.380 alternatives to the LCP

I don't care much for the .380

The .380 cartridge seems as if it is a poor compromise between the .32 ACP and the 9mm Parabellum/Luger cartridge. My bet would be to invest in either a Kel Tec P-9 or P-11 and be far better protected. The Parabellum cartridge is more powerful, yet manageable, and ammunition will cost less.

Just my two cents worth.

Scott
 
The 9mm in a PF9 sized pistol is not as manageable as you think. You obviously haven't shot one.
Caliber does not make up for shot placement. This goes over most people's head.
 
I cant believe no one mentioned the Glock. I love the glock.380! It shoots and feels like a real size glock w/o the snappyness of a small pistol. Only down size is that is a little bigger than than the LCP. Dont know how much size matters to you:eek: However, for the little more in size its a great gun.
 
I counter-shopped some colt mustangs today, my wife has been bugging me for a gun small enough for her to IWB carry. those are some quality little guns, look and feel to be anyhow, very impressed. priced a little high for me, since it will likely rarely get carried, or used for that matter, but nice. I haven't seen a Pico in person yet, but in the end, ill probably just grab the Taurus, they have been good to me the last few years and will always fit in a budget.
 
The 9mm in a PF9 sized pistol is not as manageable as you think.
Click to expand...
9mm is very manageable in a Kahr PM9, its vastly easier to control than 380 is in a LCP.

. I love the glock.380! It shoots and feels like a real size glock w/o the snappyness of a small pistol. Only down size is that is a little bigger than than the LCP.
Click to expand...

The G42 should shoot good. Not only is it a lot bigger than the LCP, its even longer, taller and thicker than the Kahr PM/CM9.
 
The .380 cartridge seems as if it is a poor compromise between the .32 ACP and the 9mm Parabellum/Luger
Click to expand...
Old school thinking with old school fmj ammo.
Modern ammo offerings in standard SAAMI pressure rounds like Speer Gold Dot are effective in the 380acp at civilian CCW self defense range.
 
The 9mm in a PF9 sized pistol is not as manageable as you think. You obviously haven't shot one.

Caliber does not make up for shot placement. This goes over most people's head.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with you hear, Bill. Pocket .380 Autos and .38 Specials have earned reputations for being unpleasant to shoot. Shooting pocket 9 Lugers must be a chore. It stands to reason that such a gun won't see much practice time, and lack of practice combined with onerous recoil translates to missed shots at a time when you can't afford to miss.

The FBI has finally acknowledged the downside of recoil as a matter of agency policy.
 
I haven't seen the Ruger LC380 mentioned. It's a bit larger than the LCP which helps if you have large hands.
 
Then there is the recently introduced Kahr CT380 (7+1), a slightly larger version of the CW380. Here it is with my LCP:

c1915944df1bb405826a21e3a2c764aa486535e.jpg
 
I think the Ruger LCP is a good choice in 380ACP micros but prefer the Kahr CW380 which can be found around the same price. I like the CW380 trigger better and its last round slide holdback is a huge advantage.

Conversely, when comparing 9mm big brothers, I prefer the LC9s Pro over the Kahr CM9 so it's not brand loyalty.
 
I have put several hundred rounds of various types of .380 ammo through my LCP. It has never had a malfunction, from the first shot to the present. Can't say that about too many of my pistols. :cool:
 
I had read a lot of the Glock 42 being too big compared to other pocket 380s Internet threads. So many in fact that I had ruled out the G42 when I decided I wanted a pocket 380. Then by chance I went into the local hardware store and in their gun display they had the S&W Bodyguard (both models), the Ruger LCP, and to my surprise a Glock 42. I had them get out all three so I could compare them side by side. That's when I realized that all of the Glock 42 being too big talk was much ado about nothing. Pictures do not do the G42 justice, you have to see and handle one in person. In fact, I selected the 42 because it was very comparable in size to the others, but unlike the others being mentioned the 42 was built like every other Glock, and most likely will be much more durable if you actually shoot it frequently. Not to mention that the small difference in size, and the fact that it is locked breach make it an absolute pleasure to shoot. It is easily carried in a pocket like the others. So, I'll take the minimal increase in size for the much better handling characteristics, and long term reliability. Just my 2cents.

So far I like both the Sticky and Mika pocket holsters.

 
Last edited:
If you can get around the smaller caliber, S&W's Bodyguard .380 is a good choice. My wife carries her's when anything bigger or bulkier is not going to make it with her clothing choices. It'll slip into a front jeans pocket like it was built for it, and the same is true for the rear jeans pockets.

Modern .380 JHP ammunition as made by Hornady et al. has elevated this old caliber into a solid defensive choice. Any 9mm is better, and if I could find one in that small a package, that she could hit with, it would obviously be a better choice. So when her J-frame S&W M637 in .38 special, or her Glock 23 can't go along, it's the little Smith that's always in her purse or pocket.

In the example we own, it's been just about 100% for 600+ round now and that's with Hornady's Critical defense, my 95 gr JHPs, and a cross section of the available FMJ practice ammunition now available. As to effectiveness of the Hornady Critical Defense...I had to shoot a raccoon recently with it, and from 15' that little round took most of his head off...expansion and penetration were spectacular to say the least.

HTH's Rod
 
A little historical information, gents

When the OSS was formed and trained its members, as they drew equipment for assignments, thet were given the choice of either the .32ACP or .380ACP model of the 1903 Colt Model M.
A majority chose the .32ACP, as they considered it more accurate for close in shooting, and that the german police normally were assigned the .32 , as the military normally used the .380.

Too bad that Colt remaking the Model M, but the $1000 price is a LITTLE steep for a carry firearm.
 
I base my opinion of the size of the Glock 42 more on the fact that it is nearly 1/2" longer, and slightly bigger in all other measurements than my 9MM Kahr CM9. So then why would I carry a 380 of the same size in a caliber that is weaker? I have handled, and shot the 42. It shoots well, but to me it's size difference to the LCP and other mouse guns in it's style is obvious. Also, Even though the Kahr conceals, sometimes it is much harder to get a full grip on, and draw from my pocket. While my Kahr conceals well in some pockets, OK in others, and prints obviously in others, when utmost concealment is needed, I do carry an LCP.
 
Doug S said:
I had read a lot of the Glock 42 being too big compared to other pocket 380s Internet threads. So many in fact that I had ruled out the G42 when I decided I wanted a pocket 380. Then by chance I went into the local hardware store and in their gun display they had the S&W Bodyguard (both models), the Ruger LCP, and to my surprise a Glock 42. I had them get out all three so I could compare them side by side. That's when I realized that all of the Glock 42 being too big talk was much ado about nothing. Pictures do not do the G42 justice, you have to see and handle one in person. In fact, I selected the 42 because it was very comparable in size to the others, but unlike the others being mentioned the 42 was built like every other Glock, and most likely will be much more durable if you actually shoot it frequently. Not to mention that the small difference in size, and the fact that it is locked breach make it an absolute pleasure to shoot. It is easily carried in a pocket like the others. So, I'll take the minimal increase in size for the much better handling characteristics, and long term reliability. Just my 2cents.

So far I like both the Sticky and Mika pocket holsters.

Click to expand...
Thats a good word Doug. From what I hear from competing USPSA shooters, who are shooting some expensive hardware, they love the G42. Its extremely accuate and soft shooting. I would agree to not just go by the specs and comparisons and get your hand on one. It has a great feel to it.

The only time I shot the LCP was while doing some training with a young lady who had purchased it for concealed carry. Next to her was another client a Kahr CM40. The CM40 felt much less harsh and easier to shoot. I was surprised the lady could hold on the LCP, but they are very popular.
 
Last edited:
If you can tolerate the recoil of the small Polish P-64, these cost less than $300, but only hold 6+1 rds.

Having quickly become used to my .380 Auto PPK/S' recoil, I then found the P-64 to be acceptable.
The are extremely reliable guns, and three middle-aged friends "carry" them.

And the 9x18 ammo now is approx. .25/rd. on "Gunbot" (search engine).

Also, experienced shooter have replaced the original trigger (or hammer?) spring with a lighter Wolff, and find the gun just as reliable as with the original.
 
Also, experienced shooter have replaced the original trigger (or hammer?) spring with a lighter Wolff, and find the gun just as reliable as with the original.
Click to expand...
I have a P64, as a range toy, not as a carry piece. As they come the DA trigger pull is the heaviest I have experienced with any handgun. But the SA pull is one of the lightest. Changing the main spring (hammer spring) did lighten the DA to an acceptable level. But the SA pull, with or without the lighter spring, is so sensitive that unwanted double taps are common without a concentrated effort to avoid them. Something not conducive to a safe CCW weapon in my mind.
Solid as a rock, accurate, reliable, and plenty fun at the range, but that is where it's use will stay for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top