PDA

View Full Version : Kahr CM9, DB9, or Kahr CM9?


Glockfan36
September 10, 2011, 04:18 PM
Of these, which would you pick and why? Plwase vote in the poll as I'm trying to decide on a new pocket pistol in 9mm only- NO .380'S! I'll leave the poll open in definitely to help get more feedback. Thanks in advance!

Glockfan36
September 10, 2011, 04:25 PM
I voted for the CM9- it seems to be a little smaller than the other two. I'm in no hurry to buy, so I'll let this thread play itself out before I buy aznything. I don't know enough about the Diamondback to decide one way or the other-yet!

threegun
September 10, 2011, 04:43 PM
If money is tight CM9 if not PM9. I prefer the milled parts and dove tailed front and rear sights in the PM9 over the MIM (metal injection molded) parts and staked front sites on the CM9.

I own the diamond back 380 and I am having an issue that I haven't worked out yet. Light primer strikes. Could be ammo brand but I don't know yet. I"m fearful of recommending a newer gun when the company's first one isn't proved yet.

Glockfan36
September 10, 2011, 07:13 PM
I really do appreciate the input! I'm leaning more towards the CM9, but I'm in no hurry to buy, either so I can take my time on this one. Everything's pointing towards that one. I would prefer this gun had at least one spare mag, as I don't like carrying without a reload option of some sort! But, we'll see what happens before next summer!

C0untZer0
September 10, 2011, 07:23 PM
I think the jury is still out as far as the reliability of the DB9.

If money were no object, I'd get the PM9, but I think the differences between the CM9 and the PM9 are not that great for what I would use it for - a carry pistol.

Do I really need adjustable sights on a pistol that I'm going to be shooting mostly between 3 and 15 feet?

Does the rifled barrel make that much of a difference?

I know the PM9 is nicer and if I had the cash I'd chose it over the CM9, but IMO, for the role that I would use the pistol in - the differences between the two pistols is negligable and I'd take the CM9.

Also, I think if I'm going to be putting down $800+ on a pocket pistol, I might as well look at a Borberg or Rohrbaugh. For a little more money I'm getting a smaller lighter package with either of those two.

C0untZer0
September 10, 2011, 07:27 PM
The PM9 went through a design change that lengthened it slightly.

An older PM9 might be slightly smaller than a CM9, but a new CM9 and a new PM9 should have the same dimensions.

Mrgunsngear
September 10, 2011, 07:56 PM
The DB9 has too many quality control issues. IMO, the differences between the CM9 and the PM9 are so small (barrel rifling, ect...) that it doesn't make a difference for 99 out of 100 shooters. I have the CM9 and it's the best pocket 9mm out there in my opinion. Mine has been 100% reliable through hundreds of rounds. I just swapped out the front sight for a night sight from Kahr (only $30 on their website). Other than that, it's stock.

Shadi Khalil
September 10, 2011, 08:07 PM
Do I really need adjustable sights on a pistol that I'm going to be shooting mostly between 3 and 15 feet?

I'm pretty sure the PM9 does not have adjustable sights. The difference is the CM has a pinned front sight while the PM has a dovetail cut.

franco45
September 10, 2011, 08:29 PM
CM9 for all the reasons already stated. I love mine.

jimkimmons
September 10, 2011, 10:17 PM
I posted up a video comparing the two (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOS-FWhd16U), as I have both. In the video I talk about sending the DB9 back to the factory, polymer material scrapings, and other issues.

I bought the CM9 after the DB9, as I couldn't feel comfortable carrying the DB9 for self defense. I fired another 150 rounds through the CM9 today, part Winchester White Box and 100 Blazer brass without a single problem, makes more than 600 rounds so far. It' accurate, and I love it. I actually think that the four or five ounces of extra weight is a help rather than a hindrance.

C0untZer0
September 11, 2011, 02:25 AM
I'm not sure I'd ever shoot it well enough to even know it wasn't hittin POA. I'd have to put it in a Ransom rest to see if the sights needed adjusting, and for what? It probably is accurate enough for work at 15' I could adjust the sights and then since my shot groups are going to be like 3½" at 15 feet anyway I'd hardly notice the difference before and after.

Here's another thread on this when I was looking at them back in April:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=448844

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=455532&highlight=cm9

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=449321&highlight=cm9

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4649503&highlight=pm9#post4649503

threegun
September 11, 2011, 09:41 AM
My PM9 is as accurate as I am. Literally capable of putting all the shots you want into a couple inches at 10 yards, the range I shoot it most*.



*I know its a pocket gun and should be practiced with closer but I usually shoot this one while on duty at the range I RO at. When slow of course LOL.

towncarblue
September 11, 2011, 01:42 PM
i recently bought a kahr cm9 . MUCH BETTER TRIGGER than an lc9 or any other DA pocket 9mm . muzzle flip is manageable with practice.
the kahr pm9 is just a more expensive of the cm9

DB9 looks good but past reliably ratings with the db380 turned me away from that company

threegun
September 11, 2011, 02:04 PM
I've got a db380 and its reliability hasn't been proved yet. Having light primer strikes and don't know if its ammo or gun yet.

Oldjarhead
September 11, 2011, 03:57 PM
The Kahr PM9 costs more, but has a match grade barrel, and a dove type front sight. The CM9 has a standard barrel and a pinned front sight. Might not mean much for some folks, but I like it. I got the all black stainless slide version with the night sights. Great gun.:cool: