TexasCHLforum.com

We got some of the Sig P238's in this past week and I could not wait to get one to the range for a "test drive". This is a 380 that is basically the old Colt Mustang that appears to have received some trigger modifications by Sig. Not being a fan of pocket 380's from my previous trials of the LCP's I must say I was very impressed with the way this "little" handgun performed. The bite that I felt with the LCP was not existent with the P238, as a matter of fact there was virtually no bite at all, with limited felt recoil. Since the Sig is $200 more than the LCP I would expect a better experience, I was not disappointed at all. Personally I give this a strong buy for anybody looking for a 380. Soon as I can get my hands on a 2 tone with night sights it will be joining my personal stash.

I haven't shot one but did handle one recently and cannot convince myself it is the right gun for pocket carry.

It's about the same size as a piece-of-junk AMT .380 I had years ago - which hurt to shoot, despite it's weight. The Sig is considerably lighter and I did not find the recoil bad at all, much tamer than the LCP. But we ain't put the Buffalo Bore +Ps thru it yet.

Just from looking at the specs and pictures, I think there are a number of 9mm pistols out there that are just as compact and concealable, although not made by Sig. .380 is a compromise caliber IMHO, perfect for a seriously pocketable gun like a LCP or P3AT but if you get into a gun as large as a Kahr MK9 then you might as well get the 9mm or even a .40 in the same package size.

Quote: "a number of 9mm pistols out there that are just as compact and concealable"

' Beg to differ with ya on that one. Unless ya wanna offer a list that I've not seen. The Rohrbaugh (spelling?) is the only one I'm aware of that might even come close. I've had the slightly larger PM-9 for years and, as much as I like it and the superior 9mm caliber, it simply will not fit in places that the LCPs and 238s will.

Well a Ruger LCP is far smaller than a Sig P238. However a Kahr PM9 is comparable in size to the P238.

PM9 P238
---------------------------
length 5.3" 5.5" <----PM9 is shorter
width 0.9" 1.1" <----PM9 is thinner
height 4.0" 3.9" <----PM9 is .1" taller
weight (oz) 14 15.2 <----w/o mag the Kahr is lighter, loaded probably nearly the same.

PM9 is smaller in every dimension except height, which is only .1" difference. I definitely think the size of a PM9 would be comparable to the size of the P238. Both are the same capacity and the Kahr has a longer barrel.

In fact a CW9 with a grip chop is only .3" longer barrel but otherwise the same dimensions as a PM9, is far more affordable than the P238, 9mm, and has a much longer barrel and sight radius.

I am sure there are many reasons to prefer a P238 over a PM9 or other Kahr but ease of concealment or size is probably not among them. I would think the biggest reason is preference for DA/SA or a 1911-type manual of arms.

I feel the PM9 would be an excellent choice. I have not had a chance to fire a P3AT yet, but hope to soon.

I would love to check out the Rohrbaugh, but with the very high price, it is out of my price range. I could get a couple of Sigs for that much money.

The P238 is a SAO and is meant to be carried in the cocked and locked position otherwise it would have to be manually cocked. Basically it is a mini 1911 chambered in 380 & the Colt Mustang mag's fit it so no need to buy the expensive Sig mags