Some questions about .380 ACP, especially Ruger's LCP II

I want to try the LCP2.

I have the original.
With a heavier recoil spring, extended magazine floorplate, and a hogue handall grip it is still quite a bear to shoot.
Harder to control than my .40 cal Glock 27.

We can debate the caliber and magazine capacity arguments all day and twice on Sunday.

One thing we can all agree on is if she isn't comfortable and confident in being able to pick up that gun and point it at someone and pull the trigger, then whatever gun it is doesn't really matter.

 

My wife has one of those LCPs before we married. Amongst the first things I did was promptly trade the piece of sh*t off. She was talked into it by some gunstore counter commando who obviously didn't know what the hell he was doing. At any rate, that thing was a POS. I only liked the green laser because it drove the cat crazy.

I promptly got her a G26, and that was only after she threatened to take my G19. Now she's quite happy. But I would never go less than a 38spl.

 

You know the snubs very well. It's a possibility. Smith or Ruger.
I would let her take a look at a BERSA BT or CC .380. Priced right and I have had zero issues with mine. Very light in the recoil department. Reasonably priced.
https://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog...ersa+T380MC+Thunder+380+Combat+8+1+380ACP+3.5

This is supposedly a light operational and shooting 9mm. Ergonomics on the Walthers are excellent. I've handled this and dry fired it. Great trigger.
http://www.waltherarms.com/handguns/ccp/
https://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/92740/Firearms/Handguns/Walther+Arms/Walther+Arms+5080300+CCP+9mm+Single+9mm+3.5\+8+1+Integral+Gr

The Glock 42 is getting good reviews. .380
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/daniel-zimmerman/gun-review-glock-42/

With such a crowded field, these get lost in the shuffle. .380
With or without a laser. I like the built in laser.
Trigger is so so. I like the feel myself.
https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-bodyguard-380-crimson-trace
https://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog...Wesson+M&P+Bodyguard+380+Crimson+Trace+Pistol

 

A pair o BERSAs. Heavy enough to mitigate recoil. Not ammo fussy. Good value for the money.

 

I'd take a 38 over a 380 any day of the week and twice on the weekend. Plus the reliability of a revolver speaks for itself. Just my opinion. That and $.50 will get you a cup of java.
Your mileage may vary. Offer not valid in all fifty states. Must be 18 years or older and accompanied by an adult. Do not try this at home.

 

So what do you really think...

 

A revolver is not more reliable vs an auto. More simple but not more reliable.

Jframes are great as a backup. Lframes and Redhawks are great for hunting.

 

This may be true but when you factor in that semi autos are more so dependent upon good ammo to cycle and in some cases the shooter not 'limp wristing' the damn things... I'm not sure. Lot's of variables... in the hands of an experienced shooter with premium ammo, I agree they are neck and neck. Maybe a better way to describe it is that semi autos are more susceptible to user related problems???

 

I've had bullets jump the crimp on the case due to limp wristing/light gun before. Try fixing that!

User related problems would be correct. It's a training thing not a gun thing.

 

For sure...

 

Never put much thought into it beyond the normal saying. Made sense in my head, so I never really challenged it.

Your post led me to think about it for a minute, then head to google. I read this first - http://preparedgunowners.com/2015/07/30/why-revolvers-are-not-more-reliable-than-semi-auto-pistols/ which is a pretty compelling article.

I'm going to have to do some more reading moving forward. I'm curious if anyone has actually done a study on this.

 

Normally I would try not to veer this far off the original topic, but it's a Stone thread so I'm not too worried about it.

Not to break this down to two specific pistols, but using two popular models as a cursory glance at which gun is more "complicated" or has more "parts to break".

When comparing a Smith and Wesson 642-2 vs a Glock 17: the 642 weighs in at at least 70 parts, while the glock 17 clocks in at 34 parts. I did not count "moving" parts, but at a glance I'm going to say the 642 has more moving parts. (As an afterthought at the end of typing this up, I checked the Ruger LCP as well: 35 parts.) (As a second afterhtought, I think Glock might have cheated in their diagram a bit, as some of their parts (trigger + bar) are not broken down quite as detailed as the S&W)






The images above came from:

Brownell's has a schematic of a Smith and Wesson 642-2 - https://www.brownells.com/schematics/Smith-Wesson-/J-Frame-642-2-sid519.aspx

Glock has a breakdown of components in the Gen 4 glock 17 - http://eu.glock.com/downloads/Gen4-EN.pdf

 

I started pocket carrying a S&W Bodyguard last year. I agree with the others about the recoil of a small .380. If I was looking at a .380 for a recoil sensitive shooter, I would make sure I was looking at all metal guns. Besides the recoil, I don't think anyone has mentioned how hard it is to hit anything with these little guns. When you combine how hard it is to shoot one well with how much fun they aren't to practice with, I do not think they are a good choice for a new shooter.

 

This ASH might be why everyone in the Middle East is running around with a AK and not a .380.

 

I hate to recommend a .25acp, but the Taurus PT25 with it's tip up barrel seems to be really user friendly. https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/taurus-tip-ups-top-loaders-21st-century/

 

I just picked up a Ruger LCP II, and my daily EDC is a Glock 43 or 19. (depending on the season ) The LCP II is a tack driver of a little pistol. Shoots very well and the recoil is manageable. I traded an LCR in .38 on it. I HATED the LCR. Kicked harder than a .357 mag I had previously. Slide racks easy on the LCP II as well. If you can, rent one and try it out

 

I would strongly urge against either the .38spl revolver or the .380 semiautomatic in a lightweight frame and encourage your friend towards at least a compact frame (e.g. S&W M&P or GLOCK 19 or similar) with on-body carry for the following reasons:

1) Manipulating small weapons is incredibly difficult, especially under stress
2) The smaller magazine capacity makes it more likely that you will require a reload
3) The short sight radius will make it much more challenging to hit your target, especially when said target is moving and engaging you in return
4) The less powerful caliber will require more shots or better shot placement to incapacitate a threat
5) The combination of a small slide and stiff recoil spring will make it difficult to rack

My lightweight revolvers and .380 semiautomatics are all under 16 ounces, have a double action trigger, short sight radius, small grips and a profound amount of recoil. Those factors make it difficult to accurately shoot (especially while moving) at distances of greater than seven yards.

A compact frame handgun does not have these disadvantages and is relatively easy to conceal, even for an older female in casual clothing, with a belly band or a concealment garment style holster (see generally https://www.kangaroocarry.com/).

You will not go wrong in recommending she consider such a combination, and will be much more confident in your weapon system than you would be with a lightweight revolver or .380 semiautomatic in a pocket holster or in off-body carry.

(If you insist on either the .38spl revolver or the .380 semiautomatic, I would respectfully suggest that try for an all steel frame and .38+ designed for short barrels rather than a Scandium or similar frame. An 11 ounce revolver is not pleasant to touch off.)

 

You hit the nail directly on the head.

These are my experiences as well. A J-Frame, even with mild .38 SPL ammo is NOT fun to shoot. My step-mom has a LCP and it's also not fun to shoot. My friends wife had a DB9, and you guessed it, definitely not fun to shoot.

If a gun isn't fun to shoot, you won't shoot it often. If you don't shoot it often, you shouldn't be carrying it.

I think the Sig 365, G43 and Shield all negate the reason to ever go with anything smaller for carry. All 3 of those guns shoot 9mm, are small enough to conceal just about anywhere but are still big enough so they're not a chore to shoot.

In regards to reliability of Revolvers vs auto-loaders; If you're using quality carry ammo in a clean gun, your chances of a failure are probably just as low as carrying a revolver.

 

I agree with what you guys are saying but I still love to shoot my 38 LCR even with +P ammo. I'm a recoil junkie... bring it on baby !!!