[Sheepdoggit]

If you could only have one PPK variant, what would it be and why?

 

[MoonWolf]

Since I don't carry a PPK variant, I would pick the one I have owned for 45 years. That would be the PPK/S in 22. If I was going to carry it, I'd pick the 32.
BTW: I carry a revolver.

 

[TheWatcher]

I carry the PPK when I want to travel light and since I can comfortably handle it, it is in .380.

 

[Sheepdoggit]

This is why I prefer .380 ACP over .22LR and .32 ACP. Look at the failure to incapacitate rates: https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

 

[MoonWolf]

The 380 should serve you well.



Interesting chart. I found the category below particularly interesting.



22 rimfire: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38
32 Auto: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.52
357: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.7
40 S&W: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.36
44 Magnum: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.71


I tend to take "database" results with a grain or two of salt - especially if I do not know precisely how the raw data was collected.

 

[93978]

-- For fun at the range; pocket carry on rare occasion; to marvel at it as the ultimate combination of art and science, it would be the PPK.
-- For more routine pocket carry it would be a PPKS with a flat bottom mag. (Viewed from any any angle that does not expose the backstrap, the PPKS is hard to distinguish, on first glance, from a PPK.)
-- However, for me, the most modern epitome of a PPK like weapon is the Glock 42. (A Glock 42 in .32 ACP would be pretty neat.)

 

[Jimbo80]

You forgot the PPs and the .22 PPK. Out of the guns listed I would pick the .32 PPK.

 

[ErichS]

A minty pre war PPK.

 

[halfmoonclip]

The .22 iteration is fun, the .380 is little fun, and the .32 is like baby bear's porridge. It's just right, and it still isn't like kissing your sister.
Moon

 

[93978]

I lament the day I traded my "minty pre war PPK."

 

[brunrox]

22 rimfire[/B]: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38
32 Auto: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.52
357: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.7
40 S&W: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.36
44 Magnum: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.71

Hard to believe a 44 magnum is less efficient than a 22 rimfire...

 

[MoonWolf]

Hard to believe a 44 magnum is less efficient than a 22 rimfire...

Yes. It is hard to believe. And I don't.

 

[ErichS]

I lament the day I traded my "minty pre war PPK."

The pre war guns IMO, were of the highest craftsmanship and finish.

 

[Martin]

Definitly a PPK chambered in 7,65 (7,65x17 mm ; sometimes called .32, but hey, I'm German ). I love my '62 "all day" PPK as well as my early '33/34 RZM.

 

[killian19]

The PPK 380

 

[Balogh]

I counted all of my PPK models and that's how they are chambered:
- 74% in 7.65mm
- 15% in .22lr
- 11% in 9mm k

If I take only the European made models into account, the distribution changes as follows:
- 83% in 7.65mm
- 18% in .22lr
-  3% in 9mm k

It looks like there's a definite tendency.

 

[Mongreldog]

My 1939 PPK .22LR

 

[Sheepdoggit]

The 380 should serve you well.



Interesting chart. I found the category below particularly interesting.



22 rimfire: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38
32 Auto: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.52
357: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.7
40 S&W: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.36
44 Magnum: Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.71


I tend to take "database" results with a grain or two of salt - especially if I do not know precisely how the raw data was collected.

These results are not surprising at all in my opinion. For one, smaller pistols are typically deployed at shorter ranges, so when they work, I would expect them to do the job as well as the others as there is no "significant" difference between even a .380 and the other calibers (except perhaps .357 Magnum and .357 SIG). Even .44 Magnum only ties 9mm in its failure rate because it typically over penetrates (actually, it almost always over penetrates according to one coroner).

Furthermore, you cannot shoot 1.38 rounds, so we have to round them up to (in this case to 2). In other words, these results are not as varied as you might think and commensurate with typical self-defense distances).

We also have to consider who is doing the shooting. Certainly police officers carrying 9mm and .40 S&W, who have a duty to engage, are often involved in a engagements involving different dynamics than the average civilian carrying a .25 ACP or .32 ACP pistol who is trying to extricate him or herself from the situation as quickly as possible. I would expect these realities to factor in how these caliberse would perform.

The issue isn't how many rounds it takes (2-3 rounds is pretty typical), it is how often do they fail to incapacitate at all. Somewhat predictably, .22LR, .25ACP, and .32ACP fail more often than the intermediate calibers. I imagine under penetration is often the culprit. With more powerful calibers, it is over penetration. In my opinion, the vast majority of the results are logical if you think about it.

 

[Sheepdoggit]

Hard to believe a 44 magnum is less efficient than a 22 rimfire...

Actually, it is not at all once you become familiar with ballistics. A .44 Magnum is almost guaranteed to pass through the person (along with most of its energy). If you ask a trauma room doctor familiar with treating gunshot wounds, it is almost always worse when the bullet stays in the body.

 

[Sheepdoggit]

Yes. It is hard to believe. And I don't.

That is because you do not fully understand how the ballistics work. See my previous comment.