Would you buy an LCP II in .32 ACP?

[TruthTellers]

Just wondering. I'd rather have an LCP II in .32 than a Kel Tec P-32. Better trigger.

[Bill DeShivs]

There is nothing wrong with the P32 trigger.
The LCP2 is a striker-fired gun. Ruger doesn't recommend carrying it with a round chambered! Nor do I.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

The LCP Gen 2 is a hammer fired pistol. The LCP ll is a striker fired. I have been shooting he LCP's since they first came out. Owned 4 of them. Still own one, seldom shoot it. (have moved on to better built pocket gun).

I personally believe the LCP Gen 2 had a much better trigger for CCW. In fact, I would not ever buy a LCP ll. Just too dangerous. There were many heated debates over this issue. Many have been posted on this forum. And these debates ran like wild fire on the LCP forum a few years back.
I feel I know the LCP as well as anyone, maybe better having put thousands of rounds through them. First of all, forgetting the trigger for a moment, and talking strictly about the gun, I have always felt the gun would would be better suited for the 32.cal.
The LCP's just do not hold up to a lot of ammo down range. And as any pocket gun, they need frequent range time to shoot well. The aluminum sub chassis just does not cut it. And Ruger did nothing to re-enforce the frame, like steel inserts at the stress points. Or better yet, make the gun out of stainless steel.
The LCP is terrible on recoil with a notorious high five snap.

So, while I personally would not care for the 32.cal, but if I was, the LCP Gen 2 would make a nice pistol for someone desiring that caliber. But NOT the LCP ll.
A light crisp trigger on a pocket gun never made any sense to me. These are NOT TARGET guns.
And while I do not own the Keltc P32, I have shot them many times, and agree with the poster that said "There is nothing wrong with the P32 trigger".

[Bill DeShivs]

Nor is there anything wrong with the P32!
The LCP guns were simply copies of the Keltec P3AT, and Ruger did some marketing genius! Make the gun look nicer and make it heavier, and put "Ruger" on it!
Everyone knows heavier is better, right? And, Ruger is better than Keltec, right? And, if it looks better, it must be higher quality, right?
Wrong on all points, but the average Joe doesn't think so.

[Jazzgun]

Everyone knows heavier is better, right? And, Ruger is better than Keltec, right? And, if it looks better, it must be higher quality, right?
Wrong on all points, but the average Joe doesn't think so.

I never thought so. That's why I have my little Raven.

[CDW4ME]

Sometimes I had to carry a 380 LCP/P3AT because of work attire, not enthused with its ASAP incapacitation potential.
I'm retired, smallest I carry is a 9mm and that is jogging, or as a 2nd option to a larger pistol.
32 acp not before and most certainly not now.

[kymasabe]

I pocket carry a P32 every day (in a Sticky holster). Last one j had was black/blue, ran over 2000 rounds thru that little gun, never failed, eventually wore some of the finish off the barrel from years of sweaty SW Florida carry. Current one is grey/parkerized and runs perfectly. If Ruger "improved/refined" the P32 and came out with a hammer fired LCP in .32acp, I'd buy it.
And I agree, there's nothing wrong with the P32 trigger...

[Hal]

Why?

Sounds like a waste to me - - but - that's just my opinion.

I have nothing against the .32, but, I can't see any significant gain in anything the .32 offers over the .380.

[jreXD9]

I've got a P32 and an LCP II. The Ruger looks better and feels better. The trigger feels better. Both go bang every time. Both get pocket carried with holsters that cover the trigger. What's the issue?

[TomNJVA]

My LCP II is hammer fired, albeit the hammer is internal and only visible through the slot in the back of the slide. Mine never leaves the pocket holster until I am ready to fire, so I consider it quite safe.

[gnystrom]

Why would anybody want a .32 when the LCP II .380 is already so small and carries a much better caliber.

[Ricklin]

I guess it must be recoil for the intro of the .32 LCP.

Makes no sense to me, I already feel under gunned with .380. But man oh man, sure is easy to carry in a stick holster.

If I want to shoot .32 I'll use my 1903, in spite of the tiny sights it is quite accurate.

Came back to add my vote, as I thought very much part of the majority. I think this one is a miscue from Ruger.

[weblance]

Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs

There is nothing wrong with the P32 trigger.
The LCP2 is a striker-fired gun. Ruger doesn't recommend carrying it with a round chambered!

The Ruger LCP II IS NOT striker fired. It is hammer fired, just like the original LCP.

I gave up on the LCP because 380 in a micro pistol is very hard for me to control. After two fast shots, the little pistol was so twisted in my hand, that I had to readjust my grip, and that simply was no good. Another problem I had, contrary to what the LCP fanboys will tell you... mine wasn't reliable. After a trip back to Ruger, and a fluff and buff, it still couldn't get through a box of 50 without some type of failure. And that was with brass, and good SD ammo, never steel or aluminum.

I replaced it with a P32, and that little pistol has been excellent. 32 acp is what a pistol that size should be chambered in. Its quick, accurate, and reliable. It also doesn't try to twist itself out of my hand, like holding onto an angry cat by its tail. I have several other Kel-Tec products, and have been happy with all of them.

My P32 IS NOT my EDC. I understand the limitation of 32acp, but there is an occasional time, and place, for a tiny little Pocket Rocket

I have since given up pretty much on the idea of anything new from Ruger, because there are issues reported with everything they are making currently, with the exception of the SR1911 series. Yes I understand everybody makes a lemon, but the issues being reported are stupid things that should never get out the door.

[K_Mac]

No, I would not buy or carry a .32 LCP II. I completely agree with Ricklin.

I can't help but add my .02 regarding the trigger on the LCP II and Ruger's not recommending chambered carry. I own a few Ruger handguns, and the manuals of all of them recommend loading prior to shooting. That is their standard legal CYA. I think the new version is a great carry pistol, with a chambered round and a good holster. My view is shared by many thousands of knowledgeable shooters.

Bill never misses an opportunity to express his disregard for the LCP based on the superiority of the Kaltec and his enlightened understanding. Let's just say I disagree on both counts.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs

Nor is there anything wrong with the P32!
The LCP guns were simply copies of the Keltec P3AT, and Ruger did some marketing genius! Make the gun look nicer and make it heavier, and put "Ruger" on it!
Everyone knows heavier is better, right? And, Ruger is better than Keltec, right? And, if it looks better, it must be higher quality, right?
Wrong on all points, but the average Joe doesn't think so.

I doubt many of the massive amount of new shooters even know what metals are used in their guns. Many will buy a gun that simply gets a ton of advertising. I truly believe the surge of pocket guns in the past years, we saw the LCP advertised more than just about any gun. And so many New shooters that have not even shot or owned other guns well swear the LCP is the finest made.
Yes, the Keltec was ahead of the game back many years ago when Ruger copied the design.
While I will not buy another aluminum sub chassis gun again. I think the Taurus Spectrum would be a better choice than the LCP. I had the chance to shoot one a few weeks back, and a much better shooter. However I doubt they will hold up much better than the LCP in the long run.

That said, the Spectrum is a modular design and if the Polymer grip were to crack like many of the Rugers would do, you could easily just switch out the grip.

[Doyle]

No. I think the LCP II is downright ugly and non-ergonomic. I've got a Gen 2 LCP that I carry frequently and actually like. I think Ruger didn't do us any favors when they came out with the LCP II. Secondly, the .32 has no place in my "arsenal". If I wanted something that weak, I'd shoot a .22LR for a fraction of the price.

[Bill DeShivs]

There is little real-life difference between .32 and .380 - or 9mm, for that matter.
No one wants to get shot with any of them.
No handgun is capable of a 100% sure stop, unless the central nervous system is hit. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. And a CNS hit from a .32 is as effective as a .45.

[MTT TL]

I don't know what you mean by "real life difference". The .32 is no where near as powerful as either the 380 and especially the 9mm. The whole "no one wants to get shot with any of them" saw ignores the whole "if you had to get shot which would you prefer to get shot with?" question. I am picking the .32 out of the three as the round of my attacker if it were up to me.

The LCP is special kind of junky gun. It meets the requirements of gun fighting in the "have a gun" rule. Terrible sights, not drop safe, bad ergonomics etc, etc etc. In the .32 it gets worse. The round is anemic and the tiny barrel does little for it.

So no, I would not own.

[Bill DeShivs]

A Prius is not nearly as powerful as a Corvette-but both will get you to your destination.
"Power" is a misused term. As I said- the only magic bullet is a CNS hit. Anything else MIGHT stop hostilities- it even PROBABLY will stop hostilities. Doesn't matter how much power it has, as long as it gets to major organs or the CNS. If you wait on an organ hit (even the heart) to cause bleed out, you can wait for MINUTES. Minutes is a long time if someone is shooting at you!

If you know you will have to shoot someone, of course you would want every advantage you can get, but "power" is less an advantage than you think. Accuracy is paramount.

[tallball]

If it were drop safe, I might buy a Ruger LCP version whatever in 32acp. I have a P32, and it works fine, but it has no sights at all. I have a little Taurus PT22 (Beretta copy) that I can carry in my pocket for plinking or whatever, but a P32 with sights would be a lot lighter and would plink or shoot snakes or whatever just as well. I personally don't prefer to count on 32acp for SD, but it would be better than a 22 if you were just rambling around on your family property and something unexpected came up.

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs

There is nothing wrong with the P32 trigger.
The LCP2 is a striker-fired gun. Ruger doesn't recommend carrying it with a round chambered! Nor do I.

The LCP Gen 2 is a hammer fired pistol. The LCP ll is a striker fired.

Nope. Hammer fired, just like prior versions.

The manual, page 28, lists hammer pivot pin, hammer, hammer pin, and hammer spring.

I have the original, find the trigger just fine, and don't particularly want any version in .32.

[MTT TL]

Accuracy is paramount.

I agree, and since you aren't going to get that out of a micro pistol with terrible sights you may as well step up the power rating.

[Bill DeShivs]

Most tiny pistols, the P32 And LCP included, are capable of more accuracy than 90% of shooters. It just takes practice.

[seeker_two]

I'd buy one. When the Beretta Pico was introduced at the 2013 NRA Convention, Beretta said it would come in .32 ACP & .380 ACP. I really wanted one in .32, but it never happened. I still want a .32 in the .380 frame.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[kenny53]

The main reason I would not want the 32 is I don't want another caliber. Is the 32 good enough I am not sure but I have carried 22's. I hear a lot of disparaging remarks about the LCP. I got the LCP right after they came out and I have been very happy with. It is my back up gun. It is not a fun gun to shoot but it does what I want. For the record if I am not carrying a 9 mm it will a 45 acp.