At first the Kahrs were so good I had a little spiel about them on my site but I took it down long ago. Different folks and different models will have different results I suppose but in the last ten-twelve years at least, I have not seen one I would carry, to include three .380s a few years back, each from Chicago-area cops, each had been back a few times ("well, we shot it and it worked fine") or discussed with Kahr . All had waaay excessive extractor tension and were easy to fix but Kahr had no clue. They told one guy it was because he was slingshot-loading it and "the gun can't take the extra shock, it jumbles up the rounds in the magazine".
Yep, it say to only press on the slide stop right on page 16 of the manual.
https://www.kahr.com/PDF/kahrmanual.pdf
Honestly, I wouldn't have believed that if I didn't read it myself.
The two Kahrs I have, one old and one new run fine even with Wolf. They load from sling shot or SS. Of course not using the slide stop is dumb (for the sake of speed). They fill a niche for me because when I want something SLIM and LIGHT, that is what I want. I also prefer to carry a gun that has a DA first shot. Other small slim guns don't do that, and some aren't all that light.
I just shot a Kahr last night. T9 model. It went to slide lock every time. I field stripped it and couldnt get the slide release reinstalled. This is a brand new gun. I'm going to guess that Kahr does not test fire their weapons before shipment.
I will contact the factory and advise.
Honestly? I'll bet they do test fire them.... and what I'm going to say probably applies to other makers as well-- I'll bet they test fire them and when there's a malfunction in those three rounds they ship it anyway, because hey, it's not, like, broken in, right? And that's up to you. Dear customer, your gun probably won't work until you put $100 worth of ammo through it (or $1000 according to some).
Are. You. EFFING. Kidding me?
I think that break-in period is a total cop-out that allows makers to ship guns that they are not confident in and then when it doesn't work for you, it's your fault for not "breaking it in" or some other thing like slingshotting the slide. Oh, it needs the parts mated by shooting because they're rough? Idea: don't make them rough. The break-in requirement is their free pass to manufacture to a lower standard. My guess is they have run the numbers and arrived at a point where manufacturing savings vs / the rate of problems actually realized by the customer and resulting warranty return costs are right where they want them.
First impressions are pretty hard to shake, and when they're bad ("damned thing doesn't work!") that's really hard for the end user to get over. That they (industry in general, not picking on Kahr) don't know this or don't care about it, is appalling.
Is it a good idea to run hundreds of rounds through a gun before depending on it, of course. That's different.
Well said Ned.
Bookmarks