Carbonator
Member
Thanks for the pics Alan. That's some collection you have! I like that all steel 640. That'd make a great house gun for me, and I like steel for everything but CCW. I just wish I had your problem - deciding which gun to take! 
Everything gun: 340PD or PM9?
- Thread starter Carbonator
- Start date
- Status
outfieldjack
Member
340pd
I got mine for $549 NIB at the gun here in Columbia SC. It is a bear to shoot, but I feel I have "enough gun" as far as CWP is goes... It is light and easy to conceal.
I got mine for $549 NIB at the gun here in Columbia SC. It is a bear to shoot, but I feel I have "enough gun" as far as CWP is goes... It is light and easy to conceal.
Last edited:
outfieldjack
Member
340pd
I got mine for $549 NIB at the gunshow here in Columbia SC. It is a bear to shoot, but I feel I have "enough gun" as far as CWP is goes... It is light and easy to conceal.
I got mine for $549 NIB at the gunshow here in Columbia SC. It is a bear to shoot, but I feel I have "enough gun" as far as CWP is goes... It is light and easy to conceal.
Last edited:
Carbonator
Member
outfieldjack- that 342's a real nice pick. 10.8 ounces...
PM9 sure made a comeback - had 20% of the vote, now closing in on 50%. Interesting....
PM9 sure made a comeback - had 20% of the vote, now closing in on 50%. Interesting....
DMK
Member
I'd go with the Kahr.
I'm not a big fan of .357 in such a small package. I know it's good for some people, but I can't control it reliably.
I'm not a big fan of .357 in such a small package. I know it's good for some people, but I can't control it reliably.
chaim
Member
Normally I'd say a .38 or better a .357 for a one gun situation with 9mm a close second, but with your options I'd go for the 9mm Kahr. The snub .357mag is going to be too light for most people to shoot magnums out of it, a lightweight .357 is torture. If you were looking at a lightweight .38 or steel .357 then maybe it would be ok (this will be your only gun for a while, is it your first gun). For an only gun you'd be better off with a steel 2.5" or 3" K-frame. A bit heavy, not suitable for pocket carry, but more than acceptable for IWB or OWB carry. A steel framed .38 J-frame would be acceptable as well (not too hard to control nor unpleasant to shoot) and it is just barely light enough for pocket carry.
If this was going to be an everyday ccw gun then I would opt for the 340, as it simply disapears in the front pocket. But, if this is going to be an "only" gun, then I think the 9mm offers more versatility for more situations and has a little more firepower than a 340 with .38's. I really don't see anyone shooting .357's out of one with any control. I had a 340 and sold it because I needed the money at the time. I loved that little revolver. I would suggest you give serious consideration to a separate ccw and woods gun. Perhaps a 340 or pm9 for everyday carry and a gp100 for the woods.
chaim
Member
I think Brasso is on to something. Without going too far over your budget (possibly without going over it at all) you can get two guns and be better prepared for all your criteria.
I think S&W still has the sale going on their aluminum 637 and 642 (airweight, aluminium alloy, .38spl snubs). If so you can get one for around $350-400. That should be well under what the PM9 or 340 would cost you. The .38spl, especially in +P loadings, should be suitable for self-defense, and the barely heavier aluminium gun and the .38 loading should be far more controllable than the 340. Then with the savings you can look for a K-frame .38 or (better for woods use) .357mag. You can probably still find a good used K-frame .357 for $250-300 (less if you are lucky). The K-frame would be far more controllable with magnum loads, and in a longer barrel you will get more out of the caliber (.38spl+P for HD, .357mag for woods, and in both the longer barrel gives it a little more "ommph" and makes the HP more likely to open).
I think S&W still has the sale going on their aluminum 637 and 642 (airweight, aluminium alloy, .38spl snubs). If so you can get one for around $350-400. That should be well under what the PM9 or 340 would cost you. The .38spl, especially in +P loadings, should be suitable for self-defense, and the barely heavier aluminium gun and the .38 loading should be far more controllable than the 340. Then with the savings you can look for a K-frame .38 or (better for woods use) .357mag. You can probably still find a good used K-frame .357 for $250-300 (less if you are lucky). The K-frame would be far more controllable with magnum loads, and in a longer barrel you will get more out of the caliber (.38spl+P for HD, .357mag for woods, and in both the longer barrel gives it a little more "ommph" and makes the HP more likely to open).
Carbonator
Member
Thanks for the replies everyone. Gonna go out to the range this week and shoot some. Found a 342pd to rent, and some airweights but no PM9 or 340pd. Guess I'll just pick to closest ones I can find...
I have a 340SC (same as a PD, but light in color). I've shot a Kahr PM9. I'm quicker and more accurate with follow up shots using the Kahr PM9. The S&W 340SC is an interesting revolver but I don't find it fun to take to the range, and I'm not overly recoil sensitive. I'm also faster and more accurate with follow up shots using a Glock 33 and G29.
You should consider how much bang (muzzle energy) you are getting for your buck (recoil), when shooting a hot .38 Special or .357Mag from a 2" barreled revolver.
Maybe the Kahr PM40 or P40 would fit your needs better than the 9mm Kahrs?
Depending on what I have for lunch and how much water I drink my weight
can easily change a dozen or more ounces. What's the point of carring an ultra light handgun if you aren't going to be effective with it when it really counts?
Good luck,
Rich
You should consider how much bang (muzzle energy) you are getting for your buck (recoil), when shooting a hot .38 Special or .357Mag from a 2" barreled revolver.
Maybe the Kahr PM40 or P40 would fit your needs better than the 9mm Kahrs?
Depending on what I have for lunch and how much water I drink my weight
can easily change a dozen or more ounces. What's the point of carring an ultra light handgun if you aren't going to be effective with it when it really counts?
Good luck,
Rich
BluesBear
member
Oooookay,
How many parts are there in a;
S&W Model 40
S&W 5904
S&W 1917
Colt 1911A1
Colt Python
Colt Detective Special
Colt Single Action Army
Ruger Security Six
Ruger P97
Ruger Supr Blackhawk
Beretta M10
Browning HiPower
Which one has the most parts?
Which one has the least?
WonderNine
member
Ok, I'm only going to list the bad things, because that's what sticks out in my mind in general regarding modern defensive guns. Here's my take:
PM9:
Frame problems. Peening and warping. Never addressed fully by Kahr. Feed problems with PM9's also seem ALOT more common than any of Kahr's other models.
I would think this has something to do with the short slide, but the MK9 doesn't seem to suffer from even a quarter the complaints the PM9 does regarding feed and function issues.
Older Kahr magazines have a bad reputation.
340PD:
MIM parts from what I understand. Will somebody correct me on this if I'm not right? But I believe S&Sellout uses alot of MIM parts in their new guns right, or am I having illusions? I really like the idea of a 12oz .357 tiny snub, but if there are a hint of MIM parts in this little gun for $600!!! count me out.
Very loud. .357's out of a snub are very loud even in medium velocity variations and in medium velocity offer no benefits over +p 9mm while full house .357's out of a snub will shatter your eardrums indoors (while producing EXTREMELY negligable benefits over +p+ 9mm and you'll be speaking sign language for the rest of your life.
Post Clinton Agreement Gun - draw your own conclusions.
PM9:
Frame problems. Peening and warping. Never addressed fully by Kahr. Feed problems with PM9's also seem ALOT more common than any of Kahr's other models.
I would think this has something to do with the short slide, but the MK9 doesn't seem to suffer from even a quarter the complaints the PM9 does regarding feed and function issues.
Older Kahr magazines have a bad reputation.
340PD:
MIM parts from what I understand. Will somebody correct me on this if I'm not right? But I believe S&Sellout uses alot of MIM parts in their new guns right, or am I having illusions? I really like the idea of a 12oz .357 tiny snub, but if there are a hint of MIM parts in this little gun for $600!!! count me out.
Very loud. .357's out of a snub are very loud even in medium velocity variations and in medium velocity offer no benefits over +p 9mm while full house .357's out of a snub will shatter your eardrums indoors (while producing EXTREMELY negligable benefits over +p+ 9mm and you'll be speaking sign language for the rest of your life.
Post Clinton Agreement Gun - draw your own conclusions.
James Bondrock
Member
Given those choices, I would prefer the Kahr pistol. I found my S&W 640-1 .357 quite a handful with full-power loads, and this is a steel gun that weighs twice as much as the scandium/titanium Smith. The Kahr is not only close in height and length to the revolver, but it is flatter in profile due to not having a cylinder bulge. And the 9mm cartridge suffers proportionately much less velocity loss from its 3-inch barrel (about 2 1/8 inches of actual rifled bore) than .38s and .357s from the same length barrel, so it would have superior ballistics to any .38 load. While it would not quite equal the .357 loads, it would have much less flash, blast and recoil. In the revolver's favor, its rounded contours are easier to draw from carry modes that hold the gun tight to the body (e.g., pocket holsters). I still have reservations about the littlest plastic Kahr vis a vis its durability and cycle reliability, but it seems to generally get good reviews.
WonderNine
member
Before you read the rest of this post let me say that a full house .41 magnum out of a ported (they're all ported in titanium) Taurus 415T is the loudest gun I have ever fired. Hearing protection? What's that? I couldn't hear the Space Shuttle Atlantis taking off next to me after firing a few dozen rounds through that gun.
I've fired quite a few hundred .41 magnum 210gr. full house factory loads out of a 19oz. titanium Taurus 415T .41 mag (Remington and Federal with the same specs as their factory .44 magnum)....(AND yes you're going to say I'm a masochist ), and although I've never fired full house .357 out of a Scandium revolver, nor have I fired a Scandium revolver AT ALL I can't imagine it would be much more than half as bad regarding recoil. The noise however will be very close.
These are up close weapons and I was able to keep the 415T fairly on target rapid firing at about 15 yards (not feet).
The biggest drawback IMO of the .357 snubs is the deafening noise with flash a distant second.
The noise is why I will never carry a .357 snub or any other .357 weapon with full power loads ever again.
I've fired quite a few hundred .41 magnum 210gr. full house factory loads out of a 19oz. titanium Taurus 415T .41 mag (Remington and Federal with the same specs as their factory .44 magnum)....(AND yes you're going to say I'm a masochist
), and although I've never fired full house .357 out of a Scandium revolver, nor have I fired a Scandium revolver AT ALL I can't imagine it would be much more than half as bad regarding recoil. The noise however will be very close.These are up close weapons and I was able to keep the 415T fairly on target rapid firing at about 15 yards (not feet).
The biggest drawback IMO of the .357 snubs is the deafening noise with flash a distant second.
The noise is why I will never carry a .357 snub or any other .357 weapon with full power loads ever again.
BluesBear
member
I carried a S&W M40 for over 10 years and found it very controlable with +p loads. Of course I was using Pachmayr grips.
I have shot a friends 640 quite a bit and it is rather painful with max .357 mag loads. Anyone who'd fire max loads in a 340 is a glutton for punishment. I have a M60 but am looking hard at a 640 or 649.
In my M60 I only carry a .357 as the last round.. I figure if I get that far I need all the thump I can get. I bought the .357 version of the 60 because I know I don't have to worry about beating it up with +p.
With the revolver I can use a good exposed lead HP to get penetration with expansion and not have to worry about feeding.
Beside when the balloon goes up you don't pay any attention to that muzzle blast.* But the BGs will.
*Yes, I know this for a fact !
I have shot a friends 640 quite a bit and it is rather painful with max .357 mag loads. Anyone who'd fire max loads in a 340 is a glutton for punishment. I have a M60 but am looking hard at a 640 or 649.
In my M60 I only carry a .357 as the last round.. I figure if I get that far I need all the thump I can get. I bought the .357 version of the 60 because I know I don't have to worry about beating it up with +p.
With the revolver I can use a good exposed lead HP to get penetration with expansion and not have to worry about feeding.
Beside when the balloon goes up you don't pay any attention to that muzzle blast.* But the BGs will.
*Yes, I know this for a fact !
WonderNine
member
True, but your hearing will suffer. Regardless off all the talk about "auditory exclusion" and not hearing the rounds you fire, your ears will still take the same damage regardless of what you "don't hear" because of it, and in some instances, you will be lucky if you ever hear again.
denfoote
Member
Keep the Kahr.
With the revolver, you are limited to just whats in the chambers.
With the autoloader, you have the option of carrying spare magazines. As you well know, you can get eight round mags for the Kahr.
The lure of firepower should be enough to sway you!!
With the revolver, you are limited to just whats in the chambers.
With the autoloader, you have the option of carrying spare magazines. As you well know, you can get eight round mags for the Kahr.
The lure of firepower should be enough to sway you!!
BluesBear
member
My hearing is still above average thank you very much.
When it comes to life loss or hearing loss which will you prefer?
When it comes to life loss or hearing loss which will you prefer?
WonderNine
member
Yea, I hear that everytime I make an arguement against .357 snubs vs. 9mm, but the .357 snub offers no advantage so why make yourself deaf?
BluesBear
member
Why my snub and not your mini 9mm popgun?
Because I can launch a 158gr HP-SWC and you can't.
Because I can launch a 148gr CWBH and you can't.
Because I can launch a 160gr Keith linotype and you can't.
Because I can launch 3 #000 buck and you can't.
Real reason #1 Because I have already have one.
Real reason #2 Because I am very, Very, VERY good with it.
Because I can launch a 158gr HP-SWC and you can't.
Because I can launch a 148gr CWBH and you can't.
Because I can launch a 160gr Keith linotype and you can't.
Because I can launch 3 #000 buck and you can't.
Real reason #1 Because I have already have one.
Real reason #2 Because I am very, Very, VERY good with it.
I'd get the 342PD and put some good +P ammo in it. Save money. The 340PD if you psychologically need to have some MAGNUM stuff in your pocket but I always thing those boys are trying to compensate for something! Shot placement matters more. I do shoot mine regularly and +P .38's are enough thankyou!! (And they are for those who pretend to themselves that they can handle more in such a lightweight gun)!
For PD, in the slim likelihood that you'll ever have to use it, it will likely be not more than pointing the gun. I like revolvers because even these "weekend tactical warriors" might well forget to flick their automatic's safety off in the extreme adrenaline flood of an actual life threatening encounter no matter how cool they THINK they are! For animals, well, anything that is intent on killing you will in my opinion particularly with those two choices but pretty much with any other pistol too in my opinion. For the most likely encounter there the noise alone of any gun will be enough!
Shot placement matters more. I do shoot mine regularly and +P .38's are enough thankyou!! (And they are for those who pretend to themselves that they can handle more in such a lightweight gun)! For PD, in the slim likelihood that you'll ever have to use it, it will likely be not more than pointing the gun. I like revolvers because even these "weekend tactical warriors" might well forget to flick their automatic's safety off in the extreme adrenaline flood of an actual life threatening encounter no matter how cool they THINK they are! For animals, well, anything that is intent on killing you will in my opinion particularly with those two choices but pretty much with any other pistol too in my opinion. For the most likely encounter there the noise alone of any gun will be enough!
Texas Bob
Member
I voted for the PM9 only because I did what others have talked about and fired both to see what works for me. With either choice you'll be OK in the urban jungle if you practic on a regular basis. As far as "the outback", what do you think you will encounter? If you run into a dangerous four legged animal your choices are a "Hail Mary" and "The Alamo", with the guns you selected. If you are worried about hiking and rounding a corner only to interupt a drug deal or the people who prey on someone they know can't call for help then the pistol you are the most practiced with and have the most personal convidence in is the right choice.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
