Walther PPK/S

H

HOUSTON RICK

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
10,417
Reaction score
14,763
Location
HOUSTON, TEXAS
Is the 22LR Walther PPK/S made in stainless? If so is it the same price as the blued 22LR PPK/S? Any experience with the current 22LR Walther PPK/S? Thank you!
 
Register to hide this ad
No, it's nickel-plated, and it typically costs a bit more than the black model. The Walther PPK/S .22 isn't made of steel at all, (save for the barrel and slide inserts) it's made of some proprietary alloy. Supposedly it's some sort of aluminum alloy, but thanks to a mistranslation on Walther USA's website, (which has since been corrected) people think that it's made of ZAMAK and bad-mouth it endlessly because "ewww potmetal". On the bright side, this has driven the cost down dramatically, so they can be had for a couple hundred dollars, even less if it's used.

That being said, I actually own one, and like most folks who do, I love it. It's a fun gun to take out plinking with a distinctive, iconic look.
The only kncks against it are the absurdly heavy 17.5lb DA Trigger and the so-called "blue" finish is actually matte black. Oh, and like most .22 Pistols, it can be ammo sensitive and prefers High Velocity plated ammo such as CCI Mini Mag.
 
Last edited:
I've had a PPK/S .22 for a long time. I'm no Walther authority, but I always thought it was made of steel. It doesn't feel like pot metal; it has the heft of an all steel gun like the PPK/S .380s I had along the way.
 
The current 22 LR PPk/s pistols are a great value and are well made.

The only reason I bought the nickel finish version is that the first suppressor I ever built is bare aluminium and I wanted a match

Walther2s.jpg


I probably have less than 1,000 rounds through mine even thought I bought it several years ago. So far mine has not been ammo sensitive and has had many more American Eagle subsonics through it than anything, but it has had no issue with the bulk packed Remingtons that I usually shoot

I happen to like it so much that I plan on getting a second one in blue
 
I collect Walthers. I like the PPK best. I have a TPH in .22lr. I did not buy the PPK/S size .22lr because I have too many guns that shoot .22lr already. I looked at one of them, and it is not stainless like the other models in stainless are. In addition, I much prefer the PPK over the PPK/S. I have both in stainless .380. Someday I may buy the PPK/S .22lr just to make my collection more complete.
 
Last edited:
I have one, definitely not steel frame or slide. It was on sale locally for $249.95. Not a single malfunction so far, all CCI Minimags. Yes, the trigger is very heavy in DA mode, SA is decent. Mine is very accurate.
 
rockquarry said:
I've had a PPK/S .22 for a long time. I'm no Walther authority, but I always thought it was made of steel. It doesn't feel like pot metal; it has the heft of an all steel gun like the PPK/S .380s I had along the way.
Click to expand...

He's asking about current production models. (2013 - Present)

Older models are mostly made of steel, save for the PPK/L variant which has a Duraluminum frame.

Current production models are made of some proprietary mystery alloy which Walther won't share because it's a trade secret, but they say that it's nothing like ZAMAK and is "much stronger" than any zinc alloy.
I surmise that it's likely the same aluminum alloy they use for all of their other rimfire replicas.

Current models weigh just slightly less than the all steel models, which is achieved by completely filling in the frame. If you take the grips off or look into the mag well, you'll see that inside the grip frame is essentially just a block of metal with the a narrow space for the magazine.

images

Walther did this intentionally because they wanted to match the weight/feel of the centerfire models, but personally I think that they would have been better off just making the frame share more or less the same internal dimensions as the centerfire models and marketed the light weight as a feature.
 
Last edited:
Dirty Harry Callahan said:
He's asking about current production models. (2013 - Present)

Older models are mostly made of steel, save for the PPK/L variant which has a Duraluminum frame.

Current production models are made of some proprietary mystery alloy which Walther won't share because it's a trade secret, but they say that it's nothing like ZAMAK and is "much stronger" than any zinc alloy.
I surmise that it's likely the same aluminum alloy they use for all of their other rimfire replicas.

Current models weigh just slightly less than the all steel models, which is achieved by completely filling in the frame. If you take the grips off or look into the mag well, you'll see that inside the grip frame is essentially just a block of metal with the a narrow space for the magazine.

images

Walther did this intentionally because they wanted to match the weight/feel of the centerfire models, but personally I think that they would have been better off just making the frame share more or less the same internal dimensions as the centerfire models and marketed the light weight as a feature.
Click to expand...

Okay, I guess I have an all steel gun then. I bought mine used in '96.
 
I also have one of the late production PPK/S .22s. I like it! Fine little gun and very accurate. :D
Yeah, the DA trigger is terrible. But then most folks only fire the first shot DA. Everything after that is SA, which is fine. The folks over on the Walther board assure me that given time and use, the DA trigger pull will smooth out considerably. I'm still waiting to find out as I don't shoot it much DA. :rolleyes:
Mine also likes high velocity ammo. The darn thing just absolutely loves cheap old Remington Thunderbolts. :eek:
 
I have a West German PP in .22; I might have to buy one of the new PPK/S guns in .22 to keep it company. Academy has them on sale around the corner from me. How can you beat a .22 Walther for less than $300.00?
Bob

Here's my W German Walther PP. It would be fun to partner up the PPK/S and PP.
AMScf1i.jpg
 
Last edited:
Grayfox said:
I also have one of the late production PPK/S .22s. I like it! Fine little gun and very accurate. :D
Yeah, the DA trigger is terrible. But then most folks only fire the first shot DA. Everything after that is SA, which is fine. The folks over on the Walther board assure me that given time and use, the DA trigger pull will smooth out considerably. I'm still waiting to find out as I don't shoot it much DA. :rolleyes:
Mine also likes high velocity ammo. The darn thing just absolutely loves cheap old Remington Thunderbolts. :eek:
Click to expand...

I like conventional double-action guns because of the convenience of safely having a cartridge chambered all the time. It's good to familiarize oneself with the double-action mode in preparation for a time when it might be fired in such a manner. Other than that, I always shoot these guns single-action.
 
OIF2 said:
I have a West German PP in .22; I might have to buy one of the new PPK/S guns in .22 to keep it company. Academy has them on sale around the corner from me. How can you beat a .22 Walther for less than $300.00?
Bob

Here's my W German Walther PP. It would be fun to partner up the PPK/S and PP.
AMScf1i.jpg
Click to expand...

Frankly, you can't. Just about the only good thing about Walther USA messing up the translation on their website is that it helped to drive down the cost considerably. When the PPK/S .22 first came out in 2013 they were going for as much as $475, but as soon as folks read on the US Website that they were made of ZAMAK and the elitists were happy for any tangible excuse to bash newer models so they ran with it, prices slowly went into decline.
Obviously they're still selling well enough to remain in production and apparently Walther is still profiting on them, so it's a win-win for everyone.

That being said, don't expect the same lustrous blued finish to be on the PPK/S .22, it has a matte black finish which really isn't very attractive.

Oh, one other bit of overstated nonsense which I forgot to mention. The haters love to claim that the PPK/S .22 is made by Umarex rather than Walther, which is a half-truth. You see, Walther has been a subsidiary of Umarex since 1993, so sometimes they share facilities. The Walther PPK/S .22 is manufactured within the Umarex plant in Arnesberg rather than Walther HQ in Ulm, but it is still made by Walther employees, they're simply working out of the Umarex plant because unlike Walther HQ, Umarex is already setup for the production of Rimfire pistols whereas Walther HQ specializes in the production of centerfire pistols for Self-Defense/Duty.
 
Do a search, I've posted on this a few times before.

Short story:

1) It doesn't have the heirloom potential of the original Walther pistols;

2) It's a pistol people love to hate, due to the use of Zamak alloy in the frame and slide - but most of those haters don't actually own one; and

3) Mine shoots just as well as my Walther PP in .22 LR, with the advantage of a much better magazine design, and much more available magazines at inexpensive prices.
 
Searches can be misleading though, like how you found the misinformation regarding the composition of the alloy used in the frame/slide.

I actually corresponded with Walther Germany via e-mail to get my information.

Granted that I once held aspirations of a career in investigative journalism, so I tend to go the extra mile when it comes to getting facts straight, but it just goes to show you that you can't trust everything you read on the internet, because a Google Search is just as likely to spread rampant misinformation than provide accurate information.
 
Dirty Harry Callahan said:
Searches can be misleading though, like how you found the misinformation regarding the composition of the alloy used in the frame/slide.

I actually corresponded with Walther Germany via e-mail to get my information.

Granted that I once held aspirations of a career in investigative journalism, so I tend to go the extra mile when it comes to getting facts straight, but it just goes to show you that you can't trust everything you read on the internet, because a Google Search is just as likely to spread rampant misinformation than provide accurate information.
Click to expand...

There are a half dozen or so Zamak alloys and a couple of them are common in firearms manufacture. What sets them apart from other "pot metal" zinc alloys is the purity of the alloy. It's the impurities in common zinc "pot metal" alloys that cause the cracks and dimensional instability over time. The use of lower grade zinc alloys in trigger guards etc, in lower end firearms in the 50s and 60s is where zinc alloys got such a bad reputation in the firearms industry.

However the Ithaca Model 72 used a Zamak alloy receiver (with a receiver cover over it) and the design has held up well for over 40 years. The current Henry .22 LR lever action is a derivative of it and also uses a high purity Zamak alloy.

The irony is that the Zamak alloy Henry has legions of fans who swear by them while many of those same folks will swear at the Umarex-Walther PPK/S .22 LR for using the same alloy. The Umarex Walther Colt M4 .22 LR rifles attract the same hate due to the use of Zamak alloy in the bolt carrier, even though it is a very sound and appropriate use of the alloy.

I can see why Umarex-Walther does not want to indicate what alloy is being used as zinc alloys in general are not viewed fondly. But whether they want to call it a Zamak alloy or not - whatever they want to call it, or refuse to call it, it's still a high purity zinc alloy.

I have no objection to it, as it is again a good use of the material, but you seem to be touchy about it.
 
BB57 said:
There are a half dozen or so Zamak alloys and a couple of them are common in firearms manufacture. What sets them apart from other "pot metal" zinc alloys is the purity of the alloy. It's the impurities in common zinc "pot metal" alloys that cause the cracks and dimensional instability over time. The use of lower grade zinc alloys in trigger guards etc, in lower end firearms in the 50s and 60s is where zinc alloys got such a bad reputation in the firearms industry.

However the Ithaca Model 72 used a Zamak alloy receiver (with a receiver cover over it) and the design has held up well for over 40 years. The current Henry .22 LR lever action is a derivative of it and also uses a high purity Zamak alloy.

The irony is that the Zamak alloy Henry has legions of fans who swear by them while many of those same folks will swear at the Umarex-Walther PPK/S .22 LR for using the same alloy. The Umarex Walther Colt M4 .22 LR rifles attract the same hate due to the use of Zamak alloy in the bolt carrier, even though it is a very sound and appropriate use of the alloy.

I can see why Umarex-Walther does not want to indicate what alloy is being used as zinc alloys in general are not viewed fondly. But whether they want to call it a Zamak alloy or not - whatever they want to call it, or refuse to call it, it's still a high purity zinc alloy.

I have no objection to it, as it is again a good use of the material, but you seem to be touchy about it.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have no problem with ZAMAK and I agree with your assessment of the alloy based on available facts. It is indeed a pure alloy which is available in a wide array of configurations/compositions, each tailored to specific uses, and is an industry standard alloy which is presently used in many .22 Rimfire firearms, to which it is easily suitable.

However, I believe that Walther is telling the truth and that the PPK/S .22 is made of an Aluminum alloy due to the weight of the pistol. Allow me to explain, ZAMAK isn't a particularly lightweight alloy, it has a bit more heft to it. The PPK/S .22 weighs in at about 20oz unloaded, which is roughly 3oz less than the all-steel centerfire models, despite the fact that they had to completely fill in the grip in order to make it that heavy.
For the sake of comparison, take a look at the Phoenix Arms HP22, which is considerably smaller than the PPK/S .22, yet somehow weighs the same amount at 20oz, and is admittedly constructed from ZAMAK.

7662489_01_very_nice_10_1_phoenix_arms_hp_640.jpg


585e056ece03be7f6a5033d9cfb9abb9.jpg


So as you can see, the Phoenix Arms HP22 is a little bit bigger than a Kel-Tec P32, whereas the PPK/S is obviously much larger and thicker than that.

McHale-20150514-140930_DSC0017.jpg


And here's a pic showing the PPK/S side by side with a Ruger LCP, which is a little bit bigger than a Kel-Tec P32.

So yeah, I'm inclined to take Walther's word that the PPK/S .22 isn't made of ZAMAK or any other such zinc alloy. Besides, I'm pretty sure that they could get into trouble for misrepresenting their products if they blatantly lie about what alloy they're made out of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Walther PPK/S review
Replies
12
Views
953
03hemi
03hemi
hardknocks
Walther PPK 32 acp, 2024 model.
2 3
Replies
47
Views
5K
CMudrock
C
max
007's PPk Becomes Three Other Guns In Dr No
Replies
10
Views
562
Golddollar
Golddollar
3
Any PPK fans out there?
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
Shibadog
S
S
Ammo question for Walther PPK/S .22LR
Replies
11
Views
8K
Abbynormal
Abbynormal

Latest posts

Back
Top