1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Range report PM9/SCCY CPX-1/Taurus PT111Pro

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by tango2echo, Aug 13, 2010.

  1. tango2echo

    tango2echo Well-Known Member

    A LEO friend asked me to do a review of these three at my range. They are on the list of "approved" backup pieces the are allowed to carry and I currently have access to all three. I was also looking for a 9mm compact for the wife as well.

    I didn't snap a million pics or any of the gunmag type testing like freezing in a block of ice. I just took 600 rounds of everything from 115gr FMJ to 147gr HP and back again, dumpped it all in a box, mixed it up, and planned to put 200rds through each gun without cleaning. Not scientific. Just "back porch testing."

    Well, to start with I knew nothing about the SCCY CPX-1. I had never even heard of it until a month or so ago. At first appearance it looked alittle cheesy and the slide to frame fit was pretty sloppy. Then I realized one of the two mags would not even allow a round to chamber. With the remaining mag I stepped out back to put a few rounds downrange. In the next 6 rounds the magazine dropped out 4 times. At first I thought maybe I had depressed the mag release under recoil. On closer examination I realized there wasn't even a spring in the gun to return the release to the fixed position! I made the decision to exclude the CPX-1 from further testing at this point.

    I next moved to the Taurus PT111 Pro. Now, I am not a huge fan of Taurus after having several bad experiences in the past with their 1911 clones and K-frame clones. On first inspection the gun appeared nicely made. The feed ramp was the best I've ever seen on a production gun from any maker. Perfect angle, smooth as ice on hot marble. I loaded the two mags and put 24 rnds down the pipe. Wow. I was impressed. Grouped under 6" slow fire at 30ft unsupported. No failures. Now, I will say the sights sucked. I just do not get the single dot over dot arrangement. I put 4 more mags through the Taurus before moving to the PM9.

    I have had good experiences with Kahr in the past and the PM9 didn't disappoint me. Good trigger, smooth action, nice fit to all parts. The Kahr had a much slimmer profile than the Taurus, but half the capacity. This was one of the Tridium sight models and the sights were very very good (not the Novak sights, the std 3 dot Tridiums). I put 100 rounds through it without a hiccup. Groups were in the 6-8" range at 30ft and recoil felt snappy compared to the Taurus. The Kahr had a bad habid of throwing brass vertical where it would fall into my face. (The Taurus ejected over my head the majority of the time.)

    I put the remaining rounds evenly throught the PM9 and the PT111Pro without cleaning. Neither had a malfunction of any type. Without the mixed ammo I feel I could have taken an inch off of the PM9's groups. It did very well with WWB cheap stuff and the Win PDX hp's.

    At the end of the day I give a very slight edge to the Taurus for the following reasons:

    1)Price. The Kahr is three times the price of the Taurus locally.
    2)Capacity. The Taurus holds 12+1 and the Kahr 6+1 or 7+1 with grip extensions.
    3)Ejection. The Taurus ejected spent brass perfectly, while the Kahr did the same adequately.
    4)Accuracy. While I was primarily testing function the Taurus was excellent in this reguard.

    The Kahr had the following points:

    1)Concealability. This thing is tiny!
    2)Sights. Very good with no changes needed.
    3)Fit/Finish. High quality all the way around.

    Final score in my 0-10 point scale:

    Taurus 9.5
    Kahr 9.0
    Sccy 0

    Just for the record, I bought the Kahr for the wife to play with and the Taurus has a happy new home in m Jeep. My LEO friend bought a Kahr PM40 since his issue weapon is also a .40S&W

  2. Blind Bat

    Blind Bat Well-Known Member

    Kudos on a very nice, well written review.

    Were these all 'new in the box' guns?

    Any comments on the weight, length, smoothness and rest of the triggers?
  3. tango2echo

    tango2echo Well-Known Member

    Yes, all three were NIB and unfired. The SCCY will be returned to the mfg this week.

    The trigger was "good" on the Taurus with alittle creap and over travel. I did not measure weight on any of the three. The trigger on the PM9 was smoother, but a fair bit heavier than the Taurus. Either of the two would be very suitable for the purpose of a compact 9mm. The SCCY had a very light trigger pull and the hammer strike felt soft. I did very little shooting with the SCCY due to the problems experienced, but based on what I saw I would say the trigger is "too light" and the hammer spring is likley not heavy enough. The primers were very lightly dented on the SCCY compaired to the PM9 and PT111Pro.

Share This Page