1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

TCP vs. P32 Recoil

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by IdahoSkies, Jan 30, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. IdahoSkies

    IdahoSkies Member

    Dec 2, 2009
    My current go to piece is a beretta tomcat which I have loved, except for its bulk and weight. I am looking to go a bit smaller in size. I tried the venerable P3at and LCP and really did not like the recoil at all. It just seemed like to much for to light of a gun. I was looking at a P32 (since the tomcat is a .32 I have plenty of .32 around) because I have heard it is much more manageable than the P3at. But the I picked fondled Taurus's new pocket .380 the TCP and liked how it felt and the fact it had the lock back on empty that the P32 has but the LCP and P3at don't. Reading around it seems that the TCP also seems to be softer in the hand than the LCP/P3at. As I have not fired either the P32 or the TCP I was wondering how the two compare recoil wise, so I would appreciate some feed back from from someone who has fired both, and perhaps someone who has also shot a LCP or P3at. Thanks.

    (And I'm not interested in a .32 acp, .380 comparison, I wouldn't be looking at the TCP if I didn't think the .380 had a bit more umph, I've been comfortable with the .32 I'm mainly wondering how controllable the TCP is vs. the p32.)
  2. acgill07

    acgill07 Member

    Nov 30, 2008
    I would be interested in this comparison as well. I have been looking at something to pocket carry and have been considering the P32, P3at, and now the TCP.
  3. Occam's Razor

    Occam's Razor Member

    Feb 5, 2010
    Exact Geographic Center of Nowhere
    I have both a Tomcat Inox version and a P32, and a P3AT as well. The Kel-Tecs are delayed blowback and the Tomcat is straight blowback. Even though the Tomcat weighs nearly twice as much as the others, the felt recoil is notably more than the P32 and feels to me to be a little more than even the P3AT. As far as the controlability goes, that is subjective. None of them are difficult to shoot. The texturing of the grips of the Kel-Tecs does make them a little less slippery in the hand than the LCP.

    Of the three I have, the P32 is by far, and for no particular reason, my favorite.

    Whichever .32 you choose, do some research on "rim lock" if you plan to carry HP ammunition.
    It isn't a problem with hardball, but because of the shorter OAL of the HP and the .32 being a semi-rimmed case
    the rim of one round in the mag can slip behind the rim of the round below it.
    Kel-Tec makes magazine inserts to eliminate the problem. It doesn't matter to me because
    I carry hardball in small calibers anyway.

    You should also do some research on frame breakage of the Tomcat. It seems to only affect the blued version and may hve
    by now been resolved, but it's worth looking into.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2010
  4. PT1911

    PT1911 Member

    Feb 27, 2009

    you mean the "more refined" Ruger LCP is harder to hold onto than the PLANNED texture of the P3AT? Say it isnt so... say it isnt so!!!!!;)

    Honestly however, obviously the TCP will have more bite than the p32, but only marginally. The Grip of the TCP feels larger in the meat of your hand and allows for a better grip. That allows for a better distribution of the recoil in your hand.
  5. wrench

    wrench Member

    Jan 23, 2004
    I used to have a Beretta .32, and also used to have a P32. Have not fired the Taurus.
    My current tiny carry is the Ruger LCP.
    I think the Kel Tec had less recoil than the Beretta. I really don't find the Ruger bad at all, really about equal to the Beretta in .32.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page