I had a PF9 and a PM9. The PF9 was reliable but was not nearly as accurate, slower on follow up shots due to much more felt recoil and inferior trigger and had a very sloppy fitting slide to frame all compared to the PM9, so the PF9 went bye, bye.
Ultimate subcompact 9mm showdown
- Thread starter Mayo
- Start date
- Status
mbruce
Member
Anytime -- I'm unbiased -- and I don't bash guns because I'm far from an expert on the subject. I am curious as to where Taurus will be in a few years because they have spent mega money on QC and machine controls....
You touched up on another hidden gem of keltec -- they have great CS -- if you have a problem they will fix it.
This is ONLY my personal experience with Karh CS but when I had my FTF issue on my PM9 I called Kahr and I had to "prove" to them there was a problem by shooting an additional 200 rounds of WWB ammo (at my own expense) and perform various slide function tets while doing so -- only after 2weeks of e-mails and 200 rounds -- they agreed to give me an RMA. Later I got a call from one of the gunsmiths and said the picture that I submitted to them (FTF picture) just wasn't possible. I said yea I staged it so i could screw with y'all -- I was being sarcastic -- but they shot 8 magazines worth and didn't have 1 FTF -- I had a FTF to in each of my 5 magazines every time -- the gun has been in a closet since. The gunsmith concluded I was gripping it wrong and told me if it happens again to video me shooting and send it to him. I do have the gunsmiths direct phone number -- So in the end I AM PLEASED with their CS -- just sucks I had to prove to them their was a problem.
I would rather commend a company for improving than bash a company or make bold statements directed at their past....such as Keltec.
I'll attach a picture of the FTF -- it seems as if it's a magazine problem -- but it does it in all 5 factory magazines...
Attachments
mbruce
Member
The kick is a beast.... I'd rather shoot my 10mm with full power than my Keltec...
Luis Leon
Member
PM9 is a higher quality piece... no contest.
It usually does, but not always. Everything is subjective.
Take off the laser and then sell them. Seems to me you are just bashing on the PM9. They have proven to be for many other shooters, good quality CCW tools.
So the PM9 is a luxury item? It seems to me that you're trying to build up your Kel Tec at the expense of the PM9.
From your above posts it seems to me that you have a major case of "sour grapes" when it comes to the PM9.
mbruce
Member
Luis Leon;7059657Everything is subjective. [/QUOTE said:
JohnBT
Member
"I am curious as to where Taurus will be in a few years because they have spent mega money on QC and machine controls...."
They'll be trying to live down their reputation for spotty quality.
A lot of manufacturers have this problem because it's easier to lose a good reputation than get it back.
They'll be trying to live down their reputation for spotty quality.
A lot of manufacturers have this problem because it's easier to lose a good reputation than get it back.Like all man-made mechanical devises they are subject to failure But when your life is on the line you REALLY want it to go BANG when needed too You drive a brand new car off the lot and 28-ft down the dealerships driveway the engine falls out. Yah never know when a batch a bad parts, someone wasn’t paying close enough attention because they sneezed, or it was time to change a cutting bit and they tried to squeeze one more turn out of it so the next shift had to deal with the charged setup. They whom ever they are say ,,, never buy a car that was made on a Monday or a Friday 
I have Kel Tec and I haven’t had a problem ( now with that said did I jinks it ) Now would I by something else if I could afford it?? But like the rest of us for un-sum reasons I will not buy some brands because I wouldn’t.
But when your life is on the line you REALLY want it to go BANG when needed too You drive a brand new car off the lot and 28-ft down the dealerships driveway the engine falls out. Yah never know when a batch a bad parts, someone wasn’t paying close enough attention because they sneezed, or it was time to change a cutting bit and they tried to squeeze one more turn out of it so the next shift had to deal with the charged setup. They whom ever they are say ,,, never buy a car that was made on a Monday or a Friday I have Kel Tec and I haven’t had a problem ( now with that said did I jinks it ) Now would I by something else if I could afford it?? But like the rest of us for un-sum reasons I will not buy some brands because I wouldn’t.Yes aside from the Rohrbaugh size I'd like to hear that too.
mbruce
Member
Why the Moderators closed the HK (vs glock/too expensive) threads that were entertaining .....yet leaves this one open is beyond me.
With that said -- Mayo, in your honor -- i'm taking the PM9s out of the closet today and will put some rounds thru them.
With that said -- Mayo, in your honor -- i'm taking the PM9s out of the closet today and will put some rounds thru them.
Size is a big part of the issue (for me anyway) - and I don't own a PM9; while I have set out to buy one on many occasions it seems something else has always followed me home instead. One of those "something else" guns is an R9.
While you could carry an M1A1 Abrams tank in a pocket (assuming very big pockets) for me a pocket gun is something I can carry in my rear pocket in a rear pocket holster and have it look like nothing more than a wallet. And with all the clothes I own, the PM9 is just a little too big to fit that criteria, and the same is true of the recent trend for very small 9mm pistols like the LC9, the P290, the Kimber SOLO, etc. I'm sure they will all be successful and have followers, but for me they are all too big. I was limited to a .380 (and a number of pocket .380s followed me home) until I got the R9, which is literally the size of most .380 pistols but fires 9mm.
The R9 is a special-purpose pistol and probably not for everyone. It makes no attempt to be a range gun (though I immensely enjoy shooting mine on the range); it's designed to be strictly an SD pistol. The lack of a slide lock and the heel mag release may limit it in some ways but make the package really compact, easy to conceal and draw (with no sharp edges) and that makes it better for the purpose than its small size alone suggests. Mine has been totally reliable and others (including both experienced and inexperienced shooters) have shot it well - in fact no one who has ever shot it has failed to make a well placed hit at 7 yards.
As you shrink the size of a pistol things become a lot more critical - many feel that a 3" barrel 1911 is more difficult to get running right and I tend to agree based on my own experience. I'm sure we will see some "teething pains" with the latest generation of small 9mm pistols - but this has been already sorted out with the R9.
IMTHDUKE
Member
For me...I go R9 and own the PM9 and the Sig P238.
I just like it better...and it's good if you like it
I just like it better...and it's good if you like it
Is this to be a primary carry gun or a BUG?
I prefer the PM9 to the R9 irrespective of price for the following reasons (particularly if it was to be a primary gun).
1) The controls. The PM9 has controls that are more like other guns I have. I prefer consistency on my defensive weapons to the extent possible and the PM9 has more of that. It has a mag release in the typical place as opposed to the heal release. Apart from consistence the heal release is also slower. The slide lock on the kahr is a notable feature. It is certainly nice and an advantage if one shoot the gun dry. It is also an advantage in terms of clearing a double feed. The Kahr has a lower bore axis and allows for a higher grip which allows for more control.
2) The Kahr is a less finicky gun. The R9 is what it is and is designed primarily to be very small and be capable of shooting 9mm. The trade of is it is a somewhat finicky gun because of it. One can read a lot of reports on the rohrbaugh forum about it being ammo sensitive. It will likely take more maintenance to keep the R9 running strong.
3) I prefer the trigger on the kahr, although the advantage is not a huge one.
4) Better sights. I know, I know, these are defensive guns made to be shot at very short distances . . . However, I still prefer a good set of sights lest I need to take a shot that is past the range where I can very consistently make instinctive hits. I can not say I will never need that capability so I would prefer to have it.
5) I actually find the slight increase in size to be an advantage. Guns can only be so small before their small size creates trade offs that being to outweigh the advantages. When guns are too small I find them more difficult to get a grip to draw and fire quickly. I don't like when guns are so small I cannot shoot them with my normal thumbs forward grip without my thumb being past the muzzle. when they are too small I find manipulations to be more difficult. I wouldn't choose either of these weapons as a primary EDC gun for those same reasons and more.
The R9 seems to appeal to those who want something in 9mm that is as small as possible. If those are your criteria the R9 is unbeatable. As the considerations expand other weapons begin to look much more appealing to me.
I prefer the PM9 to the R9 irrespective of price for the following reasons (particularly if it was to be a primary gun).
1) The controls. The PM9 has controls that are more like other guns I have. I prefer consistency on my defensive weapons to the extent possible and the PM9 has more of that. It has a mag release in the typical place as opposed to the heal release. Apart from consistence the heal release is also slower. The slide lock on the kahr is a notable feature. It is certainly nice and an advantage if one shoot the gun dry. It is also an advantage in terms of clearing a double feed. The Kahr has a lower bore axis and allows for a higher grip which allows for more control.
2) The Kahr is a less finicky gun. The R9 is what it is and is designed primarily to be very small and be capable of shooting 9mm. The trade of is it is a somewhat finicky gun because of it. One can read a lot of reports on the rohrbaugh forum about it being ammo sensitive. It will likely take more maintenance to keep the R9 running strong.
3) I prefer the trigger on the kahr, although the advantage is not a huge one.
4) Better sights. I know, I know, these are defensive guns made to be shot at very short distances . . . However, I still prefer a good set of sights lest I need to take a shot that is past the range where I can very consistently make instinctive hits. I can not say I will never need that capability so I would prefer to have it.
5) I actually find the slight increase in size to be an advantage. Guns can only be so small before their small size creates trade offs that being to outweigh the advantages. When guns are too small I find them more difficult to get a grip to draw and fire quickly. I don't like when guns are so small I cannot shoot them with my normal thumbs forward grip without my thumb being past the muzzle. when they are too small I find manipulations to be more difficult. I wouldn't choose either of these weapons as a primary EDC gun for those same reasons and more.
The R9 seems to appeal to those who want something in 9mm that is as small as possible. If those are your criteria the R9 is unbeatable. As the considerations expand other weapons begin to look much more appealing to me.
mbruce
Member
LOL...Mayo how did you dig this thread up?
The Kahr performed flawlessly....it's a super nice gun no doubt. fun to shoot -- is more accurate than a human. The gun kicks noticeably more without the grip extensions. so if you get the Kahr -- get the +2 extensions. I wish the slide wasn't as tight...wife has trouble pulling it back. They should really lighten up the spring since it's not made to be shot 1000s of times.
I don't want to get into the R9 vs Kahr debate...but i really don't see why anyone would pay more for a gun than the cost of a Kahr...Like i said before -- if you shoot a Kahr PM9 enough to wear it out then you have misused the gun....same goes for the Keltec pf9
For obvious donkey kicking reasons -- I left the keltec pf9 at home. but it would have shined as well!
The Kahr performed flawlessly....it's a super nice gun no doubt. fun to shoot -- is more accurate than a human. The gun kicks noticeably more without the grip extensions. so if you get the Kahr -- get the +2 extensions. I wish the slide wasn't as tight...wife has trouble pulling it back. They should really lighten up the spring since it's not made to be shot 1000s of times.
I don't want to get into the R9 vs Kahr debate...but i really don't see why anyone would pay more for a gun than the cost of a Kahr...Like i said before -- if you shoot a Kahr PM9 enough to wear it out then you have misused the gun....same goes for the Keltec pf9
For obvious donkey kicking reasons -- I left the keltec pf9 at home. but it would have shined as well!
JohnBT
Member
In no particular order.
"but i really don't see why anyone would pay more for a gun than the cost of a Kahr"
That is not evidence of the gun's superiority.
"so if you get the Kahr -- get the +2 extensions."
Now it's considerably bigger than an R9, not just a little larger. Why not just buy a bigger gun to start with?
"The R9 seems to appeal to those who want something in 9mm that is as small as possible."
Well duh, that's its purpose in life. It's why they designed it the way they did. They also appeal to buyers who appreciate fine craftsmanship and fine function. Heck, the heel release was one of the selling points for pocket carry.
Now, who was it that was implying that Rohrbaughs have problems and Kahrs don't? Somebody is viewing the world through rose-colored glasses.
Are we having fun yet?
"but i really don't see why anyone would pay more for a gun than the cost of a Kahr"
That is not evidence of the gun's superiority.
"so if you get the Kahr -- get the +2 extensions."
Now it's considerably bigger than an R9, not just a little larger. Why not just buy a bigger gun to start with?
"The R9 seems to appeal to those who want something in 9mm that is as small as possible."
Well duh, that's its purpose in life. It's why they designed it the way they did. They also appeal to buyers who appreciate fine craftsmanship and fine function. Heck, the heel release was one of the selling points for pocket carry.
Now, who was it that was implying that Rohrbaughs have problems and Kahrs don't? Somebody is viewing the world through rose-colored glasses.
Are we having fun yet?
mbruce
Member
ok -- here's what i'll say ....
If the R9 is like Sasha Grey in the palm of your hand then buy it! you will own an incredible gun. If the Kahr PM9 is "good enough" and you don't care to spend more money, even though the money spent will be buying you "better" craftsmanship, then you will own a very well made and fine gun in itself. If you don't care to spend as much and want a Keltec PF9 then you will also own a gun that is reliable. I don't want to read "When my life is on the line i want more than a Keltec" -- I have shot 2,600 rounds thru my Keltec and not one issue with the gun..... so for me Keltec is my Sasha Grey!
I am impressed with the simplicity of a Kahr PM9...has very few internal parts.
I would like to trade my Kahr PM9 in on a Baby Glock.
My Keltec PF9 kicks like a beast and is not a range gun.
I would like to own a R9...who wouldn't?
If the R9 is like Sasha Grey in the palm of your hand then buy it! you will own an incredible gun. If the Kahr PM9 is "good enough" and you don't care to spend more money, even though the money spent will be buying you "better" craftsmanship, then you will own a very well made and fine gun in itself. If you don't care to spend as much and want a Keltec PF9 then you will also own a gun that is reliable. I don't want to read "When my life is on the line i want more than a Keltec" -- I have shot 2,600 rounds thru my Keltec and not one issue with the gun..... so for me Keltec is my Sasha Grey!
I am impressed with the simplicity of a Kahr PM9...has very few internal parts.
I would like to trade my Kahr PM9 in on a Baby Glock.
My Keltec PF9 kicks like a beast and is not a range gun.
I would like to own a R9...who wouldn't?
JohnBT
Member
Jeez, I thought you said Sasha Cohen, you know, Borat. :banghead:
mbruce
Member
LOL...you know you liked the other comparison better.....
Time to include the CM9 into the conversation
http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/02/robert-farago/kahr-introduces-cm9-pistol/
http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/02/robert-farago/kahr-introduces-cm9-pistol/
- Status
