View Full Version : Walther PPS: General Durability/Life Span?
VelveteenMole
04-23-12, 04:47
I realize it may not be seen by some as a primary pistol, nor many as a "range" pistol as well, but aside from issues with the slide lock spring pre-2010 and initial break-in bobbles, can anyone speak to long term durability/reliability at high round counts with regard to major parts breakages such as in the striker assembly, trigger springs, on up to chassis, frame or slide cracks? Assuming one left the Quicksafe backstrap permanently secured with a Hogue Handall or in some other durable fashion, is there any reason to think the pistol couldn't keep up with a Glock as far as durability with comparable preventative maintenance?
Anyone have some impressive round counts to report with the PPS?
Thanks.
You might as this guy: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=103518&highlight=PPS
My GF carries one almost daily. Between the 2 of us, we have put 2300 through it and it has held up extremely well. Really no issues minus the initial break in period. However, she is dumping it to change to the Shield from smith. I am pretty confident that the shield will phase the PPS out. It is more ergonomic, cheaper, holds more rounds in smaller package, has a better trigger, more accessories, american mag release, and imo recoils quite a bit softer.
My GF carries one almost daily. Between the 2 of us, we have put 2300 through it and it has held up extremely well. Really no issues minus the initial break in period. However, she is dumping it to change to the Shield from smith. I am pretty confident that the shield will phase the PPS out. It is more ergonomic, cheaper, holds more rounds in smaller package, has a better trigger, more accessories, american mag release, and imo recoils quite a bit softer.
I agree with the part where you say the Shield is cheaper. There is no chance that it will be replacing my PPS.
I agree with the part where you say the Shield is cheaper. There is no chance that it will be replacing my PPS.
To each their own, but the only subjective statements i made were ergonomics, trigger, and felt recoil. The rest are facts.
To each their own, but the only subjective statements i made were ergonomics, trigger, and felt recoil. The rest are facts.
The Shield does not have a higher capacity. They both hold up to 8 rounds in the mag. I know that triggers are subjective, but I just don't see how you can prefer the Shield to the PPS.
Isn't the PPS a little thinner, at least the slide?
Isn't the PPS a little thinner, at least the slide?
Yes, it is slimmer, albeit slightly. According to the mfgs, the PPS is .91 in and the Shield is .95.
Candidly, they are both pretty much the same size in all dimensions, so it is really splitting hairs to say one is smaller than the other.
american mag release,
That is a huge plus for the PPS in my book.
VelveteenMole
04-24-12, 01:11
To each their own, but the only subjective statements i made were ergonomics, trigger, and felt recoil. The rest are facts.
I'll certainly try a Shield as soon as it arrives as a rental at the range, but the sample I played with had a horrendous trigger and printed worse than the PPS. I also consider the very tactile striker indicator on the PPS as a safety feedback device for holstering, while the Shield's safety isn't quite prominent enough for me to have confidence in disengagement under extreme stress.
Honestly, shooting the PPS was a revelation in ergonomic compatibility with my hand, eye, and trigger finger. And the recoil, while quick, was comfortable, and the gun felt like it was on rails as far as indexing and returning to target. The first round I fired with it was from a fast press-out at 7 yards and punctured the physical X, and that occurred several more times in the box of ammo. Definitely the best shooting introduction to a pistol I've ever had.
Mines got about 800 rounds through it now. Other then 2 double feeds with wolf ammo, and the trigger sticking to the rear when I was torture testing it in the mudd/water,I've had no issues.
I shot IDPA with it last night. Came in 10 out if 21 shooters, has numerous reloads other didn't have to make. My personal high point was shooting a 5.86 FAST drill clean with it.
The shields great, but I've not shot one. That said its gonna be hard to get me to switch over since this is just about the same gun.
Yes, it is slimmer, albeit slightly. According to the mfgs, the PPS is .91 in and the Shield is .95.
Candidly, they are both pretty much the same size in all dimensions, so it is really splitting hairs to say one is smaller than the other.
Agreed. I have both and while I don't dispute that there may be forty thousandths difference between them, it's certainly not something I've noticed. These two guns are very similar in size.
I realize it may not be seen by some as a primary pistol, nor many as a "range" pistol as well, but aside from issues with the slide lock spring pre-2010 and initial break-in bobbles, can anyone speak to long term durability/reliability at high round counts with regard to major parts breakages such as in the striker assembly, trigger springs, on up to chassis, frame or slide cracks? Assuming one left the Quicksafe backstrap permanently secured with a Hogue Handall or in some other durable fashion, is there any reason to think the pistol couldn't keep up with a Glock as far as durability with comparable preventative maintenance?
Anyone have some impressive round counts to report with the PPS?
Thanks.
I don't know that I'd consider these round counts impressive, but here's our experience with a pair of 9mm PPS:
We bought a 2008-vintage one new in August 2010. It has fired 1703 rds of various factory ammo, including 324 rds of Fed 147 gr P9HST2, our carry load. It has had one failure to extract at about rd 91 or 92, and a pair of failures of the slide to lock back when empty, at about rd 93 and rd 1085. The failure to lock back at rd 1085 was with P9HST2. This is my wife's carry/nightstand gun. I view the extraction failure as likely a break-in issue, and the failures to lock back were probably user-induced (me). I consider this gun sufficiently reliable for serious use.
We bought a 2009-vintage one new in February 2011. It has fired 2482 rds of various factory ammo, incl 310 rds of P9HST2. It has had five failures to eject and a nose-down feed failure, all with quality factory FMJ ammo, the ejection failures happening at rds 180, 435, 1692, 2360, and 2480. The feed failure happened at rd 1314. Failures were with Winchester 124 gr FMJ, American Eagle 147 gr FMJFP, Speer Lawman 147 gr TMJ, and Win Super X 147 gr FMJ. None of the failures were with P9HST2. The failures at 1692 and 2360 were when shooting weak-hand only(WHO). The failure at 2480 was when shooting strong-hand only(SHO). Probably two-thirds of the last 1000 rds through this gun were shot SHO or WHO. This gun, and our three most problematic PPS magazines, have been at S&W/Walther America for two-three weeks to be made reliable. Its role was to be a spare to backup my wife's gun and as a weakside pocket-carried backup gun for me. It is (currently)insufficiently reliable for either, IMO.
We've experienced no parts failures, nor noticed any cracks or unusual wear, with either gun. We've replaced no springs yet. We have the larger backstrap on both guns, and they are both fitted with Hogue Handalls; the backstraps have been removed only once for each gun, to replace the factory-installed smaller ones for the larger ones. Our PPSs were very tight when new, and became noticeably smoother as the rd count went up, especially the first several hundred.
I hope this info helps.
VelveteenMole
04-24-12, 14:34
Mines got about 800 rounds through it now. Other then 2 double feeds with wolf ammo, and the trigger sticking to the rear when I was torture testing it in the mudd/water,I've had no issues.
I shot IDPA with it last night. Came in 10 out if 21 shooters, has numerous reloads other didn't have to make. My personal high point was shooting a 5.86 FAST drill clean with it.
The shields great, but I've not shot one. That said its gonna be hard to get me to switch over since this is just about the same gun.
Did you notice if the extractor did some damage to the Wolf cases when it let go and did the cases seem stuck when you removed them?
The Shield does not have a higher capacity. They both hold up to 8 rounds in the mag. I know that triggers are subjective, but I just don't see how you can prefer the Shield to the PPS.
I understand they both hold up to 8, but in my post i said more capacity in a smaller package. It is not a huge difference but the shield 7rnd mag is a little smaller then the pps.
I'll certainly try a Shield as soon as it arrives as a rental at the range, but the sample I played with had a horrendous trigger and printed worse than the PPS. I also consider the very tactile striker indicator on the PPS as a safety feedback device for holstering, while the Shield's safety isn't quite prominent enough for me to have confidence in disengagement under extreme stress.
Honestly, shooting the PPS was a revelation in ergonomic compatibility with my hand, eye, and trigger finger. And the recoil, while quick, was comfortable, and the gun felt like it was on rails as far as indexing and returning to target. The first round I fired with it was from a fast press-out at 7 yards and punctured the physical X, and that occurred several more times in the box of ammo. Definitely the best shooting introduction to a pistol I've ever had.
If that gun fits you then you definitely found a winner! I did enjoy the gun and think it is a very good quality gun. I guess my statement should have been more to new coming purchasers. It will be hard for them to choose the PPS over the Shield considering they are very similar with a differnence in price of about $139. Atleast thats the difference of what we sell them for at the store i manage. I am not trying to necessarily knock the PPS and I hate jumping on bandwagons in the early stages, and I am not even really fond of m&p's considering i shoot Glock's, but it is basically the gun i have been waiting on glock making for like 6 years now.
VelveteenMole
04-24-12, 17:13
If that gun fits you then you definitely found a winner! I did enjoy the gun and think it is a very good quality gun. I guess my statement should have been more to new coming purchasers. It will be hard for them to choose the PPS over the Shield considering they are very similar with a differnence in price of about $139. Atleast thats the difference of what we sell them for at the store i manage. I am not trying to necessarily knock the PPS and I hate jumping on bandwagons in the early stages, and I am not even really fond of m&p's considering i shoot Glock's, but it is basically the gun i have been waiting on glock making for like 6 years now.
Ditto to that bit. I still wish they would.
My PPS (9mm) has run 100% with all 115-124 FMJ/JHPs that I have tried (I don't use 147s)---I've had it for a couple of years now---bought slightly used---I feel well-armed with this reliable little pistol.
I also have two Kahr CW9 pistols that also run 100%---all is good with these smaller guns.
The S&W pistol is just too new for me to feel comfortable with yet---it has to prove itself.
VelveteenMole
04-27-12, 13:48
My PPS (9mm) has run 100% with all 115-124 FMJ/JHPs that I have tried (I don't use 147s)---I've had it for a couple of years now---bought slightly used---I feel well-armed with this reliable little pistol.
I also have two Kahr CW9 pistols that also run 100%---all is good with these smaller guns.
The S&W pistol is just too new for me to feel comfortable with yet---it has to prove itself.
Round counts?
Pistol Shooter
04-27-12, 16:09
My wife and I have put 2,650 rds. of assorted fmj and jhp ammo through her 9mm PPS with zero failures to date.
It's an accurate pistol and easy to shoot well. Because of it's small size though the PPS doesn't really lend itself to high round count range shooting, like a larger pistol might, IMO.
Fmj ammo fired has been primarily Federal American Eagle 115 gr., 124 gr. and Winchester NATO 124 gr.
JHP ammo fired includes 124 gr. +P Gold Dot, 124 gr. +P HST and 124 gr. +P Golden Saber.
It's been a fine handgun by any measure and I'm very comfortable that it's my wife's carry gun and she knows how to run the hell out of it. ;)
Good luck with your choice OP. Let us know what you decide.
Canonshooter
04-28-12, 08:47
My sample is a late 2010 build.
I cannot speak to high round count - what ever that might be - but mine has been 100% so far at about 500 rounds. The only "failure" I've experienced was with a brand new 8-round magazine that was almost impossible to get the eight round into - the PPS failed to strip the round out of the mag when the slide was racked. After using the mag a few times, it is now reliable. My other 3 mags have proven 100% reliable so far.
I'm not a big guy and my mitts are even smaller. Because of this, the PPS fits my hands the best of any handgun I've ever owned over the last 30 years. As already stated above, if the gun fits - use it.
The trigger has smoothed out nicely with use and I have become very accustomed to it. I actually prefer it to the trigger pull of the Glock.
If I do my part, the PPS appears to be every bit as accurate as my G17C (which wears a set of Heinie sights).
It took some getting used to, but I now prefer the trigger guard safety of the PPS - unlike the Glock, I do not have to shift my grip to reach it.
I don't use the "backstrap safety" device. Bad design decision IMO - mine has never been off and probably never will.
It's obviously very easy to carry and conceal - here in NH, I wear mine just about every day in a CompTac Minotaur MTAC IWB holster with a 7-round mag in the gun and an 8-round mag in a CompTac IWB pouch.
The PPS has now become my primary "go to" handgun over the Glock. It fits my hand well, it's a pleasure to carry and easy to shoot well. As a civilian, it fits my self-defense carry needs perfectly and using it in IDPA matches has made me appreciate its capabilities all the more.
Unless it fails me in some way, I'll be sticking with it.
I don't know that I'd consider these round counts impressive, but here's our experience with a pair of 9mm PPS:
We bought a 2008-vintage one new in August 2010. It has fired 1703 rds of various factory ammo, including 324 rds of Fed 147 gr P9HST2, our carry load. It has had one failure to extract at about rd 91 or 92, and a pair of failures of the slide to lock back when empty, at about rd 93 and rd 1085. The failure to lock back at rd 1085 was with P9HST2. This is my wife's carry/nightstand gun. I view the extraction failure as likely a break-in issue, and the failures to lock back were probably user-induced (me). I consider this gun sufficiently reliable for serious use.
We bought a 2009-vintage one new in February 2011. It has fired 2482 rds of various factory ammo, incl 310 rds of P9HST2. It has had five failures to eject and a nose-down feed failure, all with quality factory FMJ ammo, the ejection failures happening at rds 180, 435, 1692, 2360, and 2480. The feed failure happened at rd 1314. Failures were with Winchester 124 gr FMJ, American Eagle 147 gr FMJFP, Speer Lawman 147 gr TMJ, and Win Super X 147 gr FMJ. None of the failures were with P9HST2. The failures at 1692 and 2360 were when shooting weak-hand only(WHO). The failure at 2480 was when shooting strong-hand only(SHO). Probably two-thirds of the last 1000 rds through this gun were shot SHO or WHO. This gun, and our three most problematic PPS magazines, have been at S&W/Walther America for two-three weeks to be made reliable. Its role was to be a spare to backup my wife's gun and as a weakside pocket-carried backup gun for me. It is (currently)insufficiently reliable for either, IMO.
We've experienced no parts failures, nor noticed any cracks or unusual wear, with either gun. We've replaced no springs yet. We have the larger backstrap on both guns, and they are both fitted with Hogue Handalls; the backstraps have been removed only once for each gun, to replace the factory-installed smaller ones for the larger ones. Our PPSs were very tight when new, and became noticeably smoother as the rd count went up, especially the first several hundred.
I hope this info helps.
Update on the 2009-vintage PPS that went back to Walther/S&W in early April. I got a call from a CS rep at S&W today. He told me that they found a chipped ejector on my gun. He believes that this was causing the stoppages that I experienced. According to him, they had never seen this issue before. He explained that because the ejector is an integral part of the serial numbered steel frame, the ejector cannot simply be replaced. Walther/S&W is going to replace the gun at no expense to me.
gtmtnbiker98
05-23-12, 19:54
^^ That's awesome.
This is all great info. I was looking at both the PPS (9mm) and the Shield as a possible CCW for my wife. I'm going to take her to a range and let her shoot both of these to see what she feels comfortable with.
On a side note, while I was doing some Googling of the PPS I came across this article.
http://www.defensereview.com/walther-pps-police-pistol-slim-single-stack-striker-fired-9mm-compact-pistol-for-concealed-carry-ccw-applications-and-covert-missionsoperations/
I thought it was interesting.
people seem to forget the fact that the pps has an accessory rail on it. You could mount a tlr-3 on it and carry it in a nice ntac kydex holster. A combination of a tactical side arm with illumination in a nice slim concealable profile.
On top of that the pps has the nicest striker fired trigger i've ever shot. Better than any stock glock, xd or m&p i've handled. If the shield has a trigger pull that's anything close to an m&p, i would say the pps wins hands down in that category as well.
Update on the 2009-vintage PPS that went back to Walther/S&W in early April. I got a call from a CS rep at S&W today. He told me that they found a chipped ejector on my gun. He believes that this was causing the stoppages that I experienced. According to him, they had never seen this issue before. He explained that because the ejector is an integral part of the serial numbered steel frame, the ejector cannot simply be replaced. Walther/S&W is going to replace the gun at no expense to me.
Sorry to resurrect this thread, and to quote my own earlier post, but I wanted to provide an update. This past Tuesday S&W/Walther America shipped the replacement PPS referenced above. I picked up the gun this morning from the FFL. It is a SKU WAP10001 (like our others), and has the standard "S" connector and two magazines, a 7 rnder and an 8 rnder. It has serial number AG71xx and a date code of BC, which I believe indicates 2012 manufacture. Haven't shot it yet.
My thanks go to John Young at Walther America.
people seem to forget the fact that the pps has an accessory rail on it. You could mount a tlr-3 on it and carry it in a nice ntac kydex holster. A combination of a tactical side arm with illumination in a nice slim concealable profile.
On top of that the pps has the nicest striker fired trigger i've ever shot. Better than any stock glock, xd or m&p i've handled. If the shield has a trigger pull that's anything close to an m&p, i would say the pps wins hands down in that category as well.
I think it has more creep and a heavier pull then a well broken-in glock, but it's still a damn usable trigger.
my only complaint on this gun is the back strap, but mine is pinned on now... not hard to do if you don't mind drilling a hole in a 500 dollar pistol.
I just picked up a used earlier model, unsure of the year but it's an AI prefix gun.
I will be putting it through it's paces, and if I can stand loading the mags it'll be a high-ish round count gun before I carry it.
I just picked up a used earlier model, unsure of the year but it's an AI prefix gun.
I will be putting it through it's paces, and if I can stand loading the mags it'll be a high-ish round count gun before I carry it.
Mizer, the AI date code means that it was made in 2008.
Mizer, the AI date code means that it was made in 2008.
Thanks. It wasn't a good start for this gun today. I only fired 100 rounds before I gave up.
It has an issue with the trigger not fully resetting after each round fired. It will not return 100% of the way forward before it becomes stuck and requires manual intervention to be able to fire. This happened on 9 of 100 rounds today.
It's also picking up a good deal of brass on the ejection port and under the slide as well. Not sure what that's all about.
Methinks I was sold a lemon.
Thanks. It wasn't a good start for this gun today. I only fired 100 rounds before I gave up.
It has an issue with the trigger not fully resetting after each round fired. It will not return 100% of the way forward before it becomes stuck and requires manual intervention to be able to fire. This happened on 9 of 100 rounds today.
It's also picking up a good deal of brass on the ejection port and under the slide as well. Not sure what that's all about.
Methinks I was sold a lemon.
I've broken in three 9mm PPS so far(2450, 1700, and 1100 rds) and will start breaking in a fourth one on Monday, schedule permitting. I've run into the sticky/slow/incomplete trigger reset issue on one of those three guns. It happened about four times between rds 700 and 850. I've put an additional 250 rds through it since, and haven't had a recurrence. The keys to preventing this seem to be a high level of lubrication between the frame rail and the disconnector/connector and running up the round count. If you lube it well and get 1000 rds through the gun, and it's still happening, then I'd suggest a trip back to Walther America.
Reference the brass marks, I've noticed them on all three of mine. As the gun breaks in, they seem to lessen. As far as I can tell, the marks aren't indicative of a problem.
The PPS seems to be a very tight design that requires significant break-in (300-1000 rds depending on the individual example) to reach optimum smoothness. It seems to run best when quite wet.
Hope this helps.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.