Kahr PM40 - Opinions wanted.

Damn Yankee · 01-05-2005, 01:29 PM

Hello All,

I'm considering purchasing a Kahr PM40 and looking for some opinions. I like this model for it's size (it's really small) and also because it's 40S&W which is a fairly substantial self-defence round. This gun also comes chambered in 9mm, which I like because I already have my Dillon 550b setup for 9mm, but I really like the better ballistics of the 40S&W. Worst case it will cost me about $100 to get the dies and caliber conversion for the Dillon. That's not too big of an issue.

My current "stick in my back pocket" carry gun is a Ruger SP101. It's 357mag so plenty of power but it's really too big carry as much as I'd like to. It's heavy too compared to the Kahr, 30 ounces vs 16. I'll probably trade this in on the Kahr if that's the route I take.

What do you think of Kahr in general? How about the 9mm vs 40S&W?

Size is the real issue for me. I want something I can carry all the time, not just when I can wear enough clothes to cover something up. If size didn't matter, I'd carry a Glock in 45acp or better yet, my S&W 29 4 inch in 44mag. Size does matter.

Any opinions would be appreciated.

Bryan

TScottW99 · 01-05-2005, 02:00 PM

I don't own a Kahr but have shot several and know several people who own them and love them. They are good guns and I like the single stack.

As to caliber choice, I have carried both. I now only carry the .40S&W. I carry it as a duty round and as a off duty round. I feel comfortable with it and shoot it well. The only down side is the price of ammo to practice, if you are going to reload then it's not a downside

I have nothing against the 9mm, with today's bullets it's better then ever. The main thing is putting the bullet where it needs to go anyway.

USMC PMI · 01-05-2005, 02:17 PM

Kahr's are good handguns but in my opinion it would be worth the little extra weight and bulk (only a few ounces) to carry the Glock 27. Why? I like the controls on the Glock, extremely simple, almost second nature, this is important if you actually need to use your CCW. I also feel that the Glock points much better allowing faster target acquisition and a more natural feeling sight picture. Not to mention you have almost double the capacity. Under stress your fine motor skills go out the window, the slightly larger handgun is a benifit here if you are able to carry it. Some situations may require carrying something smaller but if this is a standard CCW weapon it is fine. I have carried the 27 for 5 years now and still have no regrets. Either way you are making a good decision. My input on the 9mm. . . . not a fan. Wouldn't take a 270 cape buffalo hunting, won't use a 9mm to defend myself.

bugsNbows · 01-05-2005, 02:57 PM

I'd second the vote for the Glock 27. With an empty mag it weighs less than 20 ozs. For a little more "size" the Glock 23 weighs about 21.5 ozs. Both are .40 S&W and would serve well as managable CCW... in my opinion.

newguy23 · 01-05-2005, 04:54 PM

I have only heard good things about both the compact glock and the kahr.

If you want to save some money I have heard rave reviews for the Kel Tec (I think the only make 9mm though)

Highpower · 01-06-2005, 08:30 AM

I picked one up a couple years ago for the very same reasons. It was a .40 cal and it was small enough to carry wearing anything more than a swimsuit. It's proven to be a tough little gun. Downsides are the weight. For it's small size, it's a heavyweight and recoil. This is not a handgun to take to a long range session. Again, due to the size, the .40 raps you pretty good in this small package. Other than those two things, it's a great little carry piece and very well made.

Damn Yankee · 01-06-2005, 12:44 PM

Thanks for the replies.

I figure for the size of this gun (Kahr PMX) (5 inches long, 4 inches high, and .94 inches thick) it will have to rap pretty hard in 9mm or 40S&W. But I'm not too concerned with recoil as this will be a CCW and be fed a lighter target load for practice. I'll buy the premium ammunition for carry purposes.

My main concern is having a gun small enough to be able to carry all the time and one powerful enough to be worth carrying in case I need it. Let's face facts, the 2nd to the last thing I want to do in this world is have to shoot someone, the last thing would be not having the gun to shoot them with, and the 3rd would be having one underpowered. I hope that doesn't sound too harsh, I'd really hate to have to shoot somebody but I will do anything to protect my family and to insure that my son continues to have a father. I think I'm getting little off subject here....

I like the Glocks (model 36) and have handled them and tried them on for size. It's alot smaller and more concealable (sp?) than my Glock 17 but still a little too big for my needs. Also thought about the new Springfield sub compact but compared the Kahr, it's pretty big.

So far I haven't heard (from anybody here or outside this board) any negative comments about Kahr. Really leaning hard in that direction.

Bryan

ruffhunter · 01-06-2005, 06:33 PM

I carry an all steel K-40 as my duty back up. Great shooting gun, better than the Glock 22, I am forced to carry. I tried the plastic version at a range. It seemed to jam and recoil more. The steel version will shoot anything except those gummy. coated Wolf stuff.