was at a local gun shop saturday where they were having "smith and wesson" days, all thier guns were on display, I shot the small .380 with the built-in laser, was "ok", feeled a bit plastic, trigger pull was forever. Ive been looking for a smaller gun for carry purposes as my P95 is rather large, I really had my mind set on the Bersa 380 thunder untill I saw the PPK, what a beautiful gun! it was in stainless and there was no comparison in the "feel" quality of this pistol compared to the others, anyone have any remarks on this gun? Ive seen the recalls that were done, but I believe thats been corrected now
walther PPK
- Thread starter stevolene
- Start date
- Status
usp9
Member
Welcome to the forum. The PPK is a fine gun, though by today's polymer standards a bit heavier than some of the competition. Did you buy one?
Mad Magyar
Member
How much were they asking for a S&W PPK? I'm more familiar with the French & InterArms versions....Compared to the other choices you mentioned, you are on the right track...
loadedround
Member
I have purchased and sold over the years two Wather(S&W) PPK's. Their weight just doesn't justify the weaker 380 cartridge. You can purchase a 9mm pistol much lighter in weight than the PPK and have a more potent cartridge. Secondly the PPK's hammer bites the hell out of a large hand unless modified. JMHO!i
Loosedhorse
member
I'd think twice before carrying a slide-biting, underpowered, awful-triggered, stiff-slided, heavy-as-a-boat-anchor antique as a SD gun. Even James Bond has upgraded.
But to each his own.
But to each his own.
Mad Magyar
Member
MAN UP!!!
Cop Bob
Member
I own several.. We recently bought 5 for our office staff and partners that have access to the cash room and safes here at work..
I Carried a PP for a backup gun for many years.. very good well thought out design, I like the safety features..
The fit and finish on the Smith made versions are a bit rough when compared to the early German made guns.. They can be slicked up, the Double action trigger leaves a bit to be desired, however the single action is about where you would want a short range back up "Belly Gun" .. it is a great design.
The triggers are not the easiest to rework, that should be left to a qualified gunsmith that has some knowledge of THAT weapon.
The slides however are easy to smooth up, with a touch a valve grinding compound in the wear areas of the rails, remove the main spring, and a few, put the slide back on, back n forth a few times.. and it will smooth out pretty quick... IF it is rough... just don't overdo it.. your just trying to smooth out the high spots, a little bit of roughness in the visible finish to the working parts of the rails help hold lube/oil.... It's supposed to FEEL smooth, not necessarily LOOK smooth..
This design is as dependable as all get out... takes a huge beating and keeps on ticking...
I Carried a PP for a backup gun for many years.. very good well thought out design, I like the safety features..
The fit and finish on the Smith made versions are a bit rough when compared to the early German made guns.. They can be slicked up, the Double action trigger leaves a bit to be desired, however the single action is about where you would want a short range back up "Belly Gun" .. it is a great design.
The triggers are not the easiest to rework, that should be left to a qualified gunsmith that has some knowledge of THAT weapon.
The slides however are easy to smooth up, with a touch a valve grinding compound in the wear areas of the rails, remove the main spring, and a few, put the slide back on, back n forth a few times.. and it will smooth out pretty quick... IF it is rough... just don't overdo it.. your just trying to smooth out the high spots, a little bit of roughness in the visible finish to the working parts of the rails help hold lube/oil.... It's supposed to FEEL smooth, not necessarily LOOK smooth..
This design is as dependable as all get out... takes a huge beating and keeps on ticking...
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
Pick up a surplus p64 and change the springs. For $200.00 you essentially get a broken in PPK chambered in 9mm makarov.
http://www.p64resource.com/
I love mine.
http://www.p64resource.com/
I love mine.
sirgilligan
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Messages
- 895
To each their own...
I love mine. It is a S&W version PPK/S. It shoots accurate and precise. Mine is a keeper. It did have a recall that was done, so you need to be aware of that.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...4_750001_750051_757981_-1_757978_757978_image
My brother, who owns fives times as many firearms as me, questioned the .380 ACP and its abilities. He set up three 1 gallon plastic jugs of water in a row and asked me to shoot into the front jug. It shot clean through all three jugs of water and the bullet was not found. He was very surprised. I asked him what he expected and he said he didn't think a .380 would shoot through one jug, much less all three. It was some inexpensive full metal jacket round, don't remember which.
Here is a picture of my PPK/S:
http://www.sigarms556.com/download/file.php?id=186
I love mine. It is a S&W version PPK/S. It shoots accurate and precise. Mine is a keeper. It did have a recall that was done, so you need to be aware of that.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...4_750001_750051_757981_-1_757978_757978_image
My brother, who owns fives times as many firearms as me, questioned the .380 ACP and its abilities. He set up three 1 gallon plastic jugs of water in a row and asked me to shoot into the front jug. It shot clean through all three jugs of water and the bullet was not found. He was very surprised. I asked him what he expected and he said he didn't think a .380 would shoot through one jug, much less all three. It was some inexpensive full metal jacket round, don't remember which.
Here is a picture of my PPK/S:
http://www.sigarms556.com/download/file.php?id=186
Last edited:
Guns and more
member
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,929
I have a PPK.
I shopped around until I found a like new Interarms version. Mine is a '88 (I think) Not a scratch on it.
When Interarms ceased operations, they destroyed all the records. The only accurate date is the target (Mine says 12/8 ???)
or a list of known PPK's as found on the Walther forums.
The Interarms version seems to have better reviews than the S&W modern version.
IMO, it's heavy for a carry gun. In .380, I'd carry a Sig 238 long before a PPK.
I carry a Seecamp in .32 because it is so easy to drop in the pocket.
But I love the PPK just because............."The name is Bond, James Bond."
I shopped around until I found a like new Interarms version. Mine is a '88 (I think) Not a scratch on it.
When Interarms ceased operations, they destroyed all the records. The only accurate date is the target (Mine says 12/8 ???)
or a list of known PPK's as found on the Walther forums.
The Interarms version seems to have better reviews than the S&W modern version.
IMO, it's heavy for a carry gun. In .380, I'd carry a Sig 238 long before a PPK.
I carry a Seecamp in .32 because it is so easy to drop in the pocket.
But I love the PPK just because............."The name is Bond, James Bond."
Loosedhorse
member
Wising up is better.
And PPK? Might as well "man up" by driving a Prius!
sirgilligan
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Messages
- 895
I have owned both the PPK/S and the Sig P238.
FOR ME:
PPK/S was more accurate and precise than the P238.
P238 slide was easier to rack.
P238 felt recoil was less.
PPK/S is flatter and prints less (isn't as noticeable in a pocket).
PPK/S has a safety and a de-cocker.
.380 ACP (or 9mm short)
Obviously not as potent as a 9mm parabellum.
.380 ammo is more expensive than 9mm and often hard to find.
In the auto-loading center fire category I currently only have two calibers, .380 ACP and 9mm. Sold my 40 S&W and never owned a .45 ACP.
Old Design Firearms:
Yes the PPK is an old design. The PP was released in 1929 and the PPK in 1931.
Browning Hi-Power. Browning built two different prototypes for the project in Utah and filed the patent for this pistol in the United States on June 28, 1923 and granted on February 22, 1927.
Model 1911. The M1911 pistol originated in the late 1890s.Among the areas of success for the Colt was a test at the end of 1910 attended by its designer, John Browning. 6,000 rounds were fired from a single pistol over the course of two days. When the gun began to grow hot, it was simply immersed in water to cool it.
(Info from Wikipedia)
The argument that there are modern designs that are better needs more backing, references, and data showing this to be the case. Also, on these modern weapons, how often do they advertise that they are based or use some aspect of a design from John M. Browning?
Of the top of my head these are my requirements for a firearm:
Must haves:
Accuracy. One shoots to hit a target.
Precise. The groupings should be extremely tight and the pattern of the group should be evenly distributed.
Reliable. When the firearm is clean and maintained it should fire every time (unless the ammo is at fault).
These must haves out weigh any other factors in my opinion.
Like to have:
Good fit in hand.
Snag free sights.
13+ capacity.
Nice finish.
Easy break down / field strip.
This list could get long...
I would rather have a pistol that doesn't feel the best in my hand but shoots grapes at 10 yards over one that has new nifty feeling grips, radioactive glowing sights, 17 round mags, rust resistant polymers (that is a pun), blah blah blah.
Also I find the excuses made for "popular" brands are starting to sound like descriptions of the Emperor's new clothes. On rare occasion should a firearm that enjoys the reputation of "quality" need to go back to the factory. If it does then it is not quality and the reputation is not founded. In my opinion, because I have fallen for this as well, top tier priced firearms are exclusive and it is a status symbol to own one, and with that it must be of quality because of its cost and I must defend my purchase. Anyone saying it is not quality becomes a personal attack on my rationale.
In my opinion, a top tier firearm should work out of the box. There should be a test target and the spent brass included. Lengthy break in periods are excuses. Sights might need adjusting but they shouldn't always need adjusting for everyone. Customers defending a product because "it is made by humans and is mass produced" are just obvious statements and bring nothing to the table. Recently I have a theory about the quality issues so often reported. I am starting to believe that manufacturers are counting on the average gun owner to buy the gun, shoot a box of ammo through it, and put it on the night stand and never shoot it again. Statistically that might be the normal use of most pistols sold. If so, then they will never know that at 200 rounds the extractor gives out, or the metal in the slide is too soft, or the sights will fall off.
I have ranted a bit.
Walther PPK/S is a solid design, accurate, and precise. It shoots .380 and other smaller calibers. A .380 is a .380 and nothing more. The PPK is flat and doesn't print much. There have been several complaints of not feeding and polishing the feed ramp. Mine has had no such issues. An auto-loading weapon is all about timing, weights, spring strengths, etc, and in my opinion the old designs have it right. In my opinion, miniaturized versions of old designs often suffer from timing issues. Rent one and shoot it if you can. If you can not get the best deal on price as possible in case you don't like it and have to sell it.
FOR ME:
PPK/S was more accurate and precise than the P238.
P238 slide was easier to rack.
P238 felt recoil was less.
PPK/S is flatter and prints less (isn't as noticeable in a pocket).
PPK/S has a safety and a de-cocker.
.380 ACP (or 9mm short)
Obviously not as potent as a 9mm parabellum.
.380 ammo is more expensive than 9mm and often hard to find.
In the auto-loading center fire category I currently only have two calibers, .380 ACP and 9mm. Sold my 40 S&W and never owned a .45 ACP.
Old Design Firearms:
Yes the PPK is an old design. The PP was released in 1929 and the PPK in 1931.
Browning Hi-Power. Browning built two different prototypes for the project in Utah and filed the patent for this pistol in the United States on June 28, 1923 and granted on February 22, 1927.
Model 1911. The M1911 pistol originated in the late 1890s.Among the areas of success for the Colt was a test at the end of 1910 attended by its designer, John Browning. 6,000 rounds were fired from a single pistol over the course of two days. When the gun began to grow hot, it was simply immersed in water to cool it.
(Info from Wikipedia)
The argument that there are modern designs that are better needs more backing, references, and data showing this to be the case. Also, on these modern weapons, how often do they advertise that they are based or use some aspect of a design from John M. Browning?
Of the top of my head these are my requirements for a firearm:
Must haves:
Accuracy. One shoots to hit a target.
Precise. The groupings should be extremely tight and the pattern of the group should be evenly distributed.
Reliable. When the firearm is clean and maintained it should fire every time (unless the ammo is at fault).
These must haves out weigh any other factors in my opinion.
Like to have:
Good fit in hand.
Snag free sights.
13+ capacity.
Nice finish.
Easy break down / field strip.
This list could get long...
I would rather have a pistol that doesn't feel the best in my hand but shoots grapes at 10 yards over one that has new nifty feeling grips, radioactive glowing sights, 17 round mags, rust resistant polymers (that is a pun), blah blah blah.
Also I find the excuses made for "popular" brands are starting to sound like descriptions of the Emperor's new clothes. On rare occasion should a firearm that enjoys the reputation of "quality" need to go back to the factory. If it does then it is not quality and the reputation is not founded. In my opinion, because I have fallen for this as well, top tier priced firearms are exclusive and it is a status symbol to own one, and with that it must be of quality because of its cost and I must defend my purchase. Anyone saying it is not quality becomes a personal attack on my rationale.
In my opinion, a top tier firearm should work out of the box. There should be a test target and the spent brass included. Lengthy break in periods are excuses. Sights might need adjusting but they shouldn't always need adjusting for everyone. Customers defending a product because "it is made by humans and is mass produced" are just obvious statements and bring nothing to the table. Recently I have a theory about the quality issues so often reported. I am starting to believe that manufacturers are counting on the average gun owner to buy the gun, shoot a box of ammo through it, and put it on the night stand and never shoot it again. Statistically that might be the normal use of most pistols sold. If so, then they will never know that at 200 rounds the extractor gives out, or the metal in the slide is too soft, or the sights will fall off.
I have ranted a bit.
Walther PPK/S is a solid design, accurate, and precise. It shoots .380 and other smaller calibers. A .380 is a .380 and nothing more. The PPK is flat and doesn't print much. There have been several complaints of not feeding and polishing the feed ramp. Mine has had no such issues. An auto-loading weapon is all about timing, weights, spring strengths, etc, and in my opinion the old designs have it right. In my opinion, miniaturized versions of old designs often suffer from timing issues. Rent one and shoot it if you can. If you can not get the best deal on price as possible in case you don't like it and have to sell it.
MICHAEL T
Member
If was a German , French ,or Interarms I would say buy it Their way better. . But its a S&W and their Hit and Miss . Buy the Bersa 1/2 the price will do every thing as good or better (trigger alone way better than PPK) Yes the S&W prettier but is its trouble looks won't mean a thing
I have a Interarms PPK/S have owned for years. Bought a Bersa in 04 and PPK/s gets lot of safe time. I also have http: //bersachat.com now No PPKchat.com
Lot more happy Bersa owners than S&W PPK owners.
I have a Interarms PPK/S have owned for years. Bought a Bersa in 04 and PPK/s gets lot of safe time. I also have http: //bersachat.com now No PPKchat.com
Lot more happy Bersa owners than S&W PPK owners.
In my case, I went with the Bersa because I couldn't afford the PPK... I've shot the PPK plenty of times, loved every bit of it, with exception to the slide bite. The Bersa is a fair lookalike, doesn't bite, and at least for me, I shoot better with it.
thanks for the replies !
"Pick up a surplus p64 and change the springs. For $200.00 you essentially get a broken in PPK chambered in 9mm makarov." I will check into this for sure
havent bought a pocket pistol yet, still shopping
"How much were they asking for a S&W PPK? I'm more familiar with the French & InterArms versions....Compared to the other choices you mentioned, you are on the right track... "
price was along the lines of 500.00 actually a bit more than I want to spend on the S&W model, Ill look for an interarms model
the bersa 380 thunder felt nice but still a little to large in my opinion, seems the ruger LCP may be the way to go for value, quality and size
after reading more on the forum Im starting to realize there are tons of choices out there, the idea weapon for me would be to stay with the 9mm if a pocket version could be found, guess I better save some more $$$
__________________
"Pick up a surplus p64 and change the springs. For $200.00 you essentially get a broken in PPK chambered in 9mm makarov." I will check into this for sure
havent bought a pocket pistol yet, still shopping
"How much were they asking for a S&W PPK? I'm more familiar with the French & InterArms versions....Compared to the other choices you mentioned, you are on the right track... "
price was along the lines of 500.00 actually a bit more than I want to spend on the S&W model, Ill look for an interarms model
the bersa 380 thunder felt nice but still a little to large in my opinion, seems the ruger LCP may be the way to go for value, quality and size
after reading more on the forum Im starting to realize there are tons of choices out there, the idea weapon for me would be to stay with the 9mm if a pocket version could be found, guess I better save some more $$$
__________________
ppk
I am a fan of the ppk....
with the gold dot round
it is a good defensive pistol.
check out
brass fetcher ballistic gel tests
and see how 380 gets 12 inch plus penetration and
45 caliber expansion.
The weight of it is not an all bad factor,
but carry is complicated by weight.
depends on what you want...if a light plastic
380 then go kel-tec of lcp and get a long
DAO pull every shot, but in a light easier
to pack pistol. But 380 for self defense
is not a bad choice in these days of
well designed ammunition. might go to
youtube and find some videos of the ppk in action.
I am a fan of the ppk....
with the gold dot round
it is a good defensive pistol.
check out
brass fetcher ballistic gel tests
and see how 380 gets 12 inch plus penetration and
45 caliber expansion.
The weight of it is not an all bad factor,
but carry is complicated by weight.
depends on what you want...if a light plastic
380 then go kel-tec of lcp and get a long
DAO pull every shot, but in a light easier
to pack pistol. But 380 for self defense
is not a bad choice in these days of
well designed ammunition. might go to
youtube and find some videos of the ppk in action.
Zundfolge
Member
I'd rather have a Sig P232 than a Walther PPK (better trigger, better ergos, better sights, better looking, better built and about the same price).
But if you like the PPK, go for it ... if you find you don't like it down the road there's always someone looking for one.
But if you like the PPK, go for it ... if you find you don't like it down the road there's always someone looking for one.
- Status
