Sig 230, 232 or Walther PP??

duster68

I'm looking for a piece for concealed carry. I've considered Bersa/Firestorm .380, mostly because of price but have decided (at the advise of many of you) to go with something of higher quality and reputation. I've narrowed my search to Sig or Walther. It might be helpful for you to know that I live in CA and have a somewhat limited choice of models which are on the approved list. First question, is a .32 cal. adequate for self defense? Never having shot a .380 either, how do they compare in terms of stopping power? Any preferences to Sig or Walther? I've seen many PP's in excellent condition being sold quite cheaply. Are they worth it and as reliable as the SIG??Thanks!

nunn

Forget the .32 as long as you can get the .380 in the same size gun.Both the SIG and the Walther PPK are great pieces. The SIG, being bigger, is easier for me to shoot, but it IS bigger than the Walther, and you want a concealed carry gun.The SIG is somewhat lighter, having an aluminum frame, whereas the Walther is all steel.You pays your money and you takes your choice.

---

Certified SIG pistol armorer/FFL Dealer/Full time Peace Officer, Moderator and Supreme Ruler of the General Discussion Board on Gunbroker. Email davidnunn@texoma.net Jesus is Lord!

Cawdor

If you want a .380, don't overlook the Beretta Cheetah.[This message has been edited by Cawdor (edited 09-06-2001).]

JudgeColt

For a lot less money, you can get a amaller, locked breech, 11-shot 9mm in the Kel-Tec P11. In my opinion, there is no more desirable compact 9mm carry pistol than the Kel-Tec. There is no other pistol that combines such power, light weight, small size and high magazine capacity as found in the P11. (The Taurus titanium Millenium pistols may come close, if they ever get on the market. Gotta have a titanium .45!)As a plus, a locked breech 9mm will kick about the same as a blow-back .380. The SIG is as big as most compact 9mm pistols, so why take a .380 over a 9mm under those circumstances? In choosing between the SIG and the PP, the SIG with an alloy frame is lighter but a bit bigger. If you are set on a .380, in exchange for the lower power of the .380, you should get the smallest and lightest one you can get, which is a Colt Pony Pocketlite Lightweight. The Pony has a locked breech and is very reliable. At 12.5 ounces, it is the most power in the smallest and lightest package available. (The new Guardian .380 weighs about 16-18 ounces if memory serves, and it is about the same size as the Pony, but is a blow-back. In my opinion, the Colt is clearly the better choice.)The above is just my opinion, and others may disagree. I just wanted to get on my soapbox and preach the virtues of my choices in hopes of converting you. In the end, you should get what you like. Let us know what you choose.

gap1916

For the same size you can have a 9mm or 40cal. Check out the Kahr series. The P9 is light weight the K40 has a punch. Both are the same size as the PPK. Just my 2 cents worth.

duster68

Thanks for the input. At this point, I must vent a little about being a resident of CA and how I think the "approved list" is putting people's lives at risk.As it is with many of you, money is an object when buying a gun. Some of the fine makes and models you suggested, I'd love to have. Some of them, unfortunately, I can't afford. The thing that pisses me off is that my state's legislature has seen fit to limit the number of potential handguns I'm allowed to buy to a measly 600 or so. Many guns on the list are the higher-priced, better-known makes and models. Many, however, aren't. Want a Keltec in CA, sorry, out of luck. Talon's cheap, yet highly regarded .380?? Nope. Makarov's, cheap and extremely reliable?? Nope. I'm lucky that home defense isn't the sole reason I buy guns. My first gun, yes. The next 12 . . . well, I bought 'em 'cause I love guns. Can't say the same for law-abiding citizens living in dangerous areas or anywhere else in CA who can't afford the higher-priced weapons. This doesn't seem right. This law, toted as a "safety law" could be keeping cheaper guns out of the hands of the very people who need them. It leaves me without the gun I really want, a Makarov. I'll probably end up with the SIG 232, not because it's my first choice, but because it's one of the few that I'm "allowed" to buy.

hensel

You should be very happy with the P232. It is an excellent gun in 380acp and I find it easier to shoot than the Walther (I have both). Never consider money an object when choosing a back-up weapon. It the only thing you have left if your primary takes a *. Any time you go to your back-up, things are pretty crappy. Save your money, buy the Sig, and be safe.

rsnyder55

I personally like the Walther over the Sig inspite of its heavy double action. As far as the Makarov is concerned, they were advertized for sale this last Thursday in the major Sacramento newspaper.

drawn

Duster, If You want something that is not on the stupid list you can buy it private party to private party threw an FFL if all parties reside in Ka. Will be some extra footwork on your part to find a private person in Ka willing to sell what You really want.drawn

duster68

Yeah Drawn, I know that. It hasn't been easy finding someone in So. Cal. to buy from. I've tried. I did find a shop that had one on consignment, but he's asking $300!?! For a gun I could get for $100 if I lived anywhere else but here!? My point is that there are many, lower-income people living in So. Cal. who would be a little safer in their own homes if they could buy a cheap, reliable gun like the Markarov. They still can, you're absolutely right, but not without spending a lot more money than they should. Man, I should have gotten it last year when I still could! Been hearing that a lot lately.

duster68

Snyder, was it from a shop or private party in CA or out-of-state?? If in CA, could you pass along the name and phone number of the shop or person? email me at (tchan@gusd.net) Thanks!