Help me choose a non-Glock subcompact .40

[cz100az]

Hi all,

I'm new to posting at THR but have enjoyed many hours of reading everyone's opinions and feedback. I'd like to ask for your help in choosing my first subcompact .40 from a list of five very capable contenders. There are no Glocks here, and my caliber of choice is .40. So if you can deal with those two things, keep reading!

Right now I have a CZ100 .40 that's had some trigger work done. It is a simply awesome gun with a little work, despite what some people say about it. I grew up on a S&W 686, plate shooting with a competition trigger, and I've got the CZ set up where it's close enough to that old 686 to be enjoyable as a DAO pistol.

Now ... The CZ is quite a decent carry weapon, but it's about .25 - .5 inches off a subcompact size in all dimensions. There are times when I want to go deeper on concealment, and the CZ100 just feels a little too big.

I've narrowed my search down to the following five guns based on a lot of research and gun shop fondling! I'd love to get your opinion on each. I'm honestly not going to look outside this short list, so let's keep this thread focused on these five models if we can!

Oh, and here's my criteria for judging, from most important to least: RELIABILITY, CONCEALABILITY, ACCURACY, FIREPOWER, LOOKS, PRICE (hey, when it's my life on the line, I'm not skimping).

OK, here we go!

Springfield Armory XD40 subcompact

Walther PPS

Beretta PX4 Storm subcompact

HK p2000sk

Smith & Wesson M&P Compact .40 S&W

I look forward to everyone's feedback! Thanks in advance.

 

[critter]

Don't overlook a Kahr.

 

[Treo]

I know you asked us to stay in your list, ( he said, as he totally ignored the request) But if you're already happy W/ CZ quality why not pick up a 2075 RAMI in .40 S&W ? I carry one as a BUG & after dealing W a minor FTF issue ( That CZ has all but eliminated in the newer RAMIs) it runs like a champ.

I honestly couldn't give you a pick off your list I'm not familiar W/ any of them

 

[DigMe]

I've carried an XD9 subcompact for about 4 years. It's dead reliable and dead accurate. I can shoot it very well.

HERE'S THE RUB: If I could go back and do it again I would go as small as possible. A lot of these subcompacts are still just too big IMO. The grip is longer than many subs and the slide is too thick. The more I've carried the more I've wished I'd gone smaller and I DO plan on going smaller when I have the money to buy a new pistol.

I'd go Kahr, Kel-tec or something along that line.

brad

 

[klane]

I love my M&P9c and it meets your requirements as I think it would in a .40 as well.

 

[NG VI]

RELIABILITY, CONCEALABILITY, ACCURACY, FIREPOWER, LOOKS, PRICE (hey, when it's my life on the line, I'm not skimping).
OK, here we go!
Springfield Armory XD40 subcompact
Walther PPS
Beretta PX4 Storm subcompact
HK p2000sk
Smith & Wesson M&P Compact .40 S&W

Well if I were in the market for a subcompact with all of the above, I would be hard pressed not to buy one of the HK P2000SK's from CDNN, in their flyer they have an SK package, .40 S$W plus a .357 SIG barrel for $700, probably pretty close to or less than the normal price of a P2KSK anyway.

All of those pistols have all of what you are looking for to my knowledge, except the XD40SC is probably the ugliest subcompact I have ever seen.

Coming from the proud owner of a Glock 27.

 

[cz100az]

Thanks to all so far.... I know many of these guns are pretty new, so I thought I'd throw them out there.

DigMe -- You have a good point. I've thought the same thing (that subs may still be a little too big), so maybe I'll post another thread on sub-subcompacts! Thing is, I want to stay in that .40 if possible, and those nice, thin, small pistols are usually .380 or smaller. I guess I could be talked into a 9mm. But then, I'm breaking my own rules on this post!

Not sure about Kahrs. They are owned by the Unification Church -- the Moonies. Their leader has said he's the second coming of JC. Feels weird.

 

[jocko]

cq100AZ your last sentence is totally false..

 

[cz100az]

Kahr is a subsidiary of Saeilo Corporation, owned by the Unification Church. Justin Moon deigned the Kahr -- he's Sun Myung Moon's son. Moon (the father) is evidently a big supporter of Kim Jong Il - the North Korean dictator. Too many negatives for me ... even if they're all half truths, they add up to a good enough reason for me to choose another company to send my money to.

As an aside, I believe the church also controls a vast amount of the sushi market worldwide.

But I will check out the Kahr, so thank you for another suggestion!

 

[crhoades]

If price isn't the main driving point, check out the Springfield Armory EMP in the .40 http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?version=137
It is .5 in shorter than the XDsc and would be thinner in my estimation. You lose 1 round capacity however.

 

[jocko]

oh my god, they control the Sushi market to. for sure I would take my business somewhere else to.

 

[burningsquirrels]

from one CZ'er to another: Kahr, Kahr, and Kahr.

but if you want to stay double stack, i carried an XD-9 subcompact for a while. only reason i stopped was because i wanted something thinner due to body shape and personal preference. iirc at least one person has modified the xd-sc 9mm magazine to hold 12.

 

[kwelz]

I vote XD or M&P. I own the XDsc in 9mm and it is a great carry gun. However I have found the MP fit me best so I will be getting an M&P compact soon.

 

[cz100az]

Um, the sushi comment was a joke. Bottom line is, the Kahr's not on the list, even if people think it should be. I'm not comfortable with the company.

 

[NG VI]

It's still a good one, and it came just in time for rotation of the sig line.

 

[Rinspeed]

RELIABILITY, CONCEALABILITY, ACCURACY

The Sig 239 is as good as it gets for me.

 

[jlangton]

Although I haven't laid eyes on one yet(and according to Beretta-it's gonna be Sept before they're available)-I'm really wanting to get my hands on a subcompact PX4 Storm in .40 cal.
I think it's the perfect balance between size and capacity for a subcompact carry gun. That combined with something like an LCP or a P3AT for a pocket backup would have you setup for almost anything.
JL

 

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

XD or M&P. I like both. XD has the advantage of grip safety if that is a plus for you. The M&P has much better ergonomics. The both shoot well, have good fit & finish, rarely jam, and are similar size so it really comes down to grip safety vs ergonomics.

 

[jhco]

p2000 sk lem .40
done and done

 

[jlangton]

Here's a good photo comparison of most of the subcompacts available:
http://www.berettaweb.com/BERETTA_PX4_Storm_SubCompact/Beretta_PX4_SubCompact.htm

 

[OregonJohnny]

Coming from the proud owner of a Springfield XD40sc: you will not be disappointed.

I have thousands of rounds through mine. It's accurate, comfortable, and comforting. OK, now let me add my only slight complaint. Yes, although very small, the double-stack sub-compacts chambered in .40 are, on average, a little too bulky for extremely comfortable concealed carry. But I am a thin guy, 6' 175lbs., and I like to wear fitted clothing. So I only carry my XDsc on my person in the colder months when I can wear a long jacket over it.

I would take a look at the Springfield EMP if you are sure about .40 and turned off by the bulk of the average double-stack sub-compact.

I liked the HK P2000sk, but couldn't afford it and it didn't melt in my hand the way the XD did. Money doesn't sound like an issue in your decision, so I'd give the HK a nice hard look. I am a huge Beretta fan, and would love to try out the new PX4sc.

But for price, availability, accuracy, quality, looks (don't listen to the Glock fans, I think Glocks are hideous), ruggedness, and a very solid reputation, I think the XD is a fantastic choice. Like I said, you will not be disappointed.

 

[possum]

welcome to thr. i suggest the xd sc in .40 i have one and i love it, no issues and no complaints. i first got the xd service model and liked it so much i wanted a smaller version for ccw, so i went the route of the sc, and stuck with the .40 of course to be able to use the same mags with both guns. i love the service model but the sc is something special. the recoil is the same for me atleast as the service model, the sc is concelable, accurate and fun to shoot which is something not commonly associated with sc guns. especially in .40.

i also agree with one of the above posters, don't overlook the kahr's. stay away from the cw series and the poly models and go with the k-40 that is what i have and i couldn't be happier.

i like the kahr and the sc and they both get carried, just depends on the season and the situation.

 

[rj112275]

kahr PM40 for a really small, subcompact. is the sig239 too big? it's excellent in .40

from the 5 you pick, probably the H&K first and XD second. i don't know much about the M&P, haven't shot one.

 

[Rmart30]

XD gets my vote

 

[cz100az]

Got it!

All, thanks for the feedback. I really appreciate it!

I decided to go with the XD ... in 9mm -- violating my .40's only rule! The 17 rounds of firepower was a big factor. I also got a great package from a local shop with 5 mags (2 hicap), 2 holsters, 2 mag cases, and all the other good stuff in the XD package.

Again -- thank you all. If there are more comments, keep posting! I know I've learned a bunch from all you guys based on searching the THR threads.