Walther pp,ppk,ppk/s or Mauser Hsc?
Looking at buying a Walther pp,ppk,ppk/s or a Mauser Hsc as a conceal gun. I have a Manurhin pp 7.65 and like it alot, but for a concealed gun I am going to upgrade to a 9mm Kurz gun. In your guys opinion/ or from experience would I be better off to stick to a Walther or go for the Mauser Hsc? They both have good reputations and have stood the test of time. I like the looks and feel of the old all steel guns over the newer ones. I shot a cz 83 and didnt care for the feel, and I really dont need the 13 shot capacity. I figure if I cant hit someone/thing with 7 shots then I shouldnt be carrying in the first place.
0
-
I can't recommend anything in that category.
The PPK & PPK/S in .380 "smack" my hand painfully; shifting my grip & tightening it just don't help. It always hurts too much to fire more than 1-2 mags.
The HSc bites the web of my hand. Again, no amount of shifting my hand improves things.
I DO like the PPK in .32; many will say that it is underpowered, but those of us who can hit what we aim at should find it does the job.
You might consider a S&W .38 J-frame; it's smaller & more powerful than what you have looked at. The only downside is that it is a little wider.
Neal0 -
I think a walther over a mauser, due to ability to fix, and get a new one/parts. You may want to check a sig 230/232. 0 -
These guns are too heavy for what they are. If you are looking for a gun in that class, designed to properly fit the hand, look at the Remington 51 or the Colt 1903. Both are slimmer than the Walthers. 0 -
I've been carrying a Walther PPK in a 380 for the last 17 years or so. So I have to put tounge in cheek when I say, check out the Bersa.
It's just a matter of personal preference. They're both great pistols.
NRA life member, instructor and coach.0 -
As much as I love Mausers, the HSc is not a conceal weapon as much as a holster weapon.
The PPK is great for concealing, but only a little smaller than your Manurhin.
With some of the newer Speer .32 loads out, it's not a bad caliber (never was either). Remember when all the gun rags put it down as impotent and a mouse gun? Because none of the "mouse guns" were made in the US. Once the Seecamp came out, the .32 acp became a vunderveapon.
Stolen from, and with thanks, to Kiwibird0 -
Boy, I thought this would fill up with opinions in a couple hours. As much as I adore my Hsc, as said, it doesn't pocket very well. I think you've got two great suggestions already. The Colt 1903 is thin and thin! Only thing I don't like on mine, is that the safety is not quick and easy to flip without some amount of practice. Or look for a S&W Mod. 37 Airweight, 5 shot .38 Sp. No +P's please.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.0 -
I had a nice little Ruger revolver and hated it. I never cared for wheel guns. As for the colt 1903, it is a fine weapon but it is still single action and I like double. Its also a little too thin for my hand. I have looked at Bersa several times and even tried one out, but it didnt fit my hand as good as my Manurhin pp. And as for the weight of teh walthers and Mauser I like the heavier gun. I dont liek alloy frames very much and find that I shot better with a heavier steel framed weapon. 0 -
Neither. I have owned both and shot both. The HSc had one of the worst trigger pulls I ever used. I couldn't hit a bull in the butt with it either. I have had several PPK's in .380 and they all had one common feature. They jammed. They did however shoot better and have a better trigger than the HSc. Right now I have a 230 Sig that is an excellent gun in that size. I also have a KelTek P-3AT that is smaller, lighter, and thinner. Only had it a few days but it shoots very well and has very nice DA trigger.
Just my .02 -DonWhen they pry it from my cold dead fingers.0 -
I've been carrying a PPK .32 made in the Fatherland since 1990 and have been rather pleased with it. It does bite larger hands-especially with the load I carry-Fiocchi 60 gr. SJHP (everytime I forget, I pay) and those that may laugh at my mousegun certainly wouldn't care to be shot with it, and I kinda of wish it was lighter and had better sights. But considering where I carry it (pocket, and it'll fit where my G-23 won't) and knowing it's limitations (I have a buddy that calls it my "belly gun"-stick it in their belly and empty the clip"-ha!)I haven't found anything I like enough(and can justify the expense) to replace it.
I happened to run across this a while back-might interest you-I don't know much about 'em as I don't read the rags anymore-appears to be a Seecamp clone with a little more kick(9mm Para):
http://www.rohrbaughfirearms.com/
Somewhat attractive... (for another belly gun) until you see the price...
good luck and let us know what you get
Snuffy
The difficult we do immediately. The impossible takes a little longer--David Ben-Gurion
Si vis Pacem, Para Bellum-to maintain peace, prepare for war--Thucydides
KAPHAR HUNNU BHANDA MORNU RAMRO CHHAA
IT IS BETTER TO DIE THAN LIVE A COWARD--the Ghurka motto0 -
I believe the 380 PPK and PPKS always had a reputation for jamming although a gunsmith once claimed he could make one feed an empty case. Notwithstanding the nice double and single action features,the gun's an old design and heavier and bulkier than need be for a .380.
Have you looked at the Russian Makarov? Its in that size class but in a more serious caliber, very cheap and owners rave about them.
Personally, a pistol can't be too small or light to suit me (excepting the NAA minis). The Keltecs, Seecamp and Rohrbaughs make more sense for concealed carry in light clothing.
A full sized service automatic in my hand in an emergency would be ideal
but compromises need to be made in a concealed carry gun.0 -
PPK/S is my choice. She's never failed me in 40 years.
A good Mac is my second choice.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments