View Single Post
Old November 13, 2004, 09:21 PM   #1
pvq
Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 1999
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 56
My new Seecamp LWS 32/ammo experiances

I have been contemplating a pocket auto for a number of years. I am a law enforcement officer and, while I know, all other things being equal, that one is better off with the largest gun he/she can carry, the reality of the situation is that the best defensive weapon is the one you have with you...always. I also know myself and often, when off duty, I have no desire to dress around a gun, which is generally required on all firearms that would be considered "serious" defensive calibers. I have always operated under the premise that "no one wants to get shot" and the reality that, in 99% of potentially serious confrontations, simply brandishing a firearm is enough to diffuse a conflict. I therefore set about identifying the smallest, lightest, most easily concealable "always" gun out there, which for me will be the one that I will most likely end up carrying.

My choices were very quickly narrowed down to the Seecamp LWS 32 or the NAA Guardian 32 ACP. When compared to these two guns, the Beretta Tomcat seems like a boat anchor, and the Kel-Tec, despite all the raves it gets, is just not of the quality that I expect in a firearm. I have always viewed firearms as items which should last a lifetime and ultimately, would be passed down to future generations. I just can't get that from the Kel-Tec.

My viceral reaction from the outset was that the Seecamp would be the gun for me. It is a full two ounces lighter that the Guardian, and in a weapon of this size, two ounces is significant. While I prefer the frame mounted magazine release, and the relative ease of disassembly of the NAA, realistically, this is a last ditch effort piece for which I am sure I will not be toting a reload...and disassembly of the Seecamp...while more difficult than the NAA...is a snap after the first time. My bigger concerns with the Seecamp revolve around overall serviceability. NAA is a large company which (hopefully) will be around for a good many years. Seecamp is a relatively small company...and I don't know what Mr. Seecamp's plans are once he enters retirement.

In any case, the choice was made for me since NAA does not have a single Guardian available. Apparently they are having trouble getting their supply of frames from Kahr (which is their CNC machiner) and they currently have a six month backlog of orders to fill. Since I want my new gun now, and since I was trending there anyway, I went with the Seecamp.

My LWS arrived on 11/8/04, serial number 045***. It was immediately apparant that this gun was built like a swiss watch...superbly finished compared to the Guardians I have handled...and noticably more "streamlined" in its outward appointments and lower weight. I set off to the range with silvertips, hydroshocks, and Gold Dots.

This gun obviously loves Gold Dots. I had several failures to feed with the Silvertips (6 out of a box of 50), and the hydroshocks keyholed so badly that at the 10 foot range from which I was firing, it looked as if a tomahawk had hit the paper. Gold Dots by contrast, left perfect little 32 caliber holes in the target.

There are many arguments for and against the Seecamp, as well as for and against the Guardian...sights or lack of...only hollowpoints vs ball...and so on. For me the bottom line was lowest weight...smallest package...and longevity. Remember...this is a last ditch effort gun with a practical useful range of 10 feet or less...just enough to get someone out of your personal space and for you to retreat to safety (or to get a bigger gun!)

In summary, I am absolutely thrilled with my Seecamp. I have not ruled out the purchase of a Guardian at some future date (if they ever get their manufactuing issues resolved) but I am confident that if I had both of them in front of me right now, the Seecamp LWS 32, stoked with Gold Dots, would be the gun to accompany me out the door!
__________________
PVQ
pvq is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03691 seconds with 8 queries