Category Archives: Firearms

Fun Firearms Friday — Pocket Pistol Shootout: Colt Mustang vs. Beretta Tomcat


Left to right: Walther PPK, Beretta Tomcat, PPK/S, Colt Mustang

I hope you’ve enjoyed Pocket Pistol Week here at the blog, but now it’s time to determine a winner. The 9mm P99c AS by Walther remains my primary concealed carry weapon, and it will continue in that role. But sometimes you simply need something just slightly more compact than the (in my opinion) best concealed carry weapon ever made, and for years my go-to choices for this were the Walther .380 ACP PPK/S for winter and the .32 ACP PPK for summer. Let’s look at the relevant numbers:

Walther PPK/S:

  • Length: 6.1 inches/155mm
  • Width: .98 inches/25mm
  • Height: 4.3 inches/109mm
  • Weight with empty 7-round .380 ACP magazine/9mm kurz: 23.6 ounces/627 grams

Walther PPK same as PPK/S above except:

  • Height: 3.8 inches/97mm
  • Weight with empty 7-round .32 ACP magazine: 22.1 ounces/669 grams

Colt Mustang Lite:

  • Length: 5.5 inches/140 millimeters
  • Width: 1.06 inches/27 mm
  • Height with flat-based 6-round magazine: 3.9 inches/99 mm
  • Weight with empty 6-round .380 ACP/9mm kurz magazine: 12.58 ounces/357 grams

Beretta 3032 Tomcat:

  • Length: 4.92 inches/125 millimeters
  • Width: 1.1 inches/28 mm
  • Height: 3.7 inches/94 mm
  • Weight with empty 7-round .32 ACP/7.65mm magazine:
    • Early thin-slide Tomcat 14.38 ounces/408 grams
    • Later wide-slide Tomcat 15.72 ounces/446 grams

Mustang vs. Tomcat

As you can see, the Walther pocket pistols are noticeably larger and much heavier than the competition in today’s article, almost to the point that calling either a “pocket pistol” is really a misnomer by today’s standards. Between the Mustang and the Beretta measurements get a bit tighter, with the Colt coming out ahead in the weight category, and the Beretta clearly winning in length and height. The two pistols are virtually tied in overall width, but the much narrower slide of the Mustang makes it feel substantially thinner compared to the Tomcat.

Mustang vs. Tomcat length

Ergonomically the Mustang wins by a landslide. The button slide release on the Colt is where any experienced shooter expects, directly behind the trigger. And when pressed, the magazine falls freely from the grip magazine well. The Tomcat button release is much farther down the slide and located to the rear, making thumb manipulation with the shooting hand (for right-handers) very awkward. It’s actually easier to use the off hand to press the release, and when released the magazine stops dropping after just over a third of an inch of travel, about 10mm.  The Mustang also comes out on top with an ambidextrous safety and a slide that locks back on the last shot. The Tomcat’s only real win here is the ease of breech loading that marvelous tip-barrel rather than having to rack the slide. Further working in the Beretta’s favor here is the location of the barrel release lever above and slightly behind the trigger; its location is perfect for thumb activation with the shooting hand.

Mustang vs. Tomcat height

Triggers are pretty much a wash. The Mustang’s single-action only trigger is much stiffer than what one normally encounters in a 1911-type design. I’d estimate it at over seven pounds, probably approaching eight.  Reset is shorter, at about a sixteenth of an inch/1.6mm compared to three sixteenths/4.8mm for the Tomcat.  The Tomcat single-action trigger feels lighter than the Colt’s, but not appreciably so; probably around six pounds if I must guess (I really need to invest in a trigger gauge at some point for these articles).  As for the Tomcat’s double-action trigger, it’s better than the above cited Walthers, but it’s not very smooth and you can both feel and hear when the hammer passes the half-cock position. Despite its flaws, the Tomcat’s double-action trigger is more than adequate at self-defense ranges, and the Beretta has the added advantage of a cocked-and-locked option.

Mustang with 7+1 magazine vs. Tomcat height

I’m going to grant a tie in the shootability between the Mustang and the Tomcat. Both have atrocious sights. Both are very mild in the recoil department, the Mustang being surprisingly so considering the more powerful .380 ACP in a lighter package. Because of their light recoil characteristics, both are extremely quick at reacquiring the target for follow up shots, or would be if the sights were actually up to that task. With factory magazines the Tomcat comes out ahead for two reasons.  First, the Tomcat is 7+1 versus 6+1 for the Mustang, although there are 7+1 magazines available for the latter at the expense of an extra inch of height.  Second, the Beretta’s factory magazine actually worked. The Colt’s did not, as the rounds nose-dived into the feed ramp so badly I couldn’t even get a round chambered until I switched to the three after-market Metalform seven-rounders I’d brought with me to the range.

Targets — Colt vs. Beretta

Both the Tomcat and the Mustang are quality pistols at comparable pricing.  Indeed, the Mustang would be my choice for a mini-1911 pistol in .380 ACP when compared to higher priced offerings from SIG (P238) and Kimber (Micro 380). The Mustang is lighter and less expensive than either, although I do like the SIG’s night sight option.

Walther PPK over Beretta Tomcat; PPK/S over Colt Mustang

Tomcat overlying PPK; Mustang atop PPK/S

So, bottom line, which weapon wins in the battle to replace the PPK and PPK/S as an alternate carry to the Walther P99c AS? Surprisingly to most having read this, I’m going with the Beretta Tomcat for several reasons:

  • I like being able to safely decock the weapon without having to clear the chamber
  • I’m more accustomed to double-action/single-action, and feel safer with the added resistance necessary to pull the trigger in double-action mode
  • For accuracy shots at beyond 21 feet, the hammer can still be thumbed back to place the weapon in single-action
  • The Tomcat still provides me with single-action cocked-and-locked capability if I so choose, whereas the Mustang only gives me that one method of carry

On a cold winter day, I’ll probably consider going with the Mustang for better penetration of heavier clothing, but in those cases the 9mm, 10+1 P99c AS is going to be easy to conceal anyway so the need to carry a smaller weapon is less likely to arise.

The Overall Winner in the occasional deep-concealment carry sweepstakes — Beretta’s .32 ACP 3032 Tomcat.

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under Firearms, R. Doug Wicker

Pocket Pistol Week — Beretta Tomcat


Original “thin-slide” Beretta 3032 Tomcat from 1997 — second year of production

No discussion of pocket pistols is complete without bringing up Beretta. And no discussion of Beretta pocket pistols is complete without reference to Beretta’s famous tip-barrel designs. Beretta’s most famous pocket pistol was the Model 418, which began life shortly after World War I as the Beretta Model 1920. The Model 418 is a blow-back design chambered in .25 ACP/6.35x16mmSR (SR = Semi-Rimmed cartridge). This pistol was discontinued in the mid-1950s, with production running concurrently for a few years with its successor, the Beretta Model 950 Jetfire introduced in 1952.

The Model 950 offered several improvements and features unavailable in the Model 418. The most obvious of these design changes was the implementation of a tip-barrel. The semiautomatic pistol could still be loaded using the standard method of inserting a loaded magazine, racking the slide to chamber a round, then removing the magazine to top it off before reinserting it back into the magazine well. Or, you could now insert a fully loaded magazine, push forward on the side-mounted thumb lever, which released the barrel and allowed it pivot upward from the muzzle end.  This presented the exposed breech to the shooter. With the breech tipped up, the shooter simply drops in a cartridge, then, pushes down on the rear of the barrel until it locks back into place.

Barrel tipped for breech loading

Why a tipping barrel? It can be a trial to rack the slide of small semiautomatics because of their limited grip surface. Additionally, people with weak hands may not be able to overcome the tension of the recoil and hammer/striker springs to chamber a round from a magazine. The Model 950 addressed these obstacles by borrowing the tip-barrel design from an earlier pistol, the Steyr Pieper Model 1908. With the advent of the Model 950 almost anyone could now operate a semiautomatic pistol, although in a caliber that left much to be desired. As for the 950’s trigger, it’s single-action and the weapon has no safety. That means that the hammer must be manually cocked before the gun can fire. This can be done from a half-cocked safety position.

Alas, because of its small size the Model 950 was banned from importation into the U.S. following passage of the 1968 Gun Control Act, and no one in the U.S made anything comparable until Beretta began producing the Beretta Model 20 from 1983 until 1985 at a Maryland-based manufacturing facility. The Model 20 is a refinement of the Model 950. While the Model 20 retained the tip-up barrel, the trigger was now double-action/single-action and the pistol came with a manual safety that allowed the Model 20 to be carried cocked-and-locked. Want to decock the weapon . . . safely? Tilt up the barrel to get the loaded cartridge away from any potential firing pin contact, placed your thumb on the hammer spur, pull the trigger, and gently ride the hammer to the decocked position.

3032 Tomcat cocked-and-locked

3032 Tomcat in double-action, safety off

After only two years of U.S. production the Model 21A Bobcat replaced the Model 20 in 1985. The Model 21A was available in both .25 ACP/6.35x16mmSR and .22 LR/5.6x15mmR (R = Rimmed cartridge). Some differences between the Model 21A and its predecessor:

  • An increase in grip length and girth
  • Increase in weight
  • Improved manual safety
  • Addition of a half-cock position
  • Matte finish replacing the previous high-gloss bluing
  • Stainless “INOX” version

However, if you thought .380 ACP/9mm kurz was a hard self-defense sell in the 1980s at around 200 ft. lbs./270 joules of muzzle energy, just imagine trying to convince buyers that 65 ft. lbs./88 joules is somehow adequate. The .22 LR/5.6mm was great for cheap range enjoyment, but not many people consider .25 ACP/6.35mm much more than an expensive novelty. And while Beretta had once produced a tip-barrel .380 ACP/9mm kurz version of the Cheetah designated the Model 86 (see: Shooting a Pair of Cheetahs — Comparing the Beretta 84FS and 85FS), it was several inches longer and taller, much wider, and over twice as heavy than the diminutive Bobcat.

If .25 ACP doesn’t sell, and a weapon designed for .380 ACP is too large for the intended tip-barrel pocket pistol market, what’s the solution? How about a cartridge that fits nicely between the two — the .32 ACP/7.65x17mmSR Browning at 130 ft. lbs./176 joules. This would place into the Bobcat design the cartridge for which the Walther PP and PPK were originally designed (see: The Perfect Fashion Accessory—Walther PPK in .32 ACP), and in a package much smaller and at almost half the weight of the Walther. The slide mass was increased. The frame was strengthened by making the trigger guard a thicker, molded part of the frame rather than the Bobcat’s separate, thin piece of metal that also acted as a spring to automatically rotate the barrel upward upon release. The total weight from the Bobcat increased approximately 1.5 ounces/43 grams, but the Bobcat’s length, width, and height were retained in a pistol with a new name and model number.

Thus, eleven years after the Bobcat debuted, the beefed up .32 ACP Beretta 3032 Tomcat arrived. Too bad all that engineering didn’t work.

While the mass of the slide was increased to handle a cartridge with twice the power of the .25 ACP, and the frame strengthened with the revised trigger guard, these modifications still weren’t enough for the frame to reliably handle the battering from the slide. Internal cracking of the frame just above the trigger began showing up in many of the original Tomcats. These cracks were in a non-structural portion of the frame, but that did nothing to alleviate concerns from unhappy owners; and if the cracked metal displaced upward even slightly, the damaged frame would rub against the slide preventing proper cycling and causing jams.

Quick and easy disassembly

The solution was to increase the slide mass even more to further reduce slide velocity. The result was the Beretta 3032 “wide slide” Tomcat. But not only was the slide widened, now matching the width of the grips, the side rails of the slide were also raised. The raised rail on the right side of the pistol is lowered forward of the breech face to accommodate ejection of the spent casing. If you happen upon a used Tomcat and want to know if it is an early version or a later wide-slide variant, just look for this area on the right side (see the photos below). On an original 3032 the right-side rail will have a uniform height the entire length. The wide-slide right rail will be lowered forward of the breech face.

Original “thin-slide” and newer “wide-slide”

Slide-by-slide comparison

Thin-slide Tomcat left; wide-slide Tomcat right

Now for some interesting design notes and observations:

  1. The Tomcat is a true blow back design, clear down to case ejection. Look at the tipped-up barrel and you’ll notice something is missing. There’s no extractor. The spent case is blown out of the barrel rather than being pulled out at the end of an extractor hook
  2. The closed barrel is under tension from a leaf spring in the frame, so when the barrel release lever is pushed the barrel pivots upward with enough velocity to toss a loaded cartridge right out of the chamber. Considering that a standard “tap-rack-bang” drill won’t work in a gun that lacks an extractor, this is a rather ingenious solution to quickly removing a dud cartridge.
  3. The Tomcat lacks a decock, but that’s not a problem. If you want to safely decock the loaded weapon, just tilt the barrel, pull the trigger, and gently lower the hammer with your thumb (Beretta recommends against dry fire, so don’t let the hammer just fall). Using this procedure, it’s not even necessary to remove a loaded magazine to safely decock the weapon. Once the Tomcat is decocked, just push the barrel with the chambered round back into place.
  4. One other “missing” piece. Below is an image of the exposed frame and the underside of the slide. Notice that there is no recoil spring? Actually, there are two of them, but they are hidden behind the grips. When the slide travels rearward, two slots on the underneath sides of the slide engage levers on either side of the frame above the grips.  These levers compress the hidden recoil springs downward.

Under side of slide; exposed frame

The Tomcat has quickly become one of my favorite weapons, but it isn’t without at least two glaring drawbacks:

  1. Once again, we get from the manufacturer a pistol with only one magazine. That, in my view, is totally unacceptable. Minimum should be three (thank you, FN and SIG), even though the industry standard appears to be two (just about everyone else, including Colt with their 1911/1991 models and Beretta on most of their other pistols). On the plus side, unlike the Colt Mustang shown Monday (see: Pocket Pistol Week — Colt Mustang), the sole magazine included with the Tomcat actually worked.

    One magazine? Are you kidding me?

  2. As with the Colt Mustang, the sights on the Tomcat are terrible. On the early Tomcat I fired for this article, the black-on-black front/rear sight combination is terrible. The stainless-on-black front/rear combination on the INOX wide-slides are better, but not by much. Like the Colt, the front sights on these Tomcats will at some point receive a higher visibility paint treatment. Too bad Beretta have discontinued the Alley Cat night-sighted version of the Tomcat.

    Not bad considering the dismal sights

I think I just heard a collective gasp. Many of you are probably under the impression that Beretta quit making the Tomcat. Not true. Refer to the photo below. The matte black original is from the second year of production, 1997. The INOX all-natural finish Tomcat is from 2016. The INOX two-tone variant comes from this year’s batch. Apparently, Beretta U.S. still manufacture these wonderful little packages of unique shooting pleasure in small runs about once or so a year. The same is true of the .22 LR and .25 ACP Bobcat. If you want either, make sure you tell your favorite local gun store to reserve one for you when they come out. All three of the 2017 Tomcats and the single .22 LR Bobcat received by my favorite store (Collector’s Gun Exchange) went in less than a week, and another store I routinely patronize hasn’t been able to obtain any.

Original Tomcat, 1997; Two-tone INOX, 2017; All-natural INOX, 2016

By now you’re asking how the Tomcat shoots. Like a dream. Recoil is incredibly light. Reacquisition of target is quick and easy, despite the rather lacking sights. The heavier Walther PPK in .32 ACP might win in a direct comparison of these two factors, but not by much; and the Walther certainly loses out to the Tomcat in size, weight, and concealability. I’ve yet to test the slightly heavier wide-slides, but even with the 14.38-ounce/408-gram original version Tomcat absolutely no problems staying on paper. And that slide cracking issue on the originals? This 1997 showed no signs of having this problem. Beretta’s manual recommends that ammunition for the Tomcat be restricted to no more than 130 ft. lbs. /176 joules of energy, so that’s what I used with no ill effects on the weapon. On Friday I’ll be comparing the double-action/single-action trigger of the Tomcat to the single-action only trigger of the Colt Mustang.

For someone who lacks the strength or grip to manipulate the slide of a semiautomatic, yet doesn’t want the wide bulk and low capacity of a five-round revolver, the Tomcat offers a perfect solution — the tip-up barrel with breech loading. Capacity is adequate at 7+1, and certainly more than adequate when carrying a spare magazine or two. Some will criticize the .32 ACP for being a “mouse gun” caliber, but that’s simply ignorance speaking. European police and military forces used the .32 ACP with quite satisfactory results for the better part of a century.

A quick word about .32 ACP “rim lock”: The .32 ACP/7.65x17mmSR, as noted above, is a semi-rimmed cartridge. Being semi-rimmed, it is possible to insert cartridges into a magazine in such a manner that an upper cartridge seats behind the cartridge below it. In this case, the rim of the upper cartridge would not smoothly glide over the lower cartridge and into the chamber, but rather “lock” rims and jam the magazine solid. This is known as “rim lock”. Below are two photos of stacked .32 ACP cartridges. The top photo shows the cartridges in proper alignment as they would be if correctly loaded into a magazine. The second photo shows a “rim lock” configuration, in which the top cartridge would be prevented from passing over the lower one on its way to being stripped from the magazine and loaded into the chamber. In my opinion this is not likely to occur in the Tomcat, as the angle of the magazine should be more than enough to prevent this during loading. I suppose given a sufficiently short bullet, as with some hollow-point profiles, that a lower cartridge in the stack could conceivably get ahead of the one above it, but I doubt it. At any rate, care should be taken during loading a magazine designed for any semi-rimmed cartridge, which besides .32 ACP also includes .25 ACP, .38 ACP, and .38 Super.

Proper alignment

Rim lock alignment

Will the Tomcat replace as my primary carry choice the 9mm Walther P99c AS (see: When Fashion Goes Macho—Walther P99c AS in 9mm)? No. Will it replace as my P99c AS alternative, more concealable backups, the .32 ACP Walther PPK and .380 ACP Walther PPK/S? Will the Colt Mustang win out over both Walthers and the Beretta? Tune in Friday for the answer to that question.

Beretta 3032 Tomcat specifications:

  • Trigger: Double-action/single-action; cocked-and-locked capable
  • Caliber: .32 ACP/7.65 mm
  • Capacity: 7+1
  • Steel slide, alloy frame
  • Length: 4.92 inches/125 millimeters
  • Width: 1.1 inches/28 mm
  • Height: 3.7 inches/94 mm
  • Weight with empty 7-round magazine (as measured by the author):
    • Early thin-slide Tomcat 14.38 ounces/408 grams
    • Later wide-slide Tomcat 15.72 ounces/446 grams
  • Barrel length: 2.4 inches/61 mm

Comments Off on Pocket Pistol Week — Beretta Tomcat

Filed under Firearms, R. Doug Wicker

Pocket Pistol Week — Colt Mustang


What’s in the Box: Colt Mustang Lite .380 ACP/9mm kurz, one magazine, safety lock, and a nice zippered gun pouch

This is Pocket Pistol Week. I’ll return to travel and photography next Monday, but today we’re taking an in-depth look at the latest iteration of the Colt Mustang. Wednesday’s mystery pocket pistol is going to be a bit of a surprise, especially if you’re one of the many people who believe that Wednesday’s pistol is no longer in production. And on Fun Firearms Friday both pistols are going head-to-head on the range for a direct comparison, as well as a size comparison to the most famous and probably the most prolific pocket pistols ever made, the Walther PPK and PPK/S (see: The Perfect Fashion Accessory—Walther PPK in .32 ACP).

Before the Mustang there was the Colt MK IV Series 80 Government Model 380, which first came to market in 1984.  This pistol was, not surprisingly considering the name, chambered in .380 ACP/9mm kurz. The Colt Government 380 was a scaled-down version of Colt’s famous M1911 design, but without the grip safety. Alas, the Colt Government wasn’t much of an improvement in either size or weight over other .380 ACP/9mm kurz pistols long established in this market segment. The competition included such .380 ACP stalwarts as Walther’s PPK and PPK/S, SIG’s P230/232 line, and Beretta’s slightly larger but elegantly satisfying Cheetah series. The milder recoil of the Colt’s locked breech design was nice, but not enough to become a serious contender in the .380 ACP market.

So, two years later Colt’s Government 380 underwent further reduction in both size and weight, but at the cost of losing one round of capacity in the process. The smaller pistol’s design was also simplified with the elimination of the barrel bushing and other changes. Thus was born a true “pocket pistol”, the lightweight Colt Mustang. But as interest in the .380 ACP/9mm kurz waned in the 1990s, so too did the fortunes of the Mustang. Add to this some serious quality control issues and a bad reputation for reliability, and the Mustang was discontinued without much remorse in the mid to late 1990s.

Under side of the slide; exposed frame

But a funny thing happened to the .380 ACP on the way toward obsolescence. Not only did older .380 ACP designs such as the Walther PPK/S and the SIG P230/232 continue somewhat steady sales, but by now Bersa’s Thunder had entered the market and began posing a serious, low-cost alternative to both Walther and SIG. Then, in 2003, a new pocket pistol was introduced that really ramped up the resurgence of the .380 ACP. That weapon was the Kel-Tec P-3AT double-action only pocket pistol. Whereas the PPK/S and Thunder were recoil unfriendly blow back-design beasts in .380 ACP, the P-3AT had a very controllable locked breach design that proved that the .380 ACP could be tamed to the point of pleasantness, reliable in a locked breach weapon, and much more easily concealed than its larger, heavier blow back cousins. The explosion in states allowing for concealed carry also paved the way for this resurgence, as many people simply don’t want conceal much larger weapons in the more powerful 9mm Parabellum cartridge.

Disassembled Mustang Lite — breakdown and reassembly are a snap

To add even further insult to Colt, another manufacturer took that old Colt Mustang design and got it to work quite reliably. The SIG P238, an almost direct steal of the Mustang, made its debut in 2009. Like the Mustang that preceded it, the P238 was based on Colt’s 1911 and sported the same recoil-reducing locked breach design. The P238 even kept the Mustang’s original 6+1 capacity. Sales took off, enough so that SIG discontinued the previously popular P232 in 2015. The recoil from the .380 ACP in an 18.5-ounce/520-gram blow back P232 was simply no competition for the much softer recoil from the much lighter 15.2-ounce/430-gram SIG P238 and its locked breach design. The SIG P238 became an instant hit.

With the sudden popularity in SIG’s version of the old Mustang, Colt reintroduced their pistol in 2011. And Colt learned from their past mistakes, actually making a reliable version this time around using advanced CNC machining while instituting much better quality control over the final product.

Factory 6+1 magazine and after-market 7+1 magazine

Not happy with merely improving the quality of the reintroduced Mustang, Colt now turned their attention to actually improving the design as well. Within two years Colt introduced a polymer framed Mustang called the Mustang XSP and sold it alongside the one-ounce/28-gram heavier alloy framed Mustang Pocketlite version.

The Mustang XSP is no more, but the polymer framed Mustang still exists today as the Mustang Lite. And since the Lite frame has steel rail inserts, the pistol should be more durable than the alloy frame Mustang Pocketlite despite the fact that the Lite is an ounce lighter.

The 7+1 adds an inch in height

I’ve not fired the Pocketlite, but I can tell you that the Lite is so tame and easily controlled that I don’t see the need for that extra ounce of weight. Let’s make a direct comparison with an earlier, heavier, blow back design. I have almost 35 years of experience shooting the .380 ACP version of the Walther PPK/S, which at 23.6 ounces/670 grams is almost twice the weight of the Mustang Lite’s 12.58 ounces/357 grams total weight including an empty magazine. The PPK/S has far more snap, demonstrates much more muzzle rise, and takes longer to reacquire the target for a follow-up shot than does the Mustang Lite. The PPK/S becomes a chore to shoot after only a few magazines. Although the long-tang redesign of the discontinued Smith & Wesson PPK/S variant helped immensely in this area, even that variation can become painful much over fifty rounds. Not so with the Mustang. This is an all-day shooter. There is simply no comparison. Not only is the Mustang smaller, lighter, and easier to conceal, it’s also a better shooter. Look for a description of the trigger performance on Friday’s comparison with Wednesday’s mystery gun.

Alas, all is not peaches-‘n’-cream. Every gun has a downside, and the Mustang has several.

First, the sights are horrendous. They are small and ridiculously difficult to see even under the best of lighting, and they’re certainly not adequate for anything beyond perhaps 21 feet/6.4 meters, the standard self-defense training distance. The front sight on my Mustang Lite is going to receive some high-visibility paint in the very near future, but for now I rate the sights as barely above worthless. Here you can see what I mean with my test target from the range:

All over the place, but still on paper

Second is a problem with Colt’s Manufacturing. The Mustang only ships with one magazine, and the included six-round magazine didn’t even work. The top cartridge consistently nose-dived into the feed ramp, making chambering even one round impossible. Fortunately, I had ordered several after-market seven-round magazines from Metalform. Had those aftermarket magazines not arrived in time for my range trip comparison between the Mustang and Wednesday’s mystery pistol, the Colt would have received a failing grade by default. Colt was contacted almost seven weeks ago and said they would ship a replacement, but that shipment would be delayed awaiting availability. Here it is almost two months later and I’m still waiting. I’m glad I didn’t wait to acquire those three Metalform magazines ($18.99 through CDNNSports.com), or this firearm would be nothing more than an overpriced paperweight.

One magazine just doesn’t cut it, especially when it doesn’t work

A word about Metalform’s magazines: CDNNSports lists these magazines as “Original Equipment”, which leads me to suspect that Metalform may be the OEM supplier to Colt. The followers on the Metalforms appear identical to the magazine supplied by Colt, so that is a distinct possibility. Unfortunately, the 7+1 Metalforms come with a ridiculously long finger rest that adds an inch to the overall height of the weapon.

Mustang Lite specifications:

  • Trigger: Single-action
  • Caliber: .380 ACP/9mm kurz
  • Capacity: 6+1 (factory-included magazine)
  • Stainless steel slide, polymer frame
  • Length: 5.5 inches/140 millimeters
  • Width: 1.06 inches/27 mm
  • Height with flat-based 6-round magazine: 3.9 inches/99 mm
  • Weight with empty 6-round magazine (as measured by the author): 12.58 ounces/357 grams (
  • Barrel length: 2.75 inches/70 mm

1 Comment

Filed under Firearms, R. Doug Wicker