testtest

Chances of Springfield Developing an LCP Max Competitor?

wmg1299

wmg1299

Professional
I have used a Ruger LCP II as my workout pocket gun and occasional backup gun for years. I prefer the Springfield 911 in .380 to the LCP II because the 911 has excellent sights. I only carry the LCP II for workouts because it is slightly lighter and I don't feel guilty getting it covered in sweat.

I just picked up a new Ruger LCP Max, and I absolutely love that gun. I'd have bought a new LCP with an adjustable tritium front sight, even if they hadn't added capacity. The Max's 10+1 or 12+1 capacity in a gun that is barely bigger that the original is an awesome feature. The LCP Max is accurate enough that I'm strongly considering making it my EDC.

While I'm loving the Max so far, I'm still partial to the 911's 1911-esque design. Do you guys think there is any chance of Springfield giving the stack-and-a-half treatment to the 911? I'd buy one in a heartbeat, but I'm not sure if there are enough shooters like me to support the product development.
 
It would be interesting and I would be interested probably. I know Sig is bringing out the p365 in .380. I heard a rumor from a friend that Browning might do thier .380 1911 in a 2011 setup, but that I am dubious about. I would buy one though if they did lol.
 
IMO, there is no reason to offer a pistol originally made in 9mm Luger in .380 - on US market. It won't be a smaller frame.
In some countries the 9mm Luger is restricted to LEO/military, so for those the .380 (9mm Kurtz/short) is an alternative.
That's what the market for a P365 in .380 would be.

LCP transition from single stack to 1-1/2 made sense because the frame remained the same.
 
Last edited:
SoNic said:
IMO, there is no reason to offer a pistol originally made in 9mm Luger in .380 - on US market. It won't be a smaller frame.
In some countries the 9mm Luger is restricted to LEO/military, so for those the .380 (9mm Kurtz/short) is an alternative.
That's what the market for a P365 in .380 would be.

LCP transition from single stack to 1-1/2 made sense because the frame remained
Click to expand...
Perhaps if you end up developing arthritis in the hands as you get older you may understand better the need and desire for them.

the large gun companies generally do not make things there is no market for.
 
SoNic said:
I didn't say that .380 is useless. Read again...
Click to expand...
I read perfectly, I never said you said that, nor did I imply it. Perhaps you need to read again. I said there is an appeal/market for certain designs which originated in 9mm in .380 for some people.
 
Last edited:
SoNic said:
I didn't say that .380 is useless. Read again...
Click to expand...
What I DID say, was that perhaps in the future you might understand the market for certain 9mm designs chambered in 380, if you unfortunately get arthritis in years to come.
 
Why would those be better for arthritis than the ones special designed for .380 like the LCP Max?
Why would be needed a P365 for that?
 
SoNic said:
Why would those be better for arthritis than the ones special designed for .380 like the LCP Max?
Why would be needed a P365 for that?
Click to expand...
Why does someone prefer a Glock over a 1911. Or a 410, or 16 Guage pump over a 12. Personal preference or comfort usually. Obviously Sig did market surveys, or had enough requests for it that they decided the product would sell enough to justify its production. I can see the appeal to someone who uses a p365 and loves it, but thier hands are quickly becoming to painful with it. Trust someone who has that issue. I had to stop using all my large bore handguns because of it and replace them with lighter calibers. I almost bought a 357 Redhawk for that same reason to replace my .44 magnum version, I loved that revolver.

Obviously you disagree, which is fine. Everyone is entitled to thier opinion.
 
Then IMO even a P365 is the wrong weapon for you. And making it in .380 won't change the fact that is a striker operation.
Check the S&W M&P EZ for example. 9mm and .380 that was designed for such use case, with a different design approach, not just a .380 conversion.
 
SoNic said:
Then IMO even a P365 is the wrong weapon for you. And making it in .380 won't change the fact that is a striker operation.
Check the S&W M&P EZ for example. 9mm and .380 that was designed for such use case, with a different design approach, not just a
Click to expand...
Like I said, everyone has an opinion. It would seem Sig, does not share yours.

But thank you for your unsolicited honest opinion. I never mentioned I was buying a p365.
 
I suppose I can see it, but I don't know. My old man is 81, arthritic and has no upper body or hand strength left. He gave me all his 1911s because he can't rack them anymore. Even using the proper method I showed him. When S&W came out with the .380 EZ I bought him one. He was very skeptical of the caliber. And still is. I've had him on my range with my Walther and HK 9MMs and he likes them. He can't rack them but he likes shooting them. I think I'm going to get him an EZ 9.

My point being if my old man can handle a 9mm with hands and arms too weak to even rack most semi autos I don't know how much of a market there would be for a company to offer a popular 9mm in .380 caliber.
 
SoNic said:
Why would those be better for arthritis than the ones special designed for .380 like the LCP Max?
Why would be needed a P365 for that?
Click to expand...
Because the LCP is still an itty-bitty little pistol, hard to control if you have larger hands, with a lot of recoil for a .380 because...wait for it...it's so bloody SMALL.

I you've ever fired a larger pistol in .380--say, a Colt 1908, or a Sphynx AT380M, or a Beretta 84--you'd know that the are easy to control, amazingly accurate, ad have little to no recoil.

These are important things if you have arthritis.

Personally? Doublestack the EMP in .380.
 
I was unaware that Sig was making the P365 in .380 ACP until I read these responses. I've carried the standard 9mm P365 as my EDC for a few years now, and it has been a terrific carry gun. I personally wouldn't downsize to the .380 version, but only because I find the 9mm recoil to be quite manageable and the firearm wouldn't be any more concealable than what I already have. I can see it being attractive to other shooters, and may even have my recoil-sensitive wife give it a try. If Sig could give the stack-and-a-half treatment to the P238, I would buy that gun in a heartbeat.
 
I gotta be honest. The fact that I can reasonably conceal a full sized .45 or a VP9 means that not only will I never go smaller than one of the Shields, the more I train with both, the less I like even the Shields. I mean I will carry them under conditions where carrying a full size doesn't work well and I do train with them, but frankly getting a proper grip on it straight out of the holster is a lot faster with a full size gun.
 
We got one in today and was not really impressed. It only came with one mag and The slide action felt gritty, which might smooth after shooting. I wanted a mag extension for it.
 
wmg1299 said:
I have used a Ruger LCP II as my workout pocket gun and occasional backup gun for years. I prefer the Springfield 911 in .380 to the LCP II because the 911 has excellent sights. I only carry the LCP II for workouts because it is slightly lighter and I don't feel guilty getting it covered in sweat.

I just picked up a new Ruger LCP Max, and I absolutely love that gun. I'd have bought a new LCP with an adjustable tritium front sight, even if they hadn't added capacity. The Max's 10+1 or 12+1 capacity in a gun that is barely bigger that the original is an awesome feature. The LCP Max is accurate enough that I'm strongly considering making it my EDC.

While I'm loving the Max so far, I'm still partial to the 911's 1911-esque design. Do you guys think there is any chance of Springfield giving the stack-and-a-half treatment to the 911? I'd buy one in a heartbeat, but I'm not sure if there are enough shooters like me to support the product development.
Click to expand...

I want one, but have not real reason to (not that it stopped me in the past). I have a Kahr p380 with mag guts I summer carry. It’s so dang light…not sure I will like the lcp, but now thank you to you I have to shoot one. Too bad 380 is still god aweful expensive.

the sights on that look pretty good. How do they compare to your sig night sights on your 365 (which are great, and I been wanting. To buy that p365x slide for rds but don’t really need it…)
 
Lchtus said:
the sights on that look pretty good. How do they compare to your sig night sights on your 365 (which are great, and I been wanting. To buy that p365x slide for rds but don’t really need it…)
Click to expand...
I agree that the 365 sights are great. The front sight on the LCP Max stands out slightly more than the Sig front sight. I personally like blacked-out rear sights with a front night sight, so I really like the blacked-out U-notch rear sight on the LCP Max. The front sight is very easy to find in low-light, and the U-notch is fairly large.

The LCP Max sights are great at traditional self-defense distances, but are large enough that they may start to cover a significant portion of your target at distances over about 20 yards. It's not hard to put rounds on a man-sized torso target at 25 yards, but these definitely aren't bullseye competition sights. Given the gun's intended self-defense purpose, and it's pocket-sized dimensions, I find the sights to be quite good.
 
wmg1299 said:
I agree that the 365 sights are great. The front sight on the LCP Max stands out slightly more than the Sig front sight. I personally like blacked-out rear sights with a front night sight, so I really like the blacked-out U-notch rear sight on the LCP Max. The front sight is very easy to find in low-light, and the U-notch is fairly large.

The LCP Max sights are great at traditional self-defense distances, but are large enough that they may start to cover a significant portion of your target at distances over about 20 yards. It's not hard to put rounds on a man-sized torso target at 25 yards, but these definitely aren't bullseye competition sights. Given the gun's intended self-defense purpose, and it's pocket-sized dimensions, I find the sights to be quite good.
Click to expand...
Nice. Appreciate the feedback. Sounds like a winner. My wallet does not thank you though…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top