Is my Walther obsolete just becasuse there's newer, lighter, more powerful guns now?

[bmcgilvray]

Ever smaller and ever lighter may be new, but I remain convinced that it's not improved. I cannot see smaller and lighter as positive attributes, but rather for what they are, stunted and cramped and made of cheap-o materials. I don't buy them, don't pay any attention to them.

 

[LostintheOzone]

I know for many there's the burning desire to get the latest/greatest gun each year. Lighter, smaller, color coordinated, works as a remote for your TV, gets 4G LTE coverage, etc.

But seriously, until and unless this is the new thing on the market

then anything that shoots a centerfire round reliably isn't "obsolete".

You want a glue gun?

 

[Echo40]

Since this thread has been bumped, I might as well update my opinions on the subject.

While I still feel that the Walther PPK(/S) is a perfectly adequate choice for Self-Defense, as of last year (May 2019) I have effectively replaced my S&W PPK/S with a Ruger LCP 10th Anniversary Edition.
The choice had more to do with the fact that I love my PPK/S so much that I would hate to lose it should I ever have to use it than anything else, but the fact that it's smaller, lighter, and far easier to carry certainly helped me to warm up to it. I don't shoot it nearly as well as my PPK/S because it obviously doesn't fit my hand as well, and it's inherently less accurate due to the shorter slight radius as well as the fact that it doesn't have a fixed barrel like the PPK/S.

Over all, as someone who has gone from carrying the PPK/S to the more modern LCP, I can safely say that it's not a straight upgrade, it's a trade-off in which I sacrificed a bit of accuracy/shootability in exchange for a ease of carry, which in many ways could easily be considered a downgrade. So yeah, in spite of what self-proclaimed "experts" may assert, newer isn't always better, and while smaller, lighter firearms may be easier to carry, they're more difficult to shoot well.

In closing, I still love the PPK/S more than the LCP that has effectively replaced it as my EDC firearm, and if only Walther would come out with an aluminum or polymer-framed variant which shaved off a few ounces of weight to get it below 20oz, then I could easily see myself going right back to carrying a PPK for the superior shootability, but as it stands, I love the LCP as a 24/7 carry gun, and even if such a PPK/L M2 were to ever surface, I would still carry the LCP as a BUG.

 

[malph]

Ever smaller and ever lighter may be new, but I remain convinced that it's not improved. I cannot see smaller and lighter as positive attributes, but rather for what they are, stunted and cramped and made of cheap-o materials. I don't buy them, don't pay any attention to them.

Its not so much the smaller and lighter thing. Its the so so reliability thing, especially if wanting to use anything other than ball. It's the minuscule sights. It's the lack of a slide stop. It's the, at least in many examples, the very heavy DA pull. The very epitome of the crunch and ticker Col. Cooper spoke about. It's the need to grip the thing differently than any other pistol you own to avoid slide bite. It's that the blowback operation of this pistols seems a little less reliable than alternatives when fired with a less than perfect grip on the pistol.

It's still a beautiful and historical gun. Yes, it can be made to work, but would you really recommend it as a CCW for a newer shooter?

 

[rockquarry]

I no longer have any .380s, but have had several PPK/Ss over many years. I'm speaking of older guns as I know nothing about the later versions that have been built in the last twenty-five years or so.

Fine, accurate, reliable, and safe pistols. Some shooters nowadays don't seem to realize that new technology doesn't necessarily equate to better technology.

The PPK/Ss I've had experience with even shoot cast bullets reliably and accurately at 25 yards. Perhaps some of the newer .380 guns by other manufacturers have similar attributes. I'll likely never find out as I'd have to get past the looks first. Cosmetic appeal is worth something, too.

 

[malph]

Cosmetic appeal is worth something, too.

Not in a self sefense scenario.

 

[sigp220.45]

In the interim since this thread started, I have added a very nice Walther PP .380 to my cool gun carry stable. It is a delight to shoot and carry.

Here it is with another nice carrying .380 - my Beretta Model 85. The Beretta is larger but lighter. It does look like it's made of Leggos compared to the smooth lines of the Walther. I carry them with whatever FMJ I have handy.

I spent over 3 decades carrying what my employer said I had to carry. Now I carry what I like.

 

[NY-1]

Speaking of the Walther PPK and PPK/s, I presently have an Interarms PPK/s and have been trying to find a way to make it more comfortable to shoot. After three magazines of .380ACP my hand and the webbing between my thumb and index finger ache significantly, and it makes the gun not particularly enjoyable to take out for a range day. I'm not getting any slide bite; I think it's the snappiness of the .380 coupled with the un-beveled backstrap and thin grips.

The S&W models seem to have plenty of aftermarket grip options, but does anyone know of any rubber or otherwise thicker grips for the Interarms models?

 

[Gene L]

I think the rubber grips would fit just fine for a /S since they're panels, unlike a PPK.

PP pistols are not a range gun. I don't shoot mine a lot; can't afford to. I see the potential for sore hands, though.

Is the PP-series obsolete? Nope. The 98 Mauser action isn't obsolete, and it's been around longer. The search for the optimal pistol/caliber is an Unicorn hunt I refuse to go on. It's good enough. Militaries and police forces used the rounds and the platform for decades.

Me being involved in a gunfight are extremely remote, so I carry my PPK because I like to carry it. Nostalgia figures into it; I always wanted one when I was a young man, and I can't say Bond, James Bond didn't figure into it.

The PP-guns have soldiered on. I can't think of another small pistol still in production since the 1930s.

 

[David LaPell]

I have the Walther's Russian designed cousin. The Makarov PM, I would hardly call it obsolete.

 

[pawncop]

Back in the day I carried a Walther PPK/S as a backup sidearm, inside my vest, strong hand side. I later switched to a model 23 Glock. For the same weight (essentially) I now had 15 rounds of 40 S&W opposed to 8 rounds of.380 ACP.

Improvement does not necessarily indicate obsolescence. I still have a Walther PPK/S (not the same one) and think it still meets a need.

When it does not meet a need, that will define it being obsolete.

 

[Echo40]

Back in the day I carried a Walther PPK/S as a backup sidearm, inside my vest, strong hand side. I later switched to a model 23 Glock. For the same weight (essentially) I now had 15 rounds of 40 S&W opposed to 8 rounds of.380 ACP.

Improvement does not necessarily indicate obsolescence. I still have a Walther PPK/S (not the same one) and think it still meets a need.

When it does not meet a need, that will define it being obsolete.

Funny, my primary carry gun is now a SW40VE, which is a clone of the Glock 23.

 

[Kurusu]

Best for what though? Best for collecting, looking at and fondling perhaps. Maybe even for recreational shooting.

What I meant was best of the Walther PP/PPK/PPKS family.

But to defend yourself? That's where I think this gun gets much harder to justify.

Certainly if the shooter's gun is reliable and the shooter can place shots where needed at speed it can get the job done. But it's hard to say it's a top choice by modern standards.

Not the top choice I agree, but as you said, it can get the job done.

The lack of a slide stop alone is an issue. Clearing a malfunction without one is not the easiest thing.

They do have a slide stop. What they don't have is a slide release.

 

[malph]

I have the Walther's Russian designed cousin. The Makarov PM, I would hardly call it obsolete.

If i had to carry a handgun into combat, I'd take that Makarov any day of the week over the PPK.

The PPK looks nicer, and in the best examples are striking examples of superlative fit, finish and attention to detail.

The Makarov is none of those but has a much better chance of working under non-optimal conditions.

It is it's finicky nature that sours me on the PPK, not it's weight or caliber.

If you have a perfectly reliable one, I'm happy for you. I'm sure they exist, but don't kid yourself that yours is reliable if you've finally got your's to feed two consecutive magazines of a specific brand of ball with a specific magazine with the gun perfectly clean while being held with a perfect Walther-specific grip.

I know I'm being harsh but once again, it's the generally finicky nature of the gun that makes it a less than stellar choice.

I'd carry an equally old M&P .38 in it's place any day.

Of course your milage and opinion may differ and I respect that.

I said my piece and will quit ranting.

 

[loknload]

I always had to have one and I got one. After having it for awhile and shooting it I wasn't impressed! I really didn't like it and I wouldn't use it for CCW purposes.
I had an old version Bersa 83 that I liked better and I like my EG Mak a lot more then that.
I still have it, it's in the gun safe and that's where it shall remain!

 

[Echo40]

You know, for as finnicky as folks say that Walther PP Series pistols are, my Smith & Wesson PPK/S has never malfunctioned once, and I once spent an entire afternoon at the range trying to cause a malfunction.

I got it dirty, limp-wristed it, shot it sideways (gangsta-style) because I heard they would malfunction if I ever had to fire one from a horizontal position, shot it upside down, shot it after my hands became all shaky towards the end of the trip, complete with combinations of all of the above.

No, I didn't do anything too terribly elaborate like your average YouTube Torture Test, but to me the fact that it continued to function while dirty, with a weak grip, in an awkward position, and with shaky hands, it performs in anything but a worst case scenario in which you dropped it into a mud puddle then call a time-out while you bent over and fished it out as your attacker politely waits for you to retrieve it. In other words, it will function in real life just fine.
Ah, but then again, all of the self-proclaimed experts on the Walther Forums insisted to me that all S&W manufactured PPKs were horribly unreliable pieces of junk that couldn't get through a single magazine without malfunctioning, so I suppose that mine is just special or something.

Oh, and it's worth noting that my S&W PPK/S has had absolutely nothing special done to it, unless you count changing out the grips, and during my testing I actually used Remington UMC, which everyone told me (after I bought it, of course) was terrible ammo that no PPK would ever cycle because it's too weak and dirty to cycle the action.

 

[andy52]

Considering that the style is still being made by more then one manufacture I would say no it's not obsolete. The one pictured has been relegated to more show they everyday carry since it got all scratched up, not a Walther but still a classic.

 

[Wyatt Burp]

James Bond never used a PPK/S.

It's the one pistol of the PP family I really dislike.

While I loved James Bond movies (Sean Connery. Not those imposters), I wasn't into Walthers. In fact I only have three semi-autos now, being a revolver guy. But after shooting a friend's Walther PPK or PP, or PPK/s, don't know which, .22 I wanted one in .380. So not being a purist I liked the compromised PPK/s with the PP frame and shorter barrel. And I specifically wanted an Interarms because I thought I could find one for $450 or less. Then found the one I started this thread about for $425 plus ammo. About seven years ago I guess. I don't like stainless guns but a stainless PPK/S is one I'd like to have. But my blue one will do.

 

[Gene L]

D. Harry, I'm a member of the Walther forum for about a year and haven't seen the S&W pistols excoriated to the extent that you report. There is a pecking order, certainly, like there is everywhere you see collectors + shooters and sometimes the lines cross. I remember someone posting an obviously humorous-intended post as intending to denigrate some PPK/S owner.

I don't own a S&W PPK, mine are Interarms and W. German, but Smiths aren't unknown on that forum. I believe S&W's customer service was the main reason that left a bad taste. And the addition of that damned long beavertail, a sore point that persists up to the Ft. Smiths currently being made. These also have their criticisms in the frames, sharpness that causes discomfort when shooting. The pre-S&Ws, BTW, even the best, most respected, have slide-bite for a LOT of people who tolerate it because, well, that's the price to be paid for shooting a fine pistol. I don't get bitten so it's not an issue for me personally because I hold the pistol properly.

There are good S&W and piss-poor pre-WW2 (the apex) Walthers. Main thing is you have a pistol that works and satisfies you. I don't think anyone on the Walther Forum will dismiss that.

Many, of not most, think the .380's recoil as being "snappy" which is apparently is made less comfortable with the sharp edges on the Ft Smith guns. A few, like me, carry PP-guns for ED carry, but most don't. Over there, the ultimate would be a commercial pre-war PPK in .32 ACP.

 

[Echo40]

@GeneL
I was a regular on the Walther Forums from 2015 to about 2018, ergo my comments are not up-to-date. Also, it's worth noting that at some point in time the Walther Forums ownership changed hands and has an entirely different administrative staff which has apparently taken an increasingly large role in policing the forum based on feedback from dissatisfied/alienated users such as myself. So yeah, my comments are dated to be sure, but if you need proof, then just look back at posts from that time period (2015-2018) on the PP/TP Subforum, or more specifically, search threads on the S&W PPK from that time frame or earlier. You'll see what I mean.

 

[texmex]

There are guns about the size of the PPK that are 9mm. There are 380s about the size of a Colt 1908 25 auto. 380s may have gotten smaller, but people's hands haven't. The shootability of the Walther is legendary. Decent double action with mild recoil. If you lay it next to a J frame revolver. It is pretty close in height and length but slimmer. It is slightly heavier, but that just makes it very pleasant to shoot. If you are carrying a 380, shot placement is critical. The PPK holds more rounds, is easy to shoot, quick to reload and very concealable. It must be a very efficient weapon since it was so deadly, they had to ban its importation with the 1968 gun control act. In my opinion, it will never ever be obsolete. Plus, some of them are made in the USA by Smith & Wesson.

 

[Echo40]

In .380 ACP the PPK, nor even it's larger frame offspring the PPK/S has what I would consider "mild" recoil. .32 ACP, maybe, (not sure, never shot a .32) .22LR, definitely, but not in .380 ACP.

I'm no lightweight when it comes to recoil either, I actually somewhat enjoy shooting firearms with some kick like my Taurus Judge Magnum and Mossberg 590 Shockwave, but my S&W PPK/S in .380 ACP is the definition of the term "snappy" with a sharp slap right to the web between the thumb and forefinger that even with the extended beavertail it will draw blood after a good 50+ rounds because it will eventually just beat the knuckle where the thumb meets the hand until it splits open. (Not as bad as slide bite leaving bloody track marks on your hand when firing an older model with a high grip, but it'll leave you with a little cut regardless.)

 

[Gene L]

Yeah. the .380 isn't what I'd call "mild." Most people don't, in fact. The Walther frames are now made in the USA, the slides in Germany.

The .32s are sweet shooters with just enough recoil to be interesting. My .380 is very accurate and I don't shoot enough rounds at one range trip to damage my hand. The J-frames with traditional wooden grips I find to be unpleasant and hard to control. Rubber grips make them tolerable and you can find rubber grips for PPs and PPK/S.

IMO, with any handgun, shot placement is critical.

 

[forrestinmathews]

The Glock will not shoot as well out beyond 50 yards. It's a fine gun.

 

[LostintheOzone]

I have the Walther's Russian designed cousin. The Makarov PM, I would hardly call it obsolete.

For some oddball reason the prices on those keep going up.
A German Mak is hard to find.

 

[Echo40]

Makarov PMs are definitely getting harder to come by, but then again, these sorts of guns get imported in waves, and with so many produced by so many countries for so long, it's very likely that they'll come back eventually once some police force that still uses them finally decides to upgrade or otherwise yet another cache of crates full of the things is discovered.
Yeah, apparently the Soviet Union just loved leaving crates full of weapons all over the place or something, because you wouldn't believe the amount of backstories of sudden imports of old Soviet Military arms coming into the country was that somebody uncovered some crazy stash of the things somewhere.

Recently a lot of Tokarev TT33s (which are basically a hybrid between the old FN 1903 and 1911 chambered in 7.62x25 Tokarev) have shown back up on the market for just about $220, so having kicked myself up and down the block for the past few years for letting a near pristine FEG PA-63 (Walther PP clone chambered in 9x18 Makarov) priced at $150 get away, I jumped on it.

 

[dr. mordo]

One more piece of information I'll add - Ruger's LC380 (not the LCP) does do everything a PPK does but is lighter, has a better trigger (as long as you don't mind a very light DAO trigger), and is designed with a tilting barrel rather than blowback. It's about the same size as a PPK, so the recoil is truly mild and the slide is the easiest the rack that I have found on any gun.

It is better than the PPK? "Better" is entirely subjective. The PPK is a classy and classic piece, but it's far more pleasant to carry and shoot the Ruger. BTW, the Ruger is also much cheaper - I got mine for right at $200 BNIB from gunbroker. YMMV.

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

The Walther PPs and PPKs are just plain cool, maybe because of or along with the Bond mystique, right up there in sentiment if not collector dollar value with the Luger despite the relatively light caliber. It does not hurt that it is accurate and easy to carry.

 

[Kifaru]

The Ruger, Taurus and the Sig all win over the Walther design as they are locked breech designs so are easier to rack and exhibit less felt recoil because of physics. If you go to a Sig 250SC in .380 you get a 12-15 round gun only a little bulkier than the PPK/S. Sadly, that model is discontinued.

I also think Sig made a mistake in discontinuing the P250 .380. I have one; it is an extremely accurate pistol, and racking the slide is one-finger easy. Fast, controlled pairs are ridiculously quick and end up right on top of one another. I think it would have been an ideal beginner's semi auto. For those who wanted it so configured, Sig could conceivably have put a thumb safety on it as they did with the M-17. Mine has the short compact frame with 15 round capacity, but I also have a sub-compact frame and a number of 12-round magazines. While they last, those mags are in the $10 range if you shop around online.

I love the PPK. Mine is an Interarms .380 in stainless that I picked up for under $400 because the loaded chamber indicator was rattling back and forth in the channel. To fix it, I stretched the spring back out, and it works fine now. However, I did get a new spring for $3.50 with free shipping that I'll get around to installing one of these days. I'm on the lookout for a blued PPK in .32 for a reasonable price as that would just be 23-Skidoo. I truly believe the Walther PPK is a "masterpiece in Art-Deco industrial design," and they are great fun to have and shoot for experienced pistoleros, but for beginners and most practical purposes, there are many better choices these days.

 

[Gene L]

I had to install a loaded round indicator spring in mine as well. An easy fix but a bit tricky. There is a two-pronged small screwdriver like tool for doing this, but I didn't have one and it went just fine. If you took the spring out and stretched it, you know hoe easy it is. I'd recommend replacing it as it only takes a few minutes.