LCP vs TCP

[Teamless]

Pulled from another thread, rather than hijack the "Ammo on sale" Thread:

I have contemplated getting myself a Bersa Thunder or Ruger LCP (as a pocket gun)

Off Topic

IMO..If you do decide to get one or the other, go with the LCP for pocket carry.
There's nothing wrong with the Bersa but the LCP is way easier to carry and conceal in a pocket.

Back on Topic

Yes... I agree. It's small, light and from everything I've read and heard, quite reliable.

I also agree that the Bersa 380 would be good, but not as a pocket weapon, compared to the LCP.

But, what about the TCP? I have heard (from a dealer) that the TCP, by Taurus, was made after the patent ran out on the LCP.
I wouldn't carry it regularly as a primary weapon due to the 6+1 (i think that is the count on the TCP), but as a once in a while carry, if I couldn't get my PT111 on, or as a BUG I have heard it is a good weapon.

[Quahog]

Here's a review of it against the LCP and Kel-Tec P3AT:

http://www.gunblast.com/Taurus-PT738.htm

[Teamless]

Here's a review of it against the LCP and Kel-Tec P3AT:

Thanks!

[A-R]

FYI ... http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic. ... cp#p404507" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I own an LCP and like it. Very accurate for it's size, especially with attached Crimson Trace laser. But it's by no means perfect.

I've held and dry fired a TCP and it fits my hand better and has better sights (LCP's sights are a joke - thus the prevalence of CT lasers on LCPs - this is the setup Gov. Perry used to dispatch the coyote).

But, as you see in the link above, it seems Taurus is still working out the kinks on the TCP and using first-edition buyers as guinea pigs in their final QA testing. I've already been through that with my LCP (recall) and to Ruger's credit for a large-scale recall it was conducted as smoothly as possible - but I still was without my $350 handgun for about 3 weeks.

Though I like the TCP and hope it succeeds because it offers features the LCP and P3AT do not for a price that Kahr and Sig can't touch with their .380s, I'm not going to be a guinea pig again. I'll wait until they work out all the kinks before considering a purchase. Same thing with the Diamondback .380, which has had a bundle of problems itself.

[Napier]

I own both, and find that the TCP is slightly more accurate. The TCP also has a slide lockback on empty, which is handy for a fast reload. My only reservation so far is the relatively light trigger for a DAO, an issue for me to carry with one up the pipe. If I had to give one up, it would be the Ruger.

[SecedeTX]

I have the LCP, and carry it when I have to wear a suit and can't conceal my Kahr MK9 Elite (which I love to no end). I recently had the opportunity to fire the brand new Kahr P380. Wow.

Having put about 500 rounds through the LCP, the major difference is controlability. The LCP is great for what it is...a highly concealable weapon, but not one you want to shoot comfortably. Price is also really nice.

http://www.kahr.com/PA-1B/review_hg10.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am really tempted to sell the LCP to defray the cost of getting the Kahr p380. It feels better made, and shoots like a dream compared to the LCP.

I am biased period. I really like Kahrs. The LCP was purchased as a pocket gun, over the KelTec...which just seemed low quality.

Kahr p380 will run you about $550 new with another $150ish for the laser sights.

It's light, really thin, not bad to shoot, little pricey.

I won't even tell you how much I have wrapped up in my MK9.

[SecedeTX]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL5EDIWh ... ature=fvwp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Youtube comparing the Kahr, LCP, and KEL-TEC

[SecedeTX]

and another

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y4XXd0x ... re=channel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TLE2]

I wish they'd make one that size in 9mm. 38 is just too hard to find and is minimal for self defense.

[secure]

I prefer the DB380 over the TCP, LCP, or P3AT. Its a backup to G26 but still more reliable and accurate IMO.