Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is it worth it to upgrade from a PM 9 to a PM 40???

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Prosser, Mar 29, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Prosser

    Prosser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,451
    Hi
    I'm wondering if the PM 40 provides enough additional punch out of that short barrel to be worth moving up from the PM 9?

    Facts, opinions, ballistic information?

    Thanks

    P
     
  2. MICHAEL T

    MICHAEL T Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,011
    Location:
    outback Kentucky
    My self I would keep the 9mm I think a 9mm with good ammo will do what needs to be done. I don't like the recoil of a 40 at all.
     
  3. desert gator

    desert gator Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    288
    Location:
    Arizona
    ^^^agreed. I feel just as safe with a pm9 and it's twice as fun to shoot recreation wise.
     
  4. Full Metal Jacket

    Full Metal Jacket member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,398
    Location:
    hiding in your bushes
    i would keep +p in 9, and be confident with that. :)
     
  5. NG VI

    NG VI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    4,884
    Location:
    Maine
    9mm is a fantastic defensive caliber these days, especially with all of the wonderfully designed JHP ammunition available. Pick something good and practice.

    My first subcompact was a Glock 27, fantasting gun, but noticeably heavier than the Kahr PM series. I don't think I'd appreciate .40 out of anything smaller or lighter than that Glock.

    Federal 147+P HST is my favorite 9mm carry load, and would be pretty ideal for a shorter barreled pistol like the Kahr. 147s as a rule have more stable velocity figures going from shorter to longer barrels and vice versa, and are designed to expand under much lower velocities than a comparable 115 or 124 grain bullet.

    So to some it is counterintuitive, but a heavy for caliber bullet is actually better for a short barreled gun than trying to go fast and light.
     
  6. JLaScala

    JLaScala Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Washington
    I personally have never been a big fan of 40. Has all the recoil of 45acp with the stopping power of 9mm. At least with the 9mm, ammo is cheaper, and you get higher capacity.
     
  7. Prosser

    Prosser Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,451
    I was considering a new gun, about 670, in Kali, with double tap ammo...
     
  8. LRS_Ranger

    LRS_Ranger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    374
    Location:
    Molalla, OR
    I would go with the 9mm.. In the same sized gun you will find that 9mm will allow you to shoot faster and generally more accurately (going for speed) than the 40. Plus ammo is cheaper and you will be able to practice more. With all the high-tech bullets that are out now, the 9 is plenty deadly. The key is shot placement. If you can't shoot it as well, the 40 will be worse despite it's higher energy.
     
  9. hammerklavier

    hammerklavier Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    837
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Get both.
     
  10. xXxplosive

    xXxplosive Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,221
    Location:
    New Jersey
    I'd forget about the .40 and just move up to what get's the job done....
    .45ACP you'll toss that 9mm.
     
  11. gofastman

    gofastman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,062
    Location:
    MN
    NG VI I'm not arguing with you, but could you sight sources on this info? I would like to read more about the physics involved in that phenomenon.

    and screw the 45ACP :neener:
     
  12. NG VI

    NG VI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    4,884
    Location:
    Maine
    Gofastman I'm searching through the old battlefield, Caliber Corner on Glocktalk, where this was explained, and where sources were cited. I'll put it up when I find it.
     
  13. outerlimit

    outerlimit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,375
    If you carry some form of 124gr +P jhp in the PM9 you're doing pretty good defensive wise for a pocket gun. I like the Ranger 124gr. +P load and a spare 8rd in weak side pocket. I'd forget about the PM40. Yeah, I'd rather have a .45acp, but it don't fit in my pocket. I wish they had made the PM45 smaller, and without that god awful plastic floorplate. A 4+1 package with 6rd extended spare mags would be great. I'd even go for a metal frame version of that.
     
  14. NG VI

    NG VI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    4,884
    Location:
    Maine
  15. outerlimit

    outerlimit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,375
    You might consider a TMJ type bullet in the 125gr. range and I think you'll generally get the same type of wounding effect as a 147gr. jhp out of a short barrel. Generally I'm speaking about a jacketed bullet with a flattened cone as opposed to a rounded one. This type of bullet is fairly popular in .40 target ammo, but not as much in 9mm and .45acp.
     
  16. Manco

    Manco Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,988
    That'll be really interesting to read. A great many people seem to believe the opposite--that lighter bullet weights work better out of short barrels because they'll maintain a higher speed--but I think that most of them are focused on attaining maximum JHP expansion rather than considering terminal performance as a whole. This subject has come up on this forum a number of times, and the intuitive explanation that I've always found most convincing (probably because I made it up ;)) is that lighter bullets need more powder to generate more gas in order to keep up with the momentum of heavier bullets, and that much of this additional gas will go to waste in a short barrel. The reason that more gas--and therefore total energy--is needed is that momentum varies proportionally with both mass and velocity, while energy varies proportionally with mass and the square of velocity, meaning that it is far easier to increase or maintain momentum by using a heavier bullet than by increasing velocity, making heavier bullets ideal for more limited equipment such as a short barrel. I'd sure like to see what others have to say about this in terms of physics.
     
  17. outerlimit

    outerlimit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,375
    I agree with you Manco. After all, there's a reason why a standard pressure 158gr. .38spl recoils harder than a 110-125gr. +P that has more energy.

    Expansion is a side issue if overall performance is generally not that great.
     
  18. Manco

    Manco Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,988
    Oh, I must have responded to a stale version of this thread because I didn't see your post. It's interesting how Paul Nowak, the designer of the ammunition, I believe, basically gives the same physical explanation as I did from a completely different direction and point of view. It seems that theory and practice are both in agreement in favoring heavier bullets in short barrels.
     
  19. Bullseye_shooter

    Bullseye_shooter Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2010
    Messages:
    112
    Location:
    Somewhere in NJ
    Due to the small dimensions of the PM series the 9mm is a better suited cartridge. Its all about shot placement anyway, a .40 is not going to drop an attacker any faster unless you make your shots count. Stay with the PM9 and loaded it up with some Extreme Shock frangibles and that will be more than enough.
     
  20. NG VI

    NG VI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    4,884
    Location:
    Maine
    That and the lighter bullets drop off in speed, and also gain speed, much more readily than heavy for caliber bullets. If you're using a 6" barrel, the difference in speed between a 124+P or +P+ and a 147 or even 147+P is going to be drastically different than the speed difference between the two loads in, say a 3.5" barrel.

    And the lightweights are designed for speed, so they have to be tougher in order to hold together at the higher speeds than the heavies, which are much better suited to expansion at slower than intended velocities.

    I personally think a lot of it has to do with people continuing to stick by the old, sort of kind of accurate for 1988 1000 FPS to expand or not at all rule of thumb. Doesn't work that way in 2010, and it hasn't worked that way since all those wonderful redesigns of JHP bullets that took place over the course of the 1990s. All the premium 147 bullets are superb expanders now, generally they are at the head of the class since designers have figured out how to use the additional weight and material of the heavy bullets to get a wider possible expansion.

    And have you guys looked at a fully expanded 124 grain bullet? They are like a fat disc! A 147 that expands to the same diameter or even a little bit wider will have more of its core left behind the frontal area of the bullet, which I can only imagine would greatly assist the bullet in maintaining its path through the target.
     
  21. Strahley

    Strahley Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    890
    Location:
    Kansas
    They will ALL get the job done if you do your part, and they will all fail to get the job done if you don't

    Stick with the 9mm IMO
     
  22. RyanM

    RyanM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,412
    Location:
    PA
    I've got an MK40. Personally, if I were moving to a lighter PM gun, I'd make it a PM9 rather than a .40 or .45. That light of a gun would be hard to get follow-up shots with in a heavier caliber.

    Just in terms of ballistics, here's some links:

    Review of an MK40 http://www.kahr.com/PA-1B/handguns102799.html
    Versus a PM9 http://www.kahr.com/PA-1B/review_ch_0902.html

    The MK40 does pretty respectably across a chronograph. But it kicks a little bit. I don't think a PM40 would be much fun to shoot at all.
     
  23. NinjaFeint

    NinjaFeint Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    649
    Location:
    CT
    I am very comfortable with my PM9 and would not get a PM40. I carry it with either +P Gold Dots or +P DPX. I wouldn't mind picking up a T40 (much more shootable than PM40) to carry during the winter but I can't ever find the T series for sale.
     
  24. The Lone Haranguer

    The Lone Haranguer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,717
    Location:
    Johnson City, TN
    I have a PM9 myself. IMO:

    A bullet that big in a gun that small is certain to hurt on both ends. If it is uncomfortable or even painful to shoot, you will not want to practice with it.
     
  25. MattTheHat

    MattTheHat Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,044
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    I don't care much for the 10mm Kurz. In fact, I don't currently own anything chambered for it.

    Now, "real" 10mm, that's another story all together! :)


    -Matt
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page