I don't want one.Originally Posted by EChryst
I don't want one.
#RESIST
Don't worry, it'll soon be easily modified by yourself or you can send it off for the stipple/undercut/frame modify at all the big and little name guys….
Yet…
It went from a pariah to a "not too bad" idea.
No it didn't .
"For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
-- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --
Er, I still don't have any more use for it than I did last week?
(And I don't necessarily think it'll be a bad gun or anything. If Glock doesn't pull another Gen4 or suffer a QC hiccup, it'll probably be the nicest-shooting pocket-ish sized .380 this side of the P232. A low hurdle, granted, but still...)
Another shooting friend (a full caliber service pistol kinda guy) has now shot a 42 and he reports it surprised him with how much fun it was to shoot such a small pistol.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
Maybe I worded that wrong. I, too, have no use for it. Not now, not ever.
But it seems like the tide has changed from "No one wants a big .380" to "Okay, it's not too bad."
I was just thinking today… "If I DID somehow desire a .380, I believe I'd go with a P230." And then I remembered that LSP552 (either him, or another of the FTU crew back then) had one, we oohhed and aahhed until we shot it; it hit maybe a foot high at 25 yards, IIRC.
So, what is the difference between the 230 and the 232… aside from the fact that none of the former were produced by the purple-fade-and-diamond-plate crowd?
Somewhere, some how, I picked up a P232 magazine that appears to be e-nickle. Would it work in a P230?
.
Well some kept an open mind from the start and then as pics and comparo's and range reports come out; it sounds like it's not so big but fun to shoot. What that? Fun?
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
Somewhere back in this 48-page imbroglio, I observed that sales predictions would best be made after reports of how it shoots and handles came in. Lo, it appears at first blush to be reliable, soft-shooting, fun, and has sights.
These things will move like Gluten-free hotcakes at a rainbow gathering kitchen. Even if the pill is only slightly better than a sharp stick and a stern glance.
Without naming names, I had a conversation today with someone in a position to know about the decisions leading to making this a .380 and not a small 9mm. The answer was that the big G consulted with their distributors, and the overwhelming feedback was that they would sell more as a .380.
Perhaps not joy to the enthusiasts, but purely a business decision. To help evaluate that statement, who has the numbers on the relative production of the Keltec, Ruger and S&W respective offerings in 9 and .380, to look at the raw numbers on 9 versus .380 units moved?
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
Reply With Quote