opinions on small 9mm pistols?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are so many good ones out there to choose from today.
Even more so than three years ago when I bought my superb PM9.
Of course most can be handled but not all can be fired unless you have a lot of friends that own them or have a place that rents them.
As in most major ticket/dollar purchases reading owner reviews is very helpful.
 
Find someplace to try them out. A lot of people don't like a KelTec PF9, I like mine for carry. Easy to pocket carry, takes a little getting used to the trigger, mine has seen several hundred rounds down the barrel and has never failed except 1 time due to a bad crimp on one of my reloads.
 
About three months ago I bought a Diamondback DB9. I've shot it several times but to tell the truth I'm not all that impressed. It's small, just a bit larger than my KelTec 380, and at 11 oz you hardly know it is in your pocket. I still use my Kimber Ultra Carry for an everyday carry gun, and keep either the KelTec or Diamondback in a hip pocket for a back up gun. The recoil of the Diamondback is quite a bit, and I just can't shoot it as well as I can the Kimber. I'm speaking of accuracy beyond 15 yards...
 
I just bought an SCCY CPX-1 and a Bersa Thunder Ultra Compact Pro 9. The Bersa is larger (13+1) and not a single stack but has a really nice trigger. Its also SAO/DAO. The SCCY is DAO and the trigger is heavy (good thing in CC of course). I think I might sell the SCCY....I really want a Boberg XR9-S.

th_IMG_0480.jpg
 
I just bought an SCCY CPX-1 and a Bersa Thunder Ultra Compact Pro 9. The Bersa is larger (13+1) and not a single stack but has a really nice trigger. Its also SAO/DAO. The SCCY is DAO and the trigger is heavy (good thing in CC of course). I think I might sell the SCCY....I really want a Boberg XR9-S.

th_IMG_0480.jpg
What don't you like about the SCCY?
 
There are a number of adequate sub-compacts out there, but after looking, handling, and shooting most of them, I have distilled it down to two, and only two, that pass my stringent criteria....Walther PPS and the S&W Shield. I chose the PPS, and the primary reason is the accessory rail, and the readily apparent of why the Walther PPS costs about $150.00 more then a Shield. That said, if you never plan on using the accessory rail, and just don't want to spend the extra cash, then the Shield will do fine.
 
I love my Kahr CM9.

It's the right size and has been 100% reliable. Also only cost me $327 new.
 
You can read the forums on any of the micro nines (ok, maybe not Rohrbaugh) and see all the horror stories. Failures to feed. Failures to eject. Double feeds. People think they can buy a 9mm micro gun and treat it like a Glock 17 right out of the box. It doesn’t work that way. It is a 35,000 psi round and the small guns operate at the extreme limits of firearms design. The nines can’t be designed like a pot metal .25 from back in the day and be expected to hold up. They have stiff recoil springs and tight tolerances. Try the slide to frame fit on a new Sig P938 or a Beretta Nano. They come out of the box as tight as a tuned 1911. They have a tendency to like heavier ammo at higher velocities. They need to rely on grip and body pressure to provide some resistance for correct operation to make up for the lack of gun mass. They really like lubrication. (I am not a Kahr guy because of a bad experience, but a buddy with a CM9 suggested I break in my P938 like he did his Kahr, with lube dripping out of the gun and down my arms.) It just takes a little bit of effort to break them in and learn their characteristics.

The sights on my P938 are awesome and make it a genuine 25+ yard gun even though I only can get 2 fingers on the grip. But, that doesn’t mean I should expect it to run through a 600 round pistol class without cleaning like a Glock. If I can get through 50 rounds of 124 grain Gold Dots without an issue, I am happy and don’t try to push it. I don’t have 50 rounds worth of magazines for it. Some people get upset because they expect it to function through the 600 round class without cleaning. The complaints seem to drop off noticeably with Glock 26/S&W Shield sized guns.

YMMV
There are some valid points in there, but most of the problems you are talking about were design flaws in older pistols, such as the tiny .45 1911's and such that were designed as bigger pistols then modified...they do have a lot of problems.
The newer pocket semi's are designed from the ground up to be smaller and are not "at the limit of their designs".
The reliability issues are by and large a thing of the past.
It sounds like your 938 has some issues that need attention, you should be able to get more than 50 rounds out without any issues.

I have a few "pocket" semi's, both 9mm and .40S&W. Some of them have had issues, some of them haven't. Some designs are better than others.
for a "pocket" gun that NEEDS to go bang when its put into service, I would rather trust a small .38 or .357 revolver.
 
Last edited:
What don't you like about the SCCY?

it just doesn't feel good in my hand. Compared to the Bersa, it has a long trigger pull. Overall, it looks like a nicely made gun and one can't argue with the price. I put it up for sale here on THR an hour or so ago....if nobody is interested, I'll keep it but if I can sell it, I'll order a Boberg.
 
Ok thanks, I have never seen one and just wondered about it.

I have had some good reliable guns hat just didn't fit me either and ended up selling them too.
 
If that were the case, I'd recommend the CZ82.

Well, the cz 82 wouldn't fit the op's requirements of either single stack or small. It is double stack. It is also about the size of a G19. I like the cz but honestly there are a whole bunch of really good 9x19s that are that size or smaller. My experience is they all have less felt recoil too since the cz 82 is blowback.
 
Well, the cz 82 wouldn't fit the op's requirements of either single stack or small. It is double stack. It is also about the size of a G19. I like the cz but honestly there are a whole bunch of really good 9x19s that are that size or smaller. My experience is they all have less felt recoil too since the cz 82 is blowback.
I'm more commenting on it VS the P64.

The CZ carries more rounds. But then you're thicker, not meeting requirements. For the record, it recoils like a pillow. The P64, not so much. Prolly due to weight.

You move up to a G19; more power, roughly same size, more capacity. But still not meeting requirements.

My point was: If you're going to give up the power of a 9x19, might as well carry MORE of the weaker 9x18 rather than the same as say a LC9 or the like as you would in the P64. I should've specified this.
 
I'm quite fond of my Kahr CW9, but there are many great recommendations in this thread. Go fondle them and see what you think.
 
My Walther PPS is extremely concealable, reliable, AND as shootable as my 1911. Scary accurate!

XDs in 9mm would be a close 2nd based on what I've seen with the .45 version.
 
For the record, it recoils like a pillow. The P64, not so much. Prolly due to weight.

How much felt recoil there is on a CZ-82 will depend a lot on the recoil spring that is in it. Felt recoil is fairly subjective. I will just say this, the blow back gun has more felt recoil to me than either my glock 26 which is appreciable smaller or my G19 which is roughly the same size or any of my other 9x19 guns that fall in that size range. Further there is a reason it is a common modification to change the recoil spring to a heavier wolf spring. I'm not saying the recoil is painful or anything, recoil to me is more about split times.

At any rate the CZ simply doesn't meet the OP's requirements and if one is going to go that big it drastically opens up the competition.

If you're going to give up the power of a 9x19, might as well carry MORE of the weaker 9x18 rather than the same as say a LC9 or the like as you would in the P64. I should've specified this.

There's is logic to that argument, although there has to be a stopping point somewhere to the more rounds is better for a carry gun when one factors in other attributes. More to the point, to my mind if you are going to give up that much in size and weight then why not simply get a 9x19 that is more powerful, holds more or a similar number of rounds, has less felt recoil (at least to me), is lighter, has a wider holster selection, has more readily available mags and parts, etc. I love the CZ, I just don't see its place in this discussion given what the OP seems to be looking for. The other small 9x18 guns might warrant discussion in that they are generally speaking what the OP is after, a small, thin, carry gun. That said the P64 has such a horrible trigger it fails on the OP's request for a good trigger. As neat of a little gun as a Makarov is, there is no way I pick one over a Walther PPS or a bunch of other more modern guns unless money is a factor. even then I think there are other 9x19 guns that can be had for that money that make more sense to me.

To the OP, your feelings on triggers may best help to narrow things down.
 
Small pocket sized pistols are a crap shoot. No matter who's gun you buy you might get a good one, you can get a lemon just as well. Any manufacturer will admit the pocket sized guns come back more than any gun in their line up.

I own a P-11. It shoots great now but to get it running right required polishing the moving parts with emery cloth. I finally got it shooting right with a White trigger stop. I also have a P-3AT that went back and forth to Kel Tec for 5 months before it was shooting right. Plus I ran at least 500 rounds of ammo through the gun during this period. I can not recommend any Kel Tec product after these experiences.
 
How much felt recoil there is on a CZ-82 will depend a lot on the recoil spring that is in it. Felt recoil is fairly subjective. I will just say this, the blow back gun has more felt recoil to me than either my glock 26 which is appreciable smaller or my G19 which is roughly the same size or any of my other 9x19 guns that fall in that size range. Further there is a reason it is a common modification to change the recoil spring to a heavier wolf spring. I'm not saying the recoil is painful or anything, recoil to me is more about split times.

At any rate the CZ simply doesn't meet the OP's requirements and if one is going to go that big it drastically opens up the competition.



There's is logic to that argument, although there has to be a stopping point somewhere to the more rounds is better for a carry gun when one factors in other attributes. More to the point, to my mind if you are going to give up that much in size and weight then why not simply get a 9x19 that is more powerful, holds more or a similar number of rounds, has less felt recoil (at least to me), is lighter, has a wider holster selection, has more readily available mags and parts, etc. I love the CZ, I just don't see its place in this discussion given what the OP seems to be looking for. The other small 9x18 guns might warrant discussion in that they are generally speaking what the OP is after, a small, thin, carry gun. That said the P64 has such a horrible trigger it fails on the OP's request for a good trigger. As neat of a little gun as a Makarov is, there is no way I pick one over a Walther PPS or a bunch of other more modern guns unless money is a factor. even then I think there are other 9x19 guns that can be had for that money that make more sense to me.

To the OP, your feelings on triggers may best help to narrow things down.
I'm not comparing the CZ to a modern 9x19, I'm comparing it to the P64.

Neither of which seem to be specified as combatants for the OPs carry weapon.

The CZ is carryable, I've done it. Not the best.

I'm the opposite: I think the 26 recoils more due to its weight. Recoil is very subjective.

I'm not suggesting the CZ is better than a trim 9x19. I'm suggesting openly that its superior to the P64. This is my opinion. Which, doesn't matter. I suggested the Shield.
 
Last edited:
I'm not comparing the CZ to a modern 9x19, I'm comparing it to the P64.

I'm aware, I followed that. My point is that the CZ is better compared to modern 9x19s as it is much more similar to them in terms of size, capacity, and weight than it is to the P64. It is only closer to the P64 in terms of the cartridge and cost.

The CZ is carryable, I've done it. Not the best.

Definitely it is. I'd say given a decent holster (and there are relatively speaking few great choices) and belt its about like carrying a Glock 19. I have both.

I'm suggesting openly that its superior to the P64.

I'd agree unless size is a big concern. (although in either case I'd still go with something else).

I'm the opposite: I think the 26 recoils more due to its weight. Recoil is very subjective.

FELT recoil is subjective. And with the CZ being a blow back gun the strength of the recoil spring is going to make a pretty big difference in one's experience. Shooting my CZ along side my G26 and G19 it has never been close to be, but again a number of factors can affect how one perceives recoil. Honestly, I should probably try a wolf spring in my CZ-82. The weight difference IIRC is something like roughly 8 oz heavier than the 26 (and a G19 is less than an 1.5 ounces heavier than the 26).

Any manufacturer will admit the pocket sized guns come back more than any gun in their line up.

This is probably true. Smaller guns are more finicky by nature. However, some manufactures have forums that are largely dedicated to sharing info on doing all the final finishing work a factory should do in order to get a gun to right and others do not, just saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top