Little .380 Walther is something else!

[Marshal Tom]

I have owned a stainless PPK and both a blue and a stainless PPKs. I think they are beautiful little guns but I never liked shooting any of them due to the issues stated by the other responders above. Most of that size pistols are now available in 9mm which is generally cheaper more effective and easier to find. I am not a fan of the .380 anyway so there you have it!

 

[LVSteve]

As far as the OP's original question is concerned...

Yes, the Lehigh products are effective IMHO. I reload the 65gr in 380 acp, 9mm (and even 357 SIG upon occasion) with no problems.

Cheers!

P.S. If it was good enough for "Bond: James Bond..." it should be good enough!

Bond used a 7.65x17 (AKA 32ACP) PPK, the proper round for that gun IMHO. I have no time for blowback 380s.

For me they kick more than a locked breech 9mm of the same size and weight, so I would have one because...?

 

[brucev]

Just a further thought. No idea what is the manufacturer of the magazine which came with the pistol. It is a matte blue seven round steel magazine with the pinkie extension.

Bought to new nickle plated Walther magazines ... one w/ a plain bottom and one w/ a extension. Figure the plain bottom will be easier to CC w/ the other magazine as a reload. The matte blue magazine is for range use. Little thumper is addictive! Not hard to shoot several boxes of ammo through it at a fairly sedate pace. Sincerely. bruce.

 

[ggibson511960]

I got rid of mine for many of the same reasons listed above plus one more. The silly loaded chamber indicator rod that protrudes through to the hammer slot can get jammed or free floated if dirty or if the return spring breaks, as mine did. It then protrudes into the breach face at random times, jamming the fresh cartridge from sliding up the breach face. Very nicely crafted weapon, but perhaps a bit too complex, a German penchant carried over from Bochardts and Lugers.

 

[BB57]

I have a couple Ranger made Interarms marked stainless steel PPK/S pistols in .380 ACP as well as the slightly heavier FEG AP and APK steel frame .380 ACP pistols.

If you choose a hollow point and it fails to expand it will act like an FMJ with a similar sized meplat. The only real risks of using a hollow point are potential feeding issues and the potential to over expand and under penetrate with some loads.

Reliability can be addressed by just shooting it with the mags you intend to carry and ensure it’s reliable over a 100-200 rounds.

Hollow point expansion depends on velocity and velocity is very dependent on barrel length as the .380 ACP is much more sensitive to barrel length than a 9mm.

With a 3.4” PPK/S the Hornady 90 gr XTP will reliably expand and penetrate 12-13” with a muzzle velocity of 1000-1050 fps. Not all commercial loads will achieve this even in a 3.4” barrel and as you get down in the 3.2” range many of those 90 gr XTP loads are only generating around 900-920 fps. IMHO Hornady factory 90 gr XTP loads are a bit on the slow side compared to some other brands and I think that’s intentional as Hornady wants you to buy their FTX load instead.

For shorter barrel .380 ACP pistols the FTX is the way to go, but in a 3.4” or 3.9” barrel it’s likely to under penetrate.

Other loads like the 85 gr Mag Tech are also ok in a short 2.75” barrel but will start under penetrating in any thing over 3”.


In the PPK/S reliability with hollow points in my experience depends on the recoil spring. Normally, with a fresh standard power recoil spring and a standard power hammer spring they give good reliability.

Since it’s a blow back design where the cocking of the hammer and the large leverage advantage the hammer has over the slide in the initial movement, the hammer spring plays a big role is slowing the opening of the slide.

Consequently if you start “upgrading” your pistol with a lighter hammer spring and a extra power recoil spring, you’re actually screwing with the engineering and mechanics of slide velocity and over run and you going to potentially effect the reliability, particularly with hollow points.

The PPKS/S DA trigger pull is heavy and that’s an artifact of the design and its geometry. A lighter hammer spring is going to create more issues than it solves.

If the recoil, starts feeling or sounding metallic, it usually an indicator of excessive slide velocity from worn out or too light springs. The block on the end of the trigger guard prevents the slide from moving too far back, and the trigger guard acts a spring to prevent that block from bottoming out on the frame. When it does start hitting the frame you get that metallic feel or ring. It’s your sign your springs are too weak.

I find the best results come from factory standard spring weights and then ensuring you replace the recoil spring every 800 rounds or so.

 

[Rammer Jammer]

For 380 carry ammo I recommend and use loads with the Hornady XTP bullet. They have a great compromise of penetration and modest expansion. FMJ over penetrates.

Fiocchi, Underwood, Hornady and Precision One all make great carry ammo. I prefer Fiocchi or Underwood for the nickel plated casings.

 

[Faulkner]

I occasionally carried one off duty for a number of years. It operated reliably with Federal Hydra shoks and was quite accurate. Like others have already noted, though, I did not like shooting it recreationally and seldom shot it without a shooting glove. Too many sharp edges. I believe the S&W PPK/s models have been smoothed out some.

I was always intrigued with the James Bond factor, but I eventually transitioned to a Ruger LC9s Pro which is lighter, just as accurate and reliable, and much more enjoyable to shoot.

 

[Holden6v8]

The PPK and /S are more complex in models than I thought. I settled on, not for, an Arkansas manufactured one with several subtle improvements, such as extended beavertail, and fantastic quality. I did so because I compared it to the Interarms and even original German manufacture and found it superior to both. Generally, these are looked down upon these days as underpowered and lacking capacity. With Buffalo Bore hardcasts in their unofficial +P loaded, it's pretty snappy!

 

[Abbynormal]

I had a Waffenproofed .32 acp PPK in the 80's and loved it, but wanted the better .380 stopping power. Never found one in my price range.

Later had a 60's PPK in .22 LR that I still kick myself for getting rid of. Most accurate and compact .22 I've ever seen.

Carried it in my RF pants pocket on hundreds of miles of trails and months of camping.

Shot several snakes and once faced down a local Ajo who loved to be a PIA to campers. He told the local popo, that I was pointing a 9MM at him, when they realized it was a .22 LR. they laughed and arrested him for assault. Dumbest thing I ever did was to get rid of it.

 

[Grayfox]

Most folks here know that I'm a fan of the Walther PP Series pistols. I have carried a PPK or PPK/s in the past and would have no trouble doing it again.

 

[Donnie805]

I’m a .380 aficionado. I started with the PPK which I really liked until I found the Colt Mustang. That was my CC for several years until the new ones came around. I went to the Bodyguard 2.0, then the Glock 42, then the Sig 365–380, and now I am carrying the new Walter PD380. I think of all of them I prefer the Sig 365–.380 with a Holosun red dot on top. It feels the best in my hand, holsters smoothly and, with that Holosun, is deadly accurate. I reload using the Lehigh Xtreme Defender and, because I trust my reloading abilities, use those in my EDC. I still have all of my ..380s and cannot stand the thought of selling them or giving them up. They’re all part of the family.

 

[GnarlsR2]

TRIGGER PULL: DA/SA - 13.4 LBS/6.1 LBS

That's a no-go for my defense carry!

 

[30-30remchester]

I often test ammo on recently killed deer and antelope. By far the best test medium. I tested a Ruger 380 ACP LCP. I tested both Remington Golder Sabre's and Cor-Bon 80 grain copper hollow points in a doe antelope within 1 minute of her expiration from a 30-30 bullet. I angled the shots from the last rib, angled to the opposite front shoulder. All bullets recovered in off shoulder, all expanded picture-perfect mushrooms. The meat loss in opposite shoulder was nonexistent and was able to eat right up to the hole. I can text photos of the bullets if someone wants to see them. Mentioned in a previous thread, about using a Walther TPH and CCI Stingers on a mule deer to test penetration and expansion which were both excellent. With modern designed bullets, expansion with short barrels can be quite reliable.

 

[greenwellg]

I got one stainless PPKS, (Made in USA post S&W) at an auction with 3 mags and wood grips. Looked brand new and clean inside, not fired much. Perfect functioning.
Don't waste your time with hollow points.
I don't generally carry but mine is in my vehicle and I have a permit going back 35 years.
Inside the belt holster for a right handed draw.
Mine is .380

 

[ISCS Yoda]

P.S. If it was good enough for "Bond: James Bond..." it should be good enough!

But was B: JB's PPK a .380 or a .32?

"Walther PPK. 7.65mm with a delivery like a brick through a plate-glass window. Takes a Brausch silencer, with little reduction in muzzle velocity. The American CIA swear by them."― Major Boothroyd to James Bond

(c) Fandom

Bond never carried a .380 AFAIK.

And I'll never shoot this one:

 

[zeke]

Own an Interarms, and it is surprisingly accurate. Am using Hdy xtp's, but not for their expansion. If you look at the rear of the slide rails that can bite ya, might notice they actually look sharpened. Broke the edges on mine, while remembering to use a firm grip, like all blow backs. Perhaps the reason a friend with very large hands had trouble with reliable function.

 

[M29since14]

I have a SS Interarms PPK in .380. I’ve never used anything in it except standard ball ammunition. It’s accurate, but the sights are getting smaller and smaller, and the DA trigger pull has always been horrid. The SA pull is very mushy. My gun shoots high. It’s reliable, but I don’t understand the shoots high part. It probably should have been returned for service when Interarms was still in business. In spite of all this, I like the gun and shoot it once or twice a year.

A couple of years ago a SS Interarms 7.65 PPK showed up in a local shop at what I’d call market price, neither good nor bad. It looked to be in like new condition. I am still disgusted with myself for not buying it.

 

[woodsltc]

Interarms PPK/S was my first cc pistol. Bought it back in the late 80's (that dates me) and used as my cc pistol until other pocket carry, lighter options became available in late 90's. Still have it and still fire it on occasion...........I can't recall it ever having a problem with any of the ammo I've used. A little heavy & large for pocket carry and that why it stays in the safe most of the time now.

Don

 

[Riposte1]

I bought a PPK/s around 1969. Fiddled with it a while (yes I too got "bit"). I found a load in the Lyman manual of a 121 gr. cast bullet at 950+ so I bought a 2 cavity mold.

I had a G.I. 1911a1 and was amazed that even in factory loads the PPK kicked more than the .45!

Also the trigger was unusable in the DA mode. I was tinkering with guns at the time and tired to lighten the trigger but that resulted in light primer strikes - I returned it to the factory spec.

I carried it as a BUG to my 1911 when I worked uniform the first time.

finally a friend of my Dad saw it and wanted it and traded me a nearly new Satain Nickel Commander in .45 - we were both happy.

Some years back I bought a PPK/s in .22 - but it didn't work well with most rim-fire ammo and it wasn't very accurate. Then I got a deal on a gun collection and in it was a PPK in .22 made in the 30's, and a PPK in 7.65 that was Pre-Nazi - both of them had manageable triggers - I wonder how they do that?

I've had other .380s but after seeing an FMJ bounce off a guys finger I wouldn't carry one - I do have a Remington Model 51 made in 1919 - it is a cute little gun and really thin!

I have a Mustang for a while - it was pretty accurate but I gave it away to a friend who carries it as a 4th gun or he did until he retired from LE.

Just Ramblin'

Riposte

 

[BB57]

I have a couple Ranger made Interarms marked PPK/S pistols and I had a Houlton ME marked S&W PPK/S.

The Ranger made pistols vary slightly as one is extremely reliable with 90 gr XTPs and 90 gr Sig V-Crowns, while the second stumbles a bit with the truncated cone shaped XTPs. Both are extremely reliable with round nose FMJs.

The S&W PPK/S just wasn't. I don't turn guns back into money often but that was an ex exception. In addition to having some odd fire control issues, even after the recall, the extended tang is sharp edges and uncomfortable to carry IWB.

To a great extent the extended tang was a un unnecessary solution to a shooter problem. The PP series was designed in 1929 for the PP and 1931 for the PPK, with the PPK/S being a hybrid of the PP grip frame and the PPK slide to meet GCA 1968 import requirements. The larger grip frame is a plus anyway as it's a bit longer allowing a better grip on the pistol and it offers one more round in the magazine.

None of them were designed with a modern "high" grip in mind and they just should not be shot that way. Shoot them with the "low" style grip intended and the slide bite issues go away for all but the largest and fleshiest of hands.

----

The PPK and PPK/S with their 3.5" barrels offer enough length to give good ballistic performance in .380 ACP where shorter 2.75" .380 ACP pistols will not.

It's been a long standing position by many shooters to just shoot ball ammunition in a small caliber like the .380 ACP and .32 ACP. that reasoning has however always been a little flawed or over simplified, and it also reflects improvements in .380 ACP hollow point design and ammunition over the years.

Hollow points like the 90 gr XTP and 90 gr V-crown do quite well in ballistic gel when launched at 1000 - 1050 fps, and good loads will achieve that in a 3.5" barrel. If the XTPs are launched slower in the 950-975 fps range expansion becomes in consistent and the ones that do not expand just act like FMJs and give FMJ penetration.

The V- Crowns still expand but start edging down below 12" as the velocity falls off.

From that perspective, the XTP hollow points are never a bad choice as worst case you get FMJ performance, and in a pistol capable of 1000 fps, they do quite well with good expansion and 12-13" penetration.

Similarly, the V-crowns are a good choice at 975 fps or better and get marginal around 950 fps.

Hollow points like the Speer Gold Dot and Hornady FTX expand well at short barrel velocities but come up a bit short on penetration at 10-11". Bullets like the 85 gr Magtech Guardian expand well but consistently under penetrate at around 10".

In other words:
- if you don't know the velocity obtained in your .380 ACP and/or are using a hollow point known to over expand and under penetrate; or
- suitable hollow points are not reliable in your .380 ACP;

then using an FMJ is your best choice. But if it's your automatic default, you're operating about 30 years behind the times and would benefit from looking at some current data and test results.