Faced with dilemma (M&P Shield 9mm vs. Kahr PM9)


PDA






AWCherry
May 3, 2013, 12:20 PM
So I'm having trouble choosing between 2 pistols for a variety of reasons. I recently put in an order for a Kahr PM9 at the LGS, and was told that 5 were on order, and I would get a phone call when they were received. I like the Kahr for a variety of reasons, first and foremost being how easy it is to conceal. I also happen to think it's a beautiful looking firearm, and those that have had them have mostly positive experiences (more on that in a minute) I've been looking for a compact 9mm platform for summer carry to replace my 1911, and had all but settled on the PM9.

Cut to today at the LGS - I'm picking up 9mm ammo in preparation for owning the gun, and the lady there asks me how attached I am to the Kahr. She knows I work for the local sheriff's department, and lets me in on S&W's deal for law enforcement: $320 for the M&P Shield in 9mm, 2 mags, and the law-enforcement trigger kit (as opposed to the horrific MA 10lb trigger). Pretty sweet deal, considering I have $700 of store credit there from recent trades.

I know many of you are Shield proponents, with an equal number being Kahr proponents as well. I'm just looking for unbiased opinions on each in terms of positives and negatives. Right now the Shield definitely wins on price by more than half, but the Kahr has size. I've heard horror stories about Kahr's springs failing to return the firearm into battery, but I've heard nothing but good things about their customer service in the event that something goes wrong.

It's my day off, I'm outside in this beautiful weather with my dog by my side, so let's talk some pistols, people!

If you enjoyed reading about "Faced with dilemma (M&P Shield 9mm vs. Kahr PM9)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Ed4032
May 3, 2013, 12:22 PM
Jump on that deal for the Shield quick fast and in a hurry.

AWCherry
May 3, 2013, 12:23 PM
Jump on that deal for the Shield quick fast and in a hurry.
Forgot to add - already put an order in for the Shield as well, with no commitment to buy. They'll call me when it comes in, and if I don't want it, the next LEO gets it.

CSG
May 3, 2013, 12:49 PM
Locally, both the Shield and PM9 have been popular as off duty weapons but the Shield is less expensive and, from what I understand, has had fewer issues. I've had a PM9 for a few years but it took two trips back to Kahr to fix it to be 100%.

Today, I'd try the Shield, especially with the LE package discount.

Grmlin
May 3, 2013, 01:36 PM
At that price I would get the shield even though I don't like the feel of it. Sorry to hear you live in Ma I was able to escape back in 86 but most of my family still lives in the western side of the state.

AWCherry
May 3, 2013, 02:54 PM
At that price I would get the shield even though I don't like the feel of it. Sorry to hear you live in Ma I was able to escape back in 86 but most of my family still lives in the western side of the state.
Yeah, the People's Republic of MA is one giant letdown when it comes to intelligent legislation. You would think that a state of such historical importance to our early history, where we threw off the shackles of tyrannical government, would be a little more conducive to Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

And Western MA? Right in my area. I'm just outside of Springfield. Hence the need to carry.

Madcap_Magician
May 3, 2013, 04:01 PM
The Shield is the clear choice there unless the smaller size is the most important factor. It is easier to shoot.

The Kahrs are fine guns, but the steel-frame ones have a reputation for reliability, whereas the polymer ones have had a few more hiccups. Odds are still good that yours would be fine, of course.

Plus, right now it's much harder to get a Shield than a PM9. If you get the Shield and don't like it, you can trade or sell it easily for more than you paid and get a PM9.

AWCherry
May 3, 2013, 04:16 PM
The Shield is definitely a better deal, and I feel myself now leaning in that direction. Since I can't do anything but wait at this point, I'll just continue to scrounge 9mm ammo where I can, and hope that the wait time isn't too extensive.

Thanks to all for the input, and I welcome any other thoughts or comments on either firearm.

340PD
May 3, 2013, 05:36 PM
I have, and carry both. Your answer totally depends on the trigger system you prefer. The Kahr has a long smooth trigger much like a super slick DA revolver. The Shield trigger is more like the standard Glock system. The Kahr is a lot smaller and is much easier to conceal than the Shield. I shoot both with equal accuracy. I have not had any feeding issues with either gun and I shoot handloads with a variety of powders. If the Kahr has any quirks, just go over to the Kahrtalk forum and you will find all the answers you need to get it exactly the way you want it. I do like the safety on the Shield as I can rack the slide with the safety on. Small sense of security the Kahr does not have.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t320/gnystrom_photos/KahrShield-1.jpg

AWCherry
May 3, 2013, 06:52 PM
I have, and carry both. Your answer totally depends on the trigger system you prefer. The Kahr has a long smooth trigger much like a super slick DA revolver. The Shield trigger is more like the standard Glock system. The Kahr is a lot smaller and is much easier to conceal than the Shield. I shoot both with equal accuracy. I have not had any feeding issues with either gun and I shoot handloads with a variety of powders. If the Kahr has any quirks, just go over to the Kahrtalk forum and you will find all the answers you need to get it exactly the way you want it. I do like the safety on the Shield as I can rack the slide with the safety on. Small sense of security the Kahr does not have.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t320/gnystrom_photos/KahrShield-1.jpg
Thanks for the photo comparison of your firearms! Both of them look great! I don't worry about the lack of a safety on the Kahr. Massachusetts wouldn't be doing its job if it wasn't protecting me from myself at every opportunity. MA-Compliant models not only have a safety and a loaded chamber indicator, but half of the instruction manual is engraved on the top of the slide as well. Not gonna lie, it makes a beautiful gun border on ugly.

Here's the devil's riddle though - if you could only have one, which would it be?

sappyg
May 3, 2013, 07:24 PM
Here's the devil's riddle though - if you could only have one, which would it be?
Good question.

Have the shield 9 & A Kahr CW9. Both are excellent.

Comes down to what you like. Me. i like them both. But, if I had to choose it would be the shield. Overall it's the better value and more workman like. I have complete confidence in it. My 1st range trip the little S&W ran 140 rounds of the cheap stuff like a pro and made me look way better than I am. Absolutely no break in.

SDGlock23
May 3, 2013, 07:37 PM
I've shot a Shield 9mm and owned a PM9 and the cheaper CM9. The Shield is bigger obviously but it shot great. Between the PM9 and CM9, I'd get the CM9 and save some big money, there's very little difference. All of them shoot great, but because of it's size I lean towards the Kahr, but the Shield was nice too, just bigger.

Beentown
May 3, 2013, 07:52 PM
I would get the Shield just for the price. But for me I preferred the Kahrs. I have owned about every micro 9 and the Kahrs just can't be beat for me.

Grmlin
May 3, 2013, 08:22 PM
Looked at a shield and they wanted $530 for it. that's $100 over S&W listed retail price.

I have cousins that live just outside of Springfield, I grew up in Greenfield and left just after graduating as I lived in other places I learned how restrictive Ma was. Like you said, we went to war when the Brits tried to hold us down and tried to confiscate our guns.

340PD
May 3, 2013, 08:40 PM
You are putting me on the spot, but considering small semi autos are to be hidden, I would keep the Kahr and sell the Shield. I carried a hammerless snubbie most of the time and the Kahr is pretty much the same trigger system. I have a very thin horsehide pocket holster and the Kahr will carry very comfortably in a pair of lightweight wool dress pants with no printing.. It wins over the Shield for my needs. My Shield cost me $399 and I have added Ameriglo sights and an apex sear. The Kahr with night sights & an extra mag (three total) ran me $550 NIB delivered under a NRA instructor program direct buy from Kahr, so I have about the same amount in each gun.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t320/gnystrom_photos/back.jpg

Now just to confuse you more, here is my PM9 laying directly on top of my Kimber Ultra CDP II.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t320/gnystrom_photos/KahrvsKimber.jpg

hardluk1
May 3, 2013, 09:19 PM
You know the pm9 is a different size of pistol compared to the sheild. The PM9 is a pocket pistol size for many, The sheild is not. Kahrs CW/P pistols are a tiny bit shorter , and lighter and with a metal mag base its the same height as a sheild. The CW9 sells for around 375 here and will feel the same as your pm9. Nothing new to learn , same feel if something larger is needed.

jfrey
May 3, 2013, 10:35 PM
Here's my experience: Had a Kahr CW9 and traded it on a G19. Got a Shield and I'm keeping it. Nothing really wrong with the CW9 but the G19 is more reliable. Shield has been 100% since the first round. What else can I say?

CSG
May 3, 2013, 11:08 PM
The G19 may be the most perfect 9mm ever made. I have its big brother and used to have its little brother. I don't get one because it's bigger than I want as a carry gun but they are simply great shooters.

Dean1818
May 4, 2013, 08:49 AM
I had a CM9 (same gun as PM9, minus a few features)

I have a Shield in 40


CM9

Likes
Thin
Light

Dislikes
200 round breakin
Loading bullet with slide stop
Trip to kahr to get it right
Exposed spring on slide stop is a bad design
For me, an accurate double tap was difficult with the very long trigger and reset
(The trigger is smooth)

The kahr is pocketable by some


The Shield to me is the perfect IWB pistol

Good trigger and reset
Thin, light
Great ergos
Feels "right" in the hand

The Shield is my EDC

The kahr is a good pistol, but to me the Shield is better

Al Thompson
May 4, 2013, 09:32 AM
FWIW, my Shield fits in my pocket (cargo pants) just fine. I've also had zero issues in the two years I've had it and accuracy is outstanding! :)

OilyPablo
May 4, 2013, 10:01 AM
In person the Shield is much larger than the CM9. CM9 is way easier to carry in pocket.

As others have said, the Kahr is not just a gun you buy and carry - you really must practice with the gun and the trigger. It's not a Glock slap trigger, it takes a smooth disciplined stroke. But one you have it down, it's great.

I like the trigger, action and feel of my P238 better than both, but it's just a wimpy .380, but it's really is very pocket-able.

AND I still like my XDs .45 much better than all of the above. Best trigger, most accurate, .45ACP, best ergo feel.

Racinbob
May 4, 2013, 10:50 AM
I had a PM9 and never trusted it. After almost 400 rounds I never had a full magazine go through it without some kind of failure. Back to Kahr it went. All I can say is that their turn around was great. But.....it was even worse when I got it back. I refused to send it back because Kahr refused to cover the shipping to them. It cost me about $60.00 the first time and I wasn't about to do it again. I sold it at a gun show letting the buyer know the entire story. He simply said "I can fix it". Fine. I now have a 9mm Shield and it's been 100%reliable from day one.

AOK
May 4, 2013, 11:22 AM
I shot both and both are excellent firearms. For me it came down to how I was carrying. Since I was carrying it as a BUG and I wanted it to go in my reaction side front pocket I went with the Kahr. While I could get the Shield in my pocket I couldn't draw it reliably. With that said, if I were going to carry on my belt, I'd probably go with the Shield.

Cokeman
May 5, 2013, 05:04 AM
The Shields have had issues too. Many have had problems returning to battery and not extracting. The dots also fall out of the sights. I have a Shield and a Kahr P380 which has the same trigger as the PM9. I have only shot 100 rounds out of the Shield, but I like the Kahr trigger better. Things might change. I will be keeping both.

blitztech
May 5, 2013, 11:22 AM
I have a PM9. Granted I haven't put thousands of rounds thru it but I've never had any failures of any kind, not even thru the break-in period. Its a solid gun and the trigger on it gives me better accuracy than any pistol I've owned previously. The one thing I don't like about it is the stipling on the grip. It eats in to my hands when I'm shooting hot loads and I can see all the marks in my skin afterwards. Its extremely accurate, especially considering that super short barrel. However, I have no experience with the Shield, though at that price I'd buy one up without hesitation

CSG
May 5, 2013, 12:42 PM
A Hogue Handall Jr. will take care of the grip issues on the PM9 if they're a bother to you.

Lj1941
May 5, 2013, 01:40 PM
Go for the Shield and don't look back. That is an excellent deal and you will love the S & W.:)

AWCherry
May 5, 2013, 01:43 PM
Thanks for all the replies! It seems like a pretty divided crowd, which is a good thing, since it seems like I can't go wrong with either. I'm now leaning more towards the Shield, the price is really tipping the battle in its favor. Since I'm waiting on both of them to come in, I've got a little more time to think. Thanks to everyone again, your comment and insights are very much appreciated.

wow6599
May 5, 2013, 02:07 PM
This reminds me of folks that wouldn't normally buy a 1911, but since Ruger makes one, now they will. The folks that think S&W, Ruger, Colt, Winchester, etc. are the only quality firearms manufactures.....or the "Moonie" association.

Hold, pocket and shoot each one; it's the only way to know which one you like better - and that's what counts.

Me? I'll keep my PM9 over the Shield due to it's trigger (yes, I've shot the Shield many times) and smaller size.

KTXdm9
May 5, 2013, 09:48 PM
The Shield is a no-brainer at that price. I'm also not a big fan of Kahr's break-in period. The Shield was GTG right out of the box, and I much prefer the shorter take-up and reset of the Shield to the long pull of the Kahr.

CSG
May 6, 2013, 12:50 AM
Yeah, the stated Kahr break-in is a joke. A gun should be good to go out of the box and get better not require 200 rounds to break it in. In my case, Kahr ended up spending the ammo as they fired over 250 rounds during its two trips back to Kahr according to the paperwork. Since the gun came back the second time it's been fine.

LightningMan
May 7, 2013, 08:38 PM
FWIW, I have a Kahr PM9, P40, & a P380 which none of them have had to be "broken in" just lucky I guess. I have heard that if you do need a break-in period, you don't nessarily need to shoot them to break them in, as you can work the slide a few hundred times instead. Its because the recoil spring is so tight when new. With all that said, I still would like to buy a Shield, but I'm in no hurry as I have & carry 99% of the time, a M&P.40 compact, which IMO would be last pistol I'd sell if I needed to. LM

Armedleprechaun
May 7, 2013, 09:33 PM
Shield all day long!!

CZguy
May 8, 2013, 12:41 AM
I think that it might come down to what type of trigger that you prefer. I'm an old revolver guy so the Kahr trigger is very easy for me to shoot well.

I understand that the Shield trigger is much better than the rest of the M&P series. But for me to shoot my M&P .357 Sig well, I had to put the Ajax trigger and trigger kit in. Now it has a 1911 feeling trigger and I really like shooting it.

Hunter991
May 8, 2013, 09:58 AM
I have a kahr cw9 and cm9. I was originally looking for a Sheild but ended up with kahr. Quite glad it worked out this way. Not because the Sheild is junk, I am sure it's great just can't find one anywhere. But the kahr is smaller (cm) by a lot. I can carry it IWB or pocket and its great. The cw is the same size as the Sheild. Both ny kahrs have been perfect. I just work the slide a hundred times and its broke in. Never had an Ftf on either of them. The kahr is also thinner.

Roadking Rider
May 8, 2013, 10:13 AM
I own a PM9 and had a Shield on order. Between the time I ordered the Shield and the time it came in I had the chance to shoot one. It was a nice pistol but it wasn't anything I wanted to trade my PM9 or G26 for. First off it was bigger then my PM9. It's about the same sizes as my Glock 26 but thinner.
The trigger was ok on the Shield but I'm kind of liking of the long and butter smooth trigger pull on the PM9. Between the PM9 which has been my EDC for a couple years and the Glock 26 which is a sometimes carry and carries 11 rounds I really didn't have a need for the Shield so I told the GS to give it to the next guy on the list. Good gun I guess? We'll have to see what the long term reviews tell us about just how good. I wish them well.

Fishbed77
May 8, 2013, 10:36 AM
The Shield is bigger obviously but it shot great. Between the PM9 and CM9, I'd get the CM9 and save some big money, there's very little difference. All of them shoot great, but because of it's size I lean towards the Kahr, but the Shield was nice too, just bigger.

This is my experience as well. Personally, I own a CM9, and it is a fantastic little pistol. It has been 100% reliable with every type of ammo I've tried. It never needed a break-in period - it has worked flawlessly from the first shot.

Also, I have no problem racking the slide to chamber a round. I've never needed to lock the slide back first.

Madcap_Magician
May 8, 2013, 11:05 AM
I think the Shield is more comparable to the CW9/P9 than it is to the CM9/PM9.

And that's not a bad thing.

wow6599
May 8, 2013, 03:27 PM
For all of you "complaining" about the break-in period of Kahr, am I to assume you don't shoot a few hundred rds through your carry guns before trusting your life to them?

Just wondering.......

Roadking Rider
May 8, 2013, 04:45 PM
Agree I always have to laugh when I hear people complaining about a break in period. Exactly what is required loading the pistol aiming it at a target and squeezing the trigger a couple hundred times. I mean it not like your not going to do that anyway. So what's the difference what you call it. Buying any pistol off the counter and using to defend your or loved ones life without a break in period could prove to be very costly, and not very smart.

Aahzz
May 8, 2013, 10:41 PM
Agree I always have to laugh when I hear people complaining about a break in period. Exactly what is required loading the pistol aiming it at a target and squeezing the trigger a couple hundred times. I mean it not like your not going to do that anyway. So what's the difference what you call it. Buying any pistol off the counter and using to defend your or loved ones life without a break in period could prove to be very costly, and not very smart.

What's the difference? If the manufacturer declares a "break-in period", I have to fire 200 rounds WITH malfunctions before I can actually test the gun. I like 3-400 malfunction-free rounds before carrying. Thus, with a Kahr, I have to fire 5-600 rounds before I trust it. Or, if there's a malfunction on round 298, I have to send it in and start over. Given current ammo costs, that's not a cheap proposition.

It's possible to make a firearm that's reliable out of the box. S&W does it, Glock does it, Ruger does it, etc. My Shield has eaten everything I have fed it, and I do trust it completely.

Madcap_Magician
May 9, 2013, 01:36 AM
For all of you "complaining" about the break-in period of Kahr, am I to assume you don't shoot a few hundred rds through your carry guns before trusting your life to them?

Just wondering.......

I like Kahr guns. But I will still gripe about the break-in period for the same reason I gripe about sharp edges on Colt 1911s. Because they're the only company for which this is apparently a problem. I buy a S&W, a Springfield Armory, a Glock, a Sig, a Beretta, a what have you, and I can be reasonably sure that it will go BANG when I pull the trigger and not go BANG if I don't. Right out of the box. On the Colts, no other company at any price range regularly sharpens the edges of their guns. Even the Armscor guns for half the price don't have edges as sharp.

Why is it so hard to make a gun that works fine out of the box? I understand the occasional lemon makes it through everyone's QC process, but "Just deal with the malfunctions until it comes right" does not seem to be acceptable to me these days.

With Kahr's steel guns this does not seem to be an issue, but the P9 I owned needed 250 rounds of at least one malfunction per magazine before it 'came right' and worked reliably.

And then the problem is... if it malfunctioned a lot in the beginning, how can you really trust that it won't start malfunctioning again? I understand this can be said of guns that have run flawlessly as well, but it would always be more worrisome to me with a gun that started out troublesome.

Fishbed77
May 9, 2013, 11:15 AM
But I will still gripe about the break-in period for the same reason I gripe about sharp edges on Colt 1911s. Because they're the only company for which this is apparently a problem.

I think the difference is that Kahr is one of the few firearms manufacturers that is actually honest about the break-in period. While my new CM9 worked flawlessly out-of-the box, it is not unreasonable to expect that most any mechanical device (be it a car or a gun or a tool, or whatever) needs a break-in period before it operates to maximum efficiency.

It's funny that Kahr takes so much heat for actually stating that in the manual.

SDGlock23
May 9, 2013, 11:50 AM
I would point out that with the 6 or 7 Kahrs I've owned, none actually needed the break in period to be reliable. My routine was when I first got it I broke it down, cleaned and lubed it, and hand racked the slide (not slow, fairly fast) about 500 times to loosen up the tight RSA and then fire away...never a problem with any of them. That also happens to be my 1911 break in too, it works.

Madcap_Magician
May 9, 2013, 12:01 PM
I think the difference is that Kahr is one of the few firearms manufacturers that is actually honest about the break-in period. While my new CM9 worked flawlessly out-of-the box, it is not unreasonable to expect that most any mechanical device (be it a car or a gun or a tool, or whatever) needs a break-in period before it operates to maximum efficiency.

It's funny that Kahr takes so much heat for actually stating that in the manual.

I give them respect for stating the need for break-in in the manual. But why is it their guns need a break-in period at all? Every other comparable new gun I've had has worked 100% out of the box.

Fishbed77
May 9, 2013, 12:25 PM
I give them respect for stating the need for break-in in the manual. But why is it their guns need a break-in period at all? Every other comparable new gun I've had has worked 100% out of the box.

As both SDGklock23 and I noted, our Kahrs did not need any break-in period to be reliable.

My guess is that the recommendation in the manual is there as a bit of a CYA measure for Kahr. Unlike many manufacturers, Kahr produces pistols that are designed solely for self-defense (i.e., none of their products are "range toys" or target guns). They know what people will be using their products for, and it makes sense to them to convey this common-sense information in the manual, since ALL defensive guns should be properly vetted with a break-in period before they are carried.

MICHAEL T
May 9, 2013, 12:35 PM
KAHR wins I wouldn't trade mine for a S&W Shield . Get the Kahr

j frame
May 9, 2013, 01:38 PM
Toss up for me; handled both this week. I'll probably get a NIB Shield from a friend who bought it last week, then had some remorse because he likes his CM9 better. I admit the Kahr trigger is great, but I like the Shield. Either is a belt gun for me anyway; I carry an LCP in the pocket, and occasionally, a j frame Centennial, but the Centennial has a tendency to hang out of the top of the pocket of the pants I wear most, and that is with almost ANY pocket holster.

mdauben
May 9, 2013, 03:18 PM
She knows I work for the local sheriff's department, and lets me in on S&W's deal for law enforcement: $320 for the M&P Shield in 9mm, 2 mags, and the law-enforcement trigger kit (as opposed to the horrific MA 10lb trigger).
Yeah, I really like Kahr pistols, but I'd be all over a deal like that! ;)

Roadking Rider
May 11, 2013, 02:44 PM
My PM9 Shot flawlessly for shot #1. Now about 2000 rounds later it still shoots flawlessly. I choose to break all my pistols in slowly where I'll shoot 50 rounds through it. Then field strip it down, clean and lube, and do it all over again till I'm comfortable that the gun is OK to carry. I really don't care how long it takes I'm not in a hurry. I like to get the feel of the pistol and how it shoots and what the insides of the gun look like and check for unusual wear marks before I'll carry it for SD.( all mine get carried at one time or another)The fact that Kahr recommends a 200 round break in period means nothing to me because I do it to all my pistols anyway with out there telling me I should. I don't care if my pistol is a full size to a pocket carry, poly or steel, hammer or striker fired they all get broken in the same way..

Big20
May 12, 2013, 10:44 PM
Picked up the Shield, too tall, gritty trigger. Have a cw-9, loved it's easy carry features. Bought a cm-9 when they came out and it is the easiest to carry 9mm I've found. Reliability with both Kahrs has been 100 percent. Yes, the trigger takes practice to be accurate with. I did an overload boo boo with the cw-9 and Kahr service was great.

Dr_B
June 4, 2013, 07:09 PM
Go with the Shield. That is all.

Hunter991
June 4, 2013, 07:50 PM
Depends if u can conceal a Sheild. I have the kahr cm9 and love it. Bought it over a Sheild and never looked back. Easier to conceal and high quality. Instead of the pm look at he cm. basically same gun but same price as the Sheild. And smaller.

vba
June 5, 2013, 11:10 AM
As others have stated, I bought the CM9 stripped it down, lubed and put it back together. Then I proceeded to cycle the slide hard 2 to 300 times. The gun has been reliable from the first mag.

The thing I like about Kahr is the barrel length of 3 inches (same as Shield) while having an over all length that is ~0.68" shorter than the Shield . Kahr knows how to build very compact pistols. I think the Shield is too big for such a short barrel gun.

The following link contains some great pictures of what I'm talking about:

http://mp-pistol.com/mp-shield-pistols/31353-m-p-shield-initial-thoughts-comparison-pics-lots-pics.html

Soldiernurse
June 5, 2013, 12:01 PM
I owned a CW9 and absolutely despised the trigger axn. I'm not a revolver guy. I do own a Charter Arms Pitbull .40S&W, love the cocked back single action, but admit the double axn mode makes for good practice at the range. Although, my Pitbull is not in my EDC rotation. Anyway, I digress.

I live in Texas, so MA's ignorance does not apply. I love the ergonomics of the M&P line. Although, only in the past 3-4 months has M&P finally made a more user friendly. Me M&P9C I bought used with test fire dated in 2011. Not long after a couple iterations at the range I went w/Apex DCAEK. Resulted in < 5lb trigger pull wt and more evident reset. Bought my Shield NIB $449. It had a little over 7lb trigger pull wt w/test fire date 5/8/13. So, I waited at the gun store while they R&R'd stock trigger assembly w/Apex DCAEK, as well as TruGlo TFO GRNs. The trigger wt result was to < 6lb trigger pull wt.

I don't know if an after-market trigger assembly is available for the Kahr's? I' imagine the Kahr purist will say the stock trigger assembly is just fine & leave it alone. I'd like to also mention the M&P's ergonomics & eye appeal are superior to the Kahr line.

The only Leo/Mil Blue Label firearm prices available in my area is GT Distributors. They offer a First Responder (same/similar) price on Glocks only. IMO, the OP should jump on Shield.

Spec Comparison
Kahr PM9
w/ External Safety & LCI
PM9193 (3.1" Barrel)
Black polymer frame, matte stainless slide with external safety & Loaded Chamber Indicator (LCI)
Caliber: 9mm
Operation: Trigger cocking DAO; lock breech; "Browning - type" recoil lug; passive striker block
Barrel: 3.1", polygonal rifling; 1 - 10 right-hand twist
Length OA: 5.42"
Height: 4.0"
Slide Width: .90"
Weight: Pistol 14 ounces
Mag: 1.9oz
Grips: Textured polymer
Sights: Drift adjustable, white bar-dot combat sights
Finish: Black polymer frame, matte stainless steel slide
Mag Cap: 6+1, 7+1 (mag w/ grip ext)
MSRP: $828
-----------------------------
S&W M&P Shield40
Axn: Striker Fire...
Apex DCAEK / < 6lbs Pull Wt
Barrel Length: 3.1"
Sights: TruGlo TFO GRN
Overall Length: 6.1"
Frame Width: .95
Overall Ht: 4.6
Wt: 19.0 oz
Frame Material: Polymer
Barrel/Slide Finish: Blk68 HRc
Sight Radius: 5.3
External Thumb Safety
Mag Cap: 6+1 & 7+1 (w/ext grip)
MSRP $449

bannockburn
June 5, 2013, 12:12 PM
I checked out the Shield when it first came out and felt that it was just a bit larger than my Kahr PM9. The trigger was okay but a little gritty (though it would probably smooth up a bit with use), and the design itself and the way it handled was comparable to the Kahr. If given a choice between the two I would go with the PM9 as I prefer its smaller size and ergonomics over those of the Shield.

meanmrmustard
June 5, 2013, 12:34 PM
Go with the Shield. That is all.
This.

Now, that is all.

wolf695
June 5, 2013, 12:36 PM
Get the S&W, your better off in the long run.

hardluk1
June 5, 2013, 03:21 PM
Atleast be fair in the comparison betwwen a like sized kahr and shield. The cw9 or cw40is closest to a shield in weight and size and at a cost that the same or lower. The low cost version of the smaller pm9 is the cm9 too.

OregonJohnny
June 5, 2013, 04:02 PM
AWCherry,

I've seen a few posters already mention it in this thread, but I don't think you've acknowledged it - what about the CM9? It is 95% of what the PM9 is, at half the cost. I have a CW9 and a CM9, and they have both been 100% reliable. The only things they lack from their more expensive P/PM counterparts are polygonal rifling, dovetailed front sights (although they are still replaceable), an extra magazine, nice rollmarks on the slide, and machined slide stop. None of these things has been an issue with me, especially considering the price cut you get.

Even though the CM9 pushes the "comfortably pocketable" envelope for me, it is doable. Anything bigger would be out of the question for me, and the Shield is bigger. I've never shot or even held the Shield so I can't knock anything about it.

I like the Kahr trigger. It does take a little getting used to if you've been shooting 1911s or Glocks exclusively. But it really is smooth and light. Just a long reset.

Anyway, take a look at the CM9 if you haven't already. The money you save over buying the PM9 will buy you plenty of extra magazines, a holster and ammo.

meanmrmustard
June 5, 2013, 04:19 PM
Atleast be fair in the comparison betwwen a like sized kahr and shield. The cw9 or cw40is closest to a shield in weight and size and at a cost that the same or lower. The low cost version of the smaller pm9 is the cm9 too.
If that's the case, I'd still say Shield.

Has a much nicer trigger.

arizona98tj
June 5, 2013, 04:58 PM
I'll go on records saying that my PM9 has run like a champ since I first cleaned it and fired the first magazine through it. That was hundreds of rounds ago. (no, it's not my regular range practice gun but it does see some range time)

It wouldn't surprise me in the least that the 200 round break-in period referenced by Kahr is as much intended to get the new owner accustomed to shooting a 14 oz. pistol as it is to let the parts wear in. I read the same kind of comments on the XD forums where new XD-S (very small single stack .45ACP) owners had issues. Just as with the PM9, I couldn't get my XD-S to malfunction no matter what I tried. It to is totally reliable as I recently passed the 600 round mark with it.

It is easy to get a very small semi-auto to run reliably? I believe it is more of a challenge than doing so on a full size pistol. I'm still not completely sold on the fact that it is always the firearms fault. Just my opinion.....

CZguy
June 5, 2013, 06:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardluk1 View Post
Atleast be fair in the comparison betwwen a like sized kahr and shield. The cw9 or cw40is closest to a shield in weight and size and at a cost that the same or lower. The low cost version of the smaller pm9 is the cm9 too.

Originally posted by meanmrmustard

If that's the case, I'd still say Shield.

Has a much nicer trigger.

That's really a personal opinion. As an old revolver guy, I would rate the Kahr trigger as excellent, and the Shield trigger as acceptable.

It's not that either one of us is right or wrong. It simply comes down to what each one of us prefer.

Soldiernurse
June 5, 2013, 06:25 PM
That's really a personal opinion. As an old revolver guy, I would rate the Kahr trigger as excellent, and the Shield trigger as acceptable.

It's not that either one of us is right or wrong. It simply comes down to what each one of us prefer.
Have you fired a Shield? I like your reference to your a long time revolver guy, which IMO validates your Kahr preference. I say that since I'm not a revolver guy, do own a Charter Arms Pitbull .40S&W that's been very reliable & kicks like a mule, and appreciate my Shield .40S&W.

meanmrmustard
June 5, 2013, 06:52 PM
That's really a personal opinion. As an old revolver guy, I would rate the Kahr trigger as excellent, and the Shield trigger as acceptable.

It's not that either one of us is right or wrong. It simply comes down to what each one of us prefer.
To assume that a creepier trigger with a less clean break is good because you're a revolver guy is the other end of that spectrum.

Not only does the Shield in many opinions have the best factory trigger that Smith offers in a semiauto, you'd be hard pressed to make a case for Kahr.

I find the ridiculously heavy DA triggers of wheel guns to be unnecessary and strictly nostalgic. Comparing your experience with revolver triggers to that of a DAO semiauto adds little to comparison. In Smith versus Kahr, if you told me you preferred the Kahr trigger over that of the Shield line, I'd have an idea you were assimilating your opinion rather than weight of pull, travel, break, and reset...things that aren't subjective.

arizona98tj
June 5, 2013, 10:31 PM
My Kahr PM9 has a stock trigger that measured 5 lb, 8.5 oz. this past weekend. (was comparing it against a friends new pistol)

For a semi-auto that has no safety of any kind which I have for CCW, I don't see a single problem with a 5 1/2 pound exceptionally smooth trigger.

Soldiernurse
June 5, 2013, 11:03 PM
My Kahr PM9 has a stock trigger that measured 5 lb, 8.5 oz. this past weekend. (was comparing it against a friends new pistol)

For a semi-auto that has no safety of any kind which I have for CCW, I don't see a single problem with a 5 1/2 pound exceptionally smooth trigger.
I'm no Kahr expert but maybe yours is an outlier? It is my understanding Kahr triggers are around 7-7.5# trigger weight & 3/8" trigger travel. More times than not, a Kahr trigger is alot heavier than a Glock NIB trigger. Your trigger may well be smooth, but you cannot rebut the fact of a looong trigger pull.

meanmrmustard
June 5, 2013, 11:06 PM
I'm no Kahr expert but maybe yours is an outlier? It is my understanding Kahr triggers are around 7-7.5# trigger weight & 3/8" trigger travel. More times than not, a Kahr trigger is alot heavier than a Glock NIB trigger. Your trigger may well be smooth, but you cannot rebut the fact of a looong trigger pull.
This has been my experience as well.

Minus the smooth part. Nominally, the Kahr trigger for me has had a mushy break. Pull was not horrible, just not crisp and surprising once the trigger had finished its travel.

CZguy
June 6, 2013, 12:04 AM
originally posted by Soldiernurse,

Have you fired a Shield? I like your reference to your a long time revolver guy, which IMO validates your Kahr preference. I say that since I'm not a revolver guy, do own a Charter Arms Pitbull .40S&W that's been very reliable & kicks like a mule, and appreciate my Shield .40S&W.


Yes I've fired a Shield quite a bit. I find them to be a good carry gun with the best trigger in the M&P line. Out of the box I would rate the trigger as acceptable.

These views are subjective and based on personal opinion. I started out shooting revolvers and 1911s in the sixties. I'm comfortable with them, so while I'm able to shoot the new breed of triggers, I prefer what I can shoot the most accurately. For me, that's a Kahr P45, and a P380 on Sundays.

meanmrmustard, please note, that I didn't say that you had to agree with me, or shoot the same type of pistols well. My whole point in this discussion, is that trigger pulls are purely based on what each of us shoot the best. So no one can proclaim what the best trigger is. :D

arizona98tj
June 6, 2013, 12:18 AM
Your trigger may well be smooth, but you cannot rebut the fact of a looong trigger pull.

I thought I made myself quite clear...since my PM9 has NO safety, I like the tigger just the way it is....and that includes the fact that it is DAO. So yes, it has a longer pull....and I LIKE THAT too. Put a thumb safety on it and I can't think of a reason to have a long trigger pull.

shooter60
June 6, 2013, 12:45 AM
I bought my wife and daughter a S&W M&P 9c because we could not find a Shield and they like the feel of them just a little bigger than the Shield but put the small back strap in and fits there hands great

meanmrmustard
June 6, 2013, 07:25 AM
meanmrmustard, please note, that I didn't say that you had to agree with me, or shoot the same type of pistols well. My whole point in this discussion, is that trigger pulls are purely based on what each of us shoot the best. So no one can proclaim what the best trigger is. :D

Sure, I can. Plus, I have.

I've trigger time with both guns. Odds are, someone going to purchase either of these two pistols is either going to learn to shoot it well or already knows the genre.

This discussion is that of one little semiauto being a better buy than another semiauto, and why. We are talking two small guns that self load, many of us use daily, and have objective information as to which is strictly better. I don't see where there's a lot of subjectivity posted yet.

My experience centers around semiautos. I've no need for revolvers, and find that their usefulness for me goes as far as handgun hunting. That being said, one would think, as far as triggers go, we would compare the trigger of these guns to each other, not give one a handicap because a poster has time behind revolver triggers. That would be subjective. It's like the S&W Sigma discussions of yore:

"The Sigma has a very gritty, heavy trigger"
"Nah, its fine."
"How do you figure?"
"I shoot revolvers, so it is a good trigger"
"...but it's a different kind of pistol."

The best "vs" threads, ones that actually work, are apples to apples.

AWCherry
June 6, 2013, 07:53 PM
AWCherry,

I've seen a few posters already mention it in this thread, but I don't think you've acknowledged it - what about the CM9? It is 95% of what the PM9 is, at half the cost. I have a CW9 and a CM9, and they have both been 100% reliable. The only things they lack from their more expensive P/PM counterparts are polygonal rifling, dovetailed front sights (although they are still replaceable), an extra magazine, nice rollmarks on the slide, and machined slide stop. None of these things has been an issue with me, especially considering the price cut you get.

Even though the CM9 pushes the "comfortably pocketable" envelope for me, it is doable. Anything bigger would be out of the question for me, and the Shield is bigger. I've never shot or even held the Shield so I can't knock anything about it.

I like the Kahr trigger. It does take a little getting used to if you've been shooting 1911s or Glocks exclusively. But it really is smooth and light. Just a long reset.

Anyway, take a look at the CM9 if you haven't already. The money you save over buying the PM9 will buy you plenty of extra magazines, a holster and ammo.
Unfortunately, the CM9 is not MA-compliant. Despite the fact that it is essentially the same gun as the PM9, our Attny General has a specific list of guns that are available for sale, and the CM9 doesn't qualify.

Unfortunately, I'm still waiting on the Shield to arrive. It's been quite some time, and I've been getting restless with it. I'm starting to the debate the merits of picking up an M&P 9c over the Shield as well. The size difference is primarily in the width, but it comes with the added advantage of a higher capacity. Since the LGS that I work with doesn't require money down, I placed an order for a 9c as well, and told them I'd pick up whatever comes in first. If it's the 9c, so be it. My father is retired military, and I can allow him to stake his claim on my Shield if/when it comes in.

Thanks to everyone for the overwhelming amount of replies and information. Despite the differences of opinion in what constitutes the better choice, everyone has made excellent points, and I appreciate it.

hardluk1
June 7, 2013, 02:36 PM
I have 3 different model kahrs , a cm9 , cw9 and tp40 and all have a less than 6lb trigger by the time you shoot a couple hundred rounds. Hard to compare the little brick glock to kahr period. Width & weight put it in a different class with a lot of other semi-small pistols. Plus I would rather try to carry a g19 than g26 with that muched up grip hump. Even a shield be be a better choice even if a apex trigger kit is needed.

AWCherry To bad MA. is so messed up

JustinJ
June 7, 2013, 08:17 PM
It depends largely on how you plan to carry. The shield, i believe, is really stretching the limits of pocket carry for most. I have an LC9 and it's just barely small enough, imo, after carrying a PF9 for some time. On the other hand, the stories of Khar reliability issues would concern me as well.

Tomac
June 18, 2013, 06:31 AM
Function over form.
I own both a S&W M&P9c & Kahr CM9. The 9c has APEX parts and thumb safety (which I wanted due to the very light APEX trigger).
The 9c is my preferred CCW due to capacity.
However, there are times when I simply can't carry the 9c and that's when the CM9 steps up to bat w/a Covert Carrier for holsterless carry.
Although I don't have anywhere near as many rds through the new CM9 as the 9c, it's been 100% reliable so far w/both 115 & 147gr loads.
Despite the CM9's DAO-like trigger, short grip & short sight radius, I can consistently hit coke cans at 10yds which is much better than I was expecting from such a small pistol.
IMHO the 9c makes the better all-around pistol but the CM9 conceals much easier.
Tomac

BLB68
June 18, 2013, 07:57 AM
I can't speak to the Kahr, so I'll just comment on my Shield 9mm.

When I first got it, the trigger was excessively gritty, to the point that I thought I'd been mis-shipped a MA compliant trigger. I called S&W to check the s/n, and it wasn't. And, yes, this was after a thorough cleaning before firing.

On the advice of my local gunsmith, I decided to just keep shooting and cleaning it and see how the trigger breaks in. He was of the opinion that the Shields don't really need a trigger job.

After 420 rounds (400 random assortment of range ammo, as I could find it, the other 20 Federal Hydra-Shok standard pressure), the trigger has improved significantly, but still has a bit of gritty feel.

So, I think on the issue of a break in period, it's a wash. If you get lucky, you won't need one with either gun. Otherwise, you will. Plus, as someone noted, it's not like you're going to buy a gun and not shoot it.

On reliability. I had two FTEs in the first 250 rounds. Both were with 115 grain FMJ loads, one S&B, one Magtech. Both were while firing unsupported strong hand. I don't believe either was due to limp wristing, as I've put quite a few magazines through with both hands unsupported, and I'd expect to see limpwristing sooner in the off hand. I suspect it was a combination of fairly light loads and new springs.

I haven't had any issues since then, regardless of ammo type, so I'm putting those down to break in or shooter error (though I won't admit to the latter, of course).

The smaller Kahr will of course be a lot more pocketable, as others have noted. I carry the Shield in the side pocket of my Columbia fleece jacket liner. Fits fine in there, but I wouldn't want to try to pocket carry it in jeans pockets. (Maybe cargo pants or hiking pants.) It's great for IWB carry, where the size difference is much less of an issue.

The gun is accurate, when the trigger is behaving. I suspect the mechanical accuracy is far better than what I've seen so far.

My only gripe aside from the rough trigger from the factory is the sights. They just plain suck. The front sight is, IMO, the important one, and it has a smaller, duller dot on it than the rear sights. It's not quick to pick up, which is a drawback. I'm thinking of getting some XS Sights to replace the cheap factory ones.

1911austin
June 18, 2013, 04:51 PM
The answer to your question is the Sig Arms P938.

CZguy
June 18, 2013, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by BLB68

On the advice of my local gunsmith, I decided to just keep shooting and cleaning it and see how the trigger breaks in. He was of the opinion that the Shields don't really need a trigger job.


I agree. For a range gun, I put an Apex trigger and kit in my M&P. But for self defense the Shield trigger is just fine.

wow6599
June 18, 2013, 11:57 PM
The answer to your question is the Sig Arms P938.

Didn't know this was in the running......guess I should pay closer attention?

Al Thompson
June 20, 2013, 06:38 PM
My Shield is a year or so old. My buddy just got one and the newer guns seem to have better triggers.

If you enjoyed reading about "Faced with dilemma (M&P Shield 9mm vs. Kahr PM9)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!