The new Walther Arms PPKs are supposed to be good stuff (the old S&W-made ones were apparently teh sux). I'd go for it.

Back when I took my Defensive Pistol class, our instructor (a veteran LEO, can't remember if he was retired or not) told us that his preferred "backup carry" setup when off-duty was a .32 Beretta Tomcat in his back pocket. Than way, if he ever got mugged, it looked like he was complying and reaching for his wallet rather than drawing his pistol. I can see a standard-size PPK (not the PPK/S) filling the same role.

Haven't shot one of the new ones but the old ones were a straight blow back action and had more recoil than it seemed they had any right to given the cartridge.  Not completely uncontrollable, mind you, but not particularly pleasant for a day at the range either.   Might have been just the way the gun fit me - or didn't - YMMV.  The sights were pretty rudimentary but probably adequate for a BUG.  Wouldn't be my choice for a concealment piece but it also wouldn't be the first time I bought something because it sang sweetly to me with little thought given to its utility. 

If its tickles your fancy, go for it.   

Thanks for the replies.  I have also looked at the Sig P238, but lean toward the PPK.  Yep, the PPK is a true blow-back action.  That's not all bad.  There are complaints by those who grip it too high that the slide can do evil things to the web between thumb and index finger!  I've been forewarned.

The newer versions (including, I believe, the new Walther Arms ones) have a slightly lengthened beavertail on the frame that mitigates (if not alleviates altogether) the slide-bite issue.

That said, having shot the SIG P238 and a pair of not-quite-PPK's (SIG P232 and a Makarov), if given the option, I'd take the P238. Lighter weight, better trigger, and surprisingly little recoil. But that's just my $0.02.

The newer versions (including, I believe, the new Walther Arms ones) have a slightly lengthened beavertail on the frame that mitigates (if not alleviates altogether) the slide-bite issue.

That said, having shot the SIG P238 and a pair of not-quite-PPK's (SIG P232 and a Makarov), if given the option, I'd take the P238. Lighter weight, better trigger, and surprisingly little recoil. But that's just my $0.02.

The extra weight is not a concern, but the trigger is.  Thanks for the observation.  I’ll look into that on both the PPK and the P238.

I have to admit that after seeing one in a LGS I'm more attracted to the eye candy gorgeousness of the thing and its European M&P history. 

This is about it.  These days, with all the objectively 'better' options out there, I imagine the reason most carry a PPK (or a Detective Special,  or a Pre-Model 10) is so they can have that connection with an age long past.

The PPK’s DA capability is a plus for me compared to the Sig which is SAO. I know it’s heavy, too.  About 14 pounds!  Were I a more well-healed sort, I’d buy both, but . . .

Maybe I’ll try to find someone local that would let me fire their baby Walter so I can assess the recoil.  I do not want to go lower than .380 on the power scale.

I know Raptor had issues with his P232, but mine?  I love mine.  Though truth be told, I haven't shot it lately.  I carry the LCR357 instead, mostly because I can carry it in my pocket.

But I never found the recoil on the 232 to be all that bad.  I need to check it out again to make sure.  I think I'll pull out for next week's bowling pin shoot.

We've strayed from the original question, and I have no real input on it, never having fired any PPK.  Other than yes, slide bite hurts.  Fatter, Pudgier, Meatier hands seem to be more apt to get cut during recoil.  I got cut twice in as many shots when I first got my P232, and quickly adjusted my grip slightly.

Raptor, I replaced the factory hard plastic grips on my 232 with a set of aftermarket (not Sig marked) Hogue finger groove grips.  They helped with the recoil, and the grooves seem to fit my hand shape well enough.  But I understand your dilemma.  The first centerfire handgun I bought after college was an S&W Model 66.  The factory grips were HUGE!  I quickly replaced them with a set of Pachmyers (non-finger groove).  They fit my hands better, but were still too fat at the top of the grips to really say I liked them.

I guess the best .380 ACP I ever fired extensively was a Beretta model 85.   Really nice pistol in terms of controllability.  The sights could have been better but they were well regulated for the Remington and Winchester ball ammunition we were shooting.  As I recall it was 90 - 95 grains at around 900 fps or so.  We were shooting both paper targets and some scrap lumber we had brought along to see how well the rounds penetrated. 

I am of the opinion that all pistol rounds are susceptible to failure in a self defense situation so my focus is on shot placement and penetration.  The rounds we were firing out of the Beretta were plenty accurate at typical combat/home defense distances but the penetration was less than optimal on the lumber.  Standard pressure .38 Special ammunition - 130 grain FMJ and 158 grain cast lead semi-wad cutters out of a 4" barreled revolver did better.  Granted, not quite up to the standards of modern ballistic gelatin testing but we made do with what we had and drew our own conclusions.   If I were using a .380 ACP I would probably opt for a FMJ design for pistol reliability and best penetration.  I would find one that worked 100% reliably in my pistol and practice with it enough to put them exactly where they would do the most good. 

Lest you think I am unduly recoil sensitive, I carry a .45 ACP that is not significantly larger than the PPK in question and that aluminum framed little beast will nudge you when the hammer is tripped on a 200 grain truncated cone FMJ.  Feeds great, hits hard, penetrates well.   

Much is made of the ability of a fired bullet to expand in the target, thereby causing a large temporary crush cavity and dumping all its energy in the target while simultaneously not over-penetrating the target.   That said, terminal ballistics is a very complicated science that has a discouraging number of variables that affect the outcome.   The .380 ACP pistols are attractive because of their size - not because they are so much more effective than anything else.  Light for caliber bullets at low velocity are always going to depend on accurate shot placement to be effective.  A pistol that cannot be controlled well enough under recoil to deliver fast, accurate follow up shots is a liability in a defensive role and doubly so if the round it fires is of questionable effectiveness. 

Now, a Mozambique drill with a .380 ACP is likely to be just as effective as anything else.  Two to the center of mass and one to the head is a pretty effective deterrent - especially if using a deep penetrating round.  But, with a .380 ACP that usually means a FMJ design and it might actually take three to get the job done.  Or so it seems to me.   

How do you like that Colt Mustang?  I've looked at them but never fired one.