Variation of an age old Question: Chosing a new CCW

Hi all,

I moved to a new state and will be getting my CCW soon. (again). It has been a few years since i CCW because i travel all the time, never went any where on the weekends and let it lapse (i digress).

When i CCW before my best two carry weapons were the Sig P239 (too heavy) traded for a Para-ordinance C6 LDA (a bit hard on the hand for shooting but was relatively accurate and reliable, but it was a bit on the heavy side for my tastes.. still wish i had kept it).

Now i am trying to select a new weapon for CCW. My Sig P229 is too big for all but the coolest of months/worst travel situations and my Ruger CCR is too lightwt, too underpowered for all but the hottest of months/safest situations.

I need something in between. I am specificallly looking for something 19oz and lighter, thinner than 1 inch (give or take), .40 caliber with a grip handle long enough to get 3 fingers on (or at least with stock magazines), in a gun with established quality and solid reliability.

Here is my VERY short list: Kahr CW40 or M&P Shield.

Have i left any off that meet my requirements?

My Very short list ended up missing a candidate i meant to include so its;

XDS vs Kahr vs M&P Shield

Truth be told all of these are two finger handles but the M&P comes with one extended mag and the XDS comes with an optional extended Mag (althougn not avail in .40 as mentioned above).

I would love to just dump the decision making and get a glock .27 but i really want a single stack and don't want a perce grip extension WITH a fat gun to get all 3 fingers around it.

The Smith automatically comes with the extended mag for no extra $ but the XDS has the nice fiber optic sights....... My Kahr K9 was rock solid but i too have seen several posts complaning about problems with the gun. For that matter the Sig 938 (a 9mm) might have been an option but i didnt want a gun that required cocked and locked carry that might end up in a front pocket at some point (and that gun has many complaints as well).

Reliability wise is the XDS vs the Shield have a better reputation?

If not it comes down to the stock fiber optic sights vs an included extended factory mag.... in which case id probably get the XDS and purchase an extended mag or two (i dont know im just thinking in text here)....

im anticipating both (and the mags) are going to be a virtual treasure hunt to find.....

Thanks for all the great feedback guys.

Today i started looking strictly at wt of the guns (I really want to actually CARRY this gun and not end up leaving it at home) and it looks like the two that are REALLY the most pocketable are the Karh PM/CM series and the M&P Shield.

The Kahr wins hands down being between 3.2 (40 cal) to 5 oz (9mm) lighter than the Shield but the Kahr is fricken $400 more on its MSRP (and no i dont plan on paying retail but....) than the Shield unless you get the econo "CM" series which gives you only 1 magazine and uses convential rifling.....

This leaves me to wonder if i am not getting a lot more gun for my money via sucking up the 3oz to 5oz and getting the shield with 2 mags and all the features... (Then again 3 to 5oz is a TON OF WT for what im trying to accomplish here. Decisions decisions....)

But that begs the question. What kind of rifiling does the Shield use? If its convential also then the Karh isnt a bad by in the "CM" series at only $40 diference over a shield.

Just to make it easy for you, ill include the links:

40cal: Kahr= .94 thick and 15.8 oz 5+1 capacity/Shield= .95 thick, 19oz and 6+1 capacity (fit flush)

http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-CM40.asp

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...80153_757781_757781_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

9mm: Karh=.90 thick and 14.0z 6+1 capacity/Shield = .95 thick, 19oz 7+1 capacity (fit flush)

http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-CM9.asp

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...80153_757781_757781_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

The Shield is cheaper and wouldnt require an immediate purchase of a spare mag but i must admit, that little .9 inch thick 14oz kahr looks sweet (let the whole....."yea but 6+1 capacity of 9mm is only A SLIGHT improvement of your Ruger LCR with 5 rds of 38+p!" comments begin....)

SoldierNurse-

I agree That XDS .45 is a merits serious consideration at 21.5 oz as well.

Danimoth 17

I cant seem to find the BPcc.40 on the bersa site. Is it even out yet? I know Bersa is generally a bargain price, very reliable, high value choice and i would never knock them after all the great press the .380 Thunder always gets.

Potatohead

I just cant get around the LC9 looking like a keltech clone. Not to knock it. My keltech PA3T in .32 was very reliable. I just have a special dislike for kel tech triggers and they dont seem to hold up as well over the long haul.

Glock 27 fans.
no offense but we all agree that while the Glock meets the durability/reliability and wt requirements.... its just too fat to ever be a pocketable or comfortable enough to in the ways you would a kahr cm or shield gun. Now im going to really piss you off and say that to me the mini glocks have no purpose. They are so fat that when i look at them, always think "why bother" as i would just get compact version instead as the mini glocks would not be all that much easier to cart all day then the compacts (because the are really not that "mini" to me). The Glock 36 being the exception to this of course.

Tomrkba:
Definately good advice and one of the reasons why i have a Sig P229 with 7 15rd Mecgar magazines and crimson trace laser grips. (That would give me about 106rds in a fire fight.)

If thats not enough...My Daniel defense M4 has about 35 of the 30rd mags waiting in the winds (two of them in the gun snapped together in a fast mag configuration with a mag pul side by side clip).

No my thinking here is i want to be armed 24/7 and of course the Ruger LCR meets that bill..... so your preaching to the choir a little as i want to be MORE armend than 5 rounds of .38 but i want it to be pocketable still. 7 rds of .40 cal (or even 6 rds of .45) and a spare mag in the pocket definately fits be bill of being (more armed)...

To be honest, i would get the compact XDM (that seems like a hell of a combat system) if i were just buying ONE gun, but i really dont need another full size 30oz+ gun because there is no way id give up my Sig P229 in 9mm (that thing is accurate, boringly reliable, will eat +P for breakfast and its a soft shooter that runs all day without tiring the gun or me....then runs some more).

Soldiernurse:

You got my attention with that XDS. 45 Im looking at it seriously now.

Which has the better trigger between the xds .45 and the shield .40? Anyone know??

Again everyone thank you! Opinions may vary but there is no such thing as a "bad opinion" when im specificially asking for everyones opinion on this.