Regarding the Walther PP/PPK

[kellmark]

I have had a Mauser Hsc, a Sig P230 Stainless, and a Walther Interarms PPK Stainless. All 380. The Mauser had a terrible trigger, traded it for something else. Then later got the P230. It was beautiful. But It was too large for a pocket. Traded it. Then I got the PPK. Never sliced me. Heavy double action, but I am used to it as I shoot double action revolvers regularly. I have carried it for years and years. It was the only pistol that I had to actually use in self defense. Luckily, I didn't have to shoot it, but it made the threat change their mind immediately and I was glad that I had it and I was confident with it. It was always comfortable in the pocket, and I was comfortable with it. Still have it. It still has a certain style about it. I put some beautiful wood grips on it, and combined with the stainless it is a great looking gun. Yet purposeful. Is it up to modern capability? No. My Sig P365 that I carry now is pretty much the exact same size and probably lighter with 10+1 9MM instead of 6+1 380. But I do still love that PPK.

 

[Gordon]

I have Walther pp in all three calibers. The .380 one is my least favorite. I took a PPK .380 with two extra magazines and one box of 50 GECO ammo with me to VN first tour Jan 1968. I was a counter Intelligence Agent and although I eventually got issued a 1911 A1 it took almost three months. I was unarmed except for the Ppk, which I had put thru maybe 600 rounds before taking it over, during Tet 68 in Saigon.
Anyway the .PP is a better weapon ergonomically, it does not bite like a PPK does. The earlier PPK are far superior to the S&W made ones. The. .32 and the .22 ( which is less reliable) are accurate and dependable " kit guns" that pack in cargo pockets or holster well and are as accurate as anything else their size. The .380 are too snappy in recoil and not as accurate. The are not very light at a few ounces over a pound , around 20 ounces loaded. I have a Mauser HCS in .380 and it handles recoil better. In this day and age the smaller .380 modern plastic guns make more sense and indeed are pocket pistols. I carry regularly a Walther PPS , I have two ; one in 9 mm and one in .40 , they are far superior in every way and about the same size and weight as the PPK /S.

 

[cfullgraf]

I have an S&W PPK in 380 ACP, a WWII vintage Walther PP in 32 ACP and an Interarms PPK/s in 32 ACP.

The recoil of the 380 ACP is a bit snappy but controllable with practice. Even the DA trigger is manageable. My S&W PPK is reliable with FMJ ammunition but not so much with the designer bullets available these days.

The 32 ACP versions are much more pleasant to shoot than the 380 ACP version but the 32 ACP is not considered an adequate cartridge these days. I'd like to find a PPK in 32 ACP though.

 

[AustinTX]

If they are recoil sensitive to a PPK they would think light 380's like the LCP and other polymers are intolerable

Nah. Even the smallest locked-breech .380s are more comfortable to shoot than their heaviest straight-blowback counterparts.

 

[MrChicken]

The wife fell in love with the way a PPK/S looked and had to have it.
Compared to the pistols of the day, weight and trigger were acceptable.
It shot fine for her, left railroad tracks on my hand.
But the fatal flaw was that it would not feed any brand of hollow point. It is one of the few guns we have ever sold.
Ironically, the proceeds went towards a beautiful Kimber that wouldn't feed anything reliably. Kimber eventually replaced the external extractor slide with an internal extractor slide and all was well after that.

 

[JDR]

If only James Bond carried a CZ 82 in 9X18 Mak, they might still be making them!

 

[Mr. Mosin]

I have an S&W PPK in 380 ACP, a WWII vintage Walther WWII PP in 32 ACP and an Interarms PPK/s in 32 ACP.

The recoil of the 380 ACP is a bit snappy but controllable with practice. Even the DA trigger is manageable. My S&W PPK is reliable with FMJ ammunition but not so much with the designer bullets available these days.

The 32 ACP versions are much more pleasant to shoot than the 380 ACP version but the 32 ACP is not considered an adequate cartridge these days. I'd like to find a PPK in 32 ACP though.

It always astonishes me. Generations before us made do with .25, .32, and .380 Autos, and .32's/.38's/.44's in wheel guns; until along comes the interwebz and now; unless you have the latest greatest wonder nine, your doomed to die a grisly death.

 

[jar]

The PPK/S I once owned was beautifully finished and never bit me, but as with many other guns, a better concept than reality. Now that 9x19 pistols are available that weigh less, carry more rounds and have real sights and reasonable trigger pulls, the PPK/S can retire comfortably. It's a classic example of its era and German design, but modern tools are better solutions.

The PPK/S has the longer grip of the PP and the shorter barrel & slide of the PPK.

 

[jmorris]

Nah. Even the smallest locked-breech .380s are more comfortable to shoot than their heaviest straight-blowback counterparts.

Interesting, thats not the way it feels to me, shooting them side by side, with the same load.

 

[GBExpat]

The PPK/S has the longer grip of the PP and the shorter barrel & slide of the PPK.

... and was designed specifically for the US market (to pass the "points system" test that came with GCA68) so that it could be imported & sold here.

 

[JERRY]

for practicality purposes there are less expensive and more modern choices. however, for the nostalgia and coolness coupled with the pride of ownership its tough to beat a PP in 7.65mm.

 

[AlexanderA]

In the early 1970's, I had a PPK/S (which I originally bought because of the James Bond mystique). But after actually shooting it, I couldn't wait to get rid of it. Horrible trigger. The only good thing about it is that it ended up as part payment for an unaltered M1894 U.S. Krag, one of the "holy grails" of U.S. martial collecting.

 

[Mosin77]

I have a stainless .32 PPK made by S&W.

I have smaller hands and wish it didn’t have the ugly beavertail that S&W added, but functionally this seems to have been an improvement for many, so I can’t complain too much.

It’s still a beautifully shaped, elegant gun. Definitely one of the top designs ever in terms of aesthetics. It feels like a quality handgun when you hold it. It’s small, but not too small, and feels solid, dense, and hand-filling. Even if you never saw a single James Bond film, you could pick up this gun and feel like it was a real gun, and that you were adequately armed to face any situation in which you were likely to need a firearm.

In terms of practicality, it is what it is. It’s a 7+1 .32, with sharp recoil. It’s not terrible to shoot, but it’s not a delight either. The DA trigger pull is heavy, which isn’t conducive to great accuracy. The pistol is capable of great mechanical accuracy thanks to its fixed barrel, but you probably won’t see it on a double action shot. I don’t find the sights bad at all. They beat the pants off my GI 1911 or Colt 1903. (An equally great or even better .32)

My PPK seems to feed reliably, but periodically misfires on double action. Apparently this is not an uncommon phenomenon with these pistols. Something about the hefty DA pull needing to be even a little more stout to ensure 100% ignition.

Would I choose it for carry? Probably not. It was doubtless a good choice in 1975, but it’s now thoroughly outmatched by guns which have greater capacity in a more potent caliber, are lighter and perhaps smaller, and do all these things with less recoil and more reliability, not to mention less cost. The only reason to deliberately choose a PPK is as a badge of rank. But as a range gun the PPK is still a great choice, if you are prepared to overlook its deficiencies in favor of its stunning looks or undeniable heritage.

 

[hemiram]

I had a German made PPK/S and it was the only gun at the time that I had ever shot at that point that had bit me. Bad. It wasn't reliable, either and I'm sure my flinching at the slide bite didn't help. About the same time I had decided it wasn't for me, shot and bought a Browning BDA .380, and the Walther was soon sold to a friend's sister, who loved it. It wasn't reliable for her either, but she had it for nearly 40 years and her daughter has it now, it's "Mom's old gun". Still looks great, and I like the looks of the PP series a lot, just don't want to shoot them again.

 

[bannockburn]

I have had a Walther PP and one by Manurhin, both in .32 ACP. They were well made (slight edge to the Walther in having a little nicer finish), reliable, and more fun to shoot than the stainless Walther PPK/s I briefly owned. It had far too many sharp edges, poorly fitted parts, and was the opposite of it's PP brethren when it came to reliable performance. In a small, pocket size .380 I greatly prefer my Colt Mustang and SIG P238. They may not have the James Bond mystique about them but they are a pleasure to shoot, surprisingly accurate, and are very reliable.

 

[Riomouse911]

It always astonishes me. Generations before us made do with .25, .32, and .380 Autos, and .32's/.38's/.44's in wheel guns; until along comes the interwebz and now; unless you have the latest greatest wonder nine, your doomed to die a grisly death.

Actually, this has nothing to do at all with the internet. In reality, along came progress that continually improved upon those rounds and gun designs to create a higher capacity firearm that shoots more effective ammo with a more ergonomic design.

The guns and rounds of the late 19th-early 20th century were true marvels, created by the hands of craftsmen using pen and paper designs. No CAD, CNC or even calculators helped them, no high speed photography showed where to improve, it was 100 pct trial and error. Some designs are truly ageless, so even to this day 1911 and other early-era guns are still effective military, SD, HD and competition guns.

That being said, in most cases time has passed that era by. No military in their right mind would equip their front line troops with k98’s or SMLEs, try to find one law enforcement agency that still requires its sworn to carry a 4” M&P .38 loaded with 158 gr RNL ammo. These were the premier tools of their time, but they’ve been relegated to history.

No one has said the PP-PPK/s-PPK aren't beautiful firearms that were well made and look great; in their time they were the creme’ de la creme’ for compact carry pistols. While some still like them today, many here have said that (like in my case) the guns weren’t all that great for us and/or in the roughly 100 years that have passed since the PP series were designed and first made other designs have surpassed them for the role they were designed for.

That’s a wave that has been in motion long before we had a computer and AOL dial-up.

Stay safe.

 

[Mosin77]

Ballistically, .380 offers something over .32. Nobody is quite sure how much, but it’s generally agreed that .380 is an acceptable defensive caliber, particularly if paired with high end self defense ammo which will expand nicely and meet the FBI penetration threshold. So historically the .380 flavor of PPK has been much more popular in the USA. It’s generally agreed that .32 is better than a sharp stick but definitely sub-optimal, with the possible exception being that the light recoil in certain guns might make it a good candidate if you can deliver 8-9 well aimed shots fast.

The problem with the PPK from a “practical use” standpoint is that it has a straight blowback action, which offers simplicity and relative cheapness in manufacture, but also means that recoil is going to be severe compared to a similar locked-breech gun. So with the PPK you’ve got a gun that has heavy-for-caliber recoil and a stout DA pull, affecting the speed and accuracy of the first shot as well as subsequent shots, a measly 6+1 capacity in .380, and yet the gun still manages to be more than twice as heavy as an LCP. And expensive. And has a reputation for feeding problems, particularly in .380 and especially with hollowpoints. And it might bite your hand too. I’d pick my PPK over no gun at all, but in .32, stoked with FMJ... and I’d rather have the Colt 1903 which is similar size and weight, recoils lighter, has 8+1, and never fails to feed or go bang. I don’t love mine or hate mine, but I’m also realistic about what it is: a gun I bought because it was pretty, and pretty cool. Not for strict practicality. I used to shoot it more before I acquired five other .32s that work better.

 

[Mr. Mosin]

Ballistically, .380 offers something over .32. Nobody is quite sure how much, but it’s generally agreed that .380 is an acceptable defensive caliber, particularly if paired with high end self defense ammo which will expand nicely and meet the FBI penetration threshold. So historically the .380 flavor of PPK has been much more popular in the USA. It’s generally agreed that .32 is better than a sharp stick but definitely sub-optimal, with the possible exception being that the light recoil in certain guns might make it a good candidate if you can deliver 8-9 well aimed shots fast.

The problem with the PPK from a “practical use” standpoint is that it has a straight blowback action, which offers simplicity and relative cheapness in manufacture, but also means that recoil is going to be severe compared to a similar locked-breech gun. So with the PPK you’ve got a gun that has heavy-for-caliber recoil and a stout DA pull, affecting the speed and accuracy of the first shot as well as subsequent shots, a measly 6+1 capacity in .380, and yet the gun still manages to be more than twice as heavy as an LCP. And expensive. And has a reputation for feeding problems, particularly in .380 and especially with hollowpoints. And it might bite your hand too. I’d pick my PPK over no gun at all, but in .32, stoked with FMJ... and I’d rather have the Colt 1903 which is similar size and weight, recoils lighter, has 8+1, and never fails to feed or go bang. I don’t love mine or hate mine, but I’m also realistic about what it is: a gun I bought because it was pretty, and pretty cool. Not for strict practicality. I used to shoot it more before I acquired five other .32s that work better.

Remind me please, didn't Colt re-issue the 1903/08 ?

 

[rust collector]

The PPK/S has the longer grip of the PP and the shorter barrel & slide of the PPK.

Curious why you would think I did not understand that?

 

[Mosin77]

Remind me please, didn't Colt re-issue the 1903/08 ?

I believe they’re made by an outside company and sold by Colt. Don’t know a lot about them. The originals are good guns. But not exactly going to win high-speed low-drag tactical operator awards themselves, with their heel release mag, single action w/safety setup a la 1911, and a design that’s not drop safe. I still love mine. ‘Course, I also carry my 1911 more often than not, too...

 

[wiscoaster]

View attachment 950913... coolness ...

Niedersachsen, West Germany State Police marked, no? Do you have a date?

 

[jar]

Curious why you would think I did not understand that?

No idea whether or not you understood that. But some might not so it seemed worth mentioning. I often see posts that seem to use the PPK and the PPK/s interchangeably.

 

[Mr. Mosin]

I believe they’re made by an outside company and sold by Colt. Don’t know a lot about them. The originals are good guns. But not exactly going to win high-speed low-drag tactical operator awards themselves, with their heel release mag, single action w/safety setup a la 1911, and a design that’s not drop safe. I still love mine. ‘Course, I also carry my 1911 more often than not, too...

I'm asking about a Colt 1903 on my thread about a PPK. "High Speed Low Drag" is irrelevant to me.

 

[JERRY]

Niedersachsen, West Germany State Police marked, no? Do you have a date?

when I checked it was from the 60s but I don't recall the exact date because there is no special value to it.

 

[wiscoaster]

when I checked it was from the 60s but I don't recall the exact date because there is no special value to it.

Monetary value - maybe not ... coolness value - definitely YES!!
Mine is Bavaria Police, 1965.