.25acp -.32acp on their way out?
- Thread starter Famas
- Start date
micromontenegro
New member
I think .25 went on the decline because nobody bothered to make a modern but really tiny one. If there was something like, say the Seecamp, the size of the abovepictured Bernardelli, or even the Browing Baby, I think it would have a small but viable customer base. Of course, it is not very reasonable to buy a new .25 which is the same size as a 380.
Vintage stuff is another thing altogether, and I will not give up my FN Baby as a last resort kinda-weapon. Come to think about it, I would not hesitate to buy a new one with a decent safety mechanism.
Vintage stuff is another thing altogether, and I will not give up my FN Baby as a last resort kinda-weapon. Come to think about it, I would not hesitate to buy a new one with a decent safety mechanism.
Onward Allusion
New member
The 25ACP, yeah - dead or dying but still has a niche. If a manufacturer or two would come out with a pistol capable of firing a HOT load, I think it might be saved. What a lot of folks don't realize is that from a really short barrel, it's still a heck of a lot better than a 22LR. A LOT better.
The 32ACP, er, nope...still popular. Modern manufacturers...
- Beretta
- Kel Tec
- Taurus
- NAA
- Walther
- Seecamp
Even CZ has a tiny little SMG looking thing (Scorpion) in 32ACP. I would not be surprised if Ruger came out with one in the LCP form factor that has one or two extra rounds over the 380 LCP.
The 32ACP, er, nope...still popular. Modern manufacturers...
- Beretta
- Kel Tec
- Taurus
- NAA
- Walther
- Seecamp
Even CZ has a tiny little SMG looking thing (Scorpion) in 32ACP. I would not be surprised if Ruger came out with one in the LCP form factor that has one or two extra rounds over the 380 LCP.
Bill DeShivs
New member
In the realm of centerfire cartridges that WORK, the .25 is at the bottom of the spectrum, with the .50+ cannon dujour at the other end.
If the .25 was not reasonably effective, we would have found out 100 years ago.
If the .25 was not reasonably effective, we would have found out 100 years ago.
Neither one is going anywhere. Too many Ravens, Davis', Lorcins, Jennings and other assorted potmetal garbage .25s in the hands of various and sundry gangbangers.
And, as far as size of a human being 100 years ago having anything to do with police carrying .32s in Europe, that is a total misconception. The average person 100 years ago had respect for law and order and was not prone to violent senseless crimes like today. And Europe was definitely a far more civilized place than the U.S.
And, as far as size of a human being 100 years ago having anything to do with police carrying .32s in Europe, that is a total misconception. The average person 100 years ago had respect for law and order and was not prone to violent senseless crimes like today. And Europe was definitely a far more civilized place than the U.S.
2damnold4this
New member
Police in the US carried revolvers in various .32 cartridges in the early 1900s.
I rather doubt that all that many of our ancestors were tiny, although it is true that many of those drafted in WWI were underweight (probably shorter, too). In fact, one used to see advertisements (before the war) for weight gain products, mostly aimed at women. However, I would have to say that the .25 and .32 calibers are on the way out because Elmer Keith said they were--50 years ago.
Still, there is a place for them, though you may argue the merits of a .22 rimfire versus the .25 auto. Personally, I think the .32 ACP and the .380 ACP aren't so far apart and in a gun like the PPK, the .32 is much more pleasant to shoot. But a PPK is not a pocket gun, not to me, anyway, no matter how you slice it.
I wonder what sort of pistol a double-derringer would make in .32 ACP. That really seems to have some value as a true hide-out gun and guns in the .25 auto category were thought of as hide-out guns, not as primary weapons.
Still, there is a place for them, though you may argue the merits of a .22 rimfire versus the .25 auto. Personally, I think the .32 ACP and the .380 ACP aren't so far apart and in a gun like the PPK, the .32 is much more pleasant to shoot. But a PPK is not a pocket gun, not to me, anyway, no matter how you slice it.
I wonder what sort of pistol a double-derringer would make in .32 ACP. That really seems to have some value as a true hide-out gun and guns in the .25 auto category were thought of as hide-out guns, not as primary weapons.
Less foolish than relying on a CNS hit from a pea-shooter.....
Look, all pistol cartridges are underpowered- if they were made powerfull enough to cause damage due to hydrostatic shock, they's need a stock to shoot quickly and accurately ..... and then they would not be a pistol, then would they?
So, you can try to hit the lottery with the .25 in a FMJ form (or fail miserably to penetrate enough to do much of anything with the HP version) , or you can double or triple the depth and width of the wound channel by using a quality JHP bullet in a caliber that exceeds the FBI standards for penetration ......... this not only increases your chances of reaching the CNS, but also will result in your attacker rapidly losing the blood pressure needed to get O2 to his brain (aka "bleeding out").....
Use what you want..... just have some logic behind it when you advocate for it on the intertubes......
There is a reason they are both falling from favor. They are practically useless. People are a bit larger than they were before WW II on the whole. It just stands to reason that more power is needed. All a 25 will do is make a 200 lb bad guy mad & a 32 is not much better.
Stick to a 380 ACP as a bare minimum.
Stick to a 380 ACP as a bare minimum.
tiny cartridges
When we discuss the merits of small caliber cartridges, the way we have been here, it seems that we lose sight of the fact that any of these little bullets are capable of real damage. In factory loadings fired from the same length barrels, 25 ACP cartridges are about 10% more energetic than .22 SV.
Remember the Reagan shooting? That was a .22. With one cylinder, the President was critically wounded, and three adult males were completely incapacitated.
Here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoZeZprXnDg
Pete
When we discuss the merits of small caliber cartridges, the way we have been here, it seems that we lose sight of the fact that any of these little bullets are capable of real damage. In factory loadings fired from the same length barrels, 25 ACP cartridges are about 10% more energetic than .22 SV.
Remember the Reagan shooting? That was a .22. With one cylinder, the President was critically wounded, and three adult males were completely incapacitated.
Here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoZeZprXnDg
Pete
Bill DeShivs
New member
Please stop saying that "all the .25 will do is make someone mad."
Someone might actually believe it.
Someone might actually believe it.
Interesting account of 25acp use to stop a sword attack. Four rounds fired into eye, two of which went all the way through the head.
http://armslocker.com/gun-rights/25966-sword-vs-handgun-real-life-mess.html
http://armslocker.com/gun-rights/25966-sword-vs-handgun-real-life-mess.html
I would carry that before I carried a lot of other things... and it IS cute! Not bad, 8+1 capacity... pair it with those 60gr. Aguila subsonics and I'd have no trouble believing it would stop an assailant after a few shots.
Hey, they're affordable too. Nice Christmas present material...
Hey, they're affordable too. Nice Christmas present material...
Yep, 60gr. 22LR. While it is intended primarily for suppressed firearms, it penetrates deeply for caliber and destabilizes on entry, yawing and causing a larger wound channel than one would expect. It also dissipates its kinetic energy deeper than HP ammo in this class usually does, meaning more oomph goes where you actually want it. I believe it was reviewed on Brassfetcher, although I might be mistaken.
If I were going to carry a 22, that's what it would be.
If I were going to carry a 22, that's what it would be.
Not going anywhere, soon....
OK, sales of new .25s are low, in the "quality" gun market, but they are still high in the "need a gun and don't have much money" market. Which is why so many "junk" .25acps are out there, and why so few new, quality designs are marketed.
As to the effectiveness of the .25 auto, yes, its ballistic performance is at the bottom end of the scale, BUT, if you focus on that alone, you are not looking at the whole picture. It isn't just the performance of the round that keeps the .25 on the market, but the performance of the gun.
And by that I mean that these tiny pocket pistols are often effective defenses without a shot being fired. They are in the "any gun is better than no gun" category. Small enough to be carried (not left behind) so they are there when needed, and they are a gun! There are no statistics on how many or how often an attack or threat is ended when the gun comes out, but it does happen, and I believe it happens fairly often. IF you assailant isn't armed with a gun, and you are, often that alone is enough to make them retreat. And ending the attack/threat, by any means is a good thing, right?
We have more than a couple generations of gun writers telling people that the minimum for self defense is a .380 (or in some cases, an even bigger round), and designers have been focusing on making smaller .380s and 9mms. Thats where the market is today. But a .25 in the hand is better than no gun at all, even if its pretty puny performance, it might make the difference.
Another reason .25s hang on, is that they are generaly more reliable than the same guns in .22LR. Even good quality .22s jam sometimes, especially with cheaper ammo. .25s almost never do.
I'm not recommending the .25acp for a defensive caliber, but its a better defense gun than no gun, or one that doesn't work all the time.
The .32ACP is better, and today you can get some JHP ammo. Again, not the best possible choice, usually, but a .32 in your pocket is better than a 9mm or .45 in the safe.
Its taken me decades to realize it, but mouse guns do have a place. While they may not be good stoppers in the worst case situations, they are more effective than fingernails and screams. Nobody who is actually thinking wants to get shot with anything, and if a mouse gun scares someone off, that's worth the price of admission, isn't it?
I like big bores. I have faith in them. But I have also come to realize that my vintage Savage 1919 or my Mauser HSc in .32acp are not totally useless lumps of steel, either. And they are a tiny bit more pocket friendly than my .38 Colt snub.
yep, thats why both world wars started there!
sorry, just couldn't resist!
OK, sales of new .25s are low, in the "quality" gun market, but they are still high in the "need a gun and don't have much money" market. Which is why so many "junk" .25acps are out there, and why so few new, quality designs are marketed.
As to the effectiveness of the .25 auto, yes, its ballistic performance is at the bottom end of the scale, BUT, if you focus on that alone, you are not looking at the whole picture. It isn't just the performance of the round that keeps the .25 on the market, but the performance of the gun.
And by that I mean that these tiny pocket pistols are often effective defenses without a shot being fired. They are in the "any gun is better than no gun" category. Small enough to be carried (not left behind) so they are there when needed, and they are a gun! There are no statistics on how many or how often an attack or threat is ended when the gun comes out, but it does happen, and I believe it happens fairly often. IF you assailant isn't armed with a gun, and you are, often that alone is enough to make them retreat. And ending the attack/threat, by any means is a good thing, right?
We have more than a couple generations of gun writers telling people that the minimum for self defense is a .380 (or in some cases, an even bigger round), and designers have been focusing on making smaller .380s and 9mms. Thats where the market is today. But a .25 in the hand is better than no gun at all, even if its pretty puny performance, it might make the difference.
Another reason .25s hang on, is that they are generaly more reliable than the same guns in .22LR. Even good quality .22s jam sometimes, especially with cheaper ammo. .25s almost never do.
I'm not recommending the .25acp for a defensive caliber, but its a better defense gun than no gun, or one that doesn't work all the time.
The .32ACP is better, and today you can get some JHP ammo. Again, not the best possible choice, usually, but a .32 in your pocket is better than a 9mm or .45 in the safe.
Its taken me decades to realize it, but mouse guns do have a place. While they may not be good stoppers in the worst case situations, they are more effective than fingernails and screams. Nobody who is actually thinking wants to get shot with anything, and if a mouse gun scares someone off, that's worth the price of admission, isn't it?
I like big bores. I have faith in them. But I have also come to realize that my vintage Savage 1919 or my Mauser HSc in .32acp are not totally useless lumps of steel, either. And they are a tiny bit more pocket friendly than my .38 Colt snub.
yep, thats why both world wars started there!
sorry, just couldn't resist!
Onward Allusion
New member
Pretty unbelievable, huh? Same as the "I'd rather have a knife than a (fill in the blank small caliber weapon)." Maybe I'm just way weaker than the rest of the guys in my age/fitness level but I think a .25 ACP would dissuade me rather quickly if I were a BG with any sense.
The Colt Model 1903/1908 in .32 or .380 is one of the finest of Browning's pistol designs in terms of appearance, to my way of thinking. They were issued as General Officer's pistols through WWII and beyond, are a nice size and easy to keep on target due to being all-steel and having light recoil.
Sights suck, admittedly, but you can dump 8 .32s into an attacker or a tin can a lot more quickly that with some sawed-off hormone monster. While 99% of the readers here are never going to have to defend their lives with the pistols they aren't permitted to carry anyway, why not opt for something well made, beautifully designed and fun to shoot?
Colt. John Browning. All steel. And I think Bogart used one in Casablanca. What's not to love?
Sights suck, admittedly, but you can dump 8 .32s into an attacker or a tin can a lot more quickly that with some sawed-off hormone monster. While 99% of the readers here are never going to have to defend their lives with the pistols they aren't permitted to carry anyway, why not opt for something well made, beautifully designed and fun to shoot?
Colt. John Browning. All steel. And I think Bogart used one in Casablanca. What's not to love?