Walther CCP Pistol Introduced at IWA

Walther CCP

Walther announced a new pistol, the CCP, at the IWA Outdoor Classics 2014 in Nuremberg, Germany.  The CCP, or Concealed Carry Pistol, is a single-stack 9mm handgun that uses a gas delayed blowback system that Walther calls the SoftCoil system.

As Walther describes it, the SoftCoil system “significantly reduced recoil” but maintains a recoil spring that is “soft” for easy manipulation of the slide.  Walther states that the SoftCoil system reroutes gas pressures, which allows for the light spring.  Additionally, the system uses a non-tilting barrel instead of a tilting barrel which is typical to a Browning-type system used in many modern handguns.

Walther CCP pistol

The CCP has a 3.54″ long barrel, with an overall gun length of 6.42″.  Even though the gun is a single stack pistol, it is still 1.18″ wide – the same width as listed for the double-stack Glock 19 pistol.  Also like the Glock, the CCP is a striker-fired pistol, and it has a 5.5 pound trigger pull.

A manual thumb safety is standard on the CCP.  Currently, Walther is not offering a version without the thumb safety.

The gun is expected to sell in the United States, but a shipping date and MSRP have not yet been announced.

Specifications

  • caliber:  9×19
  • magazine capacity:  8 rounds
  • barrel length:  3.54″
  • overall length:  6.42″
  • width:  1.18″
  • height:  5.12″
  • weight (unloaded):  22.33 oz
  • frame:  black polymer
  • slide finish:  stainless or black CERAKOTE
  • additional features:  slide serrations front and rear, ambidextrous magazine release, sights compatible with P99, PPQ and PPS pistols, manual thumb safety

Thanks to Tyler for the tip.

Related

Richard Johnson

An advocate of gun proliferation zones, Richard is a long time shooter, former cop and internet entrepreneur. Among the many places he calls home is http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/.


Advertisement

  • DW

    Walther’s version of the HK P7?

    Neat.

    • Dan

      wonder how walther worked around the problems with the gas delay system that doomed the p7. overheating and fouling.

  • M.M.D.C.

    “Even though the gun is a single stack pistol, it is still 1.18″ wide – the same width as listed for the double-stack Glock 19 pistol.”

    That’s a bit puzzling. Maybe they thought a thinner grip would increase felt recoil and defeat the purpose of the “SoftCoil” system.

    • FourString

      I wonder if that’s the grip width or the slide width.

      • floppyscience

        It’s the slide width, you can see it in the photos. Like the PPQ, it has that weird triangular-contour slide that gets pretty fat at the bottom where it meets the frame. Everywhere else the pistol is thinner. I have no doubt the actual grip is as thin as any other single-stack.

        • jlhbvbv

          might even include the safety lever in the width measurement

          • FourString

            I’ve heard that the taper of the PPQ slide makes it a lot slimmer in reality compared to what it looks like on paper. I guess this will be true for the CCP as well

  • Jimmy

    What is the point of this when they already make the PPS?

    • FourString

      PPS has a conventional tilting/locking system though and it’s a little more stubby looking.

      • Dan

        And the CCP is better how?

        • FourString

          Easier to cock, non-tilting barrel (perhaps better accuracy), says right there m8

          • Dan

            so better means taller, longer, fatter, stratospherically high bore axis, and designed for those who think they might chip a nail?

          • FourString

            have you shot it? do tell me more.

          • Dan

            They’re pitching this for concealed carry. It’s already fail on concealment compared to the competition due to the much larger dimensions than the competition.

            If I’m not going to carry it, it matters not how it shoots.

          • FourString

            U underestimate the thinness of the grip, which is pretty significant when it comes to concealed carry. The Shield is not that much smaller than the M&P 9 compact, except where it counts most, the grip width.

          • Dan

            even if you completely ignore the thickness, the ccp is a hulking monster. it’s _larger_ than a CZ 2075, and almost as heavy! it’s bigger than a glock 26, but carries less rounds.

            everyone is making their guns thinner and smaller. except walther, who i guess is making guns for americans. bigger and fatter!

          • FourString

            not true. i’ve read from people who actually handled the pistol that it is indeed as small as a walther p22. ur going off of paper specs. why don’t you wait until you actually handle one before drawing such a steadfast conclusion. . .

          • Dan

            The walther p22 is not a small gun.

          • FourString

            lol. different strokes for different folks. if it doesn’t cater to you, then don’t buy it. easy peasy

          • Dan

            it also doesn’t cater to lefties. safety isn’t reversible.

          • FourString

            Not everyone wants a stumpy Glock 26. I don’t. 8 rounds is nice for places where mag restrictions make a mostly empty double stack magazine unnecessary.

          • FourString

            In any case many people carry Browning Hi Powers and 1911s due to the grip width, so I’m sure this will do fine, esp with a Walther trigger and PPQ ergos

          • Dan

            manual safety, wtf.

            also, it needs a special tool to take it apart for field stripping. for a modern pistol that’s unheard of.

          • FourString

            the manual safety is because the trigger is actually closer to single action, with a short travel. i dunno, i really like a frame mounted thumb safety. walther will continue selling PPS’s. the Remington R51, CZ-75′s, and STI’s custom pistols all require take-down tools. another option available for other shooters won’t kill you. stop complaining on the interwebz; go out and play and be happy.

    • vereceleritas

      That was my initial reaction as well. Why make a single stack 9mm that’s even bigger than the PPS? Both are striker fired and the PPS has the option for 8rd magazines. How about a PPQ compact along the lines of a G26 instead?

    • Kovacs Jeno

      much lower msrp

    • JumpIf NotZero

      Had a PPS, sold it, trigger sucked, finger grooves were wrong for big or small hands, expensive, no aftermarket support… I love Walther, but the PPS isn’t great.

      • FourString

        Exactly. The trigger is lightyears better on the CCP, according to ppl who’ve shot it (some Walther officials are flying around the country to let ppl shoot it.)

  • Pierangelo Tendas

    I have been at IWA for http://www.all4shooters.com and I have covered and examined the pistol personally. There’s nothing new in the “SoftCoil”: it’s a Barnitzke-type gas brake system, basically the CCP is an Heckler & Koch P7 (or a South African ADP) in a P99c shell.

    • FourString

      An H&K P7 type pistol that’s newly produced in commercial numbers? Sign me up.

  • ducky
  • TangledThorns

    Dear Walther,

    Wanna make mad $$$? Release an updated PPK in 9mm.

    You’re welcome.

    • Steve Truffer

      Bah, go with the slightly larger PP. The PPK gives hammer bite, the PP does not. Only an extra 0.5″ longer, and room for one more round in the mag.

      • Anonymoose

        I prefer the PPK/S.

    • Anonymoose

      They did. It’s called the P5.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        Ugh, hated my P5. Couldn’t sell it fast enough. NOT in any fashion was that gun comparable to a Glock19.

    • BeGe1

      Straight blowback 9mm in a gun that small? Ouch. The $$$ made would be mostly from the physical therapy needed afterward :(

  • dp

    This only makes sense and I am quite surprised that someone did not come up with it earlier, after gap left by HK P7 and Steyr GB. What can be major disadvantage? Dirtier than usual locking?

    • FourString

      I think this would make a very nice California gun. Also, I like frame-mounted manual thumb safeties. This seems almost perfect.

    • vereceleritas

      The defining feature of the P7 is the squeeze cocker design that allowed a light trigger pull that was still safe to carry. This CCP may use a similar operating system but it hardly fills the gap left by the P7 IMHO.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        I’m not sure what either of you are talking about because the P7 was a gas operated handgun. Entirely different than a typical Beretta/Walther delayed blowback.

        • hkryan

          The HK P7 is gas-delayed blowback. The CCP is also announced as gas-delayed blowback, thus the correlation between the two.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            Wat? Look up how the P7 works!

            It’s not delayed blowback in any traditional sense at all. It’s is GAS OPERATED. There is a gas port hole in the barrel. It’s far closer to an AR than a blowback gun. (The P7′s gas directly acts on a recoil rod and compresses a spring that cycles the gun)

            This is why the P7 has a reputation for being finicky. It’s a tiny gas system that easily clogs up.

          • dansquad

            I´m afraid you are a bit confused. If you consider a P7 “gas operated”, it doesn´t surprise me you consider a Walther p38/Beretta 92 “delayed blowback”. How do you consider a Walther PPK then?
            Look:
            a) Blowback operation requires a fixed barrel (not Wp38/B92).
            b) The gas ported in HK P7 acts versus the recoiling impulse of the slide (as the recoil spring also does), dampening it. It has nothing in common with an AR action. Having a gas piston doesn´t mean to have the same operation.
            c) Many delayed blowback guns are finicky because their design only works well for an specific pressure range of ammo. If the pressure curve varies enough as above so below of the test, the gun usually fails. The same may happen if you change the shell material: look at the problems that France is suffering with their FAMAS rifle (yep, also delayed blowback).

          • JumpIf NotZero

            My entire point is this Walther is nothing like the P7 it’s being compared to. I think the lead was buried with discussions “what determines blowback”.

          • vereceleritas

            I see the point you’re trying to make but that’s exactly what we disagree on. Based on Walther’s description of the pistol and the picture on Montrala’s blog (link posted by ducky below), the CCP and P7 do have a similar operating system. The trigger systems are very different, of course.

            If you see nothing alike in the slide/piston assemblies of these two pistols, we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

          • sauerquint

            The Famas is LEVER delayed blowback. It doesn’t work very well, but gasses are only involved in propelling the projectile.

          • Geodkyt

            He never said teh FAMAS was gas delayed blowback. He just said “delayed blowback”, which is accurate.
            No matter WHAT system of delay you are using, delayed blowback guns are INHERENTLY very sensitive to pressure curves and case metalurgy. . . moreso (all other things being equal) than almost all other operating systems.
            Of course, if you are a nation-state, and plan on controlling the production of the ammo you are issuing (and figure your guys will always be using), these are not insurmountable issues — you just tailor your pressure curves and case metalurgy to the needs of your guns. generally speaking, delayed blowback guns LOOOOVE them some steel cased ammo. . .

          • hkryan

            I don’t need to look it up. I have mine sitting in the safe. Get your hands on one, pull the slide back and notice there is nothing to unlock, the only resistance is the spring (blowback)… Field strip it and realize the piston doesn’t drive the slide back but rather it holds it forward until the gas pressure is reduced (gas-delayed). The only similarity to an AR is the gas port in the barrel…

        • vereceleritas

          The P7 is not gas operated. It’s blowback operated. The propellant gasses don’t cycle the pistol. They’re actually used to retard the rearward motion of the slide. The gas piston is attached to the front of the slide and the gas cylinder is on the frame behind the piston. The piston opposes rearward motion when the cylinder is pressurized by a fired cartridge. I know my explanation sucks. Looking up some photos of disassembled P7′s would probably give you a better idea of how the system works.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            The recoil of the round does nothing.its not blowback.

            The gas cycles the gun through a gas port in the barrel. The gas energy is store by the compression of a spring: GAS OPERATED.

            I agree, perhaps you should check the diagrams, http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_P7

            Yes, Wikipedia has this listed as a delayed blowback, but it is not. The diagrams are correct though. This is the very definition of gas operated, no gas, no operation. As where with any time of blowback you could work the gun without gas and with momentum alone.

          • vereceleritas

            From page 5 of HK’s P7 Operator’s Manual:

            “FUNCTION AND OPERATION OF THE WEAPON
            1. ACTION
            HK P7 pistols are recoil operated pistols. However, upon ignition of the cartridge, a portion of the propellant gas flows through the gas port into the gas cylinder. In the gas cylinder, the propellant gas acts upon the piston which retards the rearward motion of the slide until the bullet has left the barrel. Once the bullet has left the barrel, the decrease in gas pressure on the piston allows the slide to move rearward, ejecting the empty cartridge case. The recoil spring then moves the slide forward chambering the next round.”

            The diagrams on the Wikipedia page you linked to are correct but I think you might be misinterpreting them. Notice that the force cycling the slide is labeled “Recoil momentum” and the propellent gasses are labeled “Resisting force against slide retraction”. There is no recoil rod. The green, cylindrical component in the diagram is the gas piston and it has no spring. The action spring is actually around the barrel. The barrel itself acts as the guide rod for the action spring. Looking up actual pictures of field stripped P7′s might clear things up.

        • FourString

          Holy crap. Yall are bickering over minuscule differences. Along with the Remington R51, it’s a modern P7 in spirit, all right? Lmao damn dudes, chillax the hell out

          • Geodkyt

            These aren’t miniscule differences. It is a very basic and core misconception of how these guns work. Like calling an AR15 a “long stroke piston” system, or saying that an M2HB Browning machine gun was “gas operated” would be.

        • BeGe1

          He’s talking about the squeeze cocker in the grip. That made it so that it was a gun with a very light trigger and no safety to worry about, yet was still safe because it was carried in the uncocked position, and all you do is squeeze the grip when you draw to cock it.

          He’s saying that regardless of operating system, this does not fill the gap of the P7 because that was the defining characteristic of the P7.

    • Geodkyt

      Um, because, like EVERY OTHER gas delayed system, it’s going to suffer from major fouling problems, and if fired enough to seriously heat up, will end up detempering the return spring.
      The Germans have spent the last 60 years or so trying to make this God-awful system work, and keep re-releasing it in different formats. Because it is probably the ONLY new truly German operating system developed for self loading arms. (Even the roller delayed is just a modification of earlier, non-German systems.)

      • dp

        Hmm, I know it is bit problematic to give it clear marks. Well, actually every solution is kind of compromise. Here at least the barrel stays straight, that should aid accuracy.
        At the end you have two choices, either try do something new (as Germans try to) or just keep repeating the same (Browning action). I do keep on mind the maxim saying “if not broke, do not fix”.
        Thanks all for their ideas!

        • Geodkyt

          Well, the difference is that the Browning system consistantly works — as witnessed by teh fact that almost all successful semiauto service pistols use a derivation of the Browning recoil operated system. The gas delayed blowback system has never worked well. And it isn’t “new” — the Germans have been pushing this dog since they tried to make an emergency carbine for militia that required minimal milling at the very end of WWII.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        It’s incorrect to say gas blowback. Same error people above are making. It’s RECOIL BLOWBACK.

        And last I checked the my Beretta seem to run pretty well dirty, the magazines are another issue entirely.

        • Goekdyt

          It doesn’t matter how many times you keep repeating “recoil blowback”, it doesn’t make it right. Recoil and blowback operation are mutually exclusive operating systems.
          The gun DOES NOT use recoil to function, nor does the P7 — it uses BLOWBACK (not recoil). The gun fires, and the fired case tries to “blow back” and push the slide open. The action is UNLOCKED – meaning there is nothing holding it shut at the moment of firing except inertia of the bolt or slide (the recoil spring force is insignificant)
          Recoil operated weapons are so called because the barrel RECOILS for some or all (i.e., “short” vs. “long” recoil operation) of the operating cycle of the bolt or slide, and the action is LOCKED until the barrel and bolt or slide part ways.

          To keep the action from opening prematurely, the gun uses gas to DELAY the opening of the action.
          Thus, “GAS DELAYED BLOWBACK”, just as the CETME/G3 is a “roller delayed blowback” and the FAMAS is a “lever delayed blowback”.
          And I have no idea why you are bringing up your Beretta, which uses a completely unrelated operating system. But, as you point out, recoil operated pistols like the Beretta, M1911, Walther P38, Browning HiPower, Sig 210, Sig 220-family, Glock, etc., are far more resistant to fouling (whether from firing residues or dust) than gas delayed blowbacks.

  • FourString

    It’s this Walther CCP and the Remington R51 that have my attention. Both are really nice options for regions where a single stack magazine make sense. Also considering an STI 1911 Spartan 9mm, as mags for that are pretty cheap.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      It is interesting that two non tilt designs are reintroduced in the same year.

      That said, the R51 seems huge and this seems appropriately (shield) sized. Too bad Walther didn’t just take the excellent PPQ trigger and put it in this. That would be about the only way I’d drop my shield.

      • FourString

        Agreed on the first comment. On the second: No, not really, check out the size comparison! The R51 is actually slimmer than the M&P Shield, as its sleeker *proportions* make it appear to be larger! (The Walther CCP & the M&P Shield only appear smaller because they are stubbier.)

        http://www.guns.com/2014/02/07/updated-remington-r51-size-comparison-chart/

        • BeGe1

          Got shield and R51 holster molds next to each other right now (I make holsters, so I have all these things lying about).

          The Shield and the R51 are actually about the same thickness in the grip, if anything I’d say the Shield is a tiny tiny bit thinner. But the big things is that the R51 is that thick while being blocky in the grip, and the shield is that thick at it’s thickest point while being more ovally (it’s a word, cuz I made it up). So shield definitely wins in width. A blocky X” thickness vs. an oval X” thickness is actually a pretty massive difference even though the specs say the same number.

          With the flush mag in the shield is definitely shorter that the R51. With the extended mag that gives it equal hand grip space to the R51 (full 3 fingers) it’s actually a bit taller though. So I guess neither has it on the other for height. The shield can be shorter but with the mag that gives equal hand purchase the R51 is shorter. So…dunno how to score that one.

          R51 is of course longer, but the extended part that’s longer rounds quite well, so that mitigates some of that. Slide feels a tad more rounded overall anyway on the R51, so I’m betting it’s about as comfortable IWB as the shield with its shorter barrel. So props to the R51 for that, similar comfort (I’m assuming) while managing the extra velocity and sight radius of the longer barrel.

          Of course, the shield’s reputation for reliability and shootability in conjunction with it’s size is what gets most people though. There are smaller pistols out there.

          • FourString

            my original post was based on old info that since has been clarified/corrected. the r51 seems to be larger in quite a few dimensions, actually. shield seems like the most concealable out of the lot.

          • BeGe1

            I don’t know that I could say the it’s more concealable outright. They’re similar enough that it would depend on your usage.

            Like I said, while the shield has the thin-ness advantage in practicality, if not in specs (because of the more rounded grip), with the extended full 3 finger grip magazine in it is taller than the R51. And while the R51 is longer, it is more rounded in the slide/barrel area, and many feel IWB negates length (within reason) anyway. So a person carrying IWB that would plan on using the full 3 finger grip extension on the shield (many do) might find the R51 more concealable.

            Either way, I do have to admit the reputation of the shield for it’s great shooting characteristics and reliability for it’s size put it head and shoulders above the R51 though. At least until the R51 can match its reputation down the road, if it actually can do so.

          • FourString

            yup the r51 sounds great in theory (ull see my earlier comments being optimistic) but the reliability in the long term remains to be seen. not sure if remington will sort out its QC and manufacturing issues atm (theyve had problems with their r1 1911′s in the past). i’ve actually started leaning toward the walther ccp instead for my purchase of a single stack ccw 9mm. all too soon to know for sure.

          • BeGe1

            All the modern walthers I have in my vast collection of holster molds have fantastic ergonomics, they just feel great in the hand. And not just my hand either, everything that picks one up says the same. So if the ccp proves reliable, I wouldn’t blame ya, it probably shoots very nice with those ergonomics. Walther also likes to taper up to the top of the slide, which makes molded holsters it dig in to you less at the top of the slide when carried tight to the body. I can’t speak for weight, reliability or shooting (because my holster molds don’t give me insight into those things), but as far as dimensionally I can say walthers are fantastic for comfort both wearing and holding vs. guns of similar size. They just put that extra thought into comfort. If I wasn’t a DA/SA kind of guy, I’d probably give walther a go.

          • FourString

            Yehh, I just wana see more reviews come out before I commit my soul to it lol

  • FourString

    I find it interesting that a lot of these subcompacts (M&P Shield and such) are being introduced with mandatory manual thumb safeties. Maybe at that size, shooting your balls off with a Glock trigger is a concern?

    • JumpIf NotZero

      More that they are not duty guns. They are specifically for carry, the safety is for mass appeal.

    • noguncontrol

      manual safeties are stupid for a subcompact, a glock or kahr system is the best, just point and shoot, which is ideal for close range self defense. hell, for any handgun i prefer just a simple point and shoot system.

      • FourString

        lol aite. if ur trained on carrying cocked and locked it doesn’t matter

  • Lance

    Looks like a compact P99…. YAWN

    • hkryan

      Lance, in all seriousness, what would make you not yawn?

      • FourString

        Lol seriously

  • strongarm

    If that gun is what it looks,
    - Slide is taken down with an over barrel motion, this precludes the necessity of dry
    firing before field stripping,
    - The latch looking like manual safety, is a take down button at the same time, when
    the slide is trackted to a point and when that button pressed in, gun goes into take
    down mode. At normal times it acts to lock the sear when rotated up.
    - Location of gas brake piston is not certain, but if it is where HK P7 had, the polymer
    body is an advantage, it does not fry the trigger finger,
    - Trigger action should be slightly changed SA P99 with shortened backward travel,
    but lengtened safety creep over the sear support post. Better than PPQ.
    It seems that this is the gun what Walther buffs wait for.

    • Kovacs Jeno

      I had it in my hand on iwa and also fieldstripped it.
      The trigger is like on XDm: single action striker, with the feeling of a DAO pistol, but is quite light and smooth. The CCP is close to the size of the Walther p22 in reality than to a much fatter G19. Its a nice IWB carry gun, for low price.

      The takedown is via pushing in the striker spring plate at the end of the slide.

      The manual safety in unnecessary, that is just for the import points to USA.

      • strongarm

        Thanks Kovacks, it is evident that I had exegarated the ability of . Walther Staffs. According to your description, CCP striker cocks
        against to a post of receiver like old time FN pistols and does not
        cock against to the recoil spring like current striker pistols. If the
        battery off discharging is case, this is a handicap since the slide
        begins its returning travel wıth fully cocked striker. Using the rear
        striker spring guıde as a take down piece as releasing it from a rear
        post closing the striker tunnel at rear of receiver is a simple and
        cheap method used at one time zamak small bore pistols and its
        intention is simply building low cost handguns like Hi Point. Since
        this dismounting needs an uncocked striker for enough room to
        press that rear guıde inside, it is necessary to start with an uncocked
        striker. Trigger work should be based upon a simple sear connection
        with backward security creep over a solid space but it needs
        prolonged disconnector recess under the slide giving the risk of
        battery off firing.
        If sume up, this pistol is aimed to a market requiring a higher quality
        than Hi Point with a little higher price, but much more reliability.

        • strongarm

          Especially field stripping of CCP resembles much to “Liliput”,
          a small cal. pistol designed by August Menz at 1920′s. This
          pistol has a frame hook at rearmost on which rear guide of
          striker spring engages and if pushed in releases the slide
          and frame connection. A small screw mounted at top of rear
          of the slide functions as retaining the whole striker related
          parts inside the slide after field stripping.

          According to the spects given by Walther and at the light of

          Liliput lay out; CCP has a hollow rear plug for striker spring
          back and this part is retained in the slide by a roll pin seen
          at right outside. So called “Dismount Aid” should have a
          thin tip crossing through the hollow rear plug and reaching
          to a uncocking lever to be pressed down if that aid pin pushed
          further as releaslng the striker to a stop lug at nearly half of
          its full travel. When that aid tip pushed even further it drives
          the rear plug out of engagement with rear frame hook as
          taking the pistol into field stripping and, the striker slips
          out of connection with decocker lever as softly striking
          against to the passive striker safety. All striker related parts
          remain in the slide after take down and in turn of assemble,
          all the thing to do, is taking the slide back on top of rear
          frame hook and pressing down the slide.

          Gas hole in front of the chamber, as opposite of HK P7,
          seems to be drilled from downside and a heat dissipating
          bar is inserted as passing through its enterance as closing
          it.

          Pistol seems simple but well thought.

  • Dan

    Huh. Not seeing any point in this over the PPS. Compared to other compact 9mm pistols this thing is enormous.

  • Mark N.

    If they engrave one more C on the slide, will it be a Makarov?
    Competition in the CCW market is pocket pistols, or slender single stacks with shortened grips for greater ease of concealment. This fits neither category.

  • Madcap_Magician

    It seems… a trifle large. Particularly in width for a single stack.

  • matt

    Hmm, I always thought the PPS made a decent concealed carry pistol (I don’t own one but always wanted to get one) why wouldn’t they stick with that platform if they wanted to make a designated concealed carry pistol? It’s already pretty slim (it’s in the name, so it must be) and single stack, and fairly compact.

    • Dan

      walther was tired of making good concealed carry pistols, so they decided to make a bad one?

    • FourString

      well the pps has a crap trigger, spongey and gritty. the new trigger on the ccp will be close to the PPQ trigger. personally i find the ccp to be much better looking than the pps.