Kahr MK9 Elite?

I have seven (so far) p365s of various models safety, no safety, SAS, XL, XL with optic, etc. Highly recommended.

If you're limited to 10 rds, no reason not to get a p365 in your pocket:



Gock ... Lock ... Glock ... ? never heard of 'em ...

I like my MK9 a lot.

TomJ said:

A family member is looking at purchasing a Kahr MK9 Elite to use as a pocket gun and asked my opinion. I'm not familiar with Kahr products, other than reading generally positive things about them. This is not an inexpensive gun, and am wondering if the price difference between this gun and other, less expensive Kahr products is worthwhile. I understand this is often a subjective thing. He lives in Cook County as is limited to 10 round magazines. I have a Shield 2.0 I'm offering to let him try, am also suggesting the Glock 43 and will talk to him about the Sig P365. Other suggestions are welcome.

https://shopkahrfirearmsgroup.com/mk9-elite-w-night-sights-m9098n/

Click to expand...

I had one, and it was reliable and accurate. It was also heavy; too heavy, certainly, for a pocket gun. Also, if your friend has an IL CHL, the magazine limit doesn't apply; there is state preemption on pistols carried with a CHL.


Larry

Not sure why he's looking at the MK9... outside of it being a nice pistol. I've been carrying a Kahr CW9 or CM9 for about 10 years and love them. Although the 'C' line is the inexpensive line, I have found them to be exceptionally serviceable... at half the cost of the P or M pistols. As far as weight, it depends on how he carries it, but even in a good belt holster, weight is weight at the end of the day. I also have a PM9, and aside from the black slide and night sights, you couldn't tell the difference between the two in a blind taste test.

My CM9 and it's High Noon holster...



...and side by side with the PM9...

As noted frequently, the MK9 is a quality but heavy gun.
CM9, Sig P365, G43, and the Shield are all excellent choices. The CM9 is the least expensive, the P365 holds the most boolets.

THe MK9 is heavy. It is an all metal gun...

Now, for the lighter polymer versions... I had a PM9 years ago - I had it for a few years. The 1st week the Shield was available, I rented one and loved it. I got one the next week, and sold that Kahr. I found the recoil on the PM9 to be pretty high. The Shield shoots like a much bigger gun, IMHO.

I tried to pocket carry a MK40 and it was a no-go. Not too big, just too heavy.

I had several Kahrs. Including the MK9 Elite. It's heavy for what it is. Not one bit of differance in the quality as far as I could tell. IMHO the price was high for what it was. Cosmetically refined but thats it. It did look good.

I sold off all but two when I got my P365's. The only one I kept was a P9 that I had cut down to take the PM9 magazines. Then I got a TP9 upper. Ultimate CCO. Short grip, 4" barrel. The tolerance gods were with me that day, everything fit together just right and made one accurate little pistol. Invisible when carried IWB.

Did the same grip job on a TP45. Shortest grip frame, longer barrel. Almost as accurate. Think 1911 commander slide on an officers frame. CCO. Thinner and lighter to boot. Two of my "never sell" guns.

Pocket carry with max rounds = P365 in my opinion. Ive owned over 500 pistols in my time. Most have been moved on. I feel that the P365 is about perfect for me and my needs.

I had the K9 and MK9 way back before this forum had its ownership feud. neither are pocket guns by weight. both were top performers for me, enough so that I tried their polymer offerings.

Have had a Kahr K9 since '95 ---love it---carried in a IWB holster---not pocket carry.
The other three are all good choices for CCW--- if rentals are available try them all---whichever feels best might be the best for him. Might be cheaper too.

Spats McGee said:

With the caveat that the only product listed here that I own is a Shield, and mine being a 1.0 at that, I suspect that it's going to be hard for your family member to go very wrong with this choice. Everything I've seen says all 4 are perfectly serviceable guns. It's just a matter of weighing priorities. Cost vs. weight vs. capacity vs. night sights . . . .

Click to expand...

As a 2.0 Shield owner I will agree with @Spats McGee with one exception; I don't think any of these would make a good pocket gun. I would steer said family member more in the direction of a .380 Bodyguard or an LCP if they want to pocket carry.

I carried an MK9 for a little over a year. It came with a pocket holster, but is way to heavy for pocket carry. Personally any 9mm is too large for my pockets but plenty of other people seem to like them for pocket carry.

I liked the MK9 quite a bit, the steel frame makes 9mm relatively soft shooting vs the polymer framed PM9 and CM9, and carrying AIWB I find the weight difference isn't a big deal when it's on a belt.

I'm not sure the Elite is worth the price over the standard MK9, which I'd still consider a "premium" firearm. I think the only functional difference is a beveled magazine well (I never had an issue with my non-beveled MK9) and possibly night sights.

The PM9 and the even cheaper CM9 will perform nearly identically and be better for pockets due to the weight savings.

I had an MK9 when they first arrived. Well made quality firearm. But quite heavy! Too heavy for pocket carry and small if using a belt holster IMO. Hard not to carry a P365 with 10+1 and 12 or 15 round mag as a spare. Couldn't fault one for carrying though

Looked at the Mk.9 Elite but thought, like many here, that it was too heavy for pocket carry. Waited for the CM9 to come out and went with it. Perfect size and weight though I usually carry it IWB in a DeSantis SOF-TUCK holster.

I have a Khar K40 (I know it's a bit bigger than the MK) and it's a heavy, all steel gun. Great to shoot, but hardly a lightweight. I also have a CM9, and it's great for pocket carry. Small and light, with the right holster it just looks like you have a cell phone in your pocket.

Like the others, I really enjoy my CM9. For me the CM9 is a little large for pocket carry but makes a nice IWB carry. I always considered the MK9 more of a range pistol due to its weight. "For me" the MK9 is more weight than want to carry for a 9mm. If I am going to carry that much weight I would rather be carrying my XDs in .45 acp.

Big Plus on the CM9! Nothing beats the size in 9mm. Love shooting them. (Have 2). Hard to believe a small 15.8 oz 9mm shooting this well. Not much bigger than some 380's.(actually love the Kahr 380 as well, have two of them) Great DAO trigger, Deliberate, smooth all the way through. 380's are the same as well.

I've had 2 kahrs , cw40 & cw45. I know many people like the trigger, I do not. My 40 SW was a handful with low capacity and the 45 was unreliable and became scrap after a couple hundred rounds. I sold both. I know higher dollar models are better but I can say with with certainty I would buy another (cheap) one.
I like the size & the feel but can't get into the long mushy trigger that resets all the way at the front.

I guess that's why they make different guns, something for everyone.

Always shoot revolvers DA so no problem with trigger---shot the 40S&W and the .45 and felt the same way---to me the 9mm shines---my K9 is a pleasure
to shoot. I can understand the trigger issue though.

I like tupperware Kahrs too.

Obturation said:

I've had 2 kahrs , cw40 & cw45. I know many people like the trigger, I do not. My 40 SW was a handful with low capacity and the 45 was unreliable and became scrap after a couple hundred rounds. I sold both. I know higher dollar models are better but I can say with with certainty I would buy another (cheap) one.
I like the size & the feel but can't get into the long mushy trigger that resets all the way at the front.

I guess that's why they make different guns, something for everyone.

Click to expand...

I've carried a PM9 since they came out. I cannot imagine that same pistol in 40 or 45. The recoil must be horrendous.