Total Disappointment

[Armybrat]

The tiny CW380 & P380 apparently have had teething problems for a lot of owners, so that's why I bought the somewhat larger CT380. Great little gun that eats everything except for WWB. I carry it with Hornady Critical defense.

If the OP didn't follow the usual Kahr "break in" routine (racking slide a few hundred times, thorough cleaning & then lube, 200 rounds down range), then it wouldn't surprise me if it got off to a horrible start. Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if it did the same even after following all the recommended steps.

Send that jamomatic back in to see if they'll make it work.

My PM9 & CW45 haven't had any problems, and am hoping the new CW9 runs good whenever it finally gets to the range.

 

[bannockburn]

I bought a new Kahr CW40 about 10 or 11 years ago. Had considerable problems with it even after the 200 round break-in period had been completed. Also pieces of the polymer frame came off making me think that maybe Kahr was having quality control issues with their product line. Ended up selling it to a guy who wanted one and was willing to work on it even after I had explained all of the issues I had with it. Waited a number of years before I started looking at Kahrs again and eventually picked up a CM9. Liked the size, weight, DAO trigger, and ergonomics. Quality must have improved since the last time I had one because this gun is very well built and is a solid performer.

Maybe the .380 version just doesn't translate well enough to the Kahr design format.

 

[Nuclear]

Kahr seems to have an issue with initial releases of calibers other than 9mm. I say this as an owner of a Kahr P9 that is my EDC.

 

[likesguns]

My CW380 had similar issues when it was new,I sent it back to Kahr,they replaced the recoil springs and re-worked the extractor and it has been flawless ever since.
I carry it with confidence now.

 

[Malamute]

...I also found some posters went around the internet making duplicate posts. As far as I can see, there IS some deliberate posting to trash Kahr, and the first thing that is common is when a post is made before the maker has had a chance to affect a repair.

It's very much an issue on forums - most that conduct themselves along a higher road of responsibility suggest to get it back and then see if the complaint is resolved, first, before posting about it. At that point, let the chips fall where they may.

I don't see justification in the outrage when due diligence is what is professed. Absent the makers repair or replacement it constitutes a drive by posting. Had this been a report of the gun still malfunctioning after repair - then disappointment would be expected...

^^^ This. One forum has a policy of no complaints about a gun problem/warranty issue before contacting the company and getting them to deal with it, if not so done, the thread is locked. Its a no go until first things are done in proper order. Seems like a good policy.

 

[jdc1244]

The problem is we all own pistols that don’t require a "break in" routine.

We own pistols that run fine out of the box with both range and self-defense ammo.

Until we buy a Kahr – in my case a CT380.

 

[1911 guy]

Sucks to shell out money for anything and it doesn't work as advertised or expected.

I'm just rolling the thought around in my head if this is a bit of a self-made problem. The market (we gun owners) are asking for smaller guns and match grade accuracy. Smaller guns have more critical timing. But we want them "tight", often in the areas that don't matter but we can check them easily and feel like we got something. And thus sacrifice the reliability that might found.

Firearm manufacturing is a competitive business, much more than when our only options were Remington, Winchester, Smith & Wesson, Colt, the occasional Marlin and the scattering (pun intended) of various shotguns. Now we have more choices than any of us could have anticipated a couple decades ago. Everybody is looking for the leg up on the competition and marketing is easier to do than manufacturing. Easier to fix a problem after the customer does the testing and evaluation, as well as far less expensive than paying actual engineers

Not going to be dogmatic about this theory. I feel for the O.P. But i see and hear a lot of people buying micro guns, which have been historically hit or miss, then we're surprised when they're it or miss. Marketing tells us otherwise, but both history and current experience tells us that the "little gun" role was filled by revolvers for a reason.

Hope the O.P. has a quick and happy resolution to this.

 

[Speedo66]

Obviously, a bad product can ruin a reputation pretty quickly, just look at the Remington fiasco. Although they had a good head start with their Remlins.

Probably a better scenario is to copy an existing design that works well, like say Ruger with their LCP and the Kel-tec P3AT. lol

Good luck with your repair.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Kahr makes phenomenal carry pistols.

Did you call them about the issues? Kahr WILL make it right for you, they are great folks to do business with, and their products are second to none.

 

[Dudedog]

I have a Kahr P380.
OK with factory Federal FMJ when new, but would not function with any of my reloads unless they were close or at MAX charges.
After about 500 rounds it loosened up and is a lot less picky now.Started getting better after about 200 rounds.

 

[Hokkmike]

From the manual
BREAK-IN PERIOD The KAHR Pistol must run through an initial break-in period before achieving fully reliable feeding and functioning. The pistol should not be considered fully reliable until after it has fired 200 rounds

I understand what you are saying but why don't THEY break it in before selling? Where else can you buy a product that brand new that is not ready for use? Imagine buying a car, toaster, microwave, tire, hearing aid, or any other product that is not fully reliable until it has been used for a while.

 

[JONWILL]

I understand what you are saying but why don't THEY break it in before selling? Where else can you buy a product that brand new that is not ready for use? Imagine buying a car, toaster, microwave, tire, hearing aid, or any other product that is not fully reliable until it has been used for a while.

I agree it is total BS. Ammo is going to cost you $60 for 200 rounds.

 

[jdc1244]

^^^ This. One forum has a policy of no complaints about a gun problem/warranty issue before contacting the company and getting them to deal with it, if not so done, the thread is locked. Its a no go until first things are done in proper order. Seems like a good policy.

But sending a gun back should not be a normal experience of ownership; it's an aberration.

 

[Malamute]

Yes, I agree it shouldnt be considered common, but thats not the issue, the issue is not publicly flogging a company before they get a chance to address the problem with the gun or parts, however they choose to do so. Just running them down with them not having any chance to address the problem isnt helpful. They may be very receptive to dealing with it, and virtually all gun makers have problems of some sort, but by then some of the damage may be done, and, sometimes people dont came back and give details of how their interaction with the company went, just leaving the negative out there hanging, and incorrectly giving a bad impression. Its more like lynch mob mentality than productive problem solving.

 

[71velle]

Yes, I agree it shouldnt be considered common, but thats not the issue, the issue is not publicly flogging a company before they get a chance to address the problem with the gun or parts, however they choose to do so. Just running them down with them not having any chance to address the problem isnt helpful. They may be very receptive to dealing with it, and virtually all gun makers have problems of some sort, but by then some of the damage may be done, and, sometimes people dont came back and give details of how their interaction with the company went, just leaving the negative out there hanging, and incorrectly giving a bad impression. Its more like lynch mob mentality than productive problem solving.

I agree if a thread is started the OP should respond with resolution. The more detail the better. I had a Ruger 22/45 that would not run out of the box, constant jams. I called Ruger and they were great telling me to send it in and get fixed up. Form what I read on the forums is that the extractor is commonly the problem for the symptoms I had. I decided to by a aftermarket extractor instead of sending it in, thought is was easier than dealing with shipping a pistol. The extractor worked great, Im not down on Ruger since they were willing to take care of it. Point of the story is that when people complete their threads it helps those down the road, also gives a fair story on the dealing with a product.

Sorry to the OP for you thread getting sidetracked, and this post has NOTHING to do with the OP.

 

[Jeff22]

One of my friends bought a very slightly used Kahr CW9 and he had a bunch of problems with malfunctions because sometimes the slide wouldn't go all the way into battery.

I borrowed it and lubed it up good with Slip 2000 and shot about 300 rnds of NATO spec 124 grn ball through it and the problem went away. That gun has a 7 round magazine -- to begin with I only loaded 5 and then 6 rounds in the magazine, and that seemed to help until the gun was broken in.

I have a P9 I bought new in 2000 and a K9 and T9 that I bought in recent years (got a good deal from friends who were standardizing on Glocks) and I didn't have that problem with any of those guns (of course two of them were purchased used).

A friend has a CW380 that he got used and when he first got it he down loaded the mags by one until the gun was broken in. Researching on some of the other forums reveals this to be a persistent issue.

 

[golfer_ray]

You may laugh at me (I do anyway) in that I had a CZ 75B compact a few years ago that I traded for a Kahr (I don't remember the model), but I wanted a lighter carry pistol. As I eventually came back to own two other CZ's, that wasn't my best trade. Anyway, that Kahr jammed all the time & I sent it back to Kahr, and a Kahr gunsmith called me and commented that Kahr's were "funny little guns", so when I got it back, it was gone soon afterwards.

So, for whatever reason, I did purchase a CW380 a couple of years ago. It honestly performed well for me besides one FTE, but the slide was stiff to rack, & I'm getting older, so I traded it off for something else. But it was very accurate.

 

[jdc1244]

Yes, I agree it shouldnt be considered common, but thats not the issue, the issue is not publicly flogging a company before they get a chance to address the problem with the gun or parts, however they choose to do so. Just running them down with them not having any chance to address the problem isnt helpful. They may be very receptive to dealing with it, and virtually all gun makers have problems of some sort, but by then some of the damage may be done, and, sometimes people dont came back and give details of how their interaction with the company went, just leaving the negative out there hanging, and incorrectly giving a bad impression. Its more like lynch mob mentality than productive problem solving.

Again, the issue is that a firearm should function properly out of the box, no ‘sending back’ to the manufacturer required, no 'second chance' is warranted – an expectation that is neither naïve nor unrealistic.

And when a new firearm fails to function properly, a public flogging is perfectly appropriate.

 

[DT Guy]

Again, the issue is that a firearm should function properly out of the box, no ‘sending back’ to the manufacturer required, no 'second chance' is warranted – an expectation that is neither naïve nor unrealistic.

And when a new firearm fails to function properly, a public flogging is perfectly appropriate.

Even when all the literature and the manual describe a break-in process; seems like an interesting philosophy.

FWIW, Kahr's can be problematic; I've owned (not sure, 4-6?) through the years, and only had problems with one, a CW45; even my CW380 has been trouble-free.

A large part of the problem with Kahr pistols is that they often press against the lower size and weight limits of the cartridge they're chambered for, and that makes them finicky about ammo (they generally want full-power, self-defense level loadings) and grip; folks who have never limp-wristed a pistol before can run into limp-wristing issues with a Kahr. As we make guns smaller and lighter, their ability to shoot any type of ammo in any grip is compromised.

The CW45 I had, for instance, would function fine in a two-hand hold, but FTF fired one-handed; obviously a grip problem, even though I've never had grip issues with any of the other hundred or so pistols I've owned through the years. After going back to Kahr, it would function for me fired strong hand, but FTF fired weak-hand; again, obviously a gripping issue. I finally traded it, since it wasn't the right gun for me.

The moral of the story, I think, is when you push the envelope of a cartridge/pistol package, especially in weight, you're trading some potential reliability off for those dimensions. It's physics, and hard to engineer away.

Larry

 

[Speedo66]

I don't think we should accept the premise from manufacturers that a gun needs to be "broken in". Manufacture the gun right from the factory so that it operates, or do the requisite breaking in at the factory. A consumer should not have to be the test dummy for any product, it should work upon leaving the factory, especially a product where lives can depend upon it.

Guns used to work when new, all this breaking in nonsense is the industry attempting to let products go without spending the money for the final step of operational testing. They use sales language to make up for their deficiencies in an attempt to make the consumer think it's normal.

 

[MikeInOr]

I just purchased a CM9 2 weeks ago. I cleaned it, racked the slide a good number of times (hundred or so times). Took it out to the range and it has shot perfectly even with my wimpy reloads I use in my old WWII 9mm's.

A CW380 isn't a CM9 though. I asked all over (including this forum) about the CM9 before buying one and received very positive feedback. That doesn't mean that the CW380 is any good though... or doesn't have QC issues. I carry an LCP for a pocket gun which I purchased based on it's reputation. I guess I am saying I won't write off all Kahr products because of troubles with the CW380. I will think twice about buying a CW380 if researching them turns up a history of problems.

 

[milemaker13]

I understand what you are saying but why don't THEY break it in before selling? Where else can you buy a product that brand new that is not ready for use? Imagine buying a car, toaster, microwave, tire, hearing aid, or any other product that is not fully reliable until it has been used for a while.

New cars need to be broken in before being fully operational... New jeans benefit from some breaking in too... a toaster needs to burn off mfg oil.....Shoes.... Lots of new products need some breaking in before they're good to go. I for one don't mind doing it, especially since they noted it in the manual. Sure, its $60 or so in ammo, but otherwise that would have drivin the cost up a hundred bucks or so and I would have considered the gun used at that point.

A prime example is the new car... I don't want a 16year old Porter driving my new car around till the odometer hits 600 or whatever. I want as few miles as possible... Same with jeans, shoes and yes, even guns.

 

[d2wing]

I had the same problem with a different brand. The problem seems to be the limited space for proper springs. I sent mine back to the factory and it came back working fine. Some ship out of spec or needs a factory upgrade. Give them a chance to fix it. Many small auto pistols do require a break in period and are selective on ammo.

 

[Speedo66]

New cars need to be broken in before being fully operational... New jeans benefit from some breaking in too... a toaster needs to burn off mfg oil.....Shoes.... Lots of new products need some breaking in before they're good to go. I for one don't mind doing it, especially since they noted it in the manual. Sure, its $60 or so in ammo, but otherwise that would have drivin the cost up a hundred bucks or so and I would have considered the gun used at that point.

A prime example is the new car... I don't want a 16year old Porter driving my new car around till the odometer hits 600 or whatever. I want as few miles as possible... Same with jeans, shoes and yes, even guns.

You used to break a car in gently in an attempt to make it last longer. However, you did expect the car to perform perfectly well during that period. It's also somewhat a thing of the past, many manufacturers no longer even mention it in their owner's manuals.

 

[bgw45]

I have no issue with break-in instructions. I buy guns to shoot. iIRC I never bought a motorcycle that didn't have break-in requirements. It bothered me much more to limit the RPM on my new 160mph bike than shooting 200 rounds through a new pistol. My Les Baers need 500 rounds to break-in. Gives me time to get proficient with the weapon.
I own a CW380 and a CM9. They both have been totally reliable after the first 200. They are pocket carried daily depending on clothing pocket size. I shoot both every month. For me, they're keepers.