PPK

[Frogwalking]

There was a time when virtually all my defense type handguns were based on the 1911 Colt. That being the case, I bought a Browning 1911 22. It is mostly aluminum, including the slide, and has fired over 5,000 rounds, with inly a few malfunctions, all of which I attributed to the ammunition. The local gun shop has several German made Walther .22 long rifle PPKs.

I am now shooting a Beretta, Sig and CZ along with the 1911s (so the reason for the 1911-22 is no longer valid). I like the feel of the steel PPK. I have traded guns at gun shops and pawn shops most of my life, and know how this trade (my 1911 22 for their PPK) is likely to go. What do you guys think of the .22 caliber PPK? This would only be a warm-up range gun and not for defense.

(I have a Ruger Mk II, so If I get the urge for handgun accuracy, it fills in nicely.)

 

[Fishinfool]

I take it you are talking about one of the older guns, not one of the new production models? I have owned neither in .22lr., but did shoot a friends older model in .22lr. The one thing I remember that stands out was the extremely heavy trigger pull, both SA and DA made the small gun hard to shoot well. Like most older Walthers, it was very well made and finished.

Larry

 

[colt_saa]

The current 22LR PPK/s in 22LR is made by the same folks that are making the 22 copies for most all of the manufactures these days, including your Browning

I have one of the Walthers that I use with suppressors. Buying one of the new ones was cheaper than having one of my old PP or PPK/s pistols extended and threaded.

I bought one in nickel since my original suppressor was just built in a plain tube. I never anodized or cerekoted it

It has bee totally reliable. I shoot it a couple times a week

 

[sigp220.45]

I don’t think the current production ones are comparable to the older rimfire PP series guns. The magazines aren’t interchangeable, and I think the new guns are made of some kind of alloy. They look kind of cheap, but I haven’t shot one and they may be great guns. They just aren’t the same as the old-school PPKs.

 

[Grayfox]

The current Walther PPK/s .22 has actually been made by Umarex in Germany for Walther since 2013. Umarex is a well known and respected European maker of air guns and many .22 caliber copies of famous handguns for other makers.
Much of the gun is made of Zamak which is a primarily zinc based with aluminum and copper alloy. This is NOT pot metal as many have unknowingly claimed. This is a quality, light weight alloy plenty strong enough for these guns.
I have one of the PPK/s .22s and its a really good gun. I also have the adapter for use with my .22 suppressor. Like any other PPK/s the DA trigger pull is heavy. But it will lighten up and smooth out it time. The SA trigger is quite good.
Yes, there are some differences with it compared to the older Walther made steel .22 caliber PPKs. The magazines are not interchangeable. But this is a good thing as current model magazines are cheap and easy to find whereas the magazines for the older steel guns are almost impossible to find and extremely expensive.
Its not a target quality pistol, but is a fun little plinker. I like mine.
I also have a Browning 1911/22. Its a fine little gun, but the Walther is more accurate.

 

[Echo40]

I own one of the newer production Walther PPK/S .22s, which the one you're seeing most likely is. Basically, if it has a threaded barrel, Matte Black or Nickel finish with black controls, then it's a modern iteration. Classic models from decades past are almost always Blued, save for a few old military contract or confiscated versions which were parkerized, plated, or coated afterwards.

There is a ridiculous amount of biased and misinformation regarding the newer (2013 or later) PPK/S .22, which I will go over here. (Settle in, this is going to take awhile to cover...)

* It's not really a Walther
As of 1993, Walther is a subsidiary of Umarex, a company which mainly produces Airsoft and Rimfire Replica Firearms. The Walther PPK/S .22 is produced at the Umarex factory, but bears the Walther banner and makes no reference to Umarex, which leads folks to believe that it's an Umarex manufactured gun using the Walther branding.
However, what folks fail to understand is that since Umarex owns Walther and has for decades, some of their firearms have been manufactured at the Umarex plant. Also, while fanboys love to use Umarex as a scapegoat for every time Walther turns out a pistol which isn't perfect or happens to have issues down the line, Umarex is in fact not a completely separate company who manufacturers low quality firearms while Walther continues to inexplicably make high quality firearms in spite of being a subsidiary of Umarex. In short, the Walther PPK/S .22 is indeed a Walther product, and even if it wasn't, that wouldn't make the PPK/S .22 a poor quality firearm. Umarex makes plenty of other officially licensed high quality Rimfire Replica firearms which are merely cheaper in price on average compared to Walther because Walther mostly makes firearms for self-defense or police, ergo more expensive materials are required because they're chambered in 9mm Luger as opposed to .22LR.

* It's made of pot metal
Due to a mixup on Walther Arms USA's website during the launch of the new production PPK/S .22 which erroneously listed the slide/frame material as "Zinc Diecast" many folks have turned their nose up at it and continue to do so to this day, citing said misinformation.
However, the Walther PPK/S .22 is in fact made of some sort of proprietary alloy which Walther Germany claims isn't "Zinc Diecast" at all. Presumably, it's the same Aluminum alloy they use for the 1911 .22 and PPQ .22 which were introduced around the same time.

* It's not really a PPK/S
Perhaps the most ignorant and demonstrably false bit of misinformation surrounding the PPK/S .22 is also sadly among the most prevalent. According to some, (namely purists) the Walther PPK/S .22 isn't really a PPK at all but rather a variant of the Walther P22 dressed up as a PPK/S.
However, this is a gross exaggeration at best. While the modern iteration of the PPK/S .22 has some minor internal differences from the classic Walther PPK/S which it shares in common with the P22, to say they're internally the same firearm is completely ridiculous. The PPK/S .22 only has three direct similarities with the P22, the threaded barrel, barrel shroud, and the barrel nut which secures it.

* TL;DR
Pretty much everything negative said about the modern iterations of the Walther PPK/S .22 are complete misinformation perpetrated by ignorant people who are just repeating what they've read online. They make excellent little plinkers with a touch of style and will please anyone besides purists who can't get past minor aesthetic differences from the classic models which typically cost 3x the price. You get what you pay for.

 

[Kurusu]

All I can say is. I like mine.

The one at the bottom. The top one is a regular .32 PP.

 

[Echo40]

All I can say is. I like mine.

The one at the bottom. The top one is a regular .32 PP.

Those are the classic models, the one TC is speaking of is most likely a modern iteration which isn't quite as pretty and is made of alloy rather than steel, but at around $300, you get what you pay for.

That said, if I'm wrong, then the TC would be both literally and figuratively robbing the second party if they agree to a trade between a 1911-22 and a classic PPK/S .22.

 

[Kurusu]

Those are the classic models, the one TC is speaking of is most likely a modern iteration which isn't quite as pretty and is made of alloy rather than steel, but at around $300, you get what you pay for.

That said, if I'm wrong, then the TC would be both literally and figuratively robbing the second party if they agree to a trade between a 1911-22 and a classic PPK/S .22.

Mine besides being all steel is not a PPK/S.

 

[Wyatt Burp]

My dad’s friend let me shoot his PPK .22 (can’t remember if PPK/S) and I fell in lust. But with the gun, preferring a .380 PPK/S that I now own. That .22 was great and I don’t recall it jamming.

 

[Echo40]

Mine besides being all steel is not a PPK/S.

I know, I was referring to the PPK/S the TC is looking to trade for, and attempting to inform him that a modern example wouldn't have such a gorgeous high polished blue finish.

So if the gun he's looking at looks like a hybrid of the PP and PPK in your picture, then it's a classic model PPK/S, which is worth significantly more than a modern iteration, ergo if the second party agrees to the trade, then it's a steal in every sense of the word.

 

[27 Man]

I have a PP22 that was British issue during that skirmish a few years back in Northern Ireland. Officially designated L66A1, the Brits applied a black finish that can only be compared to black spray paint. However, it fits in the back pocket of my jeans when I walk the pups. Pretty accurate if I do my part.

 

[shouldazagged]

Are these inclined to deliver the slide slice to the web of the gun hand?

 

[Grayfox]

If you really want to trade the 1911/22 for the Walther, the gun shop should give you a NIB gun and maybe a little bit of cash. I just checked GB and a new in box PPK/s .22 can be had for around $350. I'm sure if you shop around you can do better. Where as used 1911/22s start at $400 and go up from there. Ok, maybe a straight across trade if you really want to. But any deal where you have to put in cash, I'd walk away from.
OTOH, the gun shop does need to make a profit. So I just can't see how they could even offer any kind of a fair trade deal for you.
Honestly, I'd just buy the Walther for cash and keep the Browning.
Your call Dude.

 

[Kurusu]

Are these inclined to deliver the slide slice to the web of the gun hand?

Yes. If you don't pay attention.

Been there done that.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Have a newer PPK-S.
Good gun, my only negative comment is really heavy Double Action Trigger pull.

 

[Marshal Tom]

They are more expensive but I would look at a Beretta model 87 Cheetah. I purchased one several years ago and let it go. Wish that I hadn't done so. It was a wonderful little gun. Fit and finish were excellent and it performed flawlessly.

 

[RGVshooter]

I own one of the new Umarex made Walther PPK/s 22lr and had it since 2015. It is a great shooter and one of the pistols that I take with almost every time I go to the range. It's also the same gun that I used to teach my daughter how to shoot. The only "bad" thing about is the excessively heavy double action trigger however a lot of the Walther PPk's in 380 also have a very heavy double action trigger. Single action trigger pull is light & crisp. Extremely reliable & fun shooter. I say go for it!

 

[Frogwalking]

Thanks gentlemen. The PPK/s I handled was kind of heavy, so I assumed it was steel. Having grown up in Tennessee with "hog rifles" anything that was not iron, brass, silver or wood was pot metal. I have learned that "high strength aluminum alloy" is not pot metal. (I don't own a plastic gun.) A Marine sergeant in Navy boot-camp made that abundantly clear to me when I answered his question by telling him that the receiver of an M-16 is made from pot metal. One does not forget an experience like that.

 

[Echo40]

Thanks gentlemen. The PPK/s I handled was kind of heavy, so I assumed it was steel. Having grown up in Tennessee with "hog rifles" anything that was not iron, brass, silver or wood was pot metal. I have learned that "high strength aluminum alloy" is not pot metal. (I don't own a plastic gun.) A Marine sergeant in Navy boot-camp made that abundantly clear to me when I answered his question by telling him that the receiver of an M-16 is made from pot metal. One does not forget an experience like that.

The newer Walther PPK/S .22 is equal in weight to the steel models, which was done intentionally. Although the PPK/S .22 is made of leightweight alloy, the frame is filled in beneath the grips as opposed to the steel versions which have more conventional frames, hence the equal weight.

Next time you get a look at it, check both sides of the slide. If either side reads; "Walther Arms Fort Smith, AR" then that's a proof positive way of telling whether it's a classic model or not since Walther didn't have a factory in the USA prior to 2010.

You'll never see that marking on the slide of an older model.

 

[Kifaru]

I bought the newer model used (barely) at a big box store for $225. It came with the box, tools, extra sights, etc. I was a little nervous because two different employees reminded me of the used gun policy that stated a gun could be returned for a full refund within 5 days. Did they know something I didn't? Of course, I went out and shot it immediately. I've put only Remington Golden Bullet and CCI Mini Mag rounds through it because the CCI runs in anything and because I have tons of the Remington. I haven't had a failure yet in not quite 1,000 rounds.

I have seen a couple of the original .22 versions, and each of them were offered at more than 5 times the price I paid for my newer one. The finish on the newer one doesn't even come close to the beautiful bluing on the older ones; it looks like Krylon by comparison. Also, that cool, wave-patterned anti glare feature machined on the top of the slide of the original is merely cast into the slide of the new one rather indistinctly. And the grips are not interchangeable with any other version of the PPK/S.

But those are just cosmetic issues. The new magazines extend into the pinky extension and are therefore true 10-round mags. They also seem to be more reliable than the older ones from what I've read. I like the fact that the new one comes with different heights of front sights and the rear is drift adjustable. And it comes suppressor ready! It is easily one of my favorite plinkers as it is crazy accurate for a "pocket pistol." If you want a PPK for your collection, as an investment or an heirloom, get the original. But if you want a fun shooter, the newer one will do just fine in that role.

 

[Farmer17]

I was really excited when they brought out the new PPK/s until I looked at one and handled it, I just wasn't impressed. I would love to have one of the older PPs in 22RF but they are really expensive and I'm quite happy with my Bersa Thunder 22. It has a real steel slide, great controls, nice light DA/SA trigger, ergonomic, and accurate the only down side is some .22 ammo doesn't have enough oomph to push that heavy steel slide but cheap CCI ammo is 100% reliable so that's all I feed it.

 

[BB57]

I have the British issued, German military proofed L66A1 version of the Walther PP in .22 LR as well as the new Walther/Umarex made PPK/S .22 LR.

As noted above the latter receives a lot of hate due to the use of Zamak allow in the frame and slide. However, in terms of the design and function it's very much a PP series pistol.

Also as noted above, the space under the grips is filled in to give it the same weight as a steel framed PPK/S.

The over all design is however the same, just with slightly different execution of the small parts, and a lower level of finish to match the lower price point.

The PPK/S .22LR also uses a hybrid approach with the barrel. The barrel uses the same liner and sleeve arrangement with a barrel nut used to tension the barrel as the Walther P22, but with the barrel sleeve then pressed in the frame, in a similar manner as the PP series pistols.

The PP series .22LR pistols use a steel slide, but the steel slide is thinned to reduce weight to ensure adequate slide velocity to cycle with the .22LR cartridge. The PPK/S .22LR uses a full width slide, but made from Zamak alloy to reduce weight.

Another major difference is the magazine. The new PPK/S .22LR uses a magazine with a better feed angle and allows for better positioning of the rounds in the magazine to reduce the potential for rim lock. A finger extension is required for 10 round capacity, but it's an honest 10 rounds of reliable feeding. Many of the PPs in .22 LR will only feed 8 rounds reliably.

I've found that my PPK/S .22LR shoots every bit as reliably and accurately as my L66A1, with the added advantage that it is not picky about the ammo it shoots. In fact, it's the only semi-auto. 22LR that actually likes Remington golden bullets.

I have upwards of 2000 rounds through mine and it's still accurate and reliable. It may not have the heirloom potential of an older steel frame PP series pistol, but it isn't giving anything up when it comes to actually shooting it.

 

[Andyd]

I have a Walther PP in .22 l.r. made in Zella Mehlis that is one of the first rimfire versions made and have shot this gun extensively, my guesstimate is that I shot around 15,000 rounds through that gun which I had bought used a little over 30 years ago. The quality is amazing and it is very reliable with HV ammo. It uses the same magazine body that my Hammerli international uses.

Contrary to earlier posters, I do not consider Umarex a respected German company! Having grown up in Germany I am well aware of their history, starting out as Uma Meyer, they bought the dismal Reck firearms company, then changed name to Umareck, later Umarex and how they started manufacturing cheap starter and gas pistols, much like Roehm did. In 2010 Umarex bought the tooling from Roehm, too.

I have a firearm, or two, for every need and honestly have to say that Umarex products do not meet my expectations and quality standards.

 

[Swiftflyer]

Love my Manhurin PPK in .22lr but they are getting hard to find.

 

[Kurusu]

I have a Walther PP in .22 l.r. made in Zella Mehlis that is one of the first rimfire versions made and have shot this gun extensively, my guesstimate is that I shot around 15,000 rounds through that gun which I had bought used a little over 30 years ago. The qu

​

ality is amazing and it is very reliable with HV ammo. It uses the same magazine body that my Hammerli international uses.

Contrary to earlier posters, I do not consider Umarex a respected German company! Having grown up in Germany I am well aware of their history, starting out as Uma Meyer, they bought the dismal Reck firearms company, then changed name to Umareck, later Umarex and how they started manufacturing cheap starter and gas pistols, much like Roehm did. In 2010 Umarex bought the tooling from Roehm, too.

I have a firearm, or two, for every need and honestly have to say that Umarex products do not meet my expectations and quality standards.

A pre war PP! That is cool.

 

[Echo40]

Contrary to earlier posters, I do not consider Umarex a respected German company! Having grown up in Germany I am well aware of their history, starting out as Uma Meyer, they bought the dismal Reck firearms company, then changed name to Umareck, later Umarex and how they started manufacturing cheap starter and gas pistols, much like Roehm did. In 2010 Umarex bought the tooling from Roehm, too.

I have a firearm, or two, for every need and honestly have to say that Umarex products do not meet my expectations and quality standards.

Is it a possibility that Umarex may have improved over the years or perhaps even that you just have higher standards than that of their target demographic?

I ask because nowadays the only complaints I ever see in regards to Umarex products are cosmetic/aesthetic in nature, with little complaints in regards to function nor durability, or at least not among actual owners of the firearms.

I'd hate to be presumptuous, but it just seems to me that those who complain of the quality of Umarex products are expecting quality above and beyond their price point, and more often than not were never seeking a simple range plinker, ergo they've kind of missed the point.

Just saying, somehow I doubt that Walther/Umarex aims to equal the quality of a prewar Walther PP, nor that their target demographic was owners of classic Walther PP Series pistols. I think they were intended to be relatively low-cost rimfire replicas of popular/iconic pistols, aimed at a demographic who sought a low-cost rimfire replica of said pistols they could plink with, and assuming that was their purpose, they seem to have succeeded.

TL;DR: If you compare a prewar Walther made with all hand-fitted parts which would easily cost upwards of $1000 to reproduce to that of a modern Walther made with cast/CNC machined parts which costs around $300-$375, then you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

[BB57]

I have a Walther PP in .22 l.r. made in Zella Mehlis that is one of the first rimfire versions made and have shot this gun extensively.../

/....Contrary to earlier posters, I do not consider Umarex a respected German company!.../

/...I have a firearm, or two, for every need and honestly have to say that Umarex products do not meet my expectations and quality standards.

I don't think any of us is making a statement that anything made by Umarex is going to meet the same standard as a pre-war Walther, or even a Manurhin made PP pistol. In fact, I noted the unlikely probability of a PPK/S .22 LR ever obtaining anything close to heirloom status.

On the other hand, if you priced one of the older (even a comparatively modern "older") Walther PP or PPK in .22LR you'll notice they sell for 2.5 to 5 times the new price of one of the more recent Umarex-Walther PPK/S .22 LR pistols. If you've priced magazines for the older pistols you know they usually sell for north of $100-120 US, and a pre-war magazine will cost something north of $200.

What most of us who own one of the Umarex-Walther PPK/S .22LR pistols are saying is that they shoot far better than you'd expect for the price. Those of us who have both will more than likely tell you that they shoot on par with the older Walther pistols in terms of performance, rather than aesthetics. Real world, the new pistols sell on line in the $250 to $340 price range, with pretty much any site selling them for less than $325 being out of stock. That's the new price, used they'll sell in the $175-$200 range.

Even at the "new" price, it's actually excellent bang for the buck for someone who wants a "shooter" rather than a collector piece.

-----

The Colt-Umarex M4 .22 LR is in a similar situation. It also takes an incredible amount of heat because of its use of zinc alloy and takes additional criticism due to the lack of compatibility with aftermarket AR-15 parts.

However, I bought the M4 Tactical version shortly after it was released based on the recommendation of an old school gunsmith/gun shop owner whose opinion I trusted. He also described it as serious bang for the buck and he was absolutely spot on with his assessment.

Yes, it does use Zamak in the bolt carrier, but from an engineering perspective it's a very appropriate use of the material. The design also allows for fine tuning of the rifle to the ammo, and the barrel nut/flash hider can also be used to tension the barrel to produce excellent accuracy. My Colt-Umarex M4 Tactical is every bit as reliable and more accurate than my CMMG dedicated .22LR AR-15.

I suspect that most of the reliability and accuracy complaints with the Colt-Umarex rifles come from shooters who buy one and then almost immediately disassemble the rifle and bolt carrier without understanding how it works, with the result that they never get the recoil spring correct for the ammo, or the barrel tension where it needs to be for accuracy.

---

There is additional Zamak alloy firearm irony in the form of the Henry .22LR lever action rifles. They use a Zamak alloy receiver that is hidden under a steel or brass cover - almost identical to the Ithaca Model 49 and Model 72 lever actions, which used a painted aluminum cover over the zinc alloy receiver.

The irony is that the same folks who love their "pot metal" Henry .22s, are very often the same people who revile the "pot metal" Colt-Umarex M4 and the Umarex-Walther PPK/S.