View Full Version : Using the .380 and the Ruger LCP for a BUG or deep concealment
I've been considering Ruger LCP's lately. Several people I know are getting them, for example, because the LCP's are so incredibly tiny and concealable (only about 9oz, and smaller dimensions than any wheelie I've ever seen). These guys also believe that the LCP's are (or soon will be, when the "new model" teething issues are worked out) reliable enough for CC.
Ordinarily I haven't considered a .380, it seems like a marginal caliber. Yet I agree that any CCW is better than none, and there are some situations where it's either impossible to carry an ordinary-sized CCW in one of the larger calibers, or you just need a BUG.
So, I'm wondering: How many folks are, or would consider, using a Ruger LCP (or something similarly small) in .380 for occasional super-deep concealment carry, or as a BUG? If you wouldn't use .380 for such uses, what ARE you using? For awhile I looked at the Bersa Thunder, a very well made .380, but the problem is they are practically as big as my M&P9 compact, so unless I could get a much smaller .380 (like the LCP), I decided it was better to just carry the M&P!
MarshallDodge
09-04-08, 12:27
When I need to go small I have a Kahr E9. They were all steel and kind of heavy but very small and available in 9mm. There are a lot more ammo choices in 9mm than 380 so that is why I went that route.
Take a look at the Kahr CW9 or P9. They have polymer frames and are are pretty light.
Ordinarily I haven't considered a .380, it seems like a marginal caliber.
There's nothing marginal about it. .380 is a joke. Penetration is pathetic. Unless an attacker will allow you to put the gun to his head and pull the trigger, forget it.
Ruger will sell a ton of these silly guns though.
My deepest concealment scenario involves an G27 in an ankle rig, and it's very rare that I have to ditch my full sized pistol and go that route.
Took my new LCP to the range for the first time yesterday. The jury is still out. It had three stoppages in 235 rounds, but it was reasonably accurate (6" at 25yd with the nearly non-existent iron sights, and a perfect 50 on the Dot Torture drill at 3yd). It's much smaller and easier to carry than a j-frame, but the trigger mechanism creates a potential problem because if you short stroke it, the gun stops and you need to retract the slide manually to get it running again.
I'm hoping to have a full write-up on my site by tomorrow.
It had three stoppages in 235 rounds, but it was reasonably accurate (6" at 25yd with the nearly non-existent iron sights
Have you tried the comparable Kel tec? I'd be interested to see if it was an improvement over that gun.
demi -- I've never owned one, but have shot a few of them.
The main problem I have with the Kel Tec is that the company doesn't seem concerned about durability. We spoke with them at SHOT'08 about it. To their credit, they have no problem sending you a brand new gun every few thousand rounds if you break your P3AT. Seriously, they told me that if I wanted to buy one, they'd send me a new one every six months for the rest of my life if I kept shooting them to death.
But -- at least in theory -- the LCP is supposed to be a little higher quality and hopefully more durable. Now it may just turn out that Kel Tec is honest whereas Ruger wont' face the truth, but for now I'm betting on Ruger's reputation for making pretty durable guns.
The P3ATs I've handled have all shot way off from POA. My single sample LCP shoots almost perfectly to POA.
I did talk to a guy at the range last week who owned both (P3AT and LCP) and he preferred the LCP but couldn't really give me a good reason why.
I owned a 9mm Kahr but couldn't trust it because of a 2% failure rate and problems with the trigger resetting so I sold it. From what I've read both LCPs and Kel-Tecs are generally unreliable and I don't consider a .380 sufficient for self defence anyway so I carry a S&W J-frame for a BUG but I'm looking for something smaller. The Walther PPS in 9mm is not much larger than an LCP so it may be the best pocket pistol around. They are being released to dealers on an allocation basis and are hard as hell to find and they're a little pricey but I'm anxious to test drive one.
Seriously, they told me that if I wanted to buy one, they'd send me a new one every six months for the rest of my life if I kept shooting them to death.
Wow! That's funny.
Took my new LCP to the range for the first time yesterday. The jury is still out. It had three stoppages in 235 rounds, but it was reasonably accurate (6" at 25yd with the nearly non-existent iron sights, and a perfect 50 on the Dot Torture drill at 3yd).
Thanks for the report. That's amazing 25-yard accuracy for such as tiny thing and short sight radius.
Kel Tec sent some T&E guns for evaluation that did well for what they are. I have one that has now accumulated about 1800-1900 rounds without a problem. It shoots POA with Black Hills XTPs and Winchester Rangers. The expected lifespan is about 2500 rounds, so I expect issues are coming soon. Kel Tec said they'll replace them when they wear out.
There are two LCPs in a pool of guns used at activities which are accumulating some rounds, but I can't recall the number. They, too, are doing well.
The LCP is a v2.0 of the P3AT, and all indications are that it will be a good performer in the niche it's designed to fill.
My dad brought home a Beretta M1934 from WWII and when I was in high school (about 40 years ago) a friend, who's dad was a cop, got me some 380's to shoot in it. I was out in the woods along Lake Michigan (now NP) and saw a squirrel on the side of a tree. I aimed for his head and squeezed off a shot. The Beretta shoots low, so the squirrel took the shot just behind the shoulder. I've seen this same shot drop a squirrel in its track with 22LR HP on a number of occasions. In this instance, the squirrel jumped to the ground and took off running, finally going into a hollow log. He eventually stuck his head out and I was able to end his suffering.
That squirrel weighed about a pound.
Never trusted the 380 after that incident.
My dad brought home a Beretta M1934 from WWII and when I was in high school (about 40 years ago) a friend, who's dad was a cop, got me some 380's to shoot in it. I was out in the woods along Lake Michigan (now NP) and saw a squirrel on the side of a tree. I aimed for his head and squeezed off a shot. The Beretta shoots low, so the squirrel took the shot just behind the shoulder. I've seen this same shot drop a squirrel in its track with 22LR HP on a number of occasions. In this instance, the squirrel jumped to the ground and took off running, finally going into a hollow log. He eventually stuck his head out and I was able to end his suffering.
That squirrel weighed about a pound.
Never trusted the 380 after that incident.
I would only carry a 380 if I had to but I wouldnt worry about it they have made great improvement in 380 since the 60's. The same people will tell you 38special is a under powered round, but cops carried it for decades and seemed to do just fine. They may not be the biggest and most powerful rounds but I believe in my ability to place the shot where it needs to be no matter the caliber.
My dad brought home a Beretta M1934 from WWII and when I was in high school (about 40 years ago) a friend, who's dad was a cop, got me some 380's to shoot in it. I was out in the woods along Lake Michigan (now NP) and saw a squirrel on the side of a tree. I aimed for his head and squeezed off a shot. The Beretta shoots low, so the squirrel took the shot just behind the shoulder. I've seen this same shot drop a squirrel in its track with 22LR HP on a number of occasions. In this instance, the squirrel jumped to the ground and took off running, finally going into a hollow log. He eventually stuck his head out and I was able to end his suffering. That squirrel weighed about a pound. Never trusted the 380 after that incident.
I'd not use that event to indict the caliber as a whole.
.380 is a viable caliber (even if suboptimal), especially in the niche the P3AT/LCP are designed for.
I have two Ruger LCP's. There are 20,000 ser. #'s between my two examples. Retail price was $235.
The accuracy of these little buggers is astounding! Trigger is as good as I would want a trigger on a pocket pistol. It won't win at Camp Perry, but our two guns both shoot right... dead... on... at 7 yards. Take your time and you cut one neat 1 inch hole (that's why I bought the second one [that, and my wife took my first one]).
I have no reliability problems in 200 plus rounds between them. Ammo used was Winchester 'Target' and Remington 95GR HP's.
I can forget about re-loading my brass with these guns as the extractor rips a chunk right out of the case, and throws the case about 20 yards perpendicular to the direction of fire.
The Ruger LCP is a fantastic thing to carry... when you can't carry a gun with you. Fits the pocket perfectly for me.
I never notice the recoil of these pistols either... until about two hour later when my lower palm starts to ache a bit and the fingers start to tremor slightly.
If you would have told me 2 years ago that my main combat handgun was going to be a Smith & Wesson, and that my EDC/BUG was going to be a Ruger, I would have said you were crazy.
This review at Gun Reports (http://www.gunreports.com/special_reports/handguns/Ruger_LCP_problems_spent_cases_rim_tears_Kel-Tec_P-3AT_ejector423-1.html) was generally positive about the LCP, though the writer noted a problem with very early models that has now been fixed. Supposedly the ejection was too strong, and the spent cases all had tears in the rim. Now that those issues have been fixed, the author said the only things the LCP needs in his opinion are: rougher grips, taller/more visible sights, and a mag extension.
Dan Goodwin
09-05-08, 11:31
The day the LCP was revealed at SHOT I told Ken Jorgenson the slide ought to be milled for a press-in front sight so users could replace it with an XS BDT.
But, in its performance niche, the regular sights will be OK. Would not be shocked if Ruger soon offered it with a CTC LG on it from the factory.
I've never owned a Kel-Tec, but at my agency the reviews from officers that use them have been 50/50. They either work or they don't.
The one I had ran well over 200 ball and Golden Sabres with nary a bobble and hit POA.
Whenever asked by the men and women at my department about backup choices I recommend Airweight/Scandium J-frame and mini-Glocks. I've now added the LCP as a BUG if the other two choices are too big, or as a tertiary weapon.
P.S. Not ignoring M&P subcompacts, just haven't used one yet.
Too bad we cannot have access to the Glock 28, in .380. Looks like an awesome pocket pistol.
Given the interest in a very tiny pocket pistol like this, and Glock's reputation for reliable guns, I couldn't believe this thing isn't being sold in every gun store. So I looked it up, and found out that the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits the import of foreign guns made in calibers that are not for "sporting purposes." Grrrrrrr! You know, not only was this law ORIGINALLY unconstitutional, it should be even more clear that it needs to be scrapped now, in light of Heller.
Too bad we cannot have access to the Glock 28, in .380. Looks like an awesome pocket pistol.
Just carry a G26. The G28 has some tweaks for the cartridge, but is otherwise the same size.
I've also found recoil to be less with the 19 and 26 than the 25 and 28.
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/883273/G28Slide.JPG
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/883273/g28magazine.jpg
John Hearne
09-05-08, 15:56
IOrdinarily I haven't considered a .380, it seems like a marginal caliber. Yet I agree that any CCW is better than none, and there are some situations where it's either impossible to carry an ordinary-sized CCW in one of the larger calibers, or you just need a BUG.
I don't see any niche that the .380 can fill well. No matter how small you make the gun, the cartridge isn't ballistically efficent enought to warrant carrying. You'd be far better served with a Kahr PM-9 or a J-frame if you need a deep concealment gun. Remember, the .380 is so anemic that it does not require a locked breech to contain it - that should be a clue.
http://www.dvctargets.com/misc/images/j-frame-1.jpg
http://www.dvctargets.com/misc/images/j-frame-2.jpg
http://www.dvctargets.com/misc/images/j-frame-3.jpg
http://www.dvctargets.com/misc/images/j-frame-4.jpg
http://www.dvctargets.com/misc/images/j-frame-5.jpg
I don't see any niche that the .380 can fill well. No matter how small you make the gun, the cartridge isn't ballistically efficent enought to warrant carrying.
I think one could describe the niche as the least inconvenient, smallest possible without being a .22/25, deepest concealment, better than nothing role. It does indeed do well there. :)
I've been able to secret the P3AT in several carry modes and places that the J-frame and KelTec would not go. The Kahr, mostly for its weight.
It's certainly not a primary HG, definitely suboptimal as a BUG, but it's not without utility.
I need to add the Kahr to this pic.
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/883273/SubComparison1.jpg
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/883273/SubComparison2.jpg
To borrow a phrase from a good friend when I told him I bought a LCP ... "Well, it sure beats a stick to the eye."
I'm quite aware that it isn't a death ray. But in some cases, it means having a gun when I wouldn't ordinarily, or having a second gun when I wouldn't ordinarily. For those who don't carry a backup ... is having a second gun in .380 worse than having no second gun at all?
I'm sure there are people who wouldn't notice seven rounds of .380 Gold Dot to the chest or face. But I'm also very sure that are a lot of people who will notice. A partial solution is better than no solution.
Opinions vary, obviously, and I carry as an on-duty LE backup gun a Seecamp in .32 (gasp). I also have a Ruger LCP that I bought for my wife, it has been 100% and amazing accurate.
I am comfortable with .32 or .380 in the backup gun role, especially on my normal "light days". On "heavy days" I carry a Glock 27.
After figuring out the necessary holdover (~ 8"), today I was consistently hitting a 12x12 plate with my LCP at 75yd. It shot a couple inches low at 25yd but hitting the plate was no challenge.
Ammo was 90gr Speer Gold Dot.
The plate was painted white, which definitely helped compared to a black bullseye with the all-black sights. I'll probably put a little paint on the front sight and hopefully my Lasergrips will fall out of the sky soon.
As long as we are talking .380, what do you guys think about the Sig P232? I had a chance to fire one the other week, and I thought it was a comfortable little pistol. A bit more muzzle whip than I would have expected, but a very handy pistol overall.
How do they hold up over the long haul? Any 'gotchas' with them?
The P232 handles hollow points better than the P230, but it's not uncommon to have problems and a fair number go back to the factory for tuning.
The gun is large compared to most of the truly small .380's on the market. For just a little more size (and weight) you can get a P239 in 9mm, .40, or even 357 SIG.
I'm personally not a fan of the Euro-style mag release simply because it's such a different manual of arms than I'm used to.
I've had a P232 for about 7 years now. I bought it for a comfortable CCW at the time, and chose it over a Glock 27 (now own both). It is probably THE most comfortable feeling handgun, in the hand, for me. I got the lightweight blued version, as I was unable to find a lightweight version with a more durable finish at the time. It is unbelievably accurate, and has never faltered.
The P232 is really too large for a pocket or ankle, so I'm left with belt carry. In that role it is very lightweight, concealable, and comfortable to carry. BUT, so are many larger, heavier, and more powerful weapons. As a result, I hardly carry my P232 any more, although there is certainly nothing wrong with doing so.
To borrow a phrase from a good friend when I told him I bought a LCP ... "Well, it sure beats a stick to the eye."
I'm quite aware that it isn't a death ray. But in some cases, it means having a gun when I wouldn't ordinarily, or having a second gun when I wouldn't ordinarily. For those who don't carry a backup ... is having a second gun in .380 worse than having no second gun at all?
I'm sure there are people who wouldn't notice seven rounds of .380 Gold Dot to the chest or face. But I'm also very sure that are a lot of people who will notice. A partial solution is better than no solution.
As usual, Todd is spot-on. Personally I have no illusions about the .380 being any kind of an "effective stopper" or anything like that. It's obviously a pretty lame round compared to our other options, but to me, that doesn't necessarily suggest that it could never be useful in some cases.
Like you say, it's a LOT better than nothing: or just throwing rocks, or punches, or pulling out your folder. It doesn't HAVE to be the most effective stopper in the world to be useful, it just has to improve your chances of getting out of the situation in one piece. I agree that a "partial solution is better than no solution." I've gone through the whole route of looking at .22 derringers, lightweight (Taurus) .22 mag revolvers, .25's, .32's, .38 special, etc. The problem in a nutshell is this (for me): the smaller calibers are all even weaker and less effective than the .380. And except for the derringers, the available options for those smaller calibers are mostly as big or bigger than the LCP and the Keltec. If there were a really great option (better than those NAA derringers for the .22 mag for instance), that was no bigger than the LCP, I'd consider it, but I'm not aware of anything.
Now on the other hand, say you go to the LARGER calibers, such as the .38 special or the 9mm. You can get something like a S&W J-frame, or a tiny Kahr 9mm, but both of those are still far larger and less portable or concealable than the LCP. I've actually tried the smallest Kahr, and though it would be small enough to do the job for me in deep concealment cases, I found it to be not super reliable. And I've read enough reports of problems with it, that I decided to rule it out. So bottom line, in the larger calibers, I am not aware of ANY option that is anywhere near as small and concealable as the LCP, while still being reliable.
I really don't want to add one more caliber to my collection, but if it's the only way to get a tiny yet reliable item like the LCP that I can carry anywhere, I'll consider it. That is, IF the LCP turns out to be reliable. I'm still pending a few more reviews and reports. I understand that they've already improved a couple of things on it versus their initial production run, so I'm going to wait just a bit longer.
I got a Ruger LCP that will serve primarily as my backup to my M&P. But its good to know knowing that for the times when I absolutely can't carry my primary that I will have the LCP in me all the time.
We are talking 'pocket autos' here. So therefore I do not consider the .380ACP to be marginal, I consider it optimal. Not to long ago, when we put a pistol into our front pocket, it was a 22, 25, or 32ACP at the most. Now thanks to Kel-Tec/Ruger, we have an inexpensive, lightweight, highly accurate, and reliable pistol in the biggest small caliber there is. Will I be able to take down an outlaw biker gang with the LCP? Of course not! Will it encourage a single biker not to rape my wife? You bet. 2 to the body, 1 to the head, doesn't work, then try it again...
I have tried a bucket full of J-frame Smiths and small Beretta's in the past, the LCP outshines them all in carry-ability, and results on paper.
Thanks a bunch maximus83 for the link to the Gun Reports info!!! Unfortunately for me, one of my LCP's is an early model (ser. # 370-0486x) that does not have the shoulder relief cut. After shooting this pistol last Saturday, I broke it down for inspection to find that the shoulder area was beat up pretty bad, and the damaged shoulder metal has wore a divot up into the underside of the slide. Not good. I noticed the brass is not flying so far, and is not as chewed up as it was when this gun was new. There is also a difference in recoil also between my two LCP's, the early model seems to tork to the right under recoil more than the later one. Even though it is beating itself to pieces, this pistol has 200 trouble free rounds through it. I'm impressed that this pistol is functioning as well as it does. Not only is this pistol functioning, I was able to put 6 rounds into under 5 inches at an honest 25 yards from the ISO. Try THAT with a Beretta M21...
I don't 100% trust myself to do any WECSOG type work on this pistol. So I guess I will have to send the LCP off to Ruger for repair, which I am loath to do because I like this gun and want the same one back. I've sent a 10/22 and a SP101 back to Ruger before, and they simply replaced the whole gun with a new one instead of fixing it. Not sure if they still do this.
Does anyone have both the LCP, and Kel-tec P3AT, how do the two compare size wise, and for feel in the hand?
My primary summer gun is a PM9, but I also have a P3AT, for those times the Kahr is too big. .380 is better than nothing, but 9mm is still about the smallest caliber I'm willing to carry.
I'm curious, for the folks in this thread who have or are interested in the Ruger LCP, but not the Kahr PM-9: Why did you rule out the Kahr? I had my reasons, but in reality, the Kahr PM-9 is only slightly larger than the LCP (14 oz versus 9), and only slightly thicker and taller, so it would seem like a serious option size-wise.
theJanitor
09-16-08, 20:55
i currently have a Kahr K40elite and it's a great pistol. it's been ultra-reliable and very accurate. i'm currently looking for a pm9.
It's interesting how close the specs of a Ruger LCP and a Kahr PM9 really are.
Specs:
----------- LCP / Kahr PM9
Weight oz: 9.42 / 14
Capacity: 6+1 / 6+1
Length in.: 5.17 / 5.3
Height in.: 3.6 / 4.0
Width in.: .74 / .90
When you compare, the Kahr PM-series pistols are amazingly close to the LCP in size. And given that they fire much more potent calibers, it surprises me that more people aren't using the Kahrs as their small-carry or BUG options.
For those who are choosing the LCP over a Kahr in 9mm or .40, I'd be really interested to learn why.
Here were my main reasons:
* Kahrs are typically quite expensive, usually running 2x the cost of an LCP. But, I'd get one if it weren't for the other issues.
* The rental Kahrs I have tried at the range, plus my Dad's PM9 and a friend's PM40, just did not feel controllable or shoot well in my large hands. IMHO, it's too small a gun to effectively handle the recoil of hot self-defense 9mm and .40 loads. Granted, the LCP doesn't feel GREAT either, but it's much more controllable, at least with the rounds I fired at the rental range (I don't own one yet, just ordered mine today).
* Too many family members, friends, and others who have owned Kahrs that I know have reported feeding and reliability issues. In fact, the smallest Kahr models almost seem to be plagued with reliability issues.
* The slightly larger size of the Kahr compared to the LCP is enough to be significant. The LCP is JUST small enough to fit unobtrusively in a front pocket holster without printing, but the slightly larger size of the PM9 makes it quite a bit harder to conceal in a pocket.
One last point worth noting is, I saw on Kahr's site that they will soon be shipping their own .380 pistol, the KP3833 (http://kahr.com/PA-1_380_p.html)!!! Like other Kahrs it'll be expensive, with an MSRP of $758. But I'll admit, it sounds interesting. It has similar dimensions to the LCP, with a slide width of 0.75", weighs about 10 oz, and is actually about 0.25" shorter in overall length. If they can make it reliable, I think it could be real contender. The problem though, is that the Ruger is already reliable and is getting the "new model" bugs worked out, so it may be hard to convince customers to spend almost 2x the cost of an LCP, just to get the new Kahr that offers no real differences in size or performance.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.