Choice for comfortable concealed carry

Status
Not open for further replies.

Seattleimport

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
181
Location
Washington
I walked into the gun store today looking for an "always" gun that is:

1. Safe (no accidental discharge from drops, etc.)
2. Reliable
3. Ultra-portable and concealable (able to be carried without cumbersome holster)

I intended to check out Ruger's LCR or LCP, but the store was out. The clerk recommended a Smith & Wesson hammerless 642 as an alternative to the LCR. He recommended a Sig 232, Kel-Tec p11, Micro Eagle, Walther (forgot model name), or Kahr p9 as alternatives to the LCP.

He himself owned a P9, and said he was currently wearing it in some fancy IWB holster that allowed for tucked-in shirt. I have to say, I was impressed by that. I'm an office guy.

I handled all the guns and found the Sig to be sexiest, but too big and bulky. The Kel-Tec felt cheap. The Micro Eagle was perfect for a true pocket gun, but I was worried about accidental discharge with it in my pocket (and one in the chamber). So that meant I'd need a holster for it, sort of defeating the purpose of having a tiny gun. The Walther was close to the P9 but had a "higher" barrel, which I figured would make for a nastier recoil. The P9 felt great in my hand.

I'd be willing to go the IWB route if it were comfortable, and the slim P9 seems like it'd fit the bill. Probably safer than a Micro Eagle in pocket carry.

So: what do you guys think? Anyone have experience carrying the above guns?

-Seattleimport

PS: I walked out of the store with a XD-M 9mm. :) I was in need of a solid target pistol also suitable for home defense (able to be easily operated by both myself and my girlfriend), and this fit the bill. Brings my collection to:

1. Beretta "Laramie" Schofield SA revolver (.38)
2. Sig Sauer Mosquito (.22)
3. GSG-5 (.22)
4. Springfield XD-M (9mm)
5. Remington 870 (12 ga)
 
So are you looking for a small pistol or a tiny one.....er, I mean it sounds like you want a tiny pocket carry type weapon and not a small IWB holster gun?

Pocket guns: mostly useless in a gun fight, but its better than a knife.
Keltec p3at, P32 (uggly but work)
Ruger lcr, lcp ( nice, but tiny)
Seecamp (No experience with these)
Rohrbaur (or these, sp?)

I prefere the Ruger lcp with an extra mag. I'm going to try to find a IWB pouch type holster for it, I'm ditching pocket carry. I like my guns fixed in place, not swinging around i my pocket.

Small IWB holster guns: effective but small
Walther PPS, PPK
Keltec p11
Kahr PM9
Glock 26

I've shot all of these, they are my favorite small guns. Especially the walthers in a MTAC

Medium guns: yeah baby!
Glock 19,23,32,38

Enjoy the xd, I do.
 
I have the all-steel Kahr K9, very similar in size to the P9. It's quite small and I can't wait to find a good IWB holster for it.

I also have a P11 with factory belt clip, and it pretty much disappears with it.

Regarding this statement...
but I was worried about accidental discharge with it in my pocket (and one in the chamber).
...consider a pocket holster.
 
I carry a Kahr PM9 in a Desantis Nemisis pocket holster and I have to "dress for work". The holster is a must have for pocket carry. It keeps things out of the gun and keeps it in a constant position. During the draw it stays in the pocket and is very quick for being so well hidden. Look into this option as it works well for me in dress slacks, with jeans I prefer a holster either a IWB with a full size 1911 or a QWB belt slide with the Kahr.
 
Not quite clear on what you're searching for, so I'll toss two different ones into the mix:

Small, pocketable with good firepower: Kel Tec PF9. Only slightly larger & heavier than the KT 3AT/ Ruger LCP, but in 9mm. (See: http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/pf9.htm - use the tab on the left to compare to other Kel Tecs.) A single stack, it's thinner than it's P-11 big brother, making it a bit more "discreet," shall we say, but at the loss of 3 or 4 rounds (I forget which).

Large frame, compact model: If you like the XD, consider their XDc. You'll already be familiar with the manual of arms; you will have a smaller, compact package. Another such weapon is the Smith & Wesson M&P series, available in both full-size and compact sizes. Nice thing about the Smiths are the adjustable backstraps, so it can literally be customized to fit your hand or your GF's hand. Both XD and M&P have impressive capacity. The XD comes with 2 mags; one a compact, and one with a grip extension.

Q
 
Lots of good guns here. I know a lot of foiks pocket carry all the time, but for me I've never been able to really pull it off. Even tiny guns are fairly big, at least compared to a ring of keys box of tictacs, etc. For me holster carry works much better. If you can pull it off, great. I also believe holsters are important for a couple of reasons: keeping the trigger guard covered is an important safety measure, and keeping lint and other crud from working its way in to the works. It will anyway, but holstering keeps it down. In addition some holsters can break up a gun's profile making it harder to spot. There is no substitute for spending a lot of time in the gun shop and on the range, trying out both modes of carry, as well as shooting the gun. I always say buying a gun is like buying shoes, you gotta try 'em on. Good luck with your search.
 
I have an S&W 36

chiefs special which I never carry. I have a Glock 23 which is on my hip 90 persent of the time. I have an LCP which is on me CONSTANTLY. I mention the model 36 because, as far as I am concerned, it is too big to be a true pocket pistol, if we are talking pants pockets here. My Glock 23 is heavier but just as easily concealed in an IWB hoster with three times the firepower. The LCP, on the other hand, is a true pocket pistol. While the 380 is not the ideal self defence round, James bond not withstanding, it is only slightly less powerful than the 38 special. With two more rounds fully loaded than the chiefs special, and a couple of extra 6 round mags, it gets my vote every time. The LCP is light, easy to conceal and, most importantly, very reliable.

I also know many people who own the Kel-tec 380. They love them as much as I love my LCP. Since one of those people is a trusted friend and gunsmith I wouldn't hesitate to buy one of them either. So, with all of that said, here are my thoughts in a nutshell. If you need to carry you are better off with a full sized reliable gun, like the Glock, in a reliable cartridge like the 40 S&W. If you can't, or won't, make the effort to carry a "real gun", a compact 380 like the LCP, or Kel-Tech is the way to go. It is better than a sharp stick after all.:D
 
I get the comfortable thing...

IMO, most handguns, even smaller ones, DO require some form of belt mounted holster carry. And, in general, it's not very comfortable.
Because I value comfort and since I live and work in a low threat environment, I very much prefer pocket carry most of the time. However, I'll strap on a belt holster and a bigger gun when I think I need to.
With that, here's my thoughts on some carry guns:

The Kel-Tec P-32/P-3AT and Ruger LCP category:
These are the ultimate in comfortable front pocket carry. However, they are marginal at best in defensive effectiveness. I have a Kel-Tec and I keep it in my front pocket often, especially when its just me tooling around town or in a setting when deep conceal is necessary. Even thought mine runs like a sewing machine, Kel-Tec's customer service is the best in case I ever need it. While I'm a Ruger fan, I'm less than impressed with the LCP so far.

The 642 (and other snub .38 Ultralite concealed hammer types) Category:
I have and use the 642. It is hands down my favorite for front pocket carry!!! It goes with me most of the time, especially when my family is with me. Its light weight, highly reliable, and chambered in a "better" round. Another BIG plus is that the small revolver shape does not show (print) in my pants pocket. With great emphasis I would recommend this gun if you are needing to pick just one for front pocket carry. (Note: I would not recommend a revolver thats heavier than the 642, nor would I recommend one with an exposed hammer.)

The Kahr CW9, Kel-Tec PF-9/P-11 Category:
To me, this is where you might start needing a belt holster. I own the P-11 and I carry it in a OWB holster. In my pocket, its just too heavy and prints big time. Even in a pocket holster, its obvious that a pistol is in my pocket.

Conclusion:
Go with the 642, 442, or even the 340. After that, save your coin and get the Kel-Tec P-3AT
 
I carry a Kahr PM9 in a Desantis Nemisis pocket holster and I have to "dress for work". The holster is a must have for pocket carry.
The Nemesis is a good pocket holster. When I know I'm going to have to disarm frequently (Post Office, posted businesses, restaurants with liquor licenses, etc.) I carry my Model 36 in the Nemesis.

Most of the time I carry a medium to full sized auto or revolver in a Don Hume 715M IWB. Works fine with any clothes I ever wear except for exercise in hot weather, when pretty much nothing would work.
 
I still vote for a P3AT when talking "tiny." Made here (!) with a great warrantee. Mine has never jammed on me and it's so small, it's effortless to carry anywhere, anytime in any clothing. Yeah, it does feel a little cheap but it wasn't made to be felt; I don't want to feel it or it'd be a pain to carry. It's so small and light that I don't need to feel it until I need it.
 
Thanks for the replies and advice! To give more info: I'm looking for a gun I can comfortably carry all the time. My everyday dress is jeans, fitted t-shirt or fitted untucked button-down shirt, and sport jacket/blazer. I'm 6' tall and a slim 170lbs (32" waist).

Sounds like a lot of love for the 642 in a pocket holster. I also recently stumbled upon the 2009 Taurus catalog, and saw the new "slim" 709 (in 9mm) and the tiny, 10oz 728 (in .380). Anyone given those new pistols a whirl?
 
stumbled upon the 2009 Taurus catalog, and saw the new "slim" 709 (in 9mm)
Isn't the 709 the one that mimics a Walther PPS?
Might be worth a look, but I don't like the Taurus MP safety design, and it looks like the 709 has the same as MrsBFD's millennium pro.
 
What's wrong with it
Nothing, it is a personal preference. I don't like the safety keeping the slide locked into battery, is all. Otherwise there really isn't anything wrong with it. I just would prefer that the gun be locked open with safety on, for clearing purposes.
There are complaints that the safety can be engaged with the trigger partially depressed, leading to a possibility of a trigger pull with the safety on firing a chambered round. I tried to replicate it with a snap-cap and a safe direction ... it took deliberate effort to replicate the condition, and in a way I can't imagine happening accidentally.
 
That tiny new Taurus 380 looks very cool. I like the fish scale on the slide, and the shorter overall length seems like it'd be a better fit for jeans pockets.
 
Have had a Sig P230 (nearly the same gun as the P232, which replaced it), and can't say enough about it.

It's slim enough to hide anywhere, but with a big enough grip and enough weight (I have the all-stainless model) to send even really hot (Cor Bon) .380 downrange in rapid succession.

The way I see it is this:

If you're going to a .380, you're already "compromising" by backing off/down from a 9/40/45/357.

I'm totally comfortable with this fact, as are may others.

However, with the choice of caliber/family made, and in the face of the cartridge's disadvantage in raw power, I think it's best to choose the platform in the desired size range that lets you place the smaller rounds more quickly and effectively.

I've experienced hot .380 loads ripping out of a P3AT, and - maybe I don't practice enough, in general - didn't find that anywhere near as accurate and controllable as the P230.

The quality of the Sig is likewise impressive. Not enough to make me a Sig fanboy - I just don't like the full-size Sigs.

The P230 was one of my first guns, and the decision to get it was made as objectively as possible, well before I could be swayed by any brand loyalties, etc.
 
For those who really do care about the weapons and ammunition they carry. Not opinion, not a favorite, but the best and latest research on ths subject by the leading Terminal Ballistics scientist in the Country today.

Doc Roberts also still works as a Reserve LEO, and is a LtCommander in the Naval Reserve. Not all ivory tower. And the Heir to the research from the leading researcher of years ago Dr Fackler.

Regularly works with and for the FBI and his research is the basis of much of what the FBI does today.

The best science on the subject.

Not opinion, researched and confirmed results from the the LEO agencies that use his data, which are virtually everyone of them in the United States.

You can use your assumptions, or you can us Dr Gary Roberts science.

Guess which I use?

Go figure.

Fred

http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19914 From M4Carbine.net

BUG's: .380 ACP vs. .38 Spl

If you are an LE officer, carry a BUG!!!

Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds,they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP JHP's is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP FMJ's offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. Stick with FMJ for .380 ACP or better yet, don't use it at all. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is really not acceptable for law enforcement use and most savvy agencies prohibit them.

While both the .380 ACP and .38 sp can obviously be lethal; the .38 sp is more likely to incapacitate an attacker when used in a BUG role.

BUG--Infrequently used, but when needed, it must be 100% reliable because of the extreme emergency situation the user is dealing with. Generally secreted in pockets, ankle holsters, body armor holsters, etc... Often covered in lint, grime, and gunk. By their very nature, usually applied to the opponent in an up close and personal encounter, many times involving contact shots. A small .38 sp revolver is more reliable in these situations than a small .380 ACP pistol, especially with contact shots or if fired from a pocket.

The Speer Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP and Corbon 110 gr DPX JHP offer the most reliable expansion we have seen from a .38 sp 2” BUG.

.38 Sp Speer 135 gr +P JHP Gold Dot (53921), ave vel=856f/s
BG: pen=13.1”, RD=0.56”, RW=134.5gr
4 layer denim: pen=13.6”, RD=0.53”, RW=134.1gr
auto windshield: pen=9.4”, RD=0.51”, RW=129.6gr

There have been many reports in the scientific literature, by Dr. Fackler and others, recommending the 158 gr +P LSWCHP as offering adequate performance. Please put this in context for the time that these papers were written in the late 1980's and early 1990's--no denim testing was being performed at that time, no robust expanding JHP's, like the Barnes XPB, Federal Tactical & HST, Speer Gold Dot, or Win Ranger Talon existed. In the proper historical perspective, the 158 gr +P LSWCHP fired out 3-4" barrel revolvers was one of the best rounds available--and it is still a viable choice, as long as you understand its characteristics.

While oversimplified, bare gelatin gives information about best case performance, while 4 layer denim provides data on worst case performance--in reality, the actual performance may be somewhere in between. The four layer denim test is NOT designed to simulate any type of clothing--it is simply an engineering test to assess the ability of a projectile to resist plugging and robustly expand. FWIW, one of the senior engineers at a very respected handgun ammunition manufacturer recently commented that bullets that do well in 4 layer denim testing have invariably worked well in actual officer involved shooting incidents.

With few exceptions, such as the Speer 135 gr +P JHP and Barnes XPB, the vast majority of .38 Sp JHP's fail to expand when fired from 2" barrels in the 4 layer denim test. Many of the lighter JHP's demonstrate overexpansion and insufficient penetration in bare gel testing. Also, the harsher recoil of the +P loads in lightweight J-frames tends to minimize practice efforts and decrease accuracy for many officers. The 158 gr +P LSWCHP offers adequate penetration, however in a 2" revolver the 158gr +P LSWCHP does not reliably expand. If it fails to expand, it will produce less wound trauma than a WC. Target wadcutters offer good penetration, cut tissue efficiently, and have relatively mild recoil. With wadcutters harder alloys and sharper leading edges are the way to go. Wadcutters perform exactly the same in both bare and 4 layer denim covered gel when fired from a 2" J-frame. For example, the Win 148 gr LWC: VEL = 657 f/s, PEN = 20"+, RD = 0.36", RL = 0.64", RW = 147.4 gr

When faced with too little penetration, as is common with lightweight .38 Sp JHP loads or too much penetration like with the wadcutters, then go with penetration. Agencies around here have used the Winchester 148 gr standard pressure lead target wadcutter (X38SMRP), as well as the Federal (GM38A) version--both work. A sharper edged wadcutter would even be better... Dr. Fackler has written in Fackler ML: "The Full Wadcutter--An Extremely Effective Bullet Design", Wound Ballistics Review. 4(2):6-7, Fall 1999)
Quote:
"As a surgeon by profession, I am impressed by bullets with a cutting action (eg. Winchester Talon and Remington Golden Saber). Cutting is many times more efficient at disrupting tissue than the crushing mechanism by which ordinary bullets produce the hole through which they penetrate. The secret to the increased efficiency of the full wadcutter bullet is the cutting action of its sharp circumferential leading edge. Actually, cutting is simply very localized crush; by decreasing the area over which a given force is spread, we can greatly increase the magnitude to the amount of force delivered per unit are--which is a fancy way of saying that sharp knives cut a lot better than dull ones. As a result, the calculation of forces on tissue during penetration underestimate the true effectiveness of the wadcutter bullet relative to other shapes."

For years, J-frames were considered "arm's reach" weapons, that is until CTC Lasergrips were added. With the mild recoil of target wadcutters, officers are actually practicing with their BUG's; when combined with Lasergrips, qualification scores with J-frames have dramatically increased. Now 5 shots rapid-fire in a 6" circle at 25 yds is not uncommon--kind of mind blowing watching officers who could not hit the target at 25 yds with a J-frame suddenly qualify with all shots in the black…

Before the advent of the 110 gr standard pressure Corbon DPX load, I used to carry standard pressure wadcutters in my J-frames with Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP's in speed strips for re-loads, as the flat front wadcutters were hard to reload with under stress. My current J-frames are 342's; previously have used the 38 and 649. I like the 342 w/Lasergrips very much. Shooting is not too bad with standard pressure wadcutters and 110 gr DPX; not so comfortable with the Speer 135 gr JHP +P Gold Dots. Any of the Airweight J-frames are fine for BUG use. The steel 649's were a bit too heavy for comfortable all day wear on the ankle, body armor, or in a pocket. There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2” barrels.

At this point in time, the two best loads for 2" J-frames are the Corbon 110 gr JHP DPX standard pressure load and the Speer 135 gr +P JHP Gold Dot.

2" J-frames are a great BUG's and marginally acceptable low threat carry guns, because they are lightweight, reliable, and offer acceptable terminal performance at close range--downsides are difficulty in shooting well at longer ranges because of sight and sight radius limitations, along with reduced capacity coupled with slower reloading. Nonetheless, with the addition of CTC Laser Grips and an enclosed or shrouded hammer, the 2" J-frame models without key locks (I personally will NEVER own firearm with an integral lock) may be the best BUG's and most reliable pocket handguns available.

Another great BUG option if it can be comfortably carried, is a compact 3-3.5" barrel 9 mm pistol like the G26, Kahr PM9, Sig P239, or S&W 3913, as these offer superior terminal performance compared to either .380 ACP or .38 Sp handguns. A G26 is particularly nice when using a G19 or 17 as a primary weapon due to the ability to use the same magazines.

As always, don't get too wrapped in the nuances of ammunition terminal performance. Spend your time and money on developing a warrior mindset, training, practice, and more training.
 
Even if it is carried in your pocket, you should use a pocket holster. My favorite is the Mika. It will position as well as protect the gun in your pocket and break up the outline. If you carry on your belt (for which you really need a holster) I see little need for a pocket-sized gun in the first place.
 
For pocket carry, I'd vote for either the Kel Tec P3at or it's rip-off version the LCP. I personally pocket carry a Walther PPKS but carry the Keltec if the Walther is otherwise unavailable. Also, use a pocket holster, keeps the gun much cleaner and lessens the chance of malfunction due to pocket lint.
 
I'm a bigger guy (6'2") and carry a Taurus 851SSULT in a Uncle Mike's pocket holster. Extremely comfortable, easy to forget it's a gun and not a cell phone in that holster :) I don't feel under-equipped with 5 rounds of 38 special (I am a big fan of Remington Golden Saber +P). The Taurus is aluminum/titanium construction with a shrouded hammer (single action is technically available, but a pain in the butt to cock the hammer with that little nub thing).

Personal preference, I would stick with a double action pistol or a revolver for pocket carry. Not too keen on a "cocked and locked" pistol in my pocket.

At work, if you are allowed to carry a gun (I work in a school, so I can't) go with pleated pants, not flat front, as it prints less with a pocketed pistol.
 
For .380 try a Bersa or Firestorm PPK clone. Inexpensive, accurate and reliable. Otherwise it's hard to beat a good old snubnose .38. Check your local dealers and pawnshops. There's still plenty of these little gems out there. Internet sites are always a good way to shop from home also.
 
Regarding the previously-mentioned Taurus 709 'Slim', I agree, it looks quite appealing, no doubt their response to the popularity of the LCP, but in the bigger 9mm. I have looked high and low for one of these and also one of the new PT1911 high capacity .45s, but am told that they won't start trickling in to distributors until later this year. Stay tuned....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top