I can't take credit for any scoop on the Thunder 380 Concealed Carry.
Again, GunBlast reported with pic, and then "BersaThunder_CCW" reposted it over at
the Bersa Thunder Chapterhouse forum.
Eagle's website seems to host some wrong specs on the 'CoCa',
if the specs apply to the pistol in the photograph.
Here are the differences I perceive offhand, although what is pictured above
and described elsewhere may only be of a prototype:
1. Overall Length (OAL) reduced from 6.625" to 5.6-odd"
2. Overall Height (unloaded) reduced from 4.75" to 4.65"
3. Barrel Length reduced from 3.54" to 2.78"
3. Hammer redesigned for cleaner non-snag, overall profile
4. Magazine bottom "finger extension" removed, to print less
5. Frontstrap contoured for a more secure grip (compensating for the lost finger-extension)
6. Lower profile grip panels (to slightly reduce overall width?)
7. Lower profile snag-free disassembly lever (to slightly reduce overall width?)
8. Lower profile snag-free slide catch lever, I suppose (to slightly reduce overall width?)
9. Lower profile, snag-free ("guttersnipe"? Nooooo!) sights
etc. etc. etc...
I think, compared to the original Thunder 380...
The CoCa's going to be easier to carry. I agree with Jerry-- it'll never be
a true pocket pistol like the P3AT, which has a lock on the pocket market.
It's still going to be BERSA-dead-nuts-reliable,
It's going to be snappier-recoiling, which will affect ROF.
The ballistics/terminal performance will almost mirror Kel-Tec's P3AT.
(some JHP losing a bit of expansion, with terminal velocities south of the sweet spot)
I'm particularly concerned with the CoCa's sights.
The Thunder 380 was already at a disadvantage against the Firestorm variant's
Novak-style three-dots. Maybe the SHOT show model isn't all that representative
of the final product?
Just rambling.
Horge