Khar K40 Range Report


PDA






orangeninja
September 19, 2004, 05:31 PM
Okay guys....for a long long long time now I have been on the prowl for the perfect B.U.G. (Back up gun) to a duty weapon (Sig 229 .40) and an off duty carry weapon for days I just don't feel like packing....which is more often now than before.

Okay here is the list of previously owned potential BUGS.


Taurus 85 .38 special with bobbed hammer = I was not that accurate with it.

Charter Arms Undercover = WAAAAYYYYY unreliable....sent in to factory and was without a BUG for 3 months. It got sent back, no letter of explanation or anything. Crappy gun, crappy service.

Bersa .380 = LOVED it...but one night in the heat of fear I pulled it out when my wife was yelling at me to get my gun someone was tryint to break in. She took one look at the Bersa and yelled "NO!!! Not that pussy gun, get your real one!!!" Now my wife is not a shooter and does not like guns...so if she is not intimidated by it, neither will anyone else be unless they are a shooter themselves. Sad to see it go.

Glock 23, didn't own it, but shot it, hated it.

CZ PCR, great FANTASTIC 9mm but one night while chasing a theif into a back yard I was blinded by a flood light. All I had was this gun, and no backup mags. At that moment a 9mm felt anemic. I sold it and have since sorely regretted it.

Taurus PT111....wouldn't feed 147 grain silver tips. Had to go.

Kahr P9.....great reliablity and very light...but was extremely snappy in recoil, made follow up shots very difficult.

Taurus 605 .357 magnum.....great gun...good shooter BUT when shooting 158 grain magnum loads...(Blazer ammo) the grips split and cut my hand somehow. OUCH.....it goes.

Sig Sauer 232 Stainless .380....I have two little scars on my hand the exact width of the slide. Slide bite was a B!tch.

Sig 239 9mm.....did not fit my hands correctly. I would have kept it if I had gotten a .40 in the first place. But the size and weight are not that much different than a 229. Kind of like a "big" little gun.

Finally got a Kahr k40. Shot 100 165grain loads through it as well as some Remington Golden Saber.

Results:

Accuracy is good however it is difficult to shoot 2 inch groups beyond 100 feet because of the heavy trigger pull. It shoots like a revolver trigger wise.

Sights.....line and dot like a Sig....perfect.

Trigger...heavy but smooth. I don't think I'll lighten it since it has no safety.

Reliability...100% so far.

Recoil....very managable.....the rubber grips and heft of steel help out.

Ease of carry....wonderful for IWB carry....weight is really not much of a factor for this gun since it is so compact and evenly distributed throughout the weapon.

Warranty....lifetime...which is reassuring.

Capacity...7 shots of 180 grain .40. If you have to shoot that many in a BUG things are WAAAAYYYYYYY South.

Feel in hand....a little smaller than I would like, but good overall. I just have to concentrate on that trigger pull.

Overall rating. A fine defensive sidearm. No safety to foul you up in the moment of truth...100% reliablity. Great sights. Smooth but heavy trigger, not much heavier than a revolver though. I give it an "A".

Soon I will pick up a Springfield Micro XD .40 and give it a side by side winner stays with me competition.

If you enjoyed reading about "Khar K40 Range Report" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
DMK
September 19, 2004, 07:07 PM
So you think the K40 with 165gr. is easier to shoot accurately than the Taurus 85 J-frame? What was it about the J-frame that made it hard to shoot, the trigger, the light weight, the sights?

What brand 165s are you using in the K40 and what kind of rounds were you using in the J-frame?

The reason I'm asking is I own an S&W 642 J-frame that I love to carry, but hate to shoot. I can consistantly hit a 6" target at 15 yards, but I'm not as accurate as I'd like to be so it's got me thinking about change. I own a CZ40B that I shoot 165gr. Golden Sabers with, but it just seems like the .40 is very "snappy" to me, even in a fairly large gun.

orangeninja
September 19, 2004, 08:05 PM
"So you think the K40 with 165gr. is easier to shoot accurately than the Taurus 85 J-frame? What was it about the J-frame that made it hard to shoot, the trigger, the light weight, the sights?"

The grip angle more than anything. Believe it or not, a Rossi with factory grip seems to be the only revolver that just naturally comes "on target" without much effort.

The 165 gr. were target loads. The Golden Sabers were 180 gr. Both did well. The .40 is snappy, but you get used to it. The .40 doesn't hold a candle to a .357 magnum though.

What makes the Khar shootable is the overall weight distribution along with the sights and the grip angle. The trigger is like that of a revolver.

If you enjoyed reading about "Khar K40 Range Report" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!