Kittens or Pocket Tigers?
By Clayton Walker The Italians seem to do tiny things pretty well: tiny sunglasses that were once the epitome of chic, tiny two- seater roadsters, and tiny little cups of coffee that will wallop you with a jolt of caffeine. Though Beretta’s
Of course, we all want to know about the shooting. At the distances at which a small gun like this would be employed for the usages involved, the Puma avails itself well. Sights are actually pretty darn good for
a late-50s firearm, and reliability is absolutely excellent thanks to the open-top slide – and provided that the operator uses a factory original
magazine with FMJ ammo. Aftermarket mags and JHPs tend to provide nothing but
iconic Model 92 now strikes many shooters as big and
headaches.
All that said, perfect cen- ter-punches are easier talked about than accomplished.
bulky in an era awash with polymer subcompact guns, for a long while their handgun lineup followed in that Italian tradition of being small and impeccably designed.
Though the lowly .32 ACP is unlikely to beat one’s hands up, the Puma is still a blow-
While the Internet and social media continue to make the world smaller and smaller, there’s surprisingly little at- tention paid to two “Series” of Beretta guns that preceded the company’s iconic Model 92: those are the 70-Series and 80-Series firearms, affectionately known as the Puma and Cheetah models. Especially as shooters become more comfortable with shrinking frame sizes – we’re living in an era when concealed carry is at its zenith – I think these particular guns should be on more people’s radars. We’ll start with the Model 70. The design roots of this pistol stretch back to Beretta’s M1934/5, a gun that looks a little ungainly to modern eyes. While the M1934/5 had unmistakable Beretta DNA, including the company’s signature open-top side design, they were cumbersome to operate.
back-operated gun in a cen- terfire caliber, which means that recoil is appreciably snappy. I would put it at the level of a CCW-sized 9mm. Users expecting it to kick like a .22LR will likely be surprised. (It should be noted, however, that Beretta did indeed produce .22-chambered Series 70 guns, which it dubbed the “Jaguar” models.) Additionally, we need to remember the Puma is a de- sign of its time and place: it replaced the M1934/5, which itself was intended as a police arm. As such, the gun has a decidedly “police-spec” trigger pulls of about seven pounds. It’s not an insurmountable pull weight, but on such
The Puma, unlike its predeces- sor, allowed the user to drop the slide via a thumb-mounted release and disengage the safety one-handed. It also did away with the “Euro”- style heel magazine release in favor of a button in the bottom of the grip. All of this sounds ho-hum now, but these were significant ergonomic upgrades back in the late ‘50s. My Puma is of the earlier
a small gun it does mean that the barrel can be pushed to-and-fro that much easier when the sear finally trips. Mechanically, the gun is very accurate,
but it will need a good shooter to wrangle it. Naturally, we come to some discussion of the .32 ACP for any kind of defensive job. Charitably, I’ll say this: it wouldn’t be my first choice . The good news is that most sources agree the round is a decent penetrator for its cal- iber. I don’t know how motivated or capable I would be to continue an act of aggression if I had a few .32-caliber pills lodged in my brain, sinuses, or soft palate. I would say that a person’s comfort with carrying the Puma will come down to their ability to place three or four quick headshots inside of 7 yards. If that’s a
type, which included a push-button, crossbolt safety. The 70S would incorporate a 1911-like,
thumb-operated safety. This is the more popular control, but I find the cross-bolt works fine and preserves the clean lines of the Series 70.
800-223-4570 • dillonprecision.com
22 Blue Press
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online