Advice Needed: Kahr PM9 Vs. .38 Snub

[daredwit]

I am looking for a stow and go pocket pistol for taking out the trash and making quick runs to the store. I am having a hard time deciding on a Kahr PM9 or a 5 shot Taurus or S&W. I DO NOT plan on holstering the gun(the point is to grab, pocket and leave, if I have to holster, I will take my full size carry gun).

I like the revolver for it's simplicity and safety but I am by no means a wheelgunner (have been shooting autos for the majority of my life with some revolver shooting). I would absolutely have to have a nice trigger job to lessen the pull weight. I could really use suggestions for a good revolver smith that could get me a fantastic (and light) trigger pull if I decide to go that route. I also like the fact that laser grips are available and that I can fire inside a pocket without exposing the gun.

What I don't like, as I said is the heavy trigger pull, the unfamiliararity with wheelguns and the slow reload.

On the PM9, I love the size and the fact that all the levers are in a familiar spot. Also, while the trigger is cetainly not a single action, it was lighter than all the revolvers I tried. I like the magazine reload and I already own 9mms so I don't have buy .38s(which I currently don't own).

What I don't like about the PM9 is that ADs seem more realistic than with the revolver for pocket carry, the fact that lasergrips are not available and that they are twice as expensive as the snub(the Taurus anyway)

Also, IF I went with a snub, I would more than likely opt for a steel model. I have shot the airweight models and with .38+Ps, I find the recoil distracting.

Thanks in advance

 

[Ala Dan]

Forget the Taurus, and keep you decision between the Kahr and a S&W
snubby. You will get many, varied opinions- but its awfully hard to beat
a five shot S&W 642 .38 Special tucked away on your person. You will
not have to worry 'bout failures to feed, eject, or stovepipes. If you hit
an ammo "DUD", just pull the trigger and a fresh cartridge comes under
neath the firing pin~!

 

[daredwit]

What's wrong with Taurus? They have a lifetime warranty and I was under the impression that they made a decent gun? Are you not paying more for the S&W because it says S&W?

 

[jwxspoon]

I carry a Taurus 605 or a Kel-Tec P3AT .380 for just such an occasion. The Taurus has a clipdraw on it and I carry it in the small of the back. With the Kel-Tec, I have a small wallet holster that carries the weapon either as a wallet in the back pocket or in the front pocket.

The PM9 is in my opinion the next sized weapon up and compares to my Kel-Tec PF-9 or P-11. I would carry either one of those holstered.

jw

 

[Sistema1927]

Regardless of which you purchase, you do want a holster. A DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster (same size fits both the PM9 and the snubby) is about $20, and will keep you from having a ND.

I carried a S&W 642 in one of these holsters prior to buying my PM9. The pocket holster allows me to carry with confidence. BTW, make sure that you carry nothing else in that pocket.

 

[Ala Dan]

For Taurus Luvers

I sell firearms for a living, and in todays market Taurus revolvers have krept
up in price; challenging S&W's price. For the difference, I would pay a few
$$$ more and get the S&W- with its outstanding Lifetime Warranty. Oh yes,
Taurus claims too have one also; but recent complaints from customers
stating that after their firearms lengthy stays at the factory, their firearms
were NEVER repaired~! OTOH, some even come back with NEW problems.
No thank you Sir, NO Taurus firearms for me~!

 

[Ringer]

I have both and carry the PM9 more than the Revolver, in my case an SP101. Even after having trigger work on my Ruger I still don't shoot it as well as the Kahr. For pocket carry the weight difference is significant. It's also easy to slip an extra magazine in your back pocket. I mostly carry IWB/OWB but these are both pocketable for the right occasion.

I wouldn't carry either without a holster. I have a decent leather pocket holster for the PM9 as well as the Desantis mentioned above. The Desantis works for both guns and adds very little bulk as well as aids in the draw by keeping the gun positioned properly. Slipping it in this holster as you go really wouldn't slow you down.

I also had a set of Crimson Trace laser grips for the revolver but didn't like them. Some people seem to really like them, I just couldn't warm up to them myself. For me the PM9 with night sights is the way to go.

 

[TOADMAN]

S&w 642/442...

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I got a PM9 for pocket carry, and sold my snubnose revolvers. The pistol holds two more rounds of a (IMO) more effective cartridge and has better sights, better pointing (snubnose revolvers point very high), smoother trigger pull and less recoil, enabling you to get faster and better hits. A concealed hammer revolver does have an edge in ease of draw from a tight pocket. BTW, you still want a pocket holster. I (and, it seems, many other members; in fact it was said members who turned me on to it) am fond of the Mika.

 

[P. Plainsman]

That Kahr's an appealing package; a little blocky compared to a snub revolver but still fairly pocketable. You will want a pocket holster for virtually any pocket gun.

I strongly doubt a PM9's going to be more effective per round than a snub with a top .38+P load. Some of the actual chrono results you see in gun mags for short 9mms are eye-opening, like 124 @ 1000 - I'll confidently choose a 158 grain wide, soft lead .38+P hollowpoint over that. But you get more shots, quick reloads, and what many would consider a better trigger. I've heard different things about reliability - some say the PM9s are much less reliable than the steel Kahrs (which in turn are much heavier than a snubby revolver). Others disagree.

The PM9 was the first semi-auto to pose a realistic threat to the shrouded alloy .38+P revolver as the default pocket piece.

 

[Lou22]

My experience with pocket carry has me recommending either the PM9 or a decent snubby like Taurus or S&W. Definitely use a holster - I like Mika's too.
If you go the snubby route the .38 special is good enough, with practice and maybe +P for a little more power. Getting a lightweight .357 you might practice with .38 and carry with .357.

Lou

 

[badgerw]

A fella I greatly respect has switched from an S&W 642 to a Kahr PM9. He shot the Kahr with Tom Givens and became a believer. Me, I have a 642 with CT laser grips.

The round count (7 vs 5) is a serious issue, but the round effectiveness (9mmP vs .38 Spcl) is a wash. The Kahr is flatter, and therefore easier to conceal. Practical accuracy, I dunno. I reckon the 642 is more reliable. In my mind, that trumps everything.

The price difference (~ $700 for the Kahr vs ~$400 for the 642 + $200 for the CT grips) buys me $100 more practice ammo for the 642. I think and extra 4-500 rounds of training will make a bigger difference in my effectiveness than any mechanical / ergonomic difference.

YMMV one hell of a lot.

Bill

 

[SoonerPast]

I have both; the PM9 is the choice I take with me. The snubby weighs a bit less, but it is bulkier. Plus I am more accurate with the Kahr. Carrying a reload is also much better with a magazine than a speed strip or speed loader.

 

[Golddog]

The snub J frames are easier to draw from concealment and carry more comfortably - they're slim in the right places. But their triggers are inferior in DA, which is what you'll use in an emergency, and recoil in the alloy versions requires larger grips for effective shooting.

I pocket-carried a Kahr CW9, which is slightly larger than the PM9; it was a perfect size for me and the trigger was better than most DA-style guns.

However, the trigger was not up to a decent SA pull, so I dumped it and bought a CZ Rami. It's too chunky for a pocket, but I'd rather use other types of concealment than be stuck with a crappier trigger.

I now sometimes carry a K snub in a Mika pocket holster. It's heavy, but the DA pull is better than any J frame's. Significantly lightening a J DA pull runs too much risk of misfires, in my experience.

DO NOT pocket carry without a holster. Random junk can tie up a gun, and a pocket holster really makes the draw quicker, smoother, and safer.

 

[DAdams]

Both Might be Nice

I have both and my strategy would be as follows:







If I could only have one. 642. I would purchase the ubiquitous and versatile 642 first and add the PM 9 next.

 

[orionengnr]

I had both, and have fired both a good bit.

The PM9 is smaller (see pics above), points more naturally, has better sights and less recoil. I shoot significantly better with the PM9. Reloads are easier to carry and quicker to execute.

I had six different j-frames before owning the PM9--steel, alloy and Scandium, exposed hammers, shrouded hammers, and hammerless. I no longer own any j-frames, not do I miss them.

My PM9 is my always carry. I use a DeSantis Nemesis ($15 at Cabela's). A major advantage of the pocket holster is that it maintains the firearm in it's correct position. No movement, no rotation.

 

[PaladinX13]

For quick runs to the store and taking out the garbage, in your shoes, I'd opt for the Kahr, because you shoot them better. The .38 takes more effort, for most people, to shoot as competently as an auto and is- largely- unpleasant to shoot, thus I wouldn't expect you to put in as much shooting time as I think such a gun needs.

If you take the time to train and the revolver is your "always" instead of "occasional" gun, then I'd opt for it over the PM9 for reasons of size, weight, and reliability.

 

[redneckrepairs]

That Kahr's an appealing package; a little blocky compared to a snub revolver but still fairly pocketable. You will want a pocket holster for virtually any pocket gun.

This allways amuses me a kahr is barely under an inch thick , slightly over for the all steel models such as the mk yet they are " blocky " in some fashon that makes them worse than the 1.5 or better thickness of your choice of revolver ?? .
With that out of the way Ill say i own a couple of kahrs , one happens to be a pm 9. Its a great gun for ME and works well for ME , i bought it used at a deep discount from a fella who hated it . It jammed every round for him and has not jammed once for me . They are great little guns but not for everyone , some just cannot get along with them . I think its because they are tight heck mine till pop clay pidgens at 20 yards everytime if i do my part . ( kinda like j frame smiths lol ) . and part of it is that you dont get a full fireing grip on them ( two fingers on the grip ) and that in its self makes a lot of operator induced malfunctions . none the less as well as my pm9 works for me it is not as " good " a pocket pistol as a revolver , the kahr takes a lot more cleaning and attention than the revolver ever will . With all that being said my J frames are safe queens and my pm goes with me when my p9 cannot .

 

[P. Plainsman]

It's the shape. Rectangular slab o' slide. I find that semi-autos sometimes print worse in a pocket than comparably sized hammerless revolvers. The revolver's got a round cylinder but it's also much skinnier than an auto's slide in other places. The overall shape is less distinctively "gun." It's not clear what you've got in your pocket.

Pretty straightforward point, I had thought. I can tell you, when I handle a PM9 next to a 642, it's not hard for me to decide which is overall svelter.

 

[mjrodney]

Here's a thought for you on the J-frame.

Walk out into the garage, or the bedroom, or anywhere else you can be alone and private for a moment.

Make sure the J-frame is unloaded. Read that again.

Suddenly, and without aiming, raise the J-frame up and POINT shoot at an object in the room, pulling the trigger double action. Don't aim....point shoot across the room.

Now, hold your extended arm still and look down the sights. Look where you are aiming.

Chances are you will be very close to being COM on your target with the first shot.

Semi's tend to be better at the range where you can take carefully aimed shots. The sights are better.

Snubbies tend to lend themselves to point shooting......like you will most likely be doing in a self-defense situation.

Try it.....and consider this......the first shot gets the most points.

 

[revjross]

I have the PM9 and a Taurus ultra light with CTC laser grips. I really like both guns and shoot them about the same. I carry the PM9 most of the time, and never had any problems. A lot of this comes down to how much you want to spend. I have night sights on the Kahr and it was $6ish and the Taurus with laser grips was $4ish. ------ By the way, I have had S&W revolvers and Taurus over the years (and Ruger too). I have been pleased with all. Earlier this year I did have to send a revolver back to Taurus for repairs. It took 7 weeks to get it back and they fixed the problem and mailed it back to me. I would have prefered a couple of weeks, but hey they did a perfect job of repairing it and once it was fixed they over nighted it back to me.

 

[Muddflap]

It's the shape. Rectangular slab o' slide. I find that semi-autos sometimes print worse in a pocket than comparably sized hammerless revolvers. The revolver's got a round cylinder but it's also much skinnier than an auto's slide in other places. The overall shape is less distinctively "gun." It's not clear what you've got in your pocket.

I have both and would agree with the above statement. For me the Kahr is easier to carry IWB. The Kahr is easier to shoot, therefore I practice with it more. About 50 rounds of .38 through the snubbie, and I'm ready to quit. I can do over 100 through the Kahr without any problem. I shoot the Kahr better, because I practice with it more. I carry the Kahr more, but I won't get rid of the 642. It just works so well in a Mika pocket holster for those quick trips to the store.

For what it's worth, I truly believe that if I ever get in a situation that I have to pull a firearm, in self defense, the target is not going to be very far away. Like mjrodney said, it's probably going to be a point shooting contest, and I feel comfortable with either gun for that. If I'm shooting someone 20 yards away, I'm going to have a hard time convincing a Kansas judge I was in fear of my life.

 

[gbran]

I couldn't make up my mind either.

 

[jad0110]

One thing to consider that has not yet been mentioned. To those that find the snub uncomfortable to shoot, it could well be because the stocks don't fit the hands quite right. Felt recoil is largely determined by how well a gun fits a particular users hands. I switched stocks on my S&W 686 a bouple of times before I got the perfect fit. Now, 357s don't bother me one bit.

And therein lies a potential snub advantage - there are many more grip choices available, so if you are willing to experiment a bit, you might find something that fits like a glove.

BTW, I do love my 642. It NEVER snags on the draw and it has proven to be 100% reliable and quite accurate. Points very naturally for me. Oh yeah, I think the trigger is pretty good actually. Not quite up to K Frame standards, but decent.

Also, +1 on a pocket holster. It would surely suck to throw something in the pocket with your pocket protector not realizing it. The thought of an unholstered weapon that close to the family jewels is a bit disconcerting.

YMMV

 

[DAdams]

Pocket Carry

I like them all. J Frame and small autos.

Out of all of them though my favorite is the M&P 340. 13 ounces, .357 if you like. 38 spl 158 Plus P if you don't.

Here it is featured with the Hogue monogrips, but it came with the CTs which are back on for the time being. The Hogues sometimes show.




642, 340 and PM 9.

Not to get to far afield, there is always the Rohrbaugh 9mm at around $900 to compete with the PM9.