You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Canik Shark or Bersa Thunder Pro?
- Thread starter Cosmodragoon
- Start date
Limnophile
New member
The Shark is longer than the Thunder and heavier as well. Both companies have good reputations. I own a Canik Stingray (CZ Compact clone) and love the gun, but it's all steel, too heavy to be a carry weapon. If you are limiting yourself to the two guns then Bersa is going to be "more compact" and most likely easier to carry.
The Shark C is lighter than the Thunder Pro: 27.0 vs 30.7 oz. The compact Caniks have aluminum frames, which is why the Shark C is lighter than the 32.5-oz steel-framed CZ 75 Compact.
If a difference of a mere 5.5 oz on one's belt imposes an uncomfortable burden, just carry the bigger gun for a few days and you won't notice the difference once the atrophied muscles are put to use again. Or, lose 5.5 oz of body weight to compensate.
Last edited:
Limnophile
New member
Another vote for the Canik. With the exception of the D/A trigger pull (very stiff) these are well made guns.
Easily remedied by replacing the hammer spring with a lighter one.
BigMikey76
New member
The Shark C is lighter than the Thunder Pro: 27.0 vs 30.7 oz.
Let's be fair, now. You can't really make a fair weight comparison between the compact Shark and the full size Thunder Pro. If you look at the Thunder Pro UC, as shown by the OP's pics, it is 23 oz. - a quarter pound lighter than the Shark C.
Limnophile
New member
^I stand corrected.
However, my point about a weight difference that is a mere 4 oz remains. In fact, the heavier gun has the advantage in that it should shoot more softly. Admittedly, one is likely to spend nearly infinitely more time carrying a carry pistol than shooting it. I have no issue with someone opting to carry a lighter gun, but if a quarter pound is a major issue, consideration should be given to a smaller package, in this case a subcompact.
However, my point about a weight difference that is a mere 4 oz remains. In fact, the heavier gun has the advantage in that it should shoot more softly. Admittedly, one is likely to spend nearly infinitely more time carrying a carry pistol than shooting it. I have no issue with someone opting to carry a lighter gun, but if a quarter pound is a major issue, consideration should be given to a smaller package, in this case a subcompact.
Carik Shark or Bersa Thunder Pro
Like you, I like DA/SA pistols. I own a BERSA Thunder .380 in satin nickel, and one in .22lr. I also own several Walther, and S&W pistols in DA/SA configuration. I carry a S&W model CS 45. I would pick the Thunder Pro as I think BERSA makes good firearms.
Like you, I like DA/SA pistols. I own a BERSA Thunder .380 in satin nickel, and one in .22lr. I also own several Walther, and S&W pistols in DA/SA configuration. I carry a S&W model CS 45. I would pick the Thunder Pro as I think BERSA makes good firearms.