I attended the IACP Convention in New Orleans the past few days. S&W had a Walther PPS and a Walther PPK/S at their display. I checked out the PPK/S on the first day of the Convention. The safety/hammer drop was wobbly and when pushed upward to the "fire" position, it then fell down a bit so that it wasn't parallel to the frame.
The trigger also did not return forward to its double action position after pulling it to the rear. I had to put pressure on it to get the trigger to go forward.
I asked about both guns but the guys from S&W said they didn't really know much about the Walther line.
None of the above bode well in my mind for Walther.
The PPS felt very thin as advertised. It felt even thinner than my Colt 1902 Pocket Hammerless. I was impressed with the PPS (trigger pull was great, ergonomics were fine, good sights, etc) but despite literature being available, S&W sure didn't have it's people pushing it. It was overshadowed by the small frame S&W revolvers in .38 and .357....
I was very disappointed in the PPK/S. The polishing on the slide and frame was nice but the way the serial number is in the "box" on the frame was very cheap looking.
Walther deserves more....
The trigger also did not return forward to its double action position after pulling it to the rear. I had to put pressure on it to get the trigger to go forward.
I asked about both guns but the guys from S&W said they didn't really know much about the Walther line.
None of the above bode well in my mind for Walther.
The PPS felt very thin as advertised. It felt even thinner than my Colt 1902 Pocket Hammerless. I was impressed with the PPS (trigger pull was great, ergonomics were fine, good sights, etc) but despite literature being available, S&W sure didn't have it's people pushing it. It was overshadowed by the small frame S&W revolvers in .38 and .357....
I was very disappointed in the PPK/S. The polishing on the slide and frame was nice but the way the serial number is in the "box" on the frame was very cheap looking.
Walther deserves more....