[DMK]

Comparing a Kahr P9 Covert to a P40 Covert.

I'm a believer in shot placement. I wouldn't want a gun that I can't shoot accurately. The only .40S&W gun I have is a CZ-40B. IMO, it doesn't seem all that hotter than my CZ-75 with +P in it. However, those are both big guns that allow you a good hold on them.

Assuming a max distance of 15 yards, how controllable is the .40 in a tiny gun like the P40 Covert, with it's short handgrip?

[Intune]

I can crank out ten controlled rounds from my G27 pretty darn quick. It may be the platform not the round. I would compare a few different sub-compacts side by side if possible.

[Paladin7]

The package makes the difference...

I have a Kahr MK40 which is a sub-compact (same grip as Covert models, shorter slide/barrel). The gun with the right grips, Hogue hardwood, is very controllable (in my hands) and astonishingly accurate for its intended purpose.

If you want the 40...For faster repeat shots with this caliber and better reliability, I would go with the Kahr stainless models K40/MK40. With the right holster they present no problem to carry. You will be surprised.

Paladin7

[mlk18]

I like the .40 round and have several weapons that fire that caliber. I have no problem shooting the Glock 22/23/27 quickly and accurately. I have also shot a Sig P239 in .40 that was a pleasant shooter. But in my experience with the Kahr K40, it had way too much muzzle flip and felt recoil for fast and accurate shooting. You couldn't make me shoot a Kel-Tec P40, that's just crazy. Glock 27, XD Subcompact or Sig P239 is as small as I would go in that caliber. Everyone is different so you may have to try them out for yourself.

mlk18

[DMK]

If you want the 40...For faster repeat shots with this caliber and better reliability, I would go with the Kahr stainless models K40/MK40. Do you say that due to the added weight?

[Paladin7]

That is one of the reasons, the other is that reliability has traditionally been higher on the steel models than the polymer.

[Coltdriver]

I had a Kahr MK40.

With the mag "finger rest" it was marginally controllable for a second shot but it was about the most power I have ever found in the smallest package. I could reliably point shoot to COM on a second shot but I could never get the second shot to hit much closer than six inches from the first. I had also tried a sub sized .45 but just could not shoot it well at all.

One important factor to consider with 40 S&W is that there is no such thing as +P. The ammo, in its pure spec'd form is very hotly loaded. Most commercial ammo is not full SAMMI spec 40 S&W. I tried some Pro Load ammo in 165 grain and it was a real "handfull". Regular off the shelf 40 S&W was never as snappy as the Pro Load ammo.

If you have a gorilla grip, go for it. But I would recommend you try and find one to shoot first.

I can not imagine shooting a (polymer lower) PM 40. The stainless MK40 tamed a bit of the recoil. But it was also the biggest drawback. It weighed a lot for such a small package and made carry in a jacket or pants pocket impractical for me.

On a belt or IWB holster it was fine, even if it did weigh a lot. The other drawback that I did not care for was the inability to second strike a round. You had to manually recock the slide if it did not go off the first time. Not a big deal but definitely somthing I think Kahr overlooked.

I sold mine to a Customs agent who was going to use it as a backup to her regular full size .40.

I carry revolvers now for their weight, power and my ability to shoot them real well. They are surprisingly similar to the Kahr in that there is no safety to fumble with, you just pull the trigger with a round in the chamber and they are good for five or six rounds, second strike is a non issue. Just smaller, lighter and easier to aim well for me.

[DMK]

One important factor to consider with 40 S&W is that there is no such thing as +P. The ammo, in its pure spec'd form is very hotly loaded. Most commercial ammo is not full SAMMI spec 40 S&W. I tried some Pro Load ammo in 165 grain and it was a real "handfull". Regular off the shelf 40 S&W was never as snappy as the Pro Load ammo. That's interesting that you say that because I did a side by side comparison of 124gr. Pro-load +P in my 9mm CZ-75 to 165 gr. Golden Sabers in my CZ-40. That may explain why I didn't feel that much difference between them.

From the comments here, it sounds like I'll be happier with a 9mm Kahr. The ability to place my shots accurately is my primary concern.

[jnb01]

IMO, both the platform and the ammunition being used factor into the equation. For me personally, I find the 180gr loads the easiest to shoot in this caliber, as they seem to have less snap/muzzle flip, and the overall felt recoil is more straight back in the hand like the .45acp. To me, the 180gr loads do not recoil much more than the 124gr+P Gold Dot or 127gr+P+ Ranger T for instance, feeling slightly heavier given a similar or exact same platform, yet in some instances having less blast and a similar if not slower slide velocity during the recoil cycle.

The full power 155-165gr loads can produce a healthy snap and torque in lighter and/or smaller platforms. Some folks even find them uncomfortable to shoot in fullsize duty pistols like the G22, do to it's lightweight polymer construction. I would definitely try before you buy. Like yourself, I personally would never sacrifice shootability for any real or percieved ballistic's performance advantage.

Best, jnb01

[Darrin]

I have an Astra A-70 in .40 and love it. The size is almost identical to the Kahr. Even with the 2.5" barrel, each round hits the target out to the 7 ring. If I slow down, we're talking 8 or 9 ring. (approximately 13 yards)

Recoil? To this day, I still can't tell the difference between a 9mm and a .40. :confused:

[Bowlcut]

darrin's a-70 is sooo tiny in my hands. its basicly a compact to my hands as i can only get too GOOD fingers on the grip. how how well i shoot it shouldnt matter as i cant shoot my pistol well either :scrutiny: . But it doesnt hurt at all, and actualy comes down on target as fast or faster than my full size sw99. Few few small 40's ive shot, ive not felt any problems in control

[mrapathy2000]

just as controllable as a 9mm depending on the gr bullet you use though. 135gr-155gr are pretty controllable and they also have the best speed. remington makes some hot 155gr rounds though that do 1200fps+ typical is around 1100.
135gr rounds will do 1200-1300 and feal like a 9mm. corbon and federal hydra shock is availible in 135 gr. even in a glock 27 the 135gr rounds will get to 1200fps

not quite 357sig but it doesnt come with .357sig noise and flamethrower flash.

[Rick Blaine]

I've got a Kel-Tec P-40 that for me is easy to handle with just about any ammo. The 180 grain has a little more kick, but it's not bad. It shoots just like a 9mm with 135 grain Federal Hydra Shoks, but I prefer a 155 or 165 grain Gold Dot.

[TheOtherOne]

I have two .40 S&W's. A Browning Hi-Power and a Glock 27. I'm a better shot with the Glock 27. I have magazines for the G27 both with and without the grip extension for your pinky, but I shoot it the same with either type.

I've had the Glock longer and have shot it more often than the Browning, so that's probably the reason I'm better with it. One thing I like alot about it is the way the trigger pull is. After my first shot I can keep it pulled in and then just BARELY release it and pull it back for all the subsequent shots.

[Teufelhunden]

I've got a Taurus PT-140. I prefer it to the Kahrs because it's not much bigger and it holds 10+1 rounds as opposed to my buddy's Kahr, which only holds 5+1 rounds--and it's cheaper, which is vital on my budget. Granted, there is something to be said for the fact that if you shoot someone 6 times with a .40 and they're still coming, another 4 rounds wouldn't do you any good, but that argument has a point of diminishing return, otherwise we'd all be walking around with single-shot pistols.

Back on topic, I do not find the .40 particularly difficult to shoot in either my Taurus or his Kahr. The Kahr (MK series) is too short for a full grip, which allows the muzzle to come further up than on the Taurus, but once you know to expect it, getting back on target isn't really a problem.

-Teuf

[DMK]

Good points about the lighter bullets in .40. I've never even considered anything lighter than 155gr. in my CZ-40, but in a little pocket gun, it's certainly food for additional thought.

[TheFrontRange]

My SIG P239 in .40 has been extremely pleasant to shoot. I picked this gently-used gun up a few months ago...it's kind of a "double-shot" for me as it's my first SIG and my first .40. The combination has been working out very well! :)

The only ammo I've run through it so far is 180-grain, mostly Winchester USA white-box JHPs and FMJs. I'd be interested in trying some of the lighter-weight stuff mentioned in other posts, just to see how they feel.

[Erik]

My Kahr MK40 is plenty accurate for combat/SD.

[clubsoda22]

It's got a nice kick to it. If you can control it, more power to you, if not, go with a 9mm or even a 380. Big bullets that miss are worthless. I've triend some light compact .40's and i'm quite comfortable with them. Not the same lightning followups i can do with my bersa, but perhaps less need for the follow-ups.

Personally, I'm hoping to see a .45 XD subcompact. I like compact .45's over .40's. About the same kick, but not as sharp from a .45, which i find more comfortable. Less of a crack, more of a dull thud. It's like the difference between cracking the BG's head with a bat and hucking a good size boulder at his head. Effect is the same, delivery is different.

[Kentucky Rifle]

I almost bought a Kahr until I read a bunch of horror stories regarding service. Kahrs seem to be like Para Ord's. Get a good one and it's great. Get a bad one and it's very difficult to get it properly repaired. I shoot or shot Federal 135gr PD's in my G27. I've since switched to RBCD's. For a while, there was a shortage of G27's around here. A buddy on the Police Force told me that there was a long line of LEO's who wanted G27's as back-up weapons. It's hard to imagine ankle carry because the Glock is such a fat little pistol, but a lot of LEO's wanted them to carry on their ankles. I've had mine since '98 and put hundreds of rounds downrange. Not one single malfunction...except for the time a lady firing her own G27 ejected a just fired and very hot empty OVER the partition and down my collar. It was "fire dance" time!:o

KR

[wunderkind]

The Kahr platform was designed to feed, fire, and eject the 9mm round. The .40's are a variation on that theme. I haven't seen any long-term reliability issues brought up, but the Kahrs are fairly new.

Logic would dictate the 9mm models will last the longest and have the fewest problems since these guns were originally designed for it; they didn't have to be 'adapted' to 9mm--they were built around it.

I'm not suggesting Kahr rushed their .40's out to catch some kind of wave. Mr. Moon seems to have good quality control.

(The .40 Glocks built on the 9mm frames seem to be the most troublesome-even if only in online anecdotes...)

[Rick Daniel]

I had a G27 and it was easy to shoot, accurate, and reliable. I have small hands and had no trouble controlling the G27. I carried it often for a long time, then I started shooting my G26 more and realized how much more accurate and controllable it was. I sold the G27.

I agree that shot placement is important. I discovered that my G26 was the most accurate Glock I owned. I bought the G27 because it "matched" my G23 that I carry at work. I settled on carrying the G23 exclusively because I shoot it nearly as well as the G26 and with LE mags it holds more rounds.