Total Disappointment

[Skylerbone]

Swampwolf, my point is that your language implies, if you read the specific quotation of yours I referenced, that we can trust those companies who don’t forewarn users to test their product before assuming it works and that companies who warn users to exercise due diligence before pressing their product into service should be blacklisted.

I’ve read a fair number of your past posts over the years and I don’t feel you’re the type who unboxes a pistol and holsters up for duty without some serious real-world run time. Furthermore, I would encourage anyone to do the same, specifically those who aren’t well versed in stoppage drills or diagnosing problems. I’d like to believe we would agree that’s just sound advice (and that is what I will call Kahr’s Owner’s Manual, which is where we seem to disagree).

Plenty of threads on THR have been dedicated to problematic micros from the Colt Defender to the Mustang, Kimber (ok Kimber everything), to the Nano and Pico. I don’t doubt that many of these designs, including the Kahr 380s are at the design limits of reliability and yet all of these manufacturers still somehow are producing enough working units to satisfy the bean counters.

I only trust what I own because those specific pistols, those samples of 1 have been thoroughly wrung out by me. Now the idea of waiting 4-6 weeks for service turn around might very well get my dander up and none of this is to say Kahr, among a plethora of others, don’t have room for improvement. My apologies if I seem argumentative, I don’t take personal anyone’s choice in where they spend money and I don’t pretend that Kahr makes the best anything. My 380 for carry is an old FEG Walther clone.

 

[SwampWolf]

Swampwolf, my point is that your language implies, if you read the specific quotation of yours I referenced, that we can trust those companies who don’t forewarn users to test their product before assuming it works and that companies who warn users to exercise due diligence before pressing their product into service should be blacklisted.

I am not looking for a debate over this question. I would always advocate that everyone test any weapon extensively for proper use before they rely on it for self-defense. There should be a caution included with any firearm that is intended for use in self-defense for the user to corroborate proper functioning before depending on it for said use.
Most gun makers don't require their customers to fire hundreds of rounds to "break-in" a pistol before you can reasonably expect it to function correctly, even though, as conceded, you probably should. Kahr and Kimber are two companies that do necessitate such protocol and that's their prerogative, of course, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a pistol to be reliable at the time of purchase and work as advertised straight from the box (the companies on my "list" can be expected to do so even though verification of same is prudent).
If the particular design or configuration of a pistol, especially if its intended use is for self-defense (as most, if not all, "micro" pistols are), have historical issues of reliability due to their shorter barrels or whatever and this potential liability is known by the maker, any maker, then I think at the very least a disclaimer explaining same should be included with every such pistol sold. It should not be incumbent on the buyer to be aware of the possibility or even probability that micro-sized pistols have a greater potential for failure when compared to their "normal" size kin. Not every buyer is an internet gun site junkie.
I've read enough of your posts over the years, Skylerbone, to respect your opinions. In this discussion, I think we've both had our say and I think valid points of view were made on both "sides". I'm not too concerned anyway-my micro carry gun is an early Colt Cobra snub nose revolver.

 

[Skylerbone]

my micro carry gun is an early Colt Cobra snub nose revolver.

Great. Now I envy you that as well and I certainly understand the validity of your point (and agree they should work straight away).

 

[George P]

I have one of Kahr's compact polymer 9mms. I followed the sticky on their site about proper prep of the pistol and it has run flawlessly without any need for a multi-hundred break-in period. No malfs of any kind. That prep protocol is very in-depth and should be followed to prevent issues.

 

[Armybrat]

I guess nothing surprises you.
.

Correct - I've followed politics pretty close for 50 years, so.......

 

[MoreIsLess]

It seems like Kahr's have more issues with certain calibers and certain calibers have less problems, 9mm being one of the ones people tend to have less issues with. I have a PM9 (9mm) and it has been flawless.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

You here so many stories on the internet and it takes off like wild fire. I bought a Khar CW 380 and listened to all the wild fires. First off, I knew the gun is built with quality. And that also meant TIGHT TOLERANCES. I expected a longer break in than other lose fitting guns. I brought the gun home. First thing id did was a good cleaning. 2) I then loaded up the mags which were stiff and let the spring "Set" for a few days as well as racked the gun and let the recoil spring set.
I then racked the slide while watching TV for about 200 time. NO BIG DEAL. Then went to the range and had almost flawless rounds fired. I did take a piece of sand paper and just barely filed down the extractor a little as it was new. Now NO problems and the gun shoots great. A really nice mild shooting 380 with a lot of quality that you will not see in guns like the LCP etc. A lot of stainless steel, stainless steel inserts on the rails to stop the cracks that you see in other guns. You can see the great machining from the manufacturer. Yes, the gun is finicky on certain ammo. For instance it does not a cartridge with a LONG OAL. Find the right ammo and you got yourself one heck of a nice gun. Great sights as well. This is NOT a aluminum "Throw away gun" like so many that are out there now. It is made to last a long time.
Who cares what Cabela's sells? I could give a F'. Most LGS do not sell a lot of guns. So what. Most of them sell to newbies anyway.
I see a lot of post here of posters that do not own the gun and love to start a lynch mob.
I am sorry that the OP has some problems. If he can have some patience, it will benefit him in the long run. If not, go get a cheap aluminum based gun that will shoot well, but eventually not last long.

What the bashers never seem to do is point out many of the good features. Like this pic below that shows the Stainless steel inserts into the rails of the grip frame stress points. Why can't the other manufactures do the same. LOL, because it cost money.
Why can't the other manufacturer actually give good sights and the ability to add night sights? Too much cost. Sorry Charlie.

 

[miamivicedade]

Like I mentioned in my original posting. I like Kahrs. The CM9 is a fantastic pistol, at least for me so far. I choose to carry it over my HKs and Glocks. My beef was with the QC of the CW380. It was painfully obvious that absolutely nobody at Kahr inspected the gun with anything more than a passing glance. Nobody should excuse that, not even the most ardent Kahr supporters. I would even venture to suspect (although I obviously can't prove it, and therefore am not stating this as a fact) that this gun showed problems during the test fire. I couldn't get rounds to chamber or fire two shots in a row. Simply put, it was the worst performing pistol I have ever seen, and I've shot many. Like I also said, in my follow up, it appears as though it may be fixed. I am able to rack the slide now, which I couldn't before. I will not know until I have time to get out to the range.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Like I mentioned in my original posting. I like Kahrs. The CM9 is a fantastic pistol, at least for me so far. I choose to carry it over my HKs and Glocks. My beef was with the QC of the CW380. It was painfully obvious that absolutely nobody at Kahr inspected the gun with anything more than a passing glance. Nobody should excuse that, not even the most ardent Kahr supporters. I would even venture to suspect (although I obviously can't prove it, and therefore am not stating this as a fact) that this gun showed problems during the test fire. I couldn't get rounds to chamber or fire two shots in a row. Simply put, it was the worst performing pistol I have ever seen, and I've shot many. Like I also said, in my follow up, it appears as though it may be fixed. I am able to rack the slide now, which I couldn't before. I will not know until I have time to get out to the range.

What ammo are you using? I need to know the OAL for starters.

 

[Paul7]

Plastic Kahrs are junk.

 

[Grapenut]

Traded my CM9 last winter. In cold weather, you could pull the trigger all the way back and the striker would not engage.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Lol, I owed a certain popular pocket gun that so many newbies rave over. Actually owned 4 of them. In the years they came out, I was on a forum and it was amazing how many problems they had. These particular guns were no where near as good as the Build quality of the Khar. My Khar CW 380 which actually is not my favorite of my Pocket guns, but still a great gun, has already run circles of the other 4 from that popular brand. Yes, the four were good guns, reliable, for the most part, that is until they were not. Cracked frames, split rails, the cheap take down pins breaking, rolling out, all kinds of failures etc. Yet, it never would get bashed. I suspect the reason was,because so many newbies would buy them and swear by them. Get to around 1500-1800 rounds and most of these guns would start folding like a cheap lawn chair. I still have one, but it rarely gets used. I know better than to push it. The Khar on the other hand will be shooting for a long time.

 

[miamivicedade]

What ammo are you using? I need to know the OAL for starters.

I've used a lot of ammo types. I just got a Glock 43, so I may be heading in that direction.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

I have a P380 that seemed awful when it was new. It wouldn't run S&B or Fiocchi at all. Remington UMC was mildly better but still not acceptable. CCI blazer brass made it seem like a different gun, it suddenly worked. Now that it is broken in, it is less picky. I still haven't messed with S&B or Fiocchi in it, my lcp gets those. I was really disappointed that a gun of that price worked out that way, but in the end it is a nice gun and we don't have any interest in getting rid of it.

Once again, this gun does not like long oal cartridges. The lower grade Fiocchi range ammo "Linenia has a long length. However the Fiocchi ":Extrema" shoots very well. There were many post on this on the Kahr forum, and I measured many rounds. I am glad you kept the Kahr. Look at how many flames on this thread simply by one gun that does not function right out of the box. My God, do you know how many problems I saw of the LCP over the years? A heck of a lot of them for sure. I feel for the OP, but he can get this gun right if he wants to, just like Ruger will get a LCP right. And if he really feels that it is repairable, then sell it at a low price. Who ever buys it, will then just simply fix it and get one heck of a deal.
Lol, mine shoots a lot of different ammo now. I love shooting Freedom Munitions through the gun, I buy it in bulk and the gun runs great. Once again, look at the OAL, the gun will eat most ammo at 2.4 mm or lower.
Shoot a Kahr that next to a LCP and there is a big difference in recoil. The Khar is very smooth, very mild. A real pleasure to shoot. The OP would do himself a favor and just get to fixing the gun. Use the warranty just like any other gun that can have a failure or just work with the gun. If not, someone else will. Also just file down the extractor with a little sand paper, or go to the forum and see how to do this. Not a big deal.