prevents longer ammunition from being loaded into it. some have bought extra magazines and removed the spacer (it is part of the locking floor plate) so they can shoot longer FMJ ammo. the wwb 71gr. FMJ is a flat point and can fit in the magazine without modification. many including myself have had success with using this FMJ as cheap target practice loads; some even preferring to carry it instead.
With how low the velocity is with most .32 ACP is, it's rather pointless to bother with hollow points in the caliber, unless it's some hot loaded Corbon or Buffalo Bore ammo.

I don't think about using a hollow point in .32 ACP until the gun has a 3.5 inch barrel.
 
20201129_185416.jpg My only 32. Bernadelli model 60 hammer fired. Its very well made and very tight. It dates to 1969. Picked it up in an auction because 32 is one of those non mainstream calibers you can get when everything else dries up. It always hangs up on the last round in the magazine. I guess it's not broken in yet. What I really want is a 1903 Colt.
 
Have a CZ Model 50 (top) that I occasionally pocket carry when I take the dog for a walk.View attachment 958634
My Beretta Model 81 double stack is a great shooter and I wouldn’t hesitate to carry it if I could find a decent holster.
View attachment 958635

https://www.craftholsters.com/beretta-81-holsters----------- I got an IWB for appendix carry. Real comfortable and holds pistol firmly. ------- https://www.craftholsters.com/concealed-carry-nylon-holster
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top