Is there sucha beast?

[dev_null]

While I love my Kimber, sometimes -- especially when it's a lot warmer than it is right now -- I'd like something smaller and lighter for CCW. What I want is something that looks like a PP/PPK/PPKS or an HSc, but chambered for 9mm parabellum. Not a .380, not a .32, not a 9x18 Mak, but a 9mm (or better yet, a .40!). And not clunky looking like a Moonie gun (Kahr) or a mini-Glunk, either. Is there such a beastie, or am I doomed to disappointment?

-0-

 

[10-Ring]

How about something like a CS 9? or a Taurus Millennium 9 mm?

 

[Keith]

I think if you check out the ballistics of a 9mm from such a short barrel, you're probably just as well off with a .380 anyway!

All of that extra powder just turns into muzzle blast and flash.

Keith

 

[Porter Rockwell]

New Pocket 9mm-

Hello, try a net search on Rohrbaugh.

 

[Amish]

Damn Keith, you get internet up there in Kodiak?

 

[Wildalaska]

Damn Keith, you get internet up there in Kodiak?

No actually the internet comes into Anchorage, from there it goes to Kodiak via a string and two tin cans...

WildoutsiderswillbelieveanythingAlaska

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Detontics used to make a neat little pistol called the "Pocket Nine"
that might be just what you are looking for. Never shot one but handled it and liked the feel.

 

[NJ3]

Sounds like you're looking for a Rohrbaugh R-9. CLICK

 

[Keith]

Uh no, we don't get Internet...

Keith

 

[Jeff OTMG]

Yep, Rohrbaugh.

 

[Don45cal]

STI LS 9 or 40

I have an STI LS 9. Small, Thin, Light, 1911 Platform, Single Action!!!!

Great little pistol. Find one!!

 

[Mike Irwin]

"No actually the internet comes into Anchorage, from there it goes to Kodiak via a string and two tin cans..."

Hehehehehehehe!

 

[yesterdaysyouth]

how about the para carry....

but that a .45, it might be too much for a carry gun....

http://www.paraord.com/pages/single/C645.html

actually shorter than my 9000s and alot thinner....

 

[Mr Jody Hudson]

I am fond of the Keltec 9mm and .40 but be sure to do your grip exercises as many of the Keltec .40s were thought to be defective when in fact it was limpwristing (less than a 140 pound grip used to hold the gun with full power loads )

 

[blades67]

You're doomed.

 

[antsi]

What about a SIG 239? 9mm, .40, or 357 SIG - your choice.

Small, light, and thin; great shooters.

Watch out for the very early ones, though. There was a trigger re-design in there somewhere. The ones with the later style trigger are a lot easier to shoot for folks with average or large hands.

 

[Gewehr98]

Well, there was the Colt Pocket 9...

But magazines are quite expensive for them now.

I'll stick with my Moonie Gun. And if you find one that sticks in your religious craw, I'll gladly take it off your hands, preferably another Kahr K9. I always wanted a matching pair.

 

[denfoote]

How about a (gasp) Sig 239!!!!! Seeing how you've already disposed of the two best (Kahr & Glock) small 9mm pocket pistols out there, you might as well go for something substandard and hope for the best!!

 

[dev_null]

Looked at the Kahr, Glunk, Rohrbaugh, Kel-tec... they all fall into the fuggly category. Like I said, I'm not interested in the boxyclunkychunky models, but rather something thinner and sleeker like the Walther or the Mauser HSc. It hadn't occurred to me that a .380 might be pretty close to a Nine in a gun that small...

Maybe the SIG 232? Anybody got any experience with these? Are they more reliable than the PPK? What about the Mustang?

-0-

 

[Gewehr98]

.380 vs. 9mm...

It hadn't occurred to me that a .380 might be pretty close to a Nine in a gun that small...

Never occurred to me, or a lot of other handgun shooters, for that matter. Probably because they aren't that close to each other in performance...

As stated above by denfoote, your ruling out the better compact 9mms has essentially relegated you to looking for something built of unobtanium.

 

[dev_null]

I think if you check out the ballistics of a 9mm from such a short barrel, you're probably just as well off with a .380 anyway!

Probably because they aren't that close to each other in performance...

OK, we got one vote for, and one vote against... This is spose ta be making me LESS confused, not MORE!

-0-

 

[Tamara]

dev_null,

Winchester gives ballistics for their 85gr .380 Silvertip as 1000/189 out of a 3.75" barrel and for their 115 9mm Silvertip as 1225/383 out of a 4.00" barrel.

If you think that .25" of barrel length is going to bleed off 225 feet-per-second, well...

 

[George Hill]

Detonics did make neat little guns...
But the "Pocket Nine" was made by Colt.

 

[dev_null]

Tam:

Yeah, just did some more surfing... over 300 fps for .9mm +P Hydra-Shok at 25 yards, vs less than 200 for the .380 Hydra. I'd say this one goes to Gwh98.

OK, so I can't get what I want, which is a SIG 232 in 9mm. I'm still wondering about reliability, accuracy, etc. of the 232 vs, say, the Colt Mustang (can I get that in a '68 fastback?) -- not to mention utility as a back up or "just going to the mailbox" piece.

I know, "shot placement, shot placement, shot placement."

-0-

 

[Blackhawk]

Is there such a beastie, or am I doomed to disappointment?

Doomed you are!

The reason PPKs are so pretty is because they're blowback designs, which allows the barrel to go through the recoil spring. The .380 is pretty much at the outer limits in recoil for what a small marketable pistol can be.

Your choice for a blowback 9mm is pretty much limited to High Point, which takes ugly to a whole new dimension.