Walther PPS 9mm or .40

[offcamber]

Considering a Walther PPS for conceal carry. Trying to decide between the 9mm and the .40 sw. aside from the fact the 9mm has one extra round in the mag is there a major difference? I'd am torn because I'd like the .40 but I already have a 9mm so it would be nice to share ammo.

Thoughts?

 

[Jason]

Nothing good comes of a 9mm ; )

 

[drgrant]

.40 S+W is too much for a gun that small. The only upshot of the .40 is you'll likely be able to pick a used one up on the cheap after a bunch of
people buy them, and then dump them because they thought it was too abusive. This is the same reason there are way more Kahr K40s P40s etc
floating around than their 9mm counterparts. People bought the guns, disliked the snappy recoil of the .40 in a tiny gun, and flipped em.

-Mike

 

[MST_2009]

Life is too short to decide between the two. Get them both!
...then give us a review on them.

 

[Jason]

.40 S+W is too much for a gun that small. The only upshot of the .40 is you'll likely be able to pick a used one up on the cheap after a bunch of
people buy them, and then dump them because they thought it was too abusive. This is the same reason there are way more Kahr K40s P40s etc
floating around than their 9mm counterparts. People bought the guns, disliked the snappy recoil of the .40 in a tiny gun, and flipped em.

-Mike

The PPS is a "heavy" small gun though. I can't say how much that matters because I haven't shot one yet. At 20.8oz it is a good deal heavier than the Keltec PF9 (12.7oz) or the Kahr PM40 (15oz). The glock 23 (Compact .40S&W) is only 21.16oz and I can shot that all day comfortably. I'd like to shoot it before buying one myself though because while I'm happy with the weight I wonder about the effect of the thin frame on recoil. Being thinner you have less surface area dispersing almost the same force. I'd expect significantly more recoil than a glock 23 even though its only 1/2 ounce less. That said I'd expect that it should be much more comfortable to shot and easier to keep on target than a Kel-tec PF9 or Kahr PM40.

 

[dagwag77]

Considering a Walther PPS for conceal carry. Trying to decide between the 9mm and the .40 sw. aside from the fact the 9mm has one extra round in the mag is there a major difference? I'd am torn because I'd like the .40 but I already have a 9mm so it would be nice to share ammo.

Thoughts?

Are you in MA? I thought only the 9mm was "approved" for us...

Anyway, I've shot the .40 PPS and loved it (free state trigger since I think the .40 PPS isn't MA compliant) I didn't find it to have too much bite, maybe a tad more than my M&P9c, but I remember being able to get a nice grouping after getting used to the gun.

Anyway, if you're a free-stater - go with the .40 if you don't mind the little extra kick

 

[EddieCoyle]

I can't say how much that matters because I haven't shot one yet.

I can. I've put 2000 rounds through mine. It's a bad gun for the .40 (as if there's a good one). Weight is only part of the equation. If you had to take the recoil of a .45 on a razor blade or a 1911, which would feel better?

I agree with DrGrant. It's fine with 9mm, but the .40 ruins it (as usual). It's too thin (even in the .40 version).

 

[offcamber]

Thanks for the input ,...I'm in NH so no worries on compliance. It does seem there are more .40s available than 9mm.