Ruger LCP vs. Makarov

[Macchina]

Looking into a small pistol for carry, I've come to the conclusion that a small big gun is still not small enough. The Ruger LCP and Makarovs both look nice. If I go an LCP, it'd be going in a pocket with a slide clip. How much bigger is a Makarov than an LCP (pictures would be great). I a Makarov in the pocket an option, or is it just an easy gun to carry in a holster? Though .380 is not that cheap, I can get it almost anywhere, how about 9x18: is it cheap and easy to get? I can get a Makarov for less than $200 OTD, while a LCP is going to run me around $330. What to do... what to do...

P.S., I am aware of the low power of both of these rounds, that is not a factor.

 

[GZOh_Jr]

Hi Michaelmcgo:

Good question. I look forward to seeing what the brain trust says.

Without highjacking your thread, in addition to those 2, I am looking at the Bersa Thunder .380. I have heard very little bad about it, and it is in between the Mak and LCP in size. Its also the right price, at ~$250 at Buds.

 

[burningsquirrels]

bersa 380 cc is a decent gun.... and recoil wise, it's not the "jump out of your hands" action you get with an LCP. don't overlook it at $279 new and $200 used.

but between a mak and an LCP.... well, the LCP has been having problems and the mak... well, is old and can be a mixed bag. at least the ones i've seen.

 

[fletcher]

A Makarov is a good deal larger than the LCP. I have a P32, which is ever so slightly smaller than the LCP. The Makarov is not a pocket gun unless you have very big pockets.

I can get a Makarov for less than $200 OTD,

If it's a real Makarov, that's a very good deal. If it's a PA-63 or PA-64 (they fire 9x18, but are sometimes mistakenly referred to as Makarovs, and are a little smaller), not so much. The price seemed a little low so I thought I'd throw that in just FYI.

how about 9x18: is it cheap and easy to get?

It's easy to find online for about the same price as 9mm.

 

[burningsquirrels]

i forgot about the huge size difference. go with what conceals better then, i guess.

 

[Prepster]

Makarov gets a big thumbs up here. Stunning accuracy and reliability, plus dirt cheap ammo. However, for pure concealability, LCP wins no contest.

 

[Keeterbird]

The Mak is a great gun. My experience is that it is not that easy to carry. As remarked earlier it is not as easy to conceal. However, My two Maks have never failed to fire and they are as accurate as anyone can ask a pistol to be. I have a neat holster from Makarov.com that goes on the belt and can be concealed if you have more than a tee shirt.

 

[porterdog]

If it matters, I think the warrantee on the Ruger may be slightly better.

 

[MICHAEL T]

For carry get the LCP or better et get the orginal Kel Tec P3AT

 

[jocko]

ruger lcp

for concealability, have to give the edge to the Ruger lcp, The Mak is one fine shooter and My east german Mak was of superb quality through out. And it went bang every time. Ruger lcp over the kt any day IMO.

 

[woad_yurt]

The Ruger is tiny, tiny. tiny and the Mak is a regular sized pistol. For carrying, I don't like holsters and stuff. I just keep my P3AT in my pocket. That would be awkward with the Mak. If you don't mind it's size, the Mak is a much better performing gun. If it came down to business, I'd rather have the Mak in my hand, btw, but, the P3AT (almost the same size as the LCP) is always with me because it's so convenient.

PS: I don't think a warrantee is really that important with the Makarov. It's really easy to disassemble and parts are dirt cheap. If it does break, which I doubt, you could have yours up and running way before Ruger fixes and sends back a gun. I hear that they can take their time.

 

[wnycollector]

I had a mak, it was my primary ccw fr ~a year. It is comfortable carried IWB but it is NOT a pocket gun!

I would go with the lcp if you wanted to go small!

 

[tinygnat219]

For concealability, the Ruger LCP and the original KT P3AT win out. For shootability, the Makarov wins hands down. If you are looking for a "one gun" solution, I'd get the Makarov.

The only real edge the .380 microguns have is concealability and a wider choice of defensive ammo available. However, this is negated with the short barrels of the two pistols.

Some things to be aware of with the Makarov: It's HEAVY, for a gun that shoots a sub 9X19 cartridge, it weighs a lot, but this is what contributes to its shootability. If you decide to carry one of these, ensure that you have a strong belt and an OWB holster as I beleive it's too thick to carry IWB.

Either one is a fine choice, but if you are going to go with just "one" handgun for home defense and concealed carry, I'd go with the Makarov. I carry one myself occassionally and it's something I only wear with a sportcoat.

 

[Macchina]

Looks like the LCP wins for what I'm looking for. Thanks for the advice. I already have a pistol that I can carry with "more than a t-shirt", and it's in .40 S&W, so the Mak would be a duplicate as far as carry goes. Thanks for all the replies.

 

[M2 Carbine]

First, if you can find a Makarov for less than $200 buy it.
I suspect that what they are telling you is a Mak is actually a overpriced ($200) PA63 or P-64. Both are not bad guns (I have 4) but $200 is too high.

The Mak is too heavy and too large for pocket carry.
I'm a big Makarov fan (have 15) but for the size and weight I carry a Kimber Ultra.

Personally I intend getting a LCP for pocket carry, after the bugs are worked out and after the price comes down.