What do you like better for deep concealment ?

642





Ruger LCP II




Attached File

I'm not sure I understand your question?
Thread title says bugout gun?
posting asks about deep conceal gun?

These are not the same 2 scenarios..Just saying

I'm a fan of 380autos for carry.
I have also always been a .38 Snub fan and carried a Jframe for years..once I started shooting and carrying my 380 the jframe is just now a bedside gun(but still love it.

But a"bugout" gun?...ya know like bugout to my emergency fall back location and live off the land while defending against intruders?.....357 or 44 w 6"in barrel

For deep concealment I used a 9mm they have become so small that the 380s are not that much smaller.

Of the two I chose the LCPII because backup ammo would be easier to carry concealed.

Ruger lcr357 

Glock 43, Sig 938

I don't know why I said " bug out"
I meant belly gun - deep concealment

I own both, and have been using the 380 more lately

friend wants to buy my 642, but I think I'll keep it.

I like the 38 special better than .380,...but i like the rugers capacity better

S&W 442 or Remington RM380.

I assumed you meant BUG backup gun.
I have a 642 if that answers your question.
But starting from scratch the sub compact 9mm are about the same size and manage ammo better.
But I like that I can get a full grip on the 642

642 is better all around.  You can shoot +P , powder puff Wadcutters, or a shotshells.

I, personally can't pocket carry it without being paranoid about it printing.

The LCP II.  Hides much better.  But that is the only benefit I see for it.

For a belly gun, I prefer my M-36's 90% of the time for the late night CVS run. So in your case the 642 in the same DeSantis holster that I carry, strong side front pocket.

The Ruger will be smaller and lighter and easier to conceal. However the snub nose is a much better gun, more powerful and more reliable, but it is a bit larger and heavier and bulkier. I much prefer the S&W since I don't mind the discomfort. But if you think you won't carry it, then you're better off with the Ruger. Something is better than nothing ya know. 

The LCP is easier to conceal and holds more rounds. It makes more sense on paper. But I'm more confident with the snub. I shoot both pretty well for their size, not sure why but I like the j frame.

I own the two of the LCP II's already, one for me and one for the wife. We had a similar as yours hammerless S&W pistol and sold it because it was just to big for a pocket pistol.
If I want something larger in pocket carry, I grab a pocket holster and a Glock 43, if I want lite weight and I'm going to be active I grab a pocket holster and the LCP II.

I voted 642 but that was based of my experience with the  original lcp. (so maybe i'm wrong)

I put 200 rnds through a lcp and never wanted to shoot it again.  IDK if the recoil impulse was fixed with the lcpII?
I personally don't want a gun i don't want to train with or shoot.  

I have a lc9s pro and it is my constant companion replacing my smith airweight.

I have an airweight and a bodyguard(which is s&w's version of the Ruger) I can't speak on the Ruger personally but the BG380 is about the same thing.


I like them both but tend to prefer the BG380 for 'deep concealment' over the airweight. It's thinner, lighter and carries more rounds then the airweight.  although the 380 round has less ummmph then the .38spl. The BG380 is 6+1 capacity. I added a magguts kit to my magazine to make mine 7+1. You can do the same with the Ruger version I think.

S&W is the answer

All I know, is that when I put my 442 in my hands it feels like home.  I shoot it OK and hopefully getting better.  It is a natural pointer, fast out of my holster, and seems like it would work.  It has a lot of downsides (like capacity, heavy trigger) but I can't explain why, I just like it.  I might not have a good reason to trust it, as some pointed out, but it just seems like it has some upsides over a tiny auto.  I admit, it might all just be in my head.  

From what I can tell the upsides are:

.38 might have the edge over .380, possibly
if a round is a dud, you just keep going
there is maybe some possibility that you might shoot someone with your muzzle touching them, and autos might not fire if they are out of battery
my guess is your 642 feels a crap ton better and more natural than that pistol.   It looks like it might be awkward to hang onto during recoil


But believe me, I'm sure the pistol has it's upsides and I don't want to overlook those.  But I did vote for the 642.  

642 all day, every day!

For concealment the LCP is the obvious choice.  Thinner, lighter, better capacity, effortless to conceal.  I prefer the original to the new version. 

The 642 packs a lot more punch but it's nowhere near as small and light.  I admit I want one, but I'll still carry the LCP most of the time.