[357-8-times]

They are almost the exact same price.

360 is 30% lighter, mostly thinner (except for the cylinder) and DA/SA which is nice for practice

PM45 has a longer barrel, 5+1, has real rear sights, is slightly smaller and a lot flatter

[Lou22]

I will receive my PM45 this coming week. I've read that the recoil is not bad out of such a light and small gun, because the bore axis is so low and the recoil comes straight back instead of causing muzzle rise. On the other hand I've heard shooting .357 loads out of the ultra lightweight snubs is an exercise in pain, and some folks carry .38 +P in them instead. I already own a PM9 and love it. Even +P+ loads out of it are not painful. I expect the slightly heavier PM45 to be fine. I've shot subcompact .45s only a little larger than the PM45 and had no problem with them.

Just my .02.

Lou

[XLMiguel]

Neither has enough handle to get a good grip on-

You will not enjoy .357 magnum loads in a 13 oz. revolver. If you don't like it, you won't practice with it . . . . .

A 19 oz .45 will be stout enough, but better geometry/ergonomics, 1 more rnd., easier to conceal, may be a better choice IMO, but that's JMO- (I have a P9 that I like real well, FWIW)

[Gator]

I'd go with the Kahr because it carries better....and it's a .45. :)

[357-8-times]

Gator, .45 and .357 are both considered ideal for self-defense and in terms of 230gr mass vs. magnum velocity AFAIK they both have fairly similar energy and stopping power; is that right?

[RickH]

I have a stainless model 60-9. It is I think around 22 oz empty. Shooting .357 is very very loud. Loud enough that people on the line next to me usually move or at least step back from the line until I am empty.
It is also quite a hand full. A friend once commented that he didn't like that little gun that kept trying to pull his thumb off.
I couldn't even imagine if it was as light as 13 oz.
It is a nice gun, but I consider it a .38 that will handle hot loads, and the occasional cylinder or two of .357. I'd say try shooting one for sure before you buy it.
Haven't shot the Kahr, but hear good things about them from others.

[Gator]

Gator, .45 and .357 are both considered ideal for self-defense and in terms of 230gr mass vs. magnum velocity AFAIK they both have fairly similar energy and stopping power; is that right?

Just personal preference on my part. Good ammo is available for short barreled .357s, but I prefer big and slow to the sharp bark, big flash, and painful recoil of the "pocket rockets." Plus, my follow up shots are much faster with a .45, even a small one.

[Lou22]

In my experience the polymer auto with a locked breech tends to have less perceived recoil in a head-to-head match against a revolver with similar power. I attribute that to the polymer frame and locked breech absorbing some of the recoil. Also when comparing the .45 auto to the .357, the lower-pressure .45 recoil is more of a push than a jab. And the muzzle blast is less pronounced, perhaps because (most) of the .45 loads are subsonic out of a short barrel.

Don't get me wrong, I like revolvers, as I have a Smith 642 in .38 that is a great gun for concealed carry. The one advantage the revolver has over the auto is greater reliability.

Lou

[357-8-times]

Tried out a 340 PD (same as 360 M&P but DAO with ti cylinder, an oz. lighter and $100 more) with .357s in it and it was a load of fun, but not something I could see using with one hand, nonetheless practicing with. Except for that one main barrier I love the little thing.

Also tried out a Model 60 which is basically a 22oz. 360 (I think it was a 2.5" or something close to that) and that was very pleasant to shoot, albeit still a real spitfire.

Now to try to get my hands on a PM45 for comparison...

[Alan Fud]

I own the 360SS but .38 +P are as high as I go in that weight/size gun. A hit with a .38 will do more damage than a miss with a .357

[Jim Watson]

Not even the gunzine writers can make the PM45 sound like a good choice. It is just cut back too far for reliable operation.

[rdrancher]

Lighter isn't always better.

I think you're right on track with a Model 60 or possibly a Ruger SP101. All steel, and you can get either one with a longer 3" barrel in the mid-twenty oz. range.

The Kahr is neat, but I'll go for reliable anytime over an extra round. For me, it's a revolver.

rd

[DAdams]

barely pulls off the PM 9 (I own one), the .40 is dubious (I won't own one).
The PM .45 sounds like 6 pounds in a five pound can. Too big for the pocket.

I'll stick with my M&P 340 for every day pocket carry. .357 if you are so inclined. SGDFSB Plus P for me.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v237/dmadams/P5210023-1.jpg

[357-8-times]

What do you mean "Too big for the pocket."? It is slightly smaller than your 340?

[gbran]

I had one of those 15 oz .357's. The kick was viscious, nearly as painfull as my .454 SRH. I have the PM9 and find it to be very controllable. I'd have to vote for the PM45. I'll keep my big .357's for hunting or target work.

[chaim]

Given your options, I'd go with the Kahr PM45.

I have a 15oz S&W 442 (.38spl). The recoil with +P is more than many people can handle (and I can't do more than a couple cylinders before it becomes very uncomfortable). I had a Taurus 605 (23oz .357mag) and it was very uncomfortable with all but the weakest magnum rounds. I'd hate to feel what a 13oz .357mag would feel like (I imagine it wouldn't even be fun with .38+P).

So, I think the PM45 is the better option. Less felt recoil means faster follow-up shots and you would be able to practice longer with it so you'd probably master it quicker.

That said, if it was me I'd go with neither. If you don't need a pocket gun but want light get the steel framed .357mag like the S&W 60 (22-23oz isn't bad) or get a Kahr P9 or P40. If you want very light and/or pocketable get the S&W 442/642 (15oz .38spl) or a Kahr PM9 (smaller, lighter and more reliable than the PM45).

[edw8ri]

I'd give the M&P a hard look. In the first place you are under estimating barrel length. Remember that a revolver barrel length never includes the cylinder. But in a automatic, the round is in the barrel, while in a revolver it's not. So to be accurate, you really need to add the cylinder length to the revolver's barrel length or subtract the length of the round from the automatic's barrel length.

Here is the other big advantage of the M&P. When you pull the trigger it will go bang - every single time. I have a PM-9 and I have had just enough feed problems so that I don't have that level of confidence I'd like to have. Now, my J frame goes in my pocket.

Also, consider all the ammunition options you have with the M&P. You can load any .38 or .357.

[357-8-times]

edw8ri, good point about barrel length, but reliability is another story. The cylinder on the 340 I tried seized up from a cartridge moving forward into the cylinder and out the front. My guess is that it was due some mix of an improperly sized case rim and the severe .357 recoil being enough to squeeze it right down the chamber. Also, there are also plenty of reports about lock failures on all lightweight-high-power Smith and Taurus revolvers so in terms of reliability, this factor has left me perplexed...

Chaim, I really enjoyed 158gr .357s in the 340, it was a blast, but although this defies logic, shooting .38 +P's in a 637 (basically a 442 with exposed hammer) was a bit too much kick in the palm to enjoy. Not sure why it felt less comfortable, perhaps it was a different grip, but that was not for me. The Model 60 was the finest .357 I have ever shot, but I want a tiny lightweight and the 60 is larger, heavier and holds fewer rounds than the PM45, so it is not really in the running. Na-Nach!

[chaim]

Chaim, I really enjoyed 158gr .357s in the 340, it was a blast, but although this defies logic, shooting .38 +P's in a 637 (basically a 442 with exposed hammer) was a bit too much kick in the palm to enjoy. Not sure why it felt less comfortable, perhaps it was a different grip, but that was not for me.

It is funny how slight differences in guns, just a slightly different grip, can make a big difference.

If you've already tried the 340 and know that you don't mind the recoil, and that is what you want, that is the way you should go. While I prefer .45ACP for home defense (similar power but the lower pressure round means less hearing damage and less danger of overpenatration for the same result), for other uses, like in a carry pistol, .357mag is a great caliber. It is one of my favorites actually (I'm consolidating my gun collection a bit but I'm making sure that a .357mag, in the form of my 3" S&W 65LS, is staying in the collection- every caliber except .357mag was on the table and considered for cutting out of the collection).

The Model 60 was the finest .357 I have ever shot That is a nice J-frame. I'd consider one if I wasn't getting out of snubs (nothing against snubs; I love my Taurus 85 and S&W 442, but since I'm consolidating my collection I'd rather have a Kahr PM9 than the snubs if I'm not going to have both).

Na-Nach! I'm not a Breslover actually. I love learning Breslov and I am Breslov influenced, but I probably won't become one (I like my meat and occasional beer too much, and I will be starting training next year to become a mental health therapist so it isn't quite a fit). I'm definitely not a Na-Nach, but I do have a ton of respect for them and their enthusiasm (I kind of wish I could go that way, I can picture myself jumping out of a Breslov van :) ).

[loplop]

I, like DAdams, have a M&P 340 and a Kahr PM9. I actually owned a PM9 awhile back, but sold it and stuck with snubs for pocket carry... But recently I found myself wishing I had the PM9 again, so I went looking. Why did I miss the PM9? It's easier to achieve competence with (snubs take a lot of practice), and 2-3 boxes of ammo is "fun" whereas with a snub I usually stick to 1 box.

I've spent the last year and a half becoming proficient on the snubbys, and I feel good about them now. So I thought maybe I'd add back in the PM9 to mix it up, and allow for some longer defensive training sessions.

PM45 is out now so why not look at that, too! I tried it in the Nemesis I still had from the PM9. Fit great, slid into my pocket nicely. But it IS larger than the PM9... And I got to thinking: since I'm comfortable with 38+P in the 340 (I do shoot 357's and do fine with them, but followups are slow so I stick with 38+P), then I'm comfortable with 9mm, especially +P. So what does the PM45 buy me? In a pocket pistol... Less rounds, and a larger frame.

It's not terribly larger when you sit them side by side, but in the pocket, it's a whole lot bigger. In some of my casual shorts, I'd be fine carrying the PM45 in the pocket. In others, the grip would be too obvious. In those shorts, the PM9 works. So I bought another PM9...

I'm still considering the PM45, though. I have a real soft spot for 45ACP, and I usually shoot it better than 9mm for some reason. My favorite gun EVER to shoot was my old Colt Defender. Loved it. Superbly accurate, easy to shoot well, enough kick to let you know you're having some fun :) But it spit brass into my head so hard I'd often bleed, and it became unreliable without frequent recoil spring changes and extractor tuning. I sold it. I'm wondering if the PM45 would kinda strike up nostalgia on that line, and not have the deficiencies of the Defender.

[GregB]

I've been lusting for a .45ACP pocket pistol for years. This may be as close as I'll ever get. I'd love to shoot one. It is a little bigger than the PM9, one of my favorite pocket pistols, but hey it is a .45:D I even went as far as to spend @$1K on the S&W 625-10. No fun to shoot at all, worse than my 17oz Taurus .357 revolver IMHO. The recoil was a push, but it was a push you couldn't get away from, whereas the .357 (with wood grips) would rotate in your hand like a single action. Still looking for an unported Taurus Tracker 2" in .45ACP (long discontinued). Don't have pockets big enough for the Judge...

GregB