Why no love for the Beretta Nano?

[ATW525]

For some people "pocket pistol" is a category or a description of a pistol type. But for people who actually want a pocket pistol to carry in their pants pockets, why would they get a Beretta Nano when they could get a Rohrbaugh R9 or Kahr PM9, and if it's a budget thing, then why would they could get a Beretta Nano when they could a Kahr CM9 ?

The same reason people looking for a full size handgun might choose a 1911 over a Glock, or a Sig over an HK: personal preference.

[C0untZer0]

OK

To put it another way..

Q: For people who actually want a pocket pistol to carry in their pants pockets, why would they get a Rohrbaugh R9 or Kahr PM9/CM9 instead of a Beretta Nano ?

A: Because the R9, PM9 and CM9 pistols actually fit into pockets. The Nano doesn't.

[DougU]

Not true count. Per your own chart, the Nano is quite a bit less than 1/4" longer and taller with the same width. I have to ask what kind of tight pants folks are wearing that can't hide one of these in a decent pocket holster or ankle rig???? I can walk around with a Ruger LCR .357 in a Blackhawk #4 pocket holster with an untucked shirt or jacket with nobody the wiser (while wearing levis) Cargo shorts in the summer are easy..........If your wearing spandex do us a favor, get a fanny pack, and please stay away from me

P.S., I have never shot a Nano, but I have shot a couple Kahrs and an LC9. The Kahrs both had serious reliability problems with FTF and FTE problems. The LC9 went bang every time but it had the absolute worst trigger I have ever felt; it was so bad that I would make it the poster child for creep, grit, long reset, etc......

[AKsRul.e]

So a NANO isn't a pocket carry gun?

I ACTUALLY carry a S&W all steel model 49 revolver in a pocket holster in my
Front Jeans pocket.

It weigh 22 ounces empty and is bigger than a NANO.

.

[LockedBreech]

Originally Posted by AKsRul.e

So a NANO isn't a pocket carry gun?

I ACTUALLY carry a S&W all steel model 49 revolver in a pocket holster in my
Front Jeans pocket.

It weigh 22 ounces empty and is bigger than a NANO.

.

No doubt you do, and it's awesome that it works for you, but a pocket gun is generally construed to mean the majority of people can comfortably pocket it, like an LCP or J-Frame.

I mean, I have a pair of cargo shorts with a pocket a G19 could fit in, but a G19 is not a pocket gun

[roman3]

Many guns will fit in a pocket but do they print? Do they fill the pocket or fit so snug they are hard and slow to draw from the pocket? Do they bulge to much that you get the banana in your pocket stare or joke? Can they fit in any pocket you may be wearing? Do they pull the pocket out of place or pull the pants down?

I have pocket carried 4 guns in my many years. First was a naa 22magnum tiny revolver. Well that worked quite well but was awfully small.

Then I carried a FEG SMC 918, a PPK copy in 9 mak, that was a pocketful to say the least but it worked in most pockets but not all.

A Charter Arms Undercover 5 shot was next. That worked well in most pockets as well but it did show the cylinder bump sometimes.

I now carry an LCP and it practically goes in anything and is light and small and easy to draw. From a business suit trousers to loose running shorts the LCP fits and if it can be seen it really looks like my wallet and not some odd bulge in my pocket.

Sure I wish it was a 9mm but the only real close pocket 9's to me are the PM9 and the Rhorbaugh and both of those are more expensive and bigger than I wish.

[Rugerismisticness]

I like that new Sig 239 or whatever it was, the 238 in 9mm? It's a tad bigger than the 238, but it looks like a quality gun.

[ATW525]

I don't pocket carry anymore, but I've pocket carried a PM40 in the past. The Nano doesn't seem significantly less pocketable than I recall the Kahr being. It's short enough in length to get deep enough into the pocket, short enough in height to allow for a snag free draw and thin enough to get a grip on it in the pocket. Yes, it's going to print, but a good pocket holster will make sure it isn't a gun shaped bulge.

[C0untZer0]

I think you mean the P938


Beretta Nano
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 3.07in
Length: 5.63in
Height: 4.17in
Width: .90in
Weight: 17.67 ounces
Capacity: 6+1

SIG SAUER P938
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 3.0in
Length: 5.9in
Height: 3.9in *
Width: 1.1in
Weight: 16.00 ounces
Capacity: 7+1

* I don't think Sig Sauer is counting the height that the magazine adds to the overall pistol hieght and their standard mag doesn't sit flush, it's an extension mag that extends about .20"

IMO the P938 is another in-betweener. It received a lot of hype at SHOT show, but it's thicker than the Nano, and a lot larger than the Kahrs or the Rohrbaugh.


.

[khegglie]

Keep Countin' Count! (cut-pasting the charts for my use with your permission).

[C0untZer0]

You mentioned the DB-9

Another pistol - like the PPS that Glock should have made but never did.

But anyway, if you go to the DB forum you'll still see people who are having problems with it. I was checking it out for a while. It's the lightest 9mm production pistol out there and I was considering purchasing one but there were some problems with parts breaking. I was expecting DB to come out with a Gen II or to cop to the issues and tell the public that they had been fixed but I didn't hear anything like that and I stopped going to their site to check on it.

You might also want to check ammo restrictions on a weapon you're considering.

The Kimber Solo, Diamondback DB9 and the Rohrbaugh R9 all have ammo restrictions.

[khegglie]

The SIG 290 is in this class too but more $$$.

[LockedBreech]

Originally Posted by khegglie

The SIG 290 is in this class too but more $$$.

I was pretty excited about the 290 until I held one. Just did not feel like a Sig to me.

[C0untZer0]

A better thread would be "Why no love for the Sig P290"

SIG SAUER P290
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 2.9in
Length: 5.5in
Height: 3.9in - magazine for P290 basically sits flush and doesn't add height to the pistol.
Width: 0.9in - 1.1in w/slide catch
Weight: 20.5 ounces w/magazine
Capacity: 6+1

I'm not even sure why I don't care for it myself. It's close in size to the PM9, the only thing I can say is that it seemed top heavy to me. The Kahr PM9 sits in my hand, the P290 felt like it was going to tip over and fall out of my hand.

I feel guilty now for leaving it out... I mention Kinber Solo, LC9, DB9, R9 and the Kahrs and I ALWAYS totally forget the P290.

WHY NO LOVE FOR THE SIG SAUER P290 ?

[tobnpr]

I had not heard of the Rohrbaugh, so I started doing a little digging.

This just might be crazy enough to be true..if so, that's certainly one to be scratched off my list...yes, I know it's an OLD thread, but relevant nonetheless.

They justify the price by claiming you're paying for the subcompact size, then say it's not meant to be shot a lot. What the &#)@ are you paying for, then? Anyone could build a cheaply built gun that size that could fail to hold up under regular use, and not charge a premium price!

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/...rbaugh-r9.html

[ScottRiqui]

Rohrbaugh admits freely that their gun is meant to be "shot a little and carried a lot". The recommended replacement interval for the recoil spring is 200 rounds, if I remember correctly. That being said, I've seen many posts from owners who have put hundreds or thousands of rounds through theirs with no problems (doing the recoil spring changes on schedule).

The R9 is pushing the limits of how physically small you can make a 9mm semi-automatic, so I'm not really surprised that it requires more-frequent maintenance compared to most other pistols.

[C0untZer0]

The R9 is pushing the limits of how physically small you can make a 9mm semi-automatic

I beleive this is true. If you look at the problems that other gun makers have had with their slides cracking, sheering off the frame, pieces shattering, or just plain not working, I think it gets extremely difficult to engineer a gun this small shooting the 9mm.

I think you also see this issue arising in that when a gun maker finally gets it to work - it only works across a small range of ammunition. If the pistols fire 124gr through 147gr, they can't seem to cycle 115gr ammo. The parameters that they are designing to are extremely narrow. The Kahrs seem to be the only pistols that can fire 115 through 147

I think the opposite is true... I have a Glock 17L supposedly with all the wrong parts - the extractor and ejector that is suppossed to ploink you in the head and all that. I haven't had any problems with it and I think the larger gun makes for a wider set of parametrs where recoil impulse, slide speed and all the physics of it can vary within a wider margin and still function correctly.

Anyway, the Rohrbaugh isn't a disposable gun, you need to go to the Rohrbaugh forum to get better info on it. There are some staunch defenders of the Rohrbaugh there though who tend to get emotional if the pistol is criticized. That happens - the same thing happens on GlockTalk if you say something bad about Glocks

But in general you can get decent information on the pistol.

http://www.rohrbaughforum.com/index.php?board=9.0

[ATW525]

WHY NO LOVE FOR THE SIG SAUER P290 ?

I can't speak for anybody else, but I don't even know if I've ever seen one. It's styled to look like a member of the P250 family, so it's something that I'd likely skip over in the display case without a second thought.

[jimbob86]

WHY NO LOVE FOR THE SIG SAUER P290 ?

'Cause the SIG 238 has a better trigger?

[Marquezj16]

I like the P290. I shot a brand new one and put five shots into less than an inch at seven yards. It's DAO trigger made me wonder about my choice for a pocket pistol. Now I would not pocket carry one the same way as my LC9. But its small enough to disappear with the proper OWB or IWB holster.

[Technosavant]

The SIG 290 is in this class too but more $$$.

I looked at a 290 right alongside the Nano. The Sig was another $100 or so at the time, and IMO, the issues I have with the Nano are also had with the 290- not big enough to fill the hand comfortably, overly top heavy, too big and bulky to be a good EDC pocket gun, and so on. Again, if I had to resort to belt carry for it, there's no shortage of other larger guns that will be better for that role.

So it basically takes the drawbacks of the Nano and adds at least $100 to the price. It may be a great gun for somebody, but not for me.

[jibberjabber]

My LGS has the Nano for $399. I handled the Sig 290 in comparison – the Sig did not feel as good in my hand as the Nano and it costs a bit more.

[khegglie]

I hope I helped to nudge you guys to talk about the SIG 290. It just LOOKS better to me than the NANO and has the exposed hammer(If you care about that) about as heavy; comes in a stainless slide treatment and can be had with a laser.
The Count put all of the stats together; and after reviewing those I figure that having a P11 and PF9 covers that comfiguration pretty well.
If it were less $$ I would prob get a SIG for the grins/giggles factor.

[jibberjabber]

Anyway, if there is not enough love for the Beretta Nano it may be because the 1,000 round torture test was not 10,000 rounds.

Now if only they can make a sub-compact 9mm that has no recoil and I can conceal behind my ear...

Kidding aside, the Nano might not be for everyone, but I'm certainly looking forward to placing rearward pressure on the firing activation lever on one in the near future.

[WildBill45]

Looking at a gun and shooting a gun are two different stories! How so many can come to conclusions without shooting and/or handling one is beyond me!