.32ACP or .380

[Onmilo]

I have always preferred the .32 acp to the .380 acp.
Most .32s offer a larger capacity, lighter recoil, a lower muzzle report at the trade off of very little in actual bullet performance.

If you have access to pistols in both calibers try the good old fashioned phone book test.
You will find the .32 acp FMJ driven at 900 fps will actually outpenetrate a .380 fmj driven to similar velocity while the .380 hollowpoint bullets will penetrate a bit deeper than the .current .32 hollowpoint offerings though the .32 FMJ will outpenetrate both hollowpoints.
I am not a fan of hollowpoint bullets in small caliber pocket pistols preferring penetration capability to expansion capability and am a firm believer that if you must use a smaller caliber as a defense weapon, hitting the target with multiple rounds is the way to go.

My current favorite if I must use this as a defense weapon choice is a fine 15 shot .32 acp CZ83
My actual choice for a defense weapon is a Glock 26 9mm using 15 shot G19 magazines

 

[rskent]

The KT and baby Rugers are to small for me to hang on to. They are great guns if they fit you. They don't work with the chubby little stubs I call fingers. I ended up with a Tomcat and a Sig 238.
The Tomcat is a good little shooter and carries great in a Don Hume pocket holster. Just like its not there. The Sig is what I carry mostly. I use a OWB holster mostly. It hides under a T shirt very
well and shoots like a dream.

In the end you gotta get what fits you, not me.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

I routinely carry a Seecamp .32. I chose it because I wanted a small. lightweight pistol that I could slip into my pocket just before I left the house to run a quick errand. It also had to be easy to draw quickly from my pocket.

While Seecamp also offers the same pistol chambered for .380 ACP I determined it would be a challenge to shoot quickly and accurately.

Weight and bulk were big factors in selecting the Seecamp .32. I really don't like things in my front pockets, especially on hot days when I'm sweaty. I've been very pleased with the Seecamp since I started carrying it about a year ago.

I also considered the NAA Guardian .32 (which is also available in .380). I was surprised that the few extra ounces of weight made THAT much difference.

There's fine line between "carry-ability" and "shoot-ability" when it comes to small pistols. For me the Seecamp .32 is BOTH easy to carry and easy to draw quickly and shoot accurately without having to re-adjust my grip after each shot.

Good luck!

 

[JR47]

I own both. The P32 just slips into a pocket almost unnoticed. I can hold it into the A target area at 15 yards, as well, in rapid fire. The gun has been flawless in performance.

Rim-lock with short OAL can be avoided by using the Kel-Tec adapter designed to avoid that. Rim-lock with FMJ is a loading error by the operator. Ask the British about that, and their .303 rounds. Or the Russians and the 7.62x54R.

My P3AT is a tiny bit larger, and prints in the same wear as the P32, perhaps due to the weight increase. It is a bit more snappy, as it should be when firing a round that is 50% heavier in the bullet, at the same velocities. I have no trouble shooting it, nor have I had any troubles with the function, but it just isn't as easy to hide in my chosen location.

The P32 is actually a bit more accurate.

Ruger LCP 2.75" barrel, 5.16" long, 3.60" high, and 0.82" wide. 9.4 oz empty.

P3AT 2.7" barre;. 5.2" long, 3.5" high, and .77" wide. 8.3 oz empty.

P32 2.7" barrel. 5.10" long, 3.50" high, and .77" wide. 6.6 oz. empty.

LCP 6+1 .380 ACP

P3AT 6+1 .380 ACP

P32 7+1 .32 ACP

 

[Armchair Bronco]

What about something like a Polish P-64 instead? Then you can go with a a ballistically superior 9x18. These are very small guns but like everything from the Iron Curtain built like a tank.

 

[jmace57]

Me too PRM - my carry gun is a Walther PP in .32. (Although I just bought a Bersa Thunder in .380 to try out)

 

[Weevil]

The P32 is quite a bit smaller and much lighter than the all steel Makarov and similiar type pistols like the P64, CZs or Walther PPs.



It's a true pocket pistol that's not only smaller and lighter but much thinner.


It's not a blowback action and does not require the big heavy slide they do.

 

[MedWheeler]

The P-64 is also substantially heavier than the pocket-pistols being discussed here, and that's a deal-breaker for many due to their carry requisites.

That being said, that one pictured is quite handsome. I wouldn't mind having one, but it would too closely duplicate my Bersa Thunder .380.

 

[fastbolt]

I try not to weigh in on recommending specific makes/models/calibers to folks looking to buy diminutive off-duty, secondary/backup or CCW weapons. I prefer to encourage them to try and find examples of whatever interests them, and then try them out on a range with some representative defensive ammunition.

Choosing between .32 & .380 can produce pro's & con's for each caliber.

Since neither has a marked advantage in ballistics I'm looking at ease of use and follow up shots.

I'd not be so quick to dismiss the "ballistics" of each caliber quite so quickly, myself.

I tend to prefer the bullet weight and more modern hollowpoint designs available in the .380, myself ... as long as the particular pistol & ammunition selection exhibits optimal feeding & functioning in any particular shooter's hand.

Reliability is critical. (This includes being able to safely grasp and manipulate the little pistol under stressful situations, without causing any shooter-related functioning issues to occur.)

The ability of the shooter/owner to make consistently accurate, controllable & effective hits on the intended target is critical.

Mindset is critical.

Caliber? Well, this is where I'd prefer to try and make the most out of the diminutive pocket pistol offerings ... and lean more toward the .380 ACP.

I just did that recently, myself, BTW.

After years of using one or another of my growing number of 5-shot J-frames as my preferred "minimum caliber" off-duty weapons, I found there were times when I wasn't able to fit a snub into some shorter pockets (pocket holstered) of some of my jeans. Being retired, I no longer feel like letting my cover garment & daily clothing selection be dictated by my need to conceal a weapon. That's me.

Having handled a Bodyguard .380 belonging to another instructor, I didn't quite like the extra frame size incorporated for the integral laser (nor did I want the added fuss of laser operation, battery replacement, etc). I decided to look further.

After having seen and heard of some good owner reports regarding the little Ruger LCP, I took another instructor up on his offer of borrowing his LCP for a little while. It slipped into the small jeans pockets with ease, and it was easier to forget I was carrying it than even my lightest J-frames.

I picked one up for myself and ran some different defensive ammunition through it. I tried Rem 102gr BJHP, Speer 90gr GDHP and Win 95gr RA380T (T-Series). All fed & fired just fine. The Rem BJHP resulted in a few hat-bouncing empty cases (the Win & Speer didn't).

Practical accuracy was pleasantly surprising. All 3 loads produced tightly clustered cloverleaf groups at close ranges (3-7 yds), and respectable groups out to 15 yards. Naturally, the rudimentary front sight (fixed, blued, machined into the slide) was hard to pick up and distinguish against the rear notch in the night/low light conditions in which I was shooting, but when I took the time to pick up & align the sights, the little gun produced impressive inherent accuracy. Indexed shooting at close ranges was also good (for me), too.

I decided the little .380 was a keeper ... and it became the first .380 I've owned and carried in about 25 years, since I got rid of a Beretta M84.

When I'm not carrying one of my snubs or smallish 9's, .40's or .45's, of course.

As an instructor, I've seen a fair number of itty bitty .22's & .25's not function so well for owners, as well as owners who couldn't shoot them very well under just the minimal stress of a qualification courses-of-fire (even when they did feed & function normally).

The .32's and .380's have done better, but as has been mentioned, rim-lock is an issue of which to be aware in the .32 pistols.

Overall, I think the newer .380's and some of the better designed .380 HP's are giving the .380 a renewed interest by users.

Something else to perhaps consider is that PD's create policies about such things as off-duty & secondary/backup weapons, it's not uncommon to sometimes see them restrict the authorized/issued calibers for such weapons to either .380 ACP or .38 S&W Special. Listening to their reasons (and sometimes just reading between the lines), it seems those 2 calibers are considered more "minimally adequate" than the .32 ACP (or .22's/.25's).

Just something to think about ...

I don't give the same thought to "nostalgic influences" as some owners seem inclined to do, but it seems to be a factor among some folks.

 

[JR47]

It's also quite apparent, listening to may expert instructors that both the .380 and .32 cartridges are split almost evenly between those who recommend FMJ, and those who say that JHP is the way to go. So, type of JHP may be considered, at leadst 50% of the time, to be of no consequence.

I'm afraid that many PDs regard the .32 ACP as a "foreign cartridge", much like the 9x19 in the 40's and 60's. They are happy with an American cartridge, and that's the .380 ACP.

I grew up in Maryland. The police there stuck with the .38 Special revolver for years after the "big switch", especially municipal police. Back-up to them was whatever they wanted to carry. Off-duty was, if regulated, some sort of revolver.

You'd have been surprised at the number of BUGS that were Ravens, Baby Colts, and some small framed .32 S&W Long, or 38 S&W revolvers. Pay in the 50's and 60's wasn't going to make you rich, and guns were expensive at that salary. Somehow, they managed to survive, and win, against some spirited opposition.

To me, the worries that we spend hours imagining ever more catastrophically, are easily dealt with. YOU are the answer, not the gun, and not the caliber. Becoming proficient in whatever you decide to carry will get you though the fight. Even better, using your awareness can usually serve to KEEP you from a fight. How anyone with a lick of common sense would put themselves in some of these scenarios is hard to believe. Nor are they representative of the average situation where a civilian will have to defend themselves.

Personally, I don't intend to argue with an entire Chapter of Hells' Angels, or call out the local MS13 for a fight. Not prudent.

 

[the_skunk]

Guns are all about "What will you carry". I always carry my Seecamp 32. Sometimes I carry my Sig 232 (380).

As for my Browning HP, Kimber, Sig 226 .... I have never carried them.

 

[MICHAEL T]

Their 3 P-32 in my house and 1 P3AT The women like the 32 I like the 380. I do carry one of the 32s now and then.

 

[Snowdog]

Armchair Bronco, I'm with you on the P64. Mine was received in near mint condition and I love the thing. It's considerably heavier and larger than my P32, but if I ever did have to draw in an emergency situation, I'd sure rather have the P64 over the P32.

Those things are scary accurate in SA!

 

[mojo357]

I too own a P64 and it's a nifty little gun but I wouldn't trust mine for carry. Sometimes it shoots all day, other times it flakes out. No matter how much "forensic" testing I give it, the reasons for its failures are a mystery.

And be aware that the P-32 also has a history of cracked frames. Like the Beretta Tomcat, the problem was supposedly fixed in newer models, but if you're considering buying a used one you might get a lemon. At least Beretta switched to an inox frame so it's easy to know it's the improved version.

If you want a smooth shooting, accurate .380 the Beretta 84 series can't be beat, but of course they aren't the size of a credit card. They hold 10-13 rounds though, and are good collectible pistols.
______________________________________

https://www.createspace.com/4094773