View Full Version : Unnecessarily controversial post#3: Best CC handgun of all: Kahr PM9!! POW!
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-22-09, 18:59
Hey guys,
Here is a list of the guns, off the top of my head, that I have concealed:
1. P7M8 (my first gun) actually a good choice. It was so thin that almost every gun since it has seemed chunky. It is, however, heavy.
2. SIG 229, 220, 228. Chunky and heavy. Damn fine guns though.
3. Glock 19, 26, 17. All too wide through the grip and generally blocky. Fine guns.
4. HK USP Compact 45 and 40. P2000 and P2000SK. All chunky. The P2000 was close though. But too wide! Badass, bomb-proof guns.
5. 1911. Too heavy, too long. Fairly thin though. I have a lightweight Officer that is damn close. It is thin, pretty light chambered in a serious round, and easy to shoot well. I have carried this a lot during the last year.
HOWEVER, I have owned a Kahr PM9 for quite a few years now (at least since 04). I think it is the best all-around CC handgun for the following reasons:
1. It is extremely small. I have owned other sub-compacts, like the G26, P2000SK, SIG P239 and others, and none of them are even close. In fact, I never could warm to the others because they were in fact so large that I felt foolish not carrying a compact. Which Always made me wonder why I didn't carry a fullsize. Of course, a fullsize is too damn big.
The Kahr is basically as small as a 9mm gets (with a few exceptions). I carry mine while out with the family, while jogging, and while driving. A lot of shooters, even one famous trainer, don't really carry full-time. I carry everywhere I legally can--and have for years. For years I was pretty hard-core and would go to crazy ends to conceal what were essentially combat pistols (see above). In my old age I am getting a little more practical (i.e. lazy).
2. It is pretty safe. Although it doesn't have a manual safety, the trigger is a lot like a revolver. It has a long, smooth take-up. I consider it much safer than the "safe-action" style systems that are currently dominant. This means more to me now that I have a child. Still, the P7 or 1911 would be even safer.
3. It is reliable. This is debatable. I can recall three jams in the last five years. All very early on. I suspect limp-wristing or break-in. Unfortunately, I have seen a lot of posts on the net that indicate that my experience isn't the norm.
4. It is more powerful than most other guns in its size class. Most guns this size are .32, .380 or .25. Although I recognize that there are a few other choices these days.
5. It is accurate. This is tricky. When I first got my Kahr I wasn't impressed with its accuracy. I quickly determined, however, that the gun was mechanically accurate--but difficult to shoot well because of its size and snappy recoil. Over the years, having shot 1000s of rounds through mine I have over come this. I still shoot my 1911s a hell of a lot better, but I can out shoot most folks at the range with my little Kahr (which makes you feel good!:D)
As with all of these things, YMMV. I think that civilians need to recognize that their needs are different than police and HSLG ninjas. We need a gun that is worth having, but convenient enough that we will actually carry it. I just may sell off the rest of my crap and shoot it exclusively. I am sure to get some laughs at my next pistol class!
GB- No experience with the Kahr, but I did have a TS guy say he really liked the USP Compact .45 as a weapon for real world usage. Considering it's size, availability of 10 rd. mags, that it shoots like a dream, and this bad MF's recommendation; it will be my wife's and my CC guns.
#1. 1911. I have a lightweight Officer that is perfect. It is thin, light chambered in a serious round, and easy to shoot well.
fixed it;);)
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-22-09, 19:14
6933,
Excellent handgun. I have owned two through the years, and the HK45 is really just an extended USP 45 compact. Just too dang big for CC IMHO.
Artos,
The Officer's and the P7 are in a three way with the Kahr depending on the phase of the moon.
GB- I feel you on the difficulties on concealing, but I look it at as a tradeoff. I don't mind a little difficulty for a little peace of mind of knowing it's capabilities I might have to fall back on in a shi*** situation. Add in a 10rd. mag in a pocket(or pocketbook) and it's GTG for us.
Concealed carry has so many variables to consider. It is simply not simple.
Artos,
The Officer's and the P7 are in a three way with the Kahr depending on the phase of the moon.
just biased of the browning design...after watching wwii in hd, gonna be hard for me to even consider anything better than the lw officers for carry. sorry for the hatchet safety job, but I'm a lefty and being descriminated...we do what we gotta do.:cool:
Dan Wesson CCO. Aluminum officer's frame with commander slide. Light, thin, 8 rounds of .45 goodness. Only gun I carry which I can actually say is truly comfortable whether IWB or OWB.
Of course I also love my G19.
Oh, and my M&P9.
Wait, what were we talking about again?
varoadking
11-22-09, 20:49
Best CC handgun of all: Kahr PM9!! POW!
You'll get no argument from me on this...
ChicagoTex
11-22-09, 20:52
While the Kahr PM9 is very excellent, I chose the Walther PPS myself, and have been extremely pleased with the results.
never owned a kahr, but carried a P7 M8 for many years. I agree, a tad heavy but very easy to conceal...
Dont pay much mind to Artos, Texas boys grew up with a 1911 shoved down in their cutoffs :p
John Hearne
11-22-09, 21:52
I have a P9 with the grip cut down to take PM9 magazines. The recoil system is less complicated than the PM9. It is utterly reliable and scary accurate. The extra barrel is not hindrance to concealment.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-22-09, 22:19
That is an excellent combo. Kind of a Colt CCO style gun.
Hey, you're a mod. You're not supposed to be starting contraversies!:)
I don't know if I would say best CCW gun. But definitely best for pocket carry in business dress in a work environment where you have to pass the same people every day who might notice things that strangers on a street might not. This might have repercussions where corporate policy prohibits the carry of weapons that are otherwise legal to carry.
I use a Kahr PM-9 for pocket carry. An important part of the equation is having a tailor deepen your dress pants pockets to give the gun more room so that it doesn't risk printing. Though most 5-11 type pants have enough pocket room, dress pants generally don't and will print hen you sit down.
With pocket carry you can have your hand in your pocket on the gun ready to draw if necessary.
Below is a picture of my Kahr PM-9 and S&W 640 both in Uncle Mikes holsters. It's hard to tell from the picture how much flatter and more compact the Kahr PM-9 is.
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i232/eds-stuff/pockguns.jpg
Kahr used to make the P9 covert - P9 slide with PM9 grip size. I had a P9 that I cut the grip down to allow the use of the shorter PM9 magazines.
It was a great CC weapon for me. As small as I would want to go with a 9mm. It was surprisingly accurate. I could shoot my PD's qualification course equally well with it as I could my then issued P220. I even shot a few IDPA matches with it, and, apart from pinching my finger on reloads, did well with it.
I sold it and began carrying a G26 off duty and as a BUG when my dept. switched to Glocks. I just wanted to keep everything the same.
The G26 has the edge in reliability, is equally accurate in my hands, has much greater magazine capacity , hell it will take G18 mags if you want, but is larger. In reality, though, unless I'm wearing a tucked-in shirt and dress pants (which I just about never do) there's no advantage gained with a smaller pistol.
Now, I am considering building a CCO-type 1911 ...
tinytornado
11-23-09, 07:52
I agree, but I have settled on the equally small but all metal version, the Kahr MK9. The added weight isn't a problem for me and it really helps in the recoil and follow-up shot department. I love my MK9!
However, I have found that with a good holster and a proper gunbelt, I can comfortably conceal my SIG P220 Carry quite well. I'm a big guy so maybe this is easier to do for me than others. The slimness of the single-stack .45 plus the DA/SA action with decocker that I like makes this a good gun for me.
So, 90% of the time I carry the SIG, but when I can't easily conceal it the Kahr MK9 goes in my pocket, and I have full confidence in it as well.
Couldn't agree more. My newer PM9 has over 500 trouble-free rounds through it, and a smooth if long-ish 5.5 pound DA trigger pull. Like the OP found, mine is surprisingly accurate, though it took me a while to get used to shooting and controlling it for best accuracy. It is the best "deep concealment CCW" gun I have ever come across. With the extended mag, I can carry 7+1 rounds of Federal 124gr or Speer Gold Dot +P HP ammo.
I do currently own an M&P compact, but it is almost a different class of gun. It is much larger, thicker, and carries 12+1, and by the same token, is harder to conceal and carry well. I do carry the M&P at times, but I carry the Kahr more, especially when wearing thinner, lighter attire.
Would someone mind posting a picture or two that shows the size difference between the PM9 and the G26?
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-23-09, 11:02
This isn't great, but it will give you an idea....
http://media.photobucket.com/image/glock%20g26%20kahr%20pm9/jerrellwise/Gun%20Pics/CarryGuns2.jpg
I always liked the PM9 in theory but my sample of one proved less than stellar. I experienced two broken magazine followers and serious barrel hood peening that persisted even after it went back to Kahr. No malfunctions once I got past the first 200 rounds, though.
Those issues combined with the fact that I found it difficult to shoot well, I decided to sell it. If you have one without those issues and can shoot it well, it is a very easy gun to carry.
It could be because I've shot a lot through a Kahr 40, and a little through a Kahr 9, but I have to say I didn't enjoy shooting either. I don't get a lot of range time in the first place so I would like to enjoy shooting my carry. I tend to do it more that way.
Of course my carry happens to be a Sig P226 in 357Sig. which is a combination that's uncomfortable to both carry and shoot for most people.
MarshallDodge
11-23-09, 19:29
I have never shot a PM9 but I love my E9 and K9. Many people talk about how heavy the steel framed models are but I find them to be perfect for my needs.
If I ankle carried then I could see how the PM9 would be an advantage.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-23-09, 21:58
I agree about the Kahr 40--too snappy.
Smith and Wesson 340PD, .357 magnum. Lightest, most easily concealed CC gun ever.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-23-09, 22:57
kmrtnsn,
Clearly! You didn't read the title. The issue is settled.:D
I did. I am trying to turn you back from the dark side.
My problem with the mini-nines like the Kahr is that I get lazy and tend to carry them all the time even when my G19 would be appropriate. Which in my opinion is a bad habit.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-24-09, 21:01
That is a good point. Perhaps I am confusing my laziness with the gun's goodness. Maybe if I sell my Kahr I will carry my 1911.
Hey guys,
Here is a list of the guns, off the top of my head, that I have concealed:
1. P7M8 (my first gun) actually a good choice. It was so thin that almost every gun since it has seemed chunky. It is, however, heavy.
2. SIG 229, 220, 228. Chunky and heavy. Damn fine guns though.
3. Glock 19, 26, 17. All too wide through the grip and generally blocky. Fine guns.
4. HK USP Compact 45 and 40. P2000 and P2000SK. All chunky. The P2000 was close though. But too wide! Badass, bomb-proof guns.
5. 1911. Too heavy, too long. Fairly thin though. I have a lightweight Officer that is damn close. It is thin, pretty light chambered in a serious round, and easy to shoot well. I have carried this a lot during the last year.
HOWEVER, I have owned a Kahr PM9 for quite a few years now (at least since 04). I think it is the best all-around CC handgun for the following reasons:
1. It is extremely small. I have owned other sub-compacts, like the G26, P2000SK, SIG P239 and others, and none of them are even close. In fact, I never could warm to the others because they were in fact so large that I felt foolish not carrying a compact. Which Always made me wonder why I didn't carry a fullsize. Of course, a fullsize is too damn big.
The Kahr is basically as small as a 9mm gets (with a few exceptions). I carry mine while out with the family, while jogging, and while driving. A lot of shooters, even one famous trainer, don't really carry full-time. I carry everywhere I legally can--and have for years. For years I was pretty hard-core and would go to crazy ends to conceal what were essentially combat pistols (see above). In my old age I am getting a little more practical (i.e. lazy).
2. It is pretty safe. Although it doesn't have a manual safety, the trigger is a lot like a revolver. It has a long, smooth take-up. I consider it much safer than the "safe-action" style systems that are currently dominant. This means more to me now that I have a child. Still, the P7 or 1911 would be even safer.
3. It is reliable. This is debatable. I can recall three jams in the last five years. All very early on. I suspect limp-wristing or break-in. Unfortunately, I have seen a lot of posts on the net that indicate that my experience isn't the norm.
4. It is more powerful than most other guns in its size class. Most guns this size are .32, .380 or .25. Although I recognize that there are a few other choices these days.
5. It is accurate. This is tricky. When I first got my Kahr I wasn't impressed with its accuracy. I quickly determined, however, that the gun was mechanically accurate--but difficult to shoot well because of its size and snappy recoil. Over the years, having shot 1000s of rounds through mine I have over come this. I still shoot my 1911s a hell of a lot better, but I can out shoot most folks at the range with my little Kahr (which makes you feel good!:D)
As with all of these things, YMMV. I think that civilians need to recognize that their needs are different than police and HSLG ninjas. We need a gun that is worth having, but convenient enough that we will actually carry it. I just may sell off the rest of my crap and shoot it exclusively. I am sure to get some laughs at my next pistol class!
I think the size and power of the Kahr's is about perfect. I HAD to have an MK40 when they came out and ordered on for myself and an MK9 for my wife, I had reliability issues with both guns and they we soon sold. It was failure to feed and a few stove pipes that could have been me limp wristing. I also remember a failure to extract, stuck case in the chamber that was a PINA to remove. I HAD to have a Seacamp too and that baby went south also because of reliability issues as well. I did not have confidence in any of those pistols and did not want to bet my life on them.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-24-09, 21:16
Mine has been very good. The very few malfunctions were in the very beginning. I had about three failures to feed when it was brand new. I have no idea if it was me or the gun--but I usually blame myself. Either way, mine is "bet your ass"worthy.
It sounds like you are suffering from the most common Kahr malady; crappy magazines. they all suffer from it and there doesn't seem to be a cure. I would not carry a Kahr as a BUG because of it and that is what they were meant for. Get yourself a 340PD and rest assured that a .357 magnum hollow point will go down range every time you pull the trigger; there is no better BUG although I am anxious to try the Ruger LCR, too bad it isn't a .357, at least not yet.
My partner bought a Kahr 9 for CCW use. They are nice guns. I still prefer a .45 for most situations. I carry a Kimber CDP compact. Nice size package and weight, controls mimic my duty weapon, controllable for longer shots, etc.
For those rare occasions where the Kimber is awkward for carry, I have a Colt Pocket Nine. Great little gun that can be worn IWB or just slipped into a pocket. Nice thing about the colt is I can wear it even with gym shorts with no sag. To bad they only made them for one year (1999).
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-25-09, 07:54
kmrtnsn .
I have had terrible luck with revolvers. I have a beautiful model 19 sitting in my safe with a cylinder that went out of time on me.
5. 1911. Too heavy, too long. Fairly thin though.
I CCW either a government or commander every day, 7 days a week. As someone said "guns are supposed to be comforting, not comfortable."
The right belt and rig, I find the 1911 comfortable enough, but sure, a tiny plastic PM9 would be more comfortable, but comfort is not my main concern.
I own a Kahr Mk9 and k40, and they are great guns, but I only CCW them when I am forced to if what I am wearing truly wont allow the 1911. :cool:
Come on Greg, just have a little sip of the Kool-Aid. Everything will be better after!
SELFDEFENSE
11-27-09, 13:27
CC weapon comfort is a state of mind and clothing choice.
Carried IWB a Glock 17L for over 7 years and now carry an FNP-45 in the winter.
I CCW either a government or commander every day, 7 days a week. As someone said "guns are supposed to be comforting, not comfortable."
The right belt and rig, I find the 1911 comfortable enough, but sure, a tiny plastic PM9 would be more comfortable, but comfort is not my main concern.
I own a Kahr Mk9 and k40, and they are great guns, but I only CCW them when I am forced to if what I am wearing truly wont allow the 1911. :cool:
Point taken, however the two are not mutually exclusive ;)
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-27-09, 21:59
"As someone said "guns are supposed to be comforting, not comfortable."
That is why I carry my 45/70 guide gun concealed all the time.:D
My Saturday or day off attire regularly consists of a pair of cargo shorts (no belt), a t-shirt, and a ball cap. I can hide a 340PD with a speed loader in that outfit all day, everyday without ever letting anyone know I am carrying. Try that with a government model.
I only carry pistols I can get my full hand around including pinky finger. I'm a big tall guy which probably helps. Those Kahrs are way too small for me as are any sub compacts.
My Saturday or day off attire regularly consists of a pair of cargo shorts (no belt), a t-shirt, and a ball cap. I can hide a 340PD with a speed loader in that outfit all day, everyday without ever letting anyone know I am carrying. Try that with a government model.
I love my 340PD for the same reason. I love that gun even though it makes me bleed every time I shoot it. Does yours? The cylinder release cuts the thumb of my shooting hand.
Have you tried speed strips? I've been using them for years. I carry two in my left pocket and my pistol in my right pocket. I also carry a third in a Kramer belt mounted pouch. With no belt you could still increase yourself to two flat low profile reloads. There is also an HKS speed-loader and safariland single belt pouch in the armrest of my truck.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=243389
http://www.bianchi-intl.com/product/Prod.php?TxtModelID=580
I have not seen the Quick Strips but plan to order one of these holsters and a few of their strips and pouch to try out. My Kramer pouch is still going strong, I bought it in 1994! The quick strip pouch looks lower profile.
I love my 340PD for the same reason. I love that gun even though it makes me bleed every time I shoot it. Does yours? The cylinder release cuts the thumb of my shooting hand.
You guys shooting .357 out of those little wheelguns are masochists.:D I can barely stand .38 +P out of my 642.
Having said that, there are some good ideas in this thread on 10-8 forums that may help you:
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=85647&an=0&page=0#85647
Yes, I've tried the speed strips and I like them a lot, great for pockets. As for making my hands bleed, I'll normally practice with .38 Specials and save the full power .357 Magnum loads for carry purposes, no blood yet but I have small hands. Even with the .38s I'm done after 20-30 rounds. That light weight frame sure came with a cost; ouch!
"As someone said "guns are supposed to be comforting, not comfortable."
That is why I carry my 45/70 guide gun concealed all the time.:D
Then this Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W4H10elwGk&feature=player_embedded) is for you :D
You guys shooting .357 out of those little wheelguns are masochists.:D I can barely stand .38 +P out of my 642.
exactly, after shooting 25 rounds of +P out of my 638, the thought of shooting .357 magnums out of a scandium j frame makes me think I'd rather prefer putting my hand on a concrete slab and having someone smash it with a sledgehammer :eek:
But there is nothing like the sound of a J frame letting loose a full power .357. I think the only thing that will get more attention at the range is letting loose Remington duty load 155gr .40 S&Ws (the old green and yellow, 25 round boxes of firing breathing thunder) from my "Angry Cricket"; HK P2000SK.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-28-09, 12:17
A GOOD buddy of mine (:mad:) once let me shoot this scandium .357. He shot it first with Wally world 38s. Then loaded it with COR-BONs for me to shoot. LOL. He was getting me back for all the "recoil is in the mind" bs I was spewing.
Vlad,
Re: video
That kid sure can pack a bunch of crappy guns. I think I saw TWO guns that I would actually have.
But there is nothing like the sound of a J frame letting loose a full power .357. I think the only thing that will get more attention at the range is letting loose Remington duty load 155gr .40 S&Ws (the old green and yellow, 25 round boxes of firing breathing thunder) from my "Angry Cricket"; HK P2000SK.
I have a 10.5" barrel AR if I want to wake up anybody napping at the range.:D
John_Wayne777
11-28-09, 12:32
IIRC the NYPD had some serious issues with the Kahr guns they authorized for off-duty carry and have since removed them from the authorized carry list.
Then this Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W4H10elwGk&feature=player_embedded) is for you :D
That's cute, but let's see the kid walk with all that shit in his pants.
IIRC the NYPD had some serious issues with the Kahr guns they authorized for off-duty carry and have since removed them from the authorized carry list.
Hmmm, fail to see the logic. I can list instances of various departments having problems with their issued pistols, including Berettas, Glocks, and M&P's. So the logic is, that because some department has a problem with their pistols, that pistol is no longer reliable?
This would only be a convincing bit of evidence if there were a widespread trend in this direction. A few individual cases are NOT convincing, regardless of the size of the given department.
Greg I just wanted to show you how to properly conceal that .45-70 lever action that you'll now be carrying.. Although it might be better to carry it appendix inside the pant leg and not at 5:30 like the kid is doing :D
...yeah they should have shown him walking in, but I bet that if he did the one stiff leg Homey walk, he could have probably pulled it off :)
Hmmm, fail to see the logic. I can list instances of various departments having problems with their issued pistols, including Berettas, Glocks, and M&P's. So the logic is, that because some department has a problem with their pistols, that pistol is no longer reliable?
This would only be a convincing bit of evidence if there were a widespread trend in this direction. A few individual cases are NOT convincing, regardless of the size of the given department.
It's one pretty large data point when an agency the size of NYPD initially approves a gun, the K9 in their case, for off-duty and backup and then removes it from the list because of problems. It's not that they stopped issuing it (because it was never issued, just approved), they flat out said "you cannot carry it at all even as a backup even if you own one yourself." That's a significant statement.
The PM9 has had a number of issues as well, including a barrel recall to recontour the feed ramp because of function issues, numerous reports of barrel hood peening and several different magazine issues - that's just what I can recall off the top of my head. What makes it even less acceptable is the price point of these guns, which is higher than Glocks, S&W M&P, and other industry leaders.
If you have a sample that works well for you then no need to drop it, but I'd hesitate to recommend the brand in general.
It's one pretty large data point when an agency the size of NYPD initially approves a gun, the K9 in their case, for off-duty and backup and then removes it from the list because of problems. It's not that they stopped issuing it (because it was never issued, just approved), they flat out said "you cannot carry it at all even as a backup even if you own one yourself." That's a significant statement.
Sorry, I don't think so. The size of the agency doesn't matter much, because it's not as if all the individuals carrying Kahr pistols had issues with them. Nor is it likely that the officers carrying them got to "vote" on whether to keep the pistols. Typically an individual or a small committee makes such decisions, and they are often made for reasons that are not revealed to the public, and sometimes the "real" reasons are very poor reasons. We all know of stories where departments will dump an entire line of handguns, ostensibly because maybe 2 or 3 of them have some kind of spectacular failure, but then later we find out that there were other circumstances involved: someone tinkered with the pistols, and there were political factors involved among those who made the decision. Something similar to this happened recently with the M&P in a CA LE agency; it was discussed in this forum.
The PM9 has had a number of issues as well, including a barrel recall to recontour the feed ramp because of function issues, numerous reports of barrel hood peening and several different magazine issues - that's just what I can recall off the top of my head. What makes it even less acceptable is the price point of these guns, which is higher than Glocks, S&W M&P, and other industry leaders.
Yep, and Glocks and M&P's have had various issues. Just so no one will accuse me of bias, I'll pick on M&P's (which I own and like as my favorite polymer pistol). They've had MULTIPLE "teething" issues since they were created: slide rust (traced to an issue with the early meloniting process), broken strikers due to dry firing, dropping magazines, and others. These have all been corrected. Numerous issues can be listed with Glocks as well, if we wanted to go into all that. I have owned all these brands, and have had issues with every one of them at some point. Having some "issues" at some point in a gun's history, in and of itself, does not make a given model bad or unreliable.
Being higher-priced also does not count against the Kahr PM9: it's harder to make a very small and lightweight pistol, and to make it all of the following at the same time, which were stated goals of the Kahr: accurate, reliable, durable, AND controllable. Many other small 9mm pistols cost even more than the Kahr (like Rohrbaugh). And of those small/lightweight 9's that cost less, it's debatable whether they have achieved all the above goals as well as Kahr has (take Taurus, for instance: they make some nice small pistols, but they definitely don't meet all the above goals in their small pistols--usually long-term durability and/or reliability are what suffers).
If you have a sample that works well for you then no need to drop it, but I'd hesitate to recommend the brand in general.
The vast majority of small Kahr pistol owners that I see in polls, in forums, and in conversation (just as is the case with Glock owners, M&P owners, H&K owners, for example) are satisfied with their pistols and feel they can trust their life to them, as I do with mine. There are reported issues with them, as there are with all these above brands, but I have not seen evidence to suggest an unreasonably high percentage of problems with the PM9, to the point that it should be avoided. Obviously the problem is, no one collects (or at least, no one publically discloses) hard numbers on the real failure rates of all these guns. We are usually operating on hunches and anecdotal evidence when we discuss reliability of guns, except in a few cases where there are published tests by the military or LE agencies that specifically do T&E's or comparative tests on certain models.
While it's hard to prove either way, my sense remains that Kahr PM9s are extremely well made, and most who get one will find them perfectly reliable, as much as could be expected with any other popular brand. As with any handgun, they should be tested with at least 500 to 1000 trouble-free rounds before starting to carry.
John_Wayne777
11-28-09, 16:19
Sorry, I don't think so. The size of the agency doesn't matter much, because it's not as if all the individuals carrying Kahr pistols had issues with them.
Actually it matters quite a bit. A sample size of 10,000 is better than a sample size of 10...so if a department with 40,000 + armed individuals has problems with a weapon authorized for off-duty carry then it's likely to have more experience with those weapons than an agency of say 100 officers.
Nor is it likely that the officers carrying them got to "vote" on whether to keep the pistols. Typically an individual or a small committee makes such decisions, and they are often made for reasons that are not revealed to the public, and sometimes the "real" reasons are very poor reasons.
...and sometimes the real reasons are very good reasons...like a track record of failures, breakages, and problems.
The vast majority of small Kahr pistol owners that I see in polls, in forums, and in conversation (just as is the case with Glock owners, M&P owners, H&K owners, for example) are satisfied with their pistols and feel they can trust their life to them, as I do with mine.
...which begs the question...how much have the majority of owners of *ANY* of those mentioned platforms really used the weapons?
This is one reason why agency data is important...because a large number of weapons in the hands of a known group of users who actually has to use them on a regular basis is a dataset you just don't get any other way.
Actually it matters quite a bit. A sample size of 10,000 is better than a sample size of 10...so if a department with 40,000 + armed individuals has problems with a weapon authorized for off-duty carry then it's likely to have more experience with those weapons than an agency of say 100 officers.
But that's just it, we don't know anything about the sample size of the NY PD with their Kahr PM9s, exactly how many of them failed, and what type of failures they were. If someone can publish those numbers, now THAT might be useful information to look at; I'd be interested to see that myself. But lacking that information, all we know is that they decided to dump their Kahrs, and they SAY it was because of reliability. But from what I've observed, departments that want to dump a weapons platform, and to justify getting a new one, ALWAYS want to point to some fault in the gun first. There's NO WAY that their own employees or decisions could ever be at fault, or that someone didn't train the officers right in the use of the weapon, or that they didn't follow manufacturer's recommended ammo guidelines, etc.
This is one reason why agency data is important...because a large number of weapons in the hands of a known group of users who actually has to use them on a regular basis is a dataset you just don't get any other way.
Agreed that agency data are both useful and important. But I'm still not SEEING the agency data anywhere, I'm just seeing the end results of the decision by the NYPD. Could somebody publish some details about their decision, such as:
* How many total PM9's were carried by their officers
* What kind of stoppage rates or failures were they experiencing
* What percentage of the pistols experienced each type of failure/stoppage
* What SPECIFICALLY was the decision to dump them based upon
To me, such info by itself would not totally prove that the PM is unreliable (because there are too many other PM9's out there in use that appear to work fine), but it WOULD be a valid instance of "evidence that counts AGAINST the PM", and would be worth noting and tracking for that reason. And if there were several large agencies that could provide data on having similar experience to the NYPD with the PM9's, I too would begin to have my doubts about them.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-28-09, 16:44
Well, I have been shooting mine for 5+ years and it works great. It is one of the guns with the barrel recall but I never sent it in. The gun runs on 124 gr gold dots, ranger and ball, so I am pretty much happy.
I have no doubt that a Glock 17 would be a better combat pistol. Still, as pointed out before, Glock has had numerous recalls (including the infamous non-recall slamfire recall) and the M&P has gone through a fair number of firing pin revisions among other fixes. But the fact is, neither of those pistols is really a practical CC piece for me. I am tired of carrying combat pistols and pretending they are concealment pistols. Again, YMMV. I have carried an HK45 concealed so believe me, I have tried it all.
There's one other factor in looking at the reliability and long-term durability of the PM9, for me personally, and that has been to look at what certain respected gunsmiths think. Some gunsmiths out there will just work on anything, but there are a number of places that stake their reputation on quality, and will ONLY work with or on guns that they would use themselves, or recommend to their customers for defensive use. Two such shops are Bowie Tactical (David Bowie), and Cylinder & Slide (Bill Laughridge). Both of these guys are gunsmiths with national reputations for tactical gunsmith work, and David has extensive operator experience himself. I have talked to both of these guys personally about the Kahr pistols, and they both feel that these pistols, while they do come very tight from the factory and because of that can have break-in issues, are extremely well made and a good platform for lightweight carry or a backup gun.
I guess you should never just blindly get any pistol just because an "expert" likes it, but I think the fact that these shops that have such good reputations think the Kahr is a good/reliable platform, is at least worth taking into account.
John_Wayne777
11-28-09, 17:02
But that's just it, we don't know anything about the sample size of the NY PD with their Kahr PM9s, exactly how many of them failed, and what type of failures they were. If someone can publish those numbers, now THAT might be useful information to look at; I'd be interested to see that myself. But lacking that information, all we know is that they decided to dump their Kahrs, and they SAY it was because of reliability. But from what I've observed, departments that want to dump a weapons platform, and to justify getting a new one, ALWAYS want to point to some fault in the gun first. There's NO WAY that their own employees or decisions could ever be at fault, or that someone didn't train the officers right in the use of the weapon, or that they didn't follow manufacturer's recommended ammo guidelines, etc.
Again, we're talking about an authorized carry weapon...not an issued gun. They weren't dumping the Kahr pistols to get a sweetheart deal on another pistol.
Agreed that agency data are both useful and important. But I'm still not SEEING the agency data anywhere,
...and you likely never will for any weapon. Gun companies will unleash packs of carnivorous lawyers to prevent that sort of data from getting out.
Again, we're talking about an authorized carry weapon...not an issued gun. They weren't dumping the Kahr pistols to get a sweetheart deal on another pistol.
...and you likely never will for any weapon. Gun companies will unleash packs of carnivorous lawyers to prevent that sort of data from getting out.
Hence, we're back to my original point. Arguing against Kahr pistols based on the NYPD dumping them is, at best, arguing from ignorance. We cannot draw any firm conclusions about Kahr reliability based on the NYPD dumping them.
But that's just it, we don't know anything about the sample size of the NY PD with their Kahr PM9s
1. They were K9 pistols, not PM9s, that NYPD allowed and then "delisted."
2. Yes, "we" - or at least anyone with perhaps blue belt level google-fu - has more detailed info on the number of guns in use by them and the types and numbers of failures and issues (numerous on both counts).
There were approximately 4,000+ of them in service. There was a special NYPD version with a heavier trigger produced and officers could buy them through an authorized dealer with their own money. According to somebody in a position to know, from a thread on another forum several years ago when this all happened:
1. There have been 46 catostrophic structures failures with the K9
2. These failures have not been isolated to a single part.
3. There have been many , many parts breaking after only a couple hundred rounds fired.
4. Major quality control lapses , such as 40 caliber parts in the 9mm K9 .
5. Extremely poor quality springs on the gun such a the recoil spring which often needs to be replaced after only 300-400 rds.
6. The trigger spring taking a set down to as low as 4 lbs !!!
Kahr also went and lobbied to "fix" them and after retrofitting and "fixing" guns, NYPD still decided to dump them. During the "fix" period, NYPD officers who had bought K9 pistols were given a form and then told what was done. Here is an example posted by the father of a NYPD officer, on another forum:
"Thank you for attending the 2006 Kahr K-9 Remediation. Your prompt response is appreciated."
"Your Kahr K-9 pistol was examined by Kahr Arms factory trained technicians and received a detailed inspection. Each Kahr K-9 pistol was also test fired by Firearms and Tactics Section instructors to insure functionality. The following improvements were made to your Kahr K-9 pistol."
Inspect: Recoil spring...............Replaced? Yes
Inspect: Stryker Spring..............Replaced? Yes
Inspect: Trigger Spring..............Replaced? Yes
Inspect: Slide Stop Lever............Replaced? No
Inspect: Slide Stop Lever............Fitted? Yes
Inspect: Trigger Bar.................Replaced? No
Inspect: Trigger Group...............Replaced? Yes
Inspect: Slide for stress fractures..Replaced? No
Inspect: Ejector for breakage........Replaced? No
Inspect: Grips.......................Replaced? No
Inspect: Grip Screws.................Replaced? Yes (1)
Inspect: Magazine Springs............Replaced? No
Inspect: Magazine Lips...............Replaced? No
Inspect: Feed Ramp...................Polished? Yes
All that to be inspected/replaced? Talk about polishing a turd.
Other complaints (from various users) have included cracked receivers and excessive rust/corrosion on various parts.
John_Wayne777
11-28-09, 18:02
Hence, we're back to my original point. Arguing against Kahr pistols based on the NYPD dumping them is, at best, arguing from ignorance. We cannot draw any firm conclusions about Kahr reliability based on the NYPD dumping them.
...my point was that yes, we can, because people in the know often share some information...often on forums like M4C...about these issues. If, however, you're wanting some sort of "Here are the reasons Kahr sucks" reports on NYPD letterhead it's going to be a long wait. ;)
...my point was that yes, we can, because people in the know often share some information...often on forums like M4C...about these issues. If, however, you're wanting some sort of "Here are the reasons Kahr sucks" reports on NYPD letterhead it's going to be a long wait. ;)
Where is the information from the NYPD that allegedly proves that the PM9 "sucks"?
BTW, my understanding is that the NYPD's rejection of Kahr had nothing to do with the PM9, which is the gun under discussion in this thread. Wasn't it the Kahr K9 that they removed from their authorized list? If that is correct, then arguing that the PM9 sucks, because ONE department rejected (for reasons still unclear) a different model of gun, is hardly germane to the question of the PM9's reliability.
ChicagoTex
11-28-09, 20:32
then arguing that the PM9 sucks, because ONE department rejected (for reasons still unclear) a different model of gun, is hardly germane to the question of the PM9's reliability.
At the risk of playing Devil's advocate: it is and it isn't. All Kahr models are extremely similar to one another - they're kind of like Glocks, the difference from one model to the next being caliber and size (and in Kahr's case, also frame material) rather than wholly different models. Because of the closeness in design, fundamental problems with larger/different models ARE potentially relavent to the PM9. Although the PM/MK series pistols do have some revised lockworking from their larger cousins, so it's not directly related.
Think of it as the difference between a Glock 17 and Glock 26, rather than the difference between say... a SIG P220 and SIG P250.
BTW, my understanding is that the NYPD's rejection of Kahr had nothing to do with the PM9, which is the gun under discussion in this thread. Wasn't it the Kahr K9 that they removed from their authorized list? If that is correct, then arguing that the PM9 sucks, because ONE department rejected (for reasons still unclear) a different model of gun, is hardly germane to the question of the PM9's reliability.
I've already listed a number of widespread problems with the PM9, which you seem to be turning a blind eye toward.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-28-09, 22:54
Hahah. I knew this would be unnecessarily controversial!:D
Hahah. I knew this would be unnecessarily controversial!:D
You got that right. :p
1. They were K9 pistols, not PM9s, that NYPD allowed and then "delisted."
Ah thank you. So we ARE talking about K9's then with the NYPD, and not the PM9's being discussed in this thread. Any discussion about a past issue concerning a different model of gun, and especially one that does not provide an official source for any of the data cited, does not seem particularly useful or relevant.
[Edited to add]: And BTW, even if the data presented earlier were about the PM9, I'd have a major problem with data based on sources like an unnamed source in another forum, and the alleged "father of some officer" who posted somebody's letter on a forum, and so on. There are so many problems with that "evidence", it's hard to know where to begin:
* Where did the numbers COME from, to begin with? An unnamed source from an unlinked forum. Let's assume we can get this person's name, which would be helpful if you could provide it, along with the link to the other forum. But the next question is, where did they get these numbers?
* But let's assume that some of the numbers are correct, they still don't tell us much. It says there were 46 "catastrophic structures [sic] failures." What was the purported cause of those failures? Was it the same in every case, and ALWAYS the fault of the pistol? Could it have been the type of ammo they used, or how they maintained the pistols? We're not told how this was evaluated or determined.
* Imprecise reporting: "many many parts breaking", etc. What does that mean? If it isn't based on a real number from a real source, it's useless. It's simply repeating what you've already asserted in earlier posts, without providing any substantiation.
* Subjective judgments: "Extremely poor quality springs" and etc., we're not told who decided this, what criteria they used, how many pistols had this problem.
* Odd, irrelevant data thrown in: the alleged letter from "the father of a NYPD officer, on another forum." Let's assume this was real: What does it have to do in ANY way proving that Kahr pistols are unreliable? So one guy has a problem with his Kahr, sends it back, and Kahr fixes a whole bunch of stuff on the pistol, going above and beyond. Springfield, and S&W, do stuff like that all the time. It doesn't mean their whole pistol lines are bad, and especially when we're talking about one guy!
The NYPD thing is irrelevant to the discussion of the PM9. In fact, I'd say much of the data present in your earlier post was even irrelevant to the K9, as it was presented.
I've already listed a number of widespread problems with the PM9, which you seem to be turning a blind eye toward.
Already answered in an earlier post. You've simply listed some previous issues reported with some Kahr pistols, and I responded that there are similar types issues with a number of popular models, including Glocks, and my own favorite, the M&P. Unless these issues can be demonstrated to occur at an extraordinary level that is beyond the pale (which you have NOT demonstrated), or unless the gun maker does not resolve the issue, it is hard to see how the mere existence of an "issue" at some point--especially early--in a model's life automatically counts against it for all time.
Remember the infamous "Phase 3" malfunction issue that plagued Glock 19's in the NYPD for years? This malfunction, which was capable of getting you killed due to an FTE, affected a large number of the Glocks in service, 10,388, according to an NYPD press release cited on the Gun Zone (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/phase3.html). But nobody suggested throwing the G19 to the dogs. They fixed it, and moved on.
The fact is, issues occur on all pistol platforms. The PM9, Glocks, H&K's, and M&P's, are no different in that respect. You have not shown that the PM9 has any higher incidence of issues than the others.
Ah thank you. So we ARE talking about K9's then with the NYPD, and not the PM9's being discussed in this thread.
And you'd want to buy a gun (that you'd trust your life to) from that company? The K9 is larger and uses a steel frame, which should make it easier to make it run reliably. They also knew those particular guns were going to the NYPD, yet they had that many problems with them. What kind of quality control do you think you're getting as a regular consumer?
And BTW, even if the data presented earlier were about the PM9, I'd have a major problem with data based on sources like an unnamed source in another forum, and the alleged "father of some officer" who posted somebody's letter on a forum, and so on. There are so many problems with that "evidence", it's hard to know where to begin
What are you looking for - a detailed memo on NYPD letterhead? Good luck.
The NYPD thing is irrelevant to the discussion of the PM9. In fact, I'd say much of the data present in your earlier post was even irrelevant to the K9, as it was presented.
No it's not. If a company produces that many lemons when they know they're going to a premier LE agency, what kind of QC are they using on the guns going to regular peons? How can you not understand this?
Also unacceptable is the fact that the guns cost significantly more than their competition (which you also passingly dismiss). It would be one thing if they cost less - like Bushmaster versus a Colt where you get what you pay for - but they don't. They charge a premium for an inferior product.
You also haven't addressed anything in the PM9-specific items I raised. Saying you already addressed it doesn't mean you actually did. None of the issues below have been reported in the other guns you listed.
What do you have to say about:
1. Numerous reports of serious barrel hood and/or slide peening, including in my own example. Go back and look at any of the Kahr forums on various boards - it's a widespread issue.
2. Kahr's response to that - which was to grind and polish down the areas and send them back with rounded off barrel hoods, only to have the peening begin again despite this "fix."
3. Barrel recall (ostensibly for feedramp polishing)
4. Magazine followers cracking in half - I had not one but two do this and I didn't even own the gun that long.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 09:45
And of course, issues that might give one pause before issuing a pistol to a police or military are not usually the same as civilian CC concerns. What makes the PM9 perfect is its size, weight, firepower and safety. There are but a very, very few guns in the same class (the Rorbaugh comes to mind). It was unlikely that the Kahr guns, which are much smaller and lighter than the vast majority of other semi-auto handguns, would be completely absolutely trouble free. As pointed out, essentially every gun maker, including ones that are worshipped on this forum, has had repeated recalls, QC issues, etc.
Honestly, I demand at least 200 rounds through a gun before I trust it. These days that is getting problematic. You used to be able to buy reject Gold dot for $21 per 50. Making a 200 round test expensive but do-able. These days, ouch!
I'm just thinking this is the same argument but different guns. I wish my Khar's and Seacamp worked for me. I am glad Kahars have worked for some of you. I have loved my Bushmaster since I bought it as a patrol rifle in 1997. I just sold it along with a P220 to finance a BCM carbine and an LMT lower. It is all a personal choice. I was told by some one here that Bushmaster was @ its best in '97. If you are happy with what you have keep carrying it. I like the saying "let those who ride decidem". Carry what you like and train with it.
My Kahr CW40 I had went back to the factory twice in six months with a broken extractor...
It worked flawlessly until you tried loading a single round in the pipe...(like if you only had one round left and didn't load it into the mag and then drop the slide)...if you did that it would break the extractor for some reason...
I did it once and it broke...got it back...shot it again...wanted to see if it was a fluke so I did it again...I should have learned the first time! LOL
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 11:34
USMC.
Glock vs Kahr is more like 4wd rock climber vs honda civic. Different tools for different jobs.
Zeus,
Well, that is how we learn!:D
ChicagoTex
11-29-09, 12:20
It worked flawlessly until you tried loading a single round in the pipe...(like if you only had one round left and didn't load it into the mag and then drop the slide)...if you did that it would break the extractor for some reason...
This is a hideously improper way of loading any semi-automatic firearm with an extractor and should really only be done in the most dire of emergencies.
Many semi autos will have their extractors break under that kind of abuse.
What the heck,
My casual observations of the Kahr line are the following.
1. Price Point, MSRP on Kahrs are VERY high, that said I have paid around $500 (+/-$50) for each of my 4 Kahrs.
2. I have a PM-9 that I got as part of a multi piece trade. I don't realy like it, but after a 1,000 rounds it's reliable and compact.
3. I prefer the P-9 which is SLIGHTLY larger then the PM-9, yet for the most part to me more concealable. How? I find that due to the small grip size of the PM-9 I have to carry it OWB vs. IWB. I have yet to find a IWB holster that allows for me to get a good draw on the PM-9 while my P-9 works in several IWB holsters.
http://pro-patria.us/kahr4.jpg
Size comparision PM-9 vs P-9. PM on top.
4. Pocket carry doesn't work for me with either Kahr. The hump of the slide catches on my pocket in everything I have tried it with except large coat pockets. In them I am never sure what position the pistol will be in when I draw, so I have preety much ruled it out. If I pocket carry I use a Colt Agent.
http://pro-patria.us/kahr6.jpg
P-9 vs. Colt Agent vs. PM-9
5. The PM-9 is harder for me to control vs. the P-9. Even with the extended mag on the PM the lack of surface means I can still get better splits off the P-9. That little bit of extra grip at the rear is worth it.
6. Kahr's have a few features that make them less maintainer freindly then a Glock or M&P. Depending on the age some of them have a retaining screw that goes into plastic. They are not meant to be routinely removed for detailed stripping ect. They don't have huge after market support, ect... Sights are relitively common though I have Heinies on the P-9 and a TP-45, Novaks on a T-9 and XOs on the PM-9(soon to be replaced with Heinies).
7. They have never pretended to be duty weapons designed to digest thousands of rounds a year. They are CCWs that for MOST users means closer to 1000 a year. I'm aware of at least one user that claims to have over 20K through his PM-9. Since I have watched his round count postings increase over the last few years, his claims seem creadible.
Finaly, how many times have we read about the high end 1911's with teething problems.
DMR, I sure like those wood grips on your wheelgun. Where did you get them?
USMC.
Glock vs Kahr is more like 4wd rock climber vs honda civic. Different tools for different jobs.
Zeus,
Well, that is how we learn!:D
I hear ya. I was thinking my G27 vs my old MK40, both used as pocket carry off duty and as back up weapons @ work. :D One big difference is a Honda Civic will run and run and run neither of my Kahr's run well enough to keep.
What are you looking for - a detailed memo on NYPD letterhead? Good luck.
Hmm, that line sounds a little familiar? :)
To answer the question, no I don't expect that, although that would be a useful source. Clearly we're not operating under scientific rigor or legal "rules of evidence" here in a forum. But at the same time, if we're going to avoid operating by total hearsay andrumors being passed on, it seems fair and reasonable to ask for some BASIC validation when you make the claim that an entire line of pistols is unreliable. For instance, not only knowing who posted the info, and a link to their original post, but also knowing WHERE they got their info from, and what are their credentials. If we can't get some basic info like this to validate broad sweeping claims that an entire line of pistols is unreliable, then we're just operating on hearsay. Which is fine if you're just talking about something trivial, but when questioning an entire line of pistols and their reputation, I think it's reasonable to ask for a little higher quality of evidence to back the argument.
Even more fundamental than all that, is the question of basic relevance. You cited a bunch of information about the K9, but this thread is discussing the PM9. The PM9 uses a different barrel, different mags, a different frame, and a different slide from the K9. Read: it's a totally different gun. They may have a few structural similarities and a few shared parts, but they are two different guns, as different as a Glock 17 and a Glock 26.
Also unacceptable is the fact that the guns cost significantly more than their competition (which you also passingly dismiss). It would be one thing if they cost less - like Bushmaster versus a Colt where you get what you pay for - but they don't. They charge a premium for an inferior product.
You're assuming the gun is overpriced because you think it is "inferior", but that is the very point being contested. I understand that's what you think, but at least some people feel otherwise. Gunsmiths like David Bowie and Bill Laughridge don't believe Kahrs are inferior (and I could list a lot more from the industry). And the PM9 I owned, and those that my friends and family have owned, certainly haven't been inferior. Quite the reverse! The PM9 for me has been a GREAT pistol, and the price seems justified, if somewhat pricey: it is not cheap to make a quality "micro-pistol" in 9mm that is accurate, reliable, and weighs only 14oz. Those that like Rohrbaugh pistols will agree with that statement.
What do you have to say about:
1. Numerous reports of serious barrel hood and/or slide peening, including in my own example. Go back and look at any of the Kahr forums on various boards - it's a widespread issue.
2. Kahr's response to that - which was to grind and polish down the areas and send them back with rounded off barrel hoods, only to have the peening begin again despite this "fix."
3. Barrel recall (ostensibly for feedramp polishing)
4. Magazine followers cracking in half - I had not one but two do this and I didn't even own the gun that long.
I already said what I have to say about this: it feels like we're going in circles. I TOTALLY AGREE that Kahr pistols, whether the PM9, or other models, have had various issues. But you may have missed where I pointed out that ALL pistols popular in this forum have had various issues of these kinds. Including Glocks, CZ's, H&K's, the M&P9 (I've experienced 3 broken strikers myself, on my favorite plastic pistol!!!), and many others. I also cited a significant example, based on an NYPD press release, of how over 10,000 of their G19's that were in service had to be "remediated" (= fixed) by Glock due to the "Phase 3" issue which caused FTE's. I could go out and spend an afternoon Googling and listing all the cited issues with Glock, M&P's, and on the list could go.
IMHO, the question is not whether a given model has ever had issues--or even whether it has had serious issues--because just about all of them have. The question is whether those issues occur at such a high rate as to constitute a given model as unreliable in real world usage. And the problem is, it seems like nobody has (or makes available) the info we'd need to be able to answer that question with any certainty. At this point, I still believe that the Kahr PM9 is reliable and a great backup gun. I base this on several things, including expert opinions, my own experiences, and those of others I know. The prevailing experience has been positive, with the PM9. I'm certainly open to having my mind changed, but I'd want to see something that would be specific and verifiable, showing that despite the positive recommendations and experiences, the PM9 is going to be unreliable. And that pretty well closes out my additions to an "unnecessarily controversial" thread. ;)
I have one of the first PM9 pistols to come out. It would not feed hollow points when I first got it. Kahr sent a new barrel out with a little different angle on the feed ramp and after the first couple of hundred rounds it have been perfect. It has fuctioned every time for about 1500rds. I carry it loaded with 115 grain JHP Corbon + p ammo. I have shot about 200 rds of the Corbons thru it with no problems and it is as easy to control as a J frame Smith shooting regular .38 specials. I find myself carrying it during the summer about 90% of the time because it is so easy to conceal. I can double tap a paper plate pretty fast with +ps at 7 yards from a Milt Sparks Talon grip IWB holster under an untucked shirt. I would and do trust my life to the PM9 and Corbon ammo. It is the perfect anytime, anywhere carry pistol.
glockshooter
11-29-09, 18:22
I think the PM9 is a very nice gun, but to me it is only appropriate as a CC when you can not carry a larger gun. I won't really say which gun is best because that is extremely subjective. I believe that as an everyday carry gun the PM9 leaves alot to be desired. Don't get me wrong I like to PM9 and I believe it has a purpose, but if you really think about it is it the best choice for everyday carry? The Kahr has a tiny grip, short barrel, low capacity, high bore axis, a smooth but long trigger that requires a extremely long reset, and can be very picky with hollowpoint ammo. If you think about it a 3 inch barrelled anything is less than desirable on the performance side. The Kahr is probably better labeled as the best gun when you really can wear one and have to have something small.
Matt
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 18:23
Usmcvet,
A .40 Kahr is closer to a poorly modded Honda--maybe one with a ghetto turbo kit!:D
The mini-Glock is ok. And mine ran fine (I stuck with 9mm--not the picky .40 Glocks). It is just too wide for comfortable carry--and doesn't conceal much better than a 19. And if you are going to carry a 19 you might as well get a 17. And so on!
But at the same time, if we're going to avoid operating by total hearsay andrumors being passed on, it seems fair and reasonable to ask for some BASIC validation when you make the claim that an entire line of pistols is unreliable.
Ok, here is some non-hearsay for you - I owned a PM9 for about 2 years. The barrel hood peened, the gun was recalled, and it broke two magazine followers. Kahr did a shitty job addressing the issues. Lots of people on gun boards had similar issues and posted photographic proof. That isn't hearsay, it's actual users and a pervasive problem. I've never seen those problems, and the numbers of well-documented complaints, for other "major" brands of comparable pistols.
I base this on several things, including expert opinions, my own experiences, and those of others I know. The prevailing experience has been positive, with the PM9.
Where's your evidence! Where's your data, and the original photographs, and the original documentation!:D
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 18:46
My very first Glock 17 had to be returned to Glock twice (one time I personally carried it to Smyrna I was so pissed). The gun was manufactured so out of spec that the gun shot 6 inches to the left at 21 feet! It ended up having a machining error. But I had to basically call them out on Glock talk with a picture of their test target showing bullet holes way to the left with their notation: "Meets Glock Specs." I got a complete replacement gun--after a few months of hassle.
I don't see anything too controversial about this topic. I haven't read all the comments just Greg's original post. I owned whatever the all stainless steel version of the Kahr mini 9mm (I think it was called KM9 or MK9) several years ago and it shot very accurately with fairly low recoil and was reliable. When the "full size" P9 came out, I bought it too. It was even easier to shoot than the mini pistol.
If it works for you and you can shoot it well and carry it all the time, that's all one can ask for in a carry gun.
Usmcvet,
A .40 Kahr is closer to a poorly modded Honda--maybe one with a ghetto turbo kit!:D
The mini-Glock is ok. And mine ran fine (I stuck with 9mm--not the picky .40 Glocks). It is just too wide for comfortable carry--and doesn't conceal much better than a 19. And if you are going to carry a 19 you might as well get a 17. And so on!
I had the same reaction and resisted buying the G27 for years, bought it last year. When they cam out I was carrying a G23 and I took the G27 and laid it ontop of the G23 and quickly found out it was not that much smaller. Carried a
G23 in a vest mounted cross draw holster for a while too.
Back on topic this is when I ended up with an MK40, I was in love with that Karh and bought an MK9 for my wife. The issues I had forced a trade and a move back to my 642 chief's special and then on to the 340PD, I snapped up the first one I saw. I bought a P225 for my wife.
My G23 SN PZ3** cria 1992 had to have a complete rebuild. I'm not even sure why now but most of the internal parts were "upgraded" free of cost on Glock. What are the issues you've had with G27's?
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 20:39
I've never had a G27. I have only owned 9mm Glocks--with a preference for the G17. I was referring to the .40 cal Glocks generally bad track-record.
If you want something that small in .40S&W get a P2000SK. It eats 155gr. duty loads without a hiccup.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 21:04
Had one! Fantastic gun. But too fat!
It may be fat but it won't blow-up in your hand!
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-09, 22:40
Yes! That is a big plus. :D
Mine was also very, very accurate.
I consistently outscore my HK USPc and P229 LEM quals with the smaller P2000SK. It must be the gun and not the loose nut behind the trigger that makes the difference.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-30-09, 09:15
I think people focus harder when they are shooting little gun.
teamacacia
12-01-09, 22:50
Anyone have thoughts about the Springfield EMP 9mm as a CCW? I usually carry either the HK P7 or P2000 but enjoyed a recent opportunity to shoot the EMP.
johnnywitt
12-01-09, 23:20
I love my 340PD for the same reason. I love that gun even though it makes me bleed every time I shoot it. Does yours? The cylinder release cuts the thumb of my shooting hand.
Have you tried speed strips? I've been using them for years. I carry two in my left pocket and my pistol in my right pocket. I also carry a third in a Kramer belt mounted pouch. With no belt you could still increase yourself to two flat low profile reloads. There is also an HKS speed-loader and safariland single belt pouch in the armrest of my truck.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=243389
http://www.bianchi-intl.com/product/Prod.php?TxtModelID=580
I have not seen the Quick Strips but plan to order one of these holsters and a few of their strips and pouch to try out. My Kramer pouch is still going strong, I bought it in 1994! The quick strip pouch looks lower profile.
You two Fellas got it almost right. A S&W 342Ti .38 Special +p for all the above mentioned reasons and because its the most lightweight J Frame that you can handle for follow up shots accurately. Additionally, the .357 is only really giving you a hell of a lot more blast and flash in a sub 2" bbl., not to mention excruciating hand numbing recoil. My 342Ti with +p ammo contributed to giving my wife carpal tunnel in her right hand. I got her a 332Ti .32 H&R Mag instead. The .357 has vicious recoil with no real appreciable gain IMO.
ChicagoTex
12-02-09, 00:45
Anyone have thoughts about the Springfield EMP 9mm as a CCW? I usually carry either the HK P7 or P2000 but enjoyed a recent opportunity to shoot the EMP.
The EMP is terrific (though a bit pricey compared to a Kahr, Glock, M&P, or Walther alternative). The only thing I think is crucial with the EMP is switching to a non-ambi safety. I'm right-handed and find ambi-safeties about triple my odds of the safety accidentally clicking off during carry.
Damn, I was about to shell out a lot of money for one of these little guns. After reading this thread, as well as threads on other sites, I'm not so sure now. I have serious reservations about spending $625-$750 (plus tax), depending on model, and hoping I don't get a lemon.
Perhaps I'll take a shooting course and learn how to shoot my S&W airweight more proficiently. I already own one, it's relatively small and brings great piece of mind knowing that I don't have to worry about a jam, FTF or FTE.
Can anyone recommend a good instructor in central Texas?
johnnywitt
06-07-10, 22:38
The thing that I think most folks are not getting is that what you need in a BUG is totally different than what you need in your main Piece.
Can you shoot a semi auto BUG one handed in awkward positions while your struggling with an attacker. Can you fire one (more than once) fron a purse (if you a metrosexual or a woman), or from a pocket without a malfunction. You have to ask yourself, am I most likely to have to defend myself at 7-25 yards, or am I going to pull my weapon at contact range and probably in a struggle. Snub nose hammerless J frame revolvers are not sexy, or glamourous- not at all. They will save your life in a fight though if you have to stick one into somebody's ribs when your rolling on the ground and fighting for your life.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.