The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 10, 2008, 01:57 AM   #1
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866
Glock 39 or Kahr PM 40????

Hi

Looking at these two guns, for thunderwear. Which would you pick, and why? Actual chronograph tests would be great, for either gun. If you own a 340 or 360 PD, do the two prior mentioned gun have any feature that justifies getting either one? In other words, is the 360PD just fine, with 148 grain JHP's at 1131 fps?

I'm looking for something flatter, with less bulges, that might conceal better. Do either conceal better then a 360PD?
Socrates is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 02:01 AM   #2
HKFan9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 2,823
I have a Kahr PM-9 that has been flawless but I heard on the rumor mill the PM-40's had a few mores bugs than the 9 but I can't attest to it. In all honesty though the Kahr is amazingly concealable and I think you will be happy with it, they really are tiny. I can carry my PM-9 in my gym short pocket and no one notices. I put a Hogue HandALL jr. grip on it which really makes it much more comfortable and controllable.
HKFan9 is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 02:26 AM   #3
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866
Forgot to ask what the Kahr trigger is like, and, if you can lower it, and, if so, how far?
Socrates is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 02:28 AM   #4
sholling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 1999
Location: Hemet (middle of nowhere) California
Posts: 4,260
I have a PM40 and out of the box it needed feed ramp work. Kahr took care of it in one trip and it works perfectly. Just keep in mind that 17oz the little Kahr is down right brutal on the hands with any self defense load. As long as you can deal with that it's a great little pistol. But if I were to do it over I'd go with an MK40 instead for the extra weight.
__________________
Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association, California Rifle & Pistol Association, and the Second Amendment Foundation.
Annual Member: Revolutionary War Veterans Association (Project Appleseed) and the Madison Society.
sholling is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 03:52 PM   #5
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Sholling is absolutely right about the plastic Kahr .40's being brutal on your hand. I had a Kahr P40 for awhile, but could not handle the whiplash effect of the recoil on my hand. I sold it after just a few months. All Plastic Kahr pistols are extremely top heavy.

I have since purchased a Kahr PM9, and have no problem with handling its recoil. The .40 is an entirely higher level of discomfort in a Kahr.

I do own a couple of compact .40's, though. My Smith & Wesson M&P 40 compact is very comfortable to shoot. It is a rather fat gun, though, with a double colum 10 round magazine. So it is not as easily concealable.

My other small .40 is my newest gun, which just came out a few months ago: The Walther PPS in .40 S&W It is more to handle than my M&P compact, but not anything like what my .40 Kahr was like. So while it requires a good strong, firm grip, it is manageable to control, and does not cause the pain I felt with my Kahr P40

Here is a comparison photo showing the relative size of my Kahr PM9, with my Walther PPS .40 S&W:




You can see that the Walther is longer. Height wise, though, the guns are extremely close. And the Walther is actually slightly thinner than the Kahr.

Length-wise and Height-wise, my S&W M&P 40 compact is about identical to my Walther PPS .40 However, the M&P is a significantly wider gun, as you can see in this photo:



The wider grip, though, helps distribute the recoil more, making the S&W M&P more comfortable to shoot. But it certainly is a drawback when it comes to affecting concealability.

Budsgunshop.com has great prices on both the M&P 40 compact and also the Walther PPS .40

.



.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 04:47 PM   #6
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
In terms of velocity, keep in mind that the Kahr PM series has 3" barrels, the Walther PPS has 3.2" barrels, and the S&W M&P compact has a 3.5 inch barrel.

If you are concerned about ballistics and decide to go with a Kahr, you may want to go with the slightly larger Kahr P40, as it has a 3.5 inch barrel.

For example, CorBon's hot 135 gr JHP load for the .40 S&W is factory rated at 1325 fps for a 4" test barrel. In a P40, it has been chronoed at 1273 fps In a PM40, only 1133. Having that extra half inch of barrel makes a difference. Although with heavier bullets, you can expect this difference to be smaller than this.

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 05:01 PM   #7
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
Forgot to ask what the Kahr trigger is like, and, if you can lower it, and, if so, how far?
The Kahr triggers are great the way they come from the factory, in my opinion. At least that has been true for both of the Kahrs that I have owned, as well as two others that I have shot.

The trigger feels very close to that of a double action revolver that has been finely tuned by a gunsmith. While the pull is rather long and heavy, it is absolutely buttery smooth in nature, with no creep at all. It breaks very cleanly. I doubt that making the trigger lighter would help accuracy.

If you consider going with the PM9 instead of the PM40, here is a good review on that gun:

http://www.gunblast.com/Kahr-PM9.htm

One thing about the Kahr PM pistols is that there will not be room on the grip for your pinky finger, as you can see here in this photo:




However, you can easily SOLVE this with a simple grip extender from Pierce. These can even be purchased from the online store on Kahr's website. Here is a photo of my PM9 that shows the grip extender installed on its magazine:



With it installed, you have something for your pinky finger to grab hold off. It definitely improves your grip, in my opinion.

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 06:17 PM   #8
HKFan9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 2,823
I am not a fan of any DAO firearm really, but I will say I find the Kahr trigger great. It is a lot better to me, than a Glock or SW M&P. I like my friends M&P and considered buying one but I do not like the kinda heavy "stacking" right before the trigger breaks. My Kahr is just a long smooth even pull.
HKFan9 is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 06:21 PM   #9
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
My Kahr is just a long smooth even pull.
That is probably the best way to describe it.

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 09:30 PM   #10
j-framer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 5, 2006
Posts: 374
Socrates said:

Quote:
Looking at these two guns, for thunderwear. Which would you pick, and why? Actual chronograph tests would be great, for either gun. If you own a 340 or 360 PD, do the two prior mentioned gun have any feature that justifies getting either one? In other words, is the 360PD just fine, with 148 grain JHP's at 1131 fps?
If I had to pick one, it would be the Kahr PM40 simply because it is much smaller than the Glock 39. But my real answer is that I would stick with the J-frame.

The only concealment advantage to the Kahr is the small, rectangular window of area in which the J-frame's cylinder diameter exceeds the width of the Kahr's slide. With the 360PD's cylinder of 1.312" diameter and the Kahr's slide width of .94", you have an area 1.625" long by .920" high (on either side of the gun) in which the J's cylinder bulges out beyond the Kahr's slide. And, even within this small window, the cylinder, at its most extreme point, is only wider than the Kahr's slide by .186", or barely 3/16" (considering width to be distributed symmetrically with regard to the guns' centerlines).

Other than this, the J-frame is thinner than the Kahr in every other location, in most places by leaps and bounds (the only exception might be the grips, but there are plenty of options available to keep the grips thin; but, I gather you are still using those modified Hogues on the 360, so you probably aren't looking to change).

What I'm trying to point out is that the concealability differences are miniscule between the Kahr and the 360PD. True, the Kahr gives you another round or two, but weigh that against the fact that the PM40 really pushes the power/(size/weight) ratio into some relatively uncharted territory. I have heard many positive opinions about the PM9, but hardly any opinions - positive or negative - about the PM40. If you get a PM40 and wring it out thorougly before trusting it on the street, more power to you; but my choice would be the tried and true Smith.
j-framer is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 11:14 PM   #11
HKFan9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 2,823
I have a model 60 J-frame and I find my Kahr PM-9 is much more concealable than it. Yea you can blame it on the cylinder being thicker but its still there no matter what so it does into over all width, no changing it. The Kahr is almost as flat as a pancake and no real points to print. I love my j-frame m60 but I carry the Kahr over it. Reloads if ever needed are about 1000x easier as well, no speed strip for me sir.
HKFan9 is offline  
Old October 10, 2008, 11:31 PM   #12
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866



Okay. These are the grips I'm currently using, but, the end result is the overall size of the gun is considerably bigger then a Baby Beretta, or a Kahr.


The Kahr doesn't have a cylinder bulge, and, has a what looks like a much shorter grip.
Socrates is offline  
Old October 11, 2008, 10:38 AM   #13
MrAnteater
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 262
I would only recommend Kahr for the Bad Guys.

I owned two PM 40 pistols and they were nothing but trouble. I had trouble with a broken frame on the first one and FTF's on the second.

Any brand is better than Kahr. Kahr = :barf:
MrAnteater is offline  
Old October 12, 2008, 12:32 AM   #14
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866
Thanks, but, I feel the same about my S&@, but, I still have it. I was the victim of the S&@ 'autolock' while dry firing, on snap caps...I lived with it, fixed it, and still have the gun.

Heard similar stuff about Kahr's, but, I don't see anything else near as powerful, and, near as compact and light...

Had two Kimbers. Sold one to orion, that always worked fine, but, it, and it's brother got a bunch of trips to a GREAT gunsmith, rather then back to Kimber. NOW they work flawlessly.

Just because you had problems, doesn't mean I won't too.
Only thing is I have a better then midling chance of getting em to work...
Socrates is offline  
Old October 12, 2008, 01:05 AM   #15
dreamweaver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2008
Posts: 713
the Kahr, at under an inch wide, is the way to go.
I carry a PM9 in smartcarry, no problems concealing, even with grip extension.
I didn't like the PM40 at all. Painful to shoot.
but it's not really meant to be a range gun, so I guess it would be OK for SD.
I can't carry my Airlite in the smartcarry. Too big and bulky.
dreamweaver is offline  
Old October 12, 2008, 11:46 AM   #16
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866
Anyone have ballistics tests on the Kahr, or the 39? Chronograph results, or tests by gun reviewers?

Thanks

S
Socrates is offline  
Old October 12, 2008, 12:13 PM   #17
sholling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 1999
Location: Hemet (middle of nowhere) California
Posts: 4,260
Socrates,

Guntests did one back on 11/04 but it requires a membership.

Quote:
Tiny and Not-so Tiny Forties: Kahr’s PM40 Is Our Carry Pick

For self-defense, we liked the PM40 better than the heavier, bulkier Springfield Sub-Compact XD and CZ’s new Rami.
Here are Kahr's linked reviews and if memory serves it's their archives.

What I'm in the market for is the long discontinued K40 Covert. Basically the MK40 with an extra 1/2" of barrel. But for now I'll settle for keeping my PM40 loaded with Speer Gold Dot For Short Barrels.
__________________
Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association, California Rifle & Pistol Association, and the Second Amendment Foundation.
Annual Member: Revolutionary War Veterans Association (Project Appleseed) and the Madison Society.

Last edited by sholling; October 12, 2008 at 03:35 PM.
sholling is offline  
Old October 12, 2008, 12:59 PM   #18
hdawson228
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2006
Posts: 1,301
This past week I picked up my new Kahr CW9 and couldn't be more impressed. Long trigger with about seven pound pull, but crisp. That adds a degree of safety. Workmanship is superb and function is flawless. Under an inch wide and 15+ ounces. Great for concealment. NEW $409. Recoil is barely noticeably more than my SA XD9 but oh so much easier to hide.

Entry level?...............................I don't think so!
hdawson228 is offline  
Old October 13, 2008, 12:15 AM   #19
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866
For you folks in FREE states: I tried to order a CW 40, since it's pretty near perfect for price, and, what I'm after. However, Kali, or Kahr, has not managed to approve the CW guns. But, the CW 9 is on the list, so, that's it....
Socrates is offline  
Old October 14, 2008, 04:06 AM   #20
imthegrumpyone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2007
Location: spring tx
Posts: 1,037
PM40 !!! Won't be sorry.
__________________
chambered and unlocked
imthegrumpyone is offline  
Old October 15, 2008, 10:44 AM   #21
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866
400 dollars for a Kahr, is, I think, a fair price for a gun with not so good support, and a decent history. I like the extra half inch of barrel over the PM, and, 9mm is just fine for this application. Have to actually try one in thunderwear and see how the butt conceals. The barrel length doesn't seem to be a problem, and, the Kahr doesn't have a hammer to stick you in the stomach.
Socrates is offline  
Old October 15, 2008, 12:49 PM   #22
hdawson228
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2006
Posts: 1,301
Socrates. Hope you'll be as happy with your's as I am with mine. And I'm very pleased with mine. You can order extra Kahr mags at Gunsources.com at very good prices if ordering more than one. (8rd with extended grip - $31)
hdawson228 is offline  
Old October 17, 2008, 09:01 PM   #23
Socrates
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: East Bay NorCal, People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 5,866


Went to the gun store, and, they had two Kahr CW40's.! Compared them to my 360PD, and, realized the Kahr is bigger. No point.

They didn't have the PM's, and, I think a baby Beretta maybe the only gun I can carry for what I have in mind...

Got to paw a Ruger .380 new model, but, Kali isn't approving pretty much ANY semi-auto now, being brought in, since there new 'drop' test elimenates about 99% of the guns on the market. I need to pass the bar, work in a DA's office, since that's about the only way to own a new model semi in Kali, until they absurd laws are overturned.
Socrates is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11891 seconds with 7 queries