PPK vs. .32 Tomcat
- Thread starter tshadow6
- Start date
Qwiks draw
Moderator
Ballistics goes to the Walther due to longer barrel length. Walthers still have very heavy DA trigger pulls, but light SA trigger pulls. Walthers made by or for Smith& Wesson have had the problem of the inertia firing pin could fly forward with a jolted gun and fired problem corrected.Earlier Walthers have this problem. Has been documented well in a number of police and special weapons magazines and books. There are a number of police departments that issue the Beretta as a backup gun. Early Tomcat reports had some problems, but the kinks were worked out. So most info that is bad may be much older type and out of date. This seems to be true of a lot of "bad press" that just about every make and model out there seems to suffer. Both are excellent pistols. Beretta has the tip up barrel making racking the slide a non issue. There is no extractor on the Beretta. If there is a jam,tack,rack and shoot won't work. The magazine has to be removed and the offending round has to dumped, by opening the barrel and removing the offending cartridge. Beretta has the best sights IMO than other pocket pistols. If you have fleshy or big hands the Walther hammer or slide might try to take a divot out of your skin. Just things that need to be considered. Bersa took care of Walther "railroad tracks or hammer bite when they designed their Walther look alike. Pocket carry is slightly easier with the Tomcat. Slightly smaller demensions. Is this a main gun or a backup gun? There are those who laugh loud and long at anything under major caliber size. Being armed with a 32 beats carrying nothing. All bullet calibers are anemic compared to long guns of just about any caliber. Then there is the fact that all bullets are small compared to the large target area of the human body and the main upper target we are supposed to hit to stop a fight. Larger can be better. What we carry is up to us individually and many documented attacks have been stopped with a 32. With the newer generation of JHPs the 32 can do a better job than with FMJ dispite what the deep penetration crowd thinks. Flesh is elastic and snaps back. Temporary pencil sized wound that close back up will bleed very little nor is much in the way of tissue or organ damage accomplished. Since the trigger pull on the Tomcat and its other features are good I would go with the Beretta. Have shot the earlier Walthers and liked them once past the DA trigger let off. Those can be worked on by competent gunsmiths so the Walther is also a godd pick. What fits you the best? Good luck on your search.
Gixerman1000
New member
There are two slides for the Tomcat, the INOX (stainless) slide is much wider than the older blued slide having more weight and mass, the extra weight slows the slide velocity down and keeps it from hammering the frame, I have shot both back to back the heavier INOX is much softer shooting.
I don't know if the newer blued Tomcats have the wider slide now or not but I have never seen or heard of any problems with the wide slide Tomcats, mine has around 800 rounds now with no problem.
As an owner and frequent user of both these guns, it is very hard to compare them. They compliment each other rather than compete.
The Tomcat is obviously smaller, and I use it when a pocketable gun is called for. I prefer the "chunky" nature of the Tomcat, and it feels a lot more comfortable in my hand than the thinner alternatives from Keltec.
The previous poster made a pretty good summary of the ballistics differences, .32 vs. 380. I am not exactly a gun expert, so my comments are just from a plain user perspective - I found the Tomcat more pleasant to shoot, as the Walther was a bit "snappy" - I usually limit my range time to 50 rounds or so with the Walther, whereas I could easily do 100 or more with the Tomcat. I am, however, much more accurate with my PPK/S than with the Tomcat - sighting is easier with the PPK/S.
I got the PPK/S to be my "small" carry gun when the occasion called for something smaller. I found that if I could carry a PPK/S, I could also likely carry my P99C or 9000S. I did, however, find that something even smaller could come in handy, and thus I got a Tomcat, but since I really, really like my PPK/S I decided to keep it. Right now I find myself carrying the Tomcat more often when small is called for.
The Tomcat is obviously smaller, and I use it when a pocketable gun is called for. I prefer the "chunky" nature of the Tomcat, and it feels a lot more comfortable in my hand than the thinner alternatives from Keltec.
The previous poster made a pretty good summary of the ballistics differences, .32 vs. 380. I am not exactly a gun expert, so my comments are just from a plain user perspective - I found the Tomcat more pleasant to shoot, as the Walther was a bit "snappy" - I usually limit my range time to 50 rounds or so with the Walther, whereas I could easily do 100 or more with the Tomcat. I am, however, much more accurate with my PPK/S than with the Tomcat - sighting is easier with the PPK/S.
I got the PPK/S to be my "small" carry gun when the occasion called for something smaller. I found that if I could carry a PPK/S, I could also likely carry my P99C or 9000S. I did, however, find that something even smaller could come in handy, and thus I got a Tomcat, but since I really, really like my PPK/S I decided to keep it. Right now I find myself carrying the Tomcat more often when small is called for.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I have both guns. Both are great little firearms but I would have to give the edge to the Walther in finish, style, power, ease of shooting, ease of carry, and it definately wins in the cool column. 
postal1911
New member
i think the ppk is a better choice for the 32acp
both r good pistols but the walthers is a better pistol
both r good pistols but the walthers is a better pistol
I have a PP in .32 that I ocassionally throw in my pocket if I'm just running to the store or something. The PP is slightly larger than the PPK, so I would say that it's entirely possible to do. I would still recommend a good belt, as the Walther PP series is all steel in construction, and tends to weigh the carry side down a bit when in a pocket.
Swampthing
New member
First hand knowledge with the TOMCAT
I write this review B?C I have recently come from a similar choice.
Heres my story.
I decided to get a mouse gun and was originally looking at the Kel tec .32.
I hated the synthetic frame (I know they have proven reasonably reliable) and liked the feel of the Tomcat MUCH better.
Being the proud owner of a Beretta 92fs, I figured that the reliability I had seen with the full size Beretta would be found in the Tomcat.
Now there are 1 of 2 reasons for the following.
1. I got a lemon
2. The Tomcat is junk.
I would like to think that the Tomcat is a quality piece, but my experience changed my mind.
The gun started out fine, I shot 100 rds through it only one problem, although it was reasonably accurate for what it was and I liked its feel.
The one problem was the rear sight had somehow become loose and would drift between 1/16th and 1/8th of an inch to one side or another, almost coming out of the groove in which it sat.
SIDENOTE:
The trigger pull feels heavier than the Walther by the way and the trigger itself is less rounded and comfortable than the Walther.
Still, it was my favorite gun.
I compensated for the heavy DA by practicing and practicing my trigger pull with it.
Back to the story:
I got very comfortable with the trigger pull and hammer break (using snap caps), when my firing pin just fell out the back of the gun one night.
It turned out that after having the gun a little more than 1 month, the "Wear and tear" I had placed on the piece proved too much for it.
I was very worried as it was to be my CCW and this did not bode well.
I tried to picture how many times I had let the hammer fall with and without snap caps.
I figured that it could not have been more than 1000 times.
I had heard around message boards that this was the approx life of the firing pin (At worst).
So I called up Beretta and they promptly shipped out a new pin.
Meanwhile I took the Tomcat back to the shop.
I expressed my concerns and but they were hesitant to take it back or exchange it.
They had their gunsmith work on it and replace the firing pin.
They examined my snap caps and informed me that they were the problem B/C the caps were just dummy rounds with a rubber primer cap. This meant that each time the firing pin was struck, it hit the rubber a few times and then made a dent in the rubber that effectively nullified the point of using the snap cap.
Well ok, this sounded reasonable and I really did not want to part with the gun, so I took it back and decided not to drop the hammer until I secured new snap caps.
All was well for a few days UNTIL...
One night, I was again practicing the trigger pull without actually dropping the hammer.
I figured that I would break the action in and build finger muscle for the range of motion immediately before the hammer was released.
I almost NEVER dropped the hammer.
Long story short, the DA/SA trigger broke and the gun would only function in SA mode where I had to manually cock the hammer.
This was the last straw for me, as a CCW it had three strikes against it and would, at this point be more likely to go "Click" than "Bang" when I needed it.
Now, I like Beretta in general, and it is possible that this was just a fluke.
But the gun was made less than a month before I purchased it in late November 2006.
For me it was the last straw, I took it back and demanded that it be exchanged towards a S&W Walther PPK/S Two Tone.
Now, I have not yet fired the Walther (This exchange happened yesterday), but the trigger pull is easier than the Tomcat and I like that, also the sight are much better, but the sharp edges do bite the hand.
Now clearly these guns are in two different classes and I really wanted the Tomcat to win the comparison, but for me there was no question. The Beretta suffered from quality issues that were unacceptable.
From what I can tell the only people who really like the Tomcat, do not seem to put the gun through its paces.
OR
I got a very BAD gun.
Its a little more than two pennies, but thats my personal experience for what its worth.
I write this review B?C I have recently come from a similar choice.
Heres my story.
I decided to get a mouse gun and was originally looking at the Kel tec .32.
I hated the synthetic frame (I know they have proven reasonably reliable) and liked the feel of the Tomcat MUCH better.
Being the proud owner of a Beretta 92fs, I figured that the reliability I had seen with the full size Beretta would be found in the Tomcat.
Now there are 1 of 2 reasons for the following.
1. I got a lemon
2. The Tomcat is junk.
I would like to think that the Tomcat is a quality piece, but my experience changed my mind.
The gun started out fine, I shot 100 rds through it only one problem, although it was reasonably accurate for what it was and I liked its feel.
The one problem was the rear sight had somehow become loose and would drift between 1/16th and 1/8th of an inch to one side or another, almost coming out of the groove in which it sat.
SIDENOTE:
The trigger pull feels heavier than the Walther by the way and the trigger itself is less rounded and comfortable than the Walther.
Still, it was my favorite gun.
I compensated for the heavy DA by practicing and practicing my trigger pull with it.
Back to the story:
I got very comfortable with the trigger pull and hammer break (using snap caps), when my firing pin just fell out the back of the gun one night.
It turned out that after having the gun a little more than 1 month, the "Wear and tear" I had placed on the piece proved too much for it.
I was very worried as it was to be my CCW and this did not bode well.
I tried to picture how many times I had let the hammer fall with and without snap caps.
I figured that it could not have been more than 1000 times.
I had heard around message boards that this was the approx life of the firing pin (At worst).
So I called up Beretta and they promptly shipped out a new pin.
Meanwhile I took the Tomcat back to the shop.
I expressed my concerns and but they were hesitant to take it back or exchange it.
They had their gunsmith work on it and replace the firing pin.
They examined my snap caps and informed me that they were the problem B/C the caps were just dummy rounds with a rubber primer cap. This meant that each time the firing pin was struck, it hit the rubber a few times and then made a dent in the rubber that effectively nullified the point of using the snap cap.
Well ok, this sounded reasonable and I really did not want to part with the gun, so I took it back and decided not to drop the hammer until I secured new snap caps.
All was well for a few days UNTIL...
One night, I was again practicing the trigger pull without actually dropping the hammer.
I figured that I would break the action in and build finger muscle for the range of motion immediately before the hammer was released.
I almost NEVER dropped the hammer.
Long story short, the DA/SA trigger broke and the gun would only function in SA mode where I had to manually cock the hammer.
This was the last straw for me, as a CCW it had three strikes against it and would, at this point be more likely to go "Click" than "Bang" when I needed it.
Now, I like Beretta in general, and it is possible that this was just a fluke.
But the gun was made less than a month before I purchased it in late November 2006.
For me it was the last straw, I took it back and demanded that it be exchanged towards a S&W Walther PPK/S Two Tone.
Now, I have not yet fired the Walther (This exchange happened yesterday), but the trigger pull is easier than the Tomcat and I like that, also the sight are much better, but the sharp edges do bite the hand.
Now clearly these guns are in two different classes and I really wanted the Tomcat to win the comparison, but for me there was no question. The Beretta suffered from quality issues that were unacceptable.
From what I can tell the only people who really like the Tomcat, do not seem to put the gun through its paces.
OR
I got a very BAD gun.
Its a little more than two pennies, but thats my personal experience for what its worth.
Kreyzhorse
New member
First off - I do not own a Tomcat so I have no stake in this, however, I've witnessed and/or helped put roughly 700 rounds through one. The gun itself is flawless and has not had one FTF or jam. No signs or wear or tear. At this point the Berretta has delievered.
From a carry standpoint, the gun is light and can certainly fit in a pocket pretty easily. I have CCW'd a Tomcat in an SOB holster and found it to be very easy to carry and conceal. My typical carry piece is a S&W 637 and you can certainly tell the difference.
While I have no experience with the PPK, I can say that my experience with the Tomcat is that it has been an exceptional carry and shooting weapon. I really doubt you could go wrong with either handgun. I think it's really a matter of personal choice.
From a carry standpoint, the gun is light and can certainly fit in a pocket pretty easily. I have CCW'd a Tomcat in an SOB holster and found it to be very easy to carry and conceal. My typical carry piece is a S&W 637 and you can certainly tell the difference.
While I have no experience with the PPK, I can say that my experience with the Tomcat is that it has been an exceptional carry and shooting weapon. I really doubt you could go wrong with either handgun. I think it's really a matter of personal choice.
OldShooter
New member
PPK vs Tomcat
I never shot a PPK so I don't know about that. I bought a Tomcat for the girlfriend. It was cute and she liked it, but she couldn't pull the trigger in DA. Then after probably less than two hundred rounds it started to fail miserably. The slide would come out of its tracks on recoil and hang up and jam very tightly. It went back to the shop I got it from. I gave her my Bersa .380, it barks a little more than a .32 but she can shoot it.
I never shot a PPK so I don't know about that. I bought a Tomcat for the girlfriend. It was cute and she liked it, but she couldn't pull the trigger in DA. Then after probably less than two hundred rounds it started to fail miserably. The slide would come out of its tracks on recoil and hang up and jam very tightly. It went back to the shop I got it from. I gave her my Bersa .380, it barks a little more than a .32 but she can shoot it.
I've carried both. The Tomcat works much better in the pocket than the PPK/S. However, I'm going to try an actual PPK, which is smaller and lighter than the PPK/S. I've been searching for a decent pocket pistol for quite awhile now, and the PPK looks like it might fit the bill. We'll see when I actually manage to acquire one.
The PPK/S is a heavy dude in the pocket, and it's hard to keep it from printing and pulling your pants down no matter what sort of holster is used. The best pants to wear are dark Docker/Khaki type pants. This pistol doesn't hide well in jeans.
I like the idea of the .380 over the .32 as well. I have shot a ppk/s in .32 and it's like shooting a .22. Very mild. There's still the slide bite issue with the old PPK's, though.
I would agree with Swampthing on one issue. The Tomcat is tiny, with tiny little parts that just don't look like they'd hold up under a beating. In fact, I had to replace the frame stops along the side on the one that I used to have. So I'm not sure of the overall durability of this gun. I'd say make sure it works, then carry it a lot and shoot it very little. It's not designed to run 100 rounds every week through it. I know for a fact the Walther is pretty darn durable. Way more so than the Beretta. That's my opinion, for what it's worth.
I'm a pocket pistol fan, let us know how it all turns out. It'll help the rest of us with such decisions.
The PPK/S is a heavy dude in the pocket, and it's hard to keep it from printing and pulling your pants down no matter what sort of holster is used. The best pants to wear are dark Docker/Khaki type pants. This pistol doesn't hide well in jeans.
I like the idea of the .380 over the .32 as well. I have shot a ppk/s in .32 and it's like shooting a .22. Very mild. There's still the slide bite issue with the old PPK's, though.
I would agree with Swampthing on one issue. The Tomcat is tiny, with tiny little parts that just don't look like they'd hold up under a beating. In fact, I had to replace the frame stops along the side on the one that I used to have. So I'm not sure of the overall durability of this gun. I'd say make sure it works, then carry it a lot and shoot it very little. It's not designed to run 100 rounds every week through it. I know for a fact the Walther is pretty darn durable. Way more so than the Beretta. That's my opinion, for what it's worth.
I'm a pocket pistol fan, let us know how it all turns out. It'll help the rest of us with such decisions.
Last edited:
rantingredneck
New member
Let me toss a monkeywrench in this
Check out the NAA guardians in either .380 or .32NAA (I love that bottlenecked little round).
Tonights target shot at 5yds with 60 gr. corbon JHP at 1200fps.
Check out the NAA guardians in either .380 or .32NAA (I love that bottlenecked little round).
Tonights target shot at 5yds with 60 gr. corbon JHP at 1200fps.
Swampthing
New member
Beretta
I have to say that I started out in this really wanting the Tomcat to be a good gun.
My feeling is this:
If you carry a gun in your pocket, its probably the only gun you are going to carry. (I know some of you carry more than one gun at a time...but I think its safe to say that most civilians carry only one at a time).
Whether or not you agree with me, I think that the gun on you should be the most reliable thing you own.
By that I mean, the Tomcat may be a good addition to your collection, bc it is a novel "Cool" little lead spitter.
But, in my case, I did not have the money or the patience to simply add it to my collection, I need(ed) an effective, durable, qualitative CCW.
I agree with everyone who says that the Tomcat wins the contest on ease of
concealability... after all it is a physically smaller gun.
My point is, for those of you who are considering the Tomcat as a CCW, be advised that I too went into the purchase bright eyed and bushy tailed regarding the quality. "Aww that won't happen to me...they've worked out the bugs by now...Beretta is a good brand..."
I think that assertion that the gun should not be shot frequently is an illogical approach.
I am not military or police, but I do know that for anything where I had to perfect a physical motion, I needed to train my body to develop a "memory" of that motion. I.e. getting a good spiral on a football, or swimming, CPR, whatever.
In my mind, if you are thinking about the Tomcat, you are thinking about a CCW.
If that is the case then you MUST practice with the gun that you will be using
when your brain has no chance to think, rather, your fingers will "remember" how to pull the trigger in question for optimal accuracy under stress.(I.e. where the trigger will break, how to squeeze properly, how the sights line up when you hold the gun...etc).
In my case, the Tomcat had a VERY hard pull that I had to learn in order to keep my shots on target(even just on the paper when I tried to simulate a quick draw and rapid fire).
By the time I returned the gun, I had my grip to where I could draw the pistol with the lights off, turn the lights on have my sights on target. (A lot of practice went into that...)
If nothing more, I would warn potential buyers of the trouble that I encountered with the Tomcat.
I took an impulsive risk with the Tomcat at the gun shop. It felt better in my hands than any other 32. auto in the shop and I knew Beretta had a good name.
After the fact I found old forum posts about Tomcat owners with broken slides (The posts were dated 2000).
I figured that the bugs had been worked out.
Apperantly new ones have taken their place.
The PPK/S has also had its share of problems and for me only time will tell if it can pass muster.
So far, I have found that use of FMJ ammo and keeping the barrel well oiled/greased keeps it in good working order.
A good feed ramp and throat polish job couldn't hurt either.
Of all the issues that I have encountered and heard about regarding the PPK/S I have not found issues relating to part fracturing, breaking or failure.
Usually a jam due to "wrong" ammo or unpolished feed ramp. For, me, that is an acceptable risk, bc I can do something to avoid those problems whereas I cannot avoid trigger failure under normal use.
Again, I wanted the Tomcat to win, but when it came down to knowing I might have to use the gun to save my life,
I would much rather have a gun I can trust in an a shoulder holster under the shirt, than taking a gamble on something that I COULD put in a pant pocket more comfortably.
END OF RANT>>>
I have to say that I started out in this really wanting the Tomcat to be a good gun.
My feeling is this:
If you carry a gun in your pocket, its probably the only gun you are going to carry. (I know some of you carry more than one gun at a time...but I think its safe to say that most civilians carry only one at a time).
Whether or not you agree with me, I think that the gun on you should be the most reliable thing you own.
By that I mean, the Tomcat may be a good addition to your collection, bc it is a novel "Cool" little lead spitter.
But, in my case, I did not have the money or the patience to simply add it to my collection, I need(ed) an effective, durable, qualitative CCW.
I agree with everyone who says that the Tomcat wins the contest on ease of
concealability... after all it is a physically smaller gun.
My point is, for those of you who are considering the Tomcat as a CCW, be advised that I too went into the purchase bright eyed and bushy tailed regarding the quality. "Aww that won't happen to me...they've worked out the bugs by now...Beretta is a good brand..."
I think that assertion that the gun should not be shot frequently is an illogical approach.
I am not military or police, but I do know that for anything where I had to perfect a physical motion, I needed to train my body to develop a "memory" of that motion. I.e. getting a good spiral on a football, or swimming, CPR, whatever.
In my mind, if you are thinking about the Tomcat, you are thinking about a CCW.
If that is the case then you MUST practice with the gun that you will be using
when your brain has no chance to think, rather, your fingers will "remember" how to pull the trigger in question for optimal accuracy under stress.(I.e. where the trigger will break, how to squeeze properly, how the sights line up when you hold the gun...etc).
In my case, the Tomcat had a VERY hard pull that I had to learn in order to keep my shots on target(even just on the paper when I tried to simulate a quick draw and rapid fire).
By the time I returned the gun, I had my grip to where I could draw the pistol with the lights off, turn the lights on have my sights on target. (A lot of practice went into that...)
If nothing more, I would warn potential buyers of the trouble that I encountered with the Tomcat.
I took an impulsive risk with the Tomcat at the gun shop. It felt better in my hands than any other 32. auto in the shop and I knew Beretta had a good name.
After the fact I found old forum posts about Tomcat owners with broken slides (The posts were dated 2000).
I figured that the bugs had been worked out.
Apperantly new ones have taken their place.
The PPK/S has also had its share of problems and for me only time will tell if it can pass muster.
So far, I have found that use of FMJ ammo and keeping the barrel well oiled/greased keeps it in good working order.
A good feed ramp and throat polish job couldn't hurt either.
Of all the issues that I have encountered and heard about regarding the PPK/S I have not found issues relating to part fracturing, breaking or failure.
Usually a jam due to "wrong" ammo or unpolished feed ramp. For, me, that is an acceptable risk, bc I can do something to avoid those problems whereas I cannot avoid trigger failure under normal use.
Again, I wanted the Tomcat to win, but when it came down to knowing I might have to use the gun to save my life,
I would much rather have a gun I can trust in an a shoulder holster under the shirt, than taking a gamble on something that I COULD put in a pant pocket more comfortably.
END OF RANT>>>
While a little larger pistol, yet easily concealable, I really like the Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless .32ACP. It's very thin, snagless and more accurate than either the PPK, or the Tomcat IMHO. You can still pick up good shooters for under $600. I carry one quite often and have it at the range frequently. They're a real hoot to shoot and very well made. The only thing I'd recommend for carry would be to have a good gunsmith clean inspect and replace springs as needed (many of these guns are 80+ yrs old, mine is 101). I also had a good trigger job done on my carry piece to lighten an already reasonable SA trigger. This is one of the few SAs I feel comfortable carrying cocked and locked.
Attachments
ppk .32 Ulm
I used to have an ex West Germany Police ppk, I shot some 1000 or rounds less through it, then it broke. Accuracy and shootability were very good, keeping the black of the bull at 25 meters was the norm. Anyway, I got the impression that it was a carry often-use seldom weapon, not a war horse. I had it repaired and I sold it, I didn't buy another.
Carlo
I used to have an ex West Germany Police ppk, I shot some 1000 or rounds less through it, then it broke. Accuracy and shootability were very good, keeping the black of the bull at 25 meters was the norm. Anyway, I got the impression that it was a carry often-use seldom weapon, not a war horse. I had it repaired and I sold it, I didn't buy another.
Carlo
Last edited: