Ok, I thought I had it all figured out. A 3" .38spl for the wife, HD or just plinking around. And then there's the Kahr K9. Smaller, lighter, thinner in a more potent round.
As a side note, I have previously owned a early version of the Kahr K9, but got so frustrated with it rusting through the oxide finish I sold it. We also owned a Taurus 85CH in .38spl with a 2" tube.
I loved the Kahr K9, it was surprisingly accurate for a small gun, recoil was pleasant and it was fairly easy to take-down. Besides the constant rusting, their was really no other complaint I nor my wife had with it. She enjoyed shooting it as well.
The Taurus 85CH was an ok gun, accuracy wasn't great, but acceptable for within 7yds and recoil could be punishing using +P ammunition. Not to mention that cleaning revolvers suck. With a five shot cylinder you had 6 cylinders to clean plus all the nooks and crannies. It was also bulkier. The only real advantage was that it didn't eject empty cases helter skelter which isn't a real concern unless you reload.
I understand Kahr has remedied the rusting problem by applying a new teflon/chrome finish that is said to be around 52 on the Rockwell C hardness scale compared to 60 something for Glocks' tenifer finish. We don't really want a stainless finish.
Another variable to mention, we do have children at home. With previous supervised experience they have a harder time chambering a semi-auto than they do operating a revolver. For untrained children the auto may have an advantage as far as safety is concerned if the gun is accessed. However, a trained child may need to operate a weapon to save their own or anothers life in which case it would be advantageous for them to operate the weapon.
My wife and I are leaning heavily towards the K9, but for simplicity and reliability I lean towards the 64. Another note is that I remember the slide being heavily springed on the K9 and it took quite a bit to rack it back, moreso than on my Glock 21.
Decisions, decisions.
As a side note, I have previously owned a early version of the Kahr K9, but got so frustrated with it rusting through the oxide finish I sold it. We also owned a Taurus 85CH in .38spl with a 2" tube.
I loved the Kahr K9, it was surprisingly accurate for a small gun, recoil was pleasant and it was fairly easy to take-down. Besides the constant rusting, their was really no other complaint I nor my wife had with it. She enjoyed shooting it as well.
The Taurus 85CH was an ok gun, accuracy wasn't great, but acceptable for within 7yds and recoil could be punishing using +P ammunition. Not to mention that cleaning revolvers suck. With a five shot cylinder you had 6 cylinders to clean plus all the nooks and crannies. It was also bulkier. The only real advantage was that it didn't eject empty cases helter skelter which isn't a real concern unless you reload.
I understand Kahr has remedied the rusting problem by applying a new teflon/chrome finish that is said to be around 52 on the Rockwell C hardness scale compared to 60 something for Glocks' tenifer finish. We don't really want a stainless finish.
Another variable to mention, we do have children at home. With previous supervised experience they have a harder time chambering a semi-auto than they do operating a revolver. For untrained children the auto may have an advantage as far as safety is concerned if the gun is accessed. However, a trained child may need to operate a weapon to save their own or anothers life in which case it would be advantageous for them to operate the weapon.
My wife and I are leaning heavily towards the K9, but for simplicity and reliability I lean towards the 64. Another note is that I remember the slide being heavily springed on the K9 and it took quite a bit to rack it back, moreso than on my Glock 21.
Decisions, decisions.