Kahr cw, or Smith &Wesson M&P compact?

[basicblur]

I'm a bit curious-when these questions come up, why is the Ruger LC9 not considered? Is it that folks don't know about it, or is there some reason I'm missing that one would consider a Kahr and not the LC9, or is it just the Kahr name?

I've always liked the size of the Kahr (who doesn't?), but I've always been a little leery of 'em.
Been wanting something slimmer than my XDSC9 for a while now, but it took the LC9's introduction to get me to come off the cash.

The fact that it's less $$$ is jest icing on the cake.

 

[shootingthebreeze]

I like my Kahr P380-the first time at the range was an excellent experience.
I like its sights; firing it was comfortable-I could easily fire 200 rounds through it without wrist/hand problems. Dis assembly/cleaning and assembly-no problems.
Carrying it is a dream.
Because the 10 yard CPL range at Rose Lake is not yet open I was firing it at the 25 yard range-which is a stretch yet got rounds in the center rings and center black which was surprising. I can't wait to fire it at close up targets.

 

[catnphx]

I'm a bit curious-when these questions come up, why is the Ruger LC9 not considered? Is it that folks don't know about it, or is there some reason I'm missing that one would consider a Kahr and not the LC9, or is it just the Kahr name?

I've always liked the size of the Kahr (who doesn't?), but I've always been a little leery of 'em.
Been wanting something slimmer than my XDSC9 for a while now, but it took the LC9's introduction to get me to come off the cash.

The fact that it's less $$$ is jest icing on the cake.

The OP only asked about Kahr CW vs M&P ... that's why Ruger has not been brought up.

 

[basicblur]

The OP only asked about Kahr CW vs M&P ... that's why Ruger has not been brought up.

I've seen a number of these threads lately where the Kahr seems to be the only choice-didn't know if folks had already eliminated the LC9 or if they just didn't know about it as it's somewhat new.
I don't care what he gets-if he knows 'bout the Ruger and does not want it for some reason, fine, but I'd hate for someone to buy the Kahr thinking that was the only? (reasonably priced) choice in a small 9mm.

 

[iwilc2]

I have both the Kahr cw9 and the m&p 9c, the Kahr is a little easier to carry but I really like both.




Len

 

[harmon rabb]

The trigger on my M&P isn't bad but isn't as smooth as the K9 (though has a much shorter pull, like a heavy SA)

That's because it IS a heavy SA trigger. Lol. The M&P is actually SAO. How in the world Smith got it classified as DAO is a mystery.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I've seen a number of these threads lately where the Kahr seems to be the only choice-didn't know if folks had already eliminated the LC9 or if they just didn't know about it as it's somewhat new.
I don't care what he gets-if he knows 'bout the Ruger and does not want it for some reason, fine, but I'd hate for someone to buy the Kahr thinking that was the only? (reasonably priced) choice in a small 9mm.

I think it might have something to do with the Kahr being a proven commodity whereas folks have learned to take a wait-n-see stance with Ruger products. Another part of it might be the advanced engineering that is part of the package when you choose a Kahr...not so much with the LC9

If you are interested in a definitive answer, I'd suggest you start a thread asking that question.

 

[Skylerbone]

I shoot the M&Pc better than the Kahr. My father shoots the Kahr better than the M&Pc. He's the real shooter in the family and thin is always in.

 

[Dean1818]

The LC9 trigger is not great...... dragging a brick over concrete is how it felt to me.
(Ok, maybe a bit overdramatic)

The M&Pc trigger was "in between" the Kahr and the LC9

 

[18DAI]

I'd take a Kahr over the M&P every time. Thinner with a useable trigger right out of the box.

If you want a second opinion, the Kahr is better looking too!

 

[harmon rabb]

I'm a bit curious-when these questions come up, why is the Ruger LC9 not considered? Is it that folks don't know about it, or is there some reason I'm missing that one would consider a Kahr and not the LC9, or is it just the Kahr name?

The Kahr has been around forever. LC9 hasn't.

But if we're mentioning all of them, why not the Taurus PT709? Far better trigger than the LC9. Mine has always been 100%, even though I really don't carry it anymore since buying my EMP.

 

[thefamcnaj]

I'm not a huge fan of the m&p's trigger pull but its more tolerable than the khar. The khar you have to pull back to the frame. The khar is thin because it has the single stack. Me personally I'd go with more rounds. The M&p is very reliable. I know the cw line from khar has had some issuse. My buddy got a cw9 and its been nothing but head aches. I'd go with the smith.

 

[Viper]

I have both a CW40 and M&P c 40. Both have been 100% and I shoot both well, but, perhaps, the CW a bit better. Weight and size are important to me in a carry gun, so most of the time the Kahr is in my holster. It's much thinner and lighter than the M&P.

 

[smitty704]

M&P 9c all day. The Kahr just doesn't have enough rounds for me. If it was ONLY about comfort obviously the Kahr would win. But if you get attacked by a BG, your not worrying about comfort, you want firepower. So get the 9c and be another satisfied M&P owner.

 

[Dean1818]

I'm not a huge fan of the m&p's trigger pull but its more tolerable than the khar. The khar you have to pull back to the frame. The khar is thin because it has the single stack. Me personally I'd go with more rounds. The M&p is very reliable. I know the cw line from khar has had some issuse. My buddy got a cw9 and its been nothing but head aches. I'd go with the smith.

Have you actually handled and shot a Khar (Kahr)

The Kahr trigger takes getting used to...Especially if you havent spent any time with a revolver. I will give you that.... But, after some time on the range, you can see the benefit of the kahr and the smoothness of the trigger.

I am not sure which Kahr that you shot that pulls all the way to the frame. None of the ones I shot or the one that I own, had to go all the way back.

 

[wow6599]

I'm a bit curious-when these questions come up, why is the Ruger LC9 not considered?

I will only speak for myself, so......

I don't want a mag disconnect, manual safety, pop-up loaded chamber indicator, lawyer warnings and a bad trigger in a small, CCW. Now, if they had made it a "bigger" LCP I would have been all over it.

Love my PM9, but I digress..........

 

[IdahoLT1]

M&P 9c all day. The Kahr just doesn't have enough rounds for me. If it was ONLY about comfort obviously the Kahr would win. But if you get attacked by a BG, your not worrying about comfort, you want firepower. So get the 9c and be another satisfied M&P owner.

The probability of a civilian ever having to use their firearm in a defensive situation is very small(unless you hang around bad parts of town looking for a reason). In the small chance a civilian does use their firearm for defensive use, the odds of using more than 6 rounds is also marginally small. My rule of thought is that if a gun is too cumbersome and to uncomfortable to carry, the person is likely to leave it at home, thus i'll take the easier to carry option over a few extra rounds.

 

[shootingthebreeze]

Smitty704, my Kahr P380 has enough rounds for defense; average number of rounds fired in an encounter (which hopefully never happens) is 3. My Kahr also came with an extra magazine. For defense it's plenty.

 

[Snowdog]

I have no issues with the statistics concerning the probability of having to use one's carry pistol defensively nor do I have any reason to doubt the typical numbers of rounds fired during such encounters.
However, the one factor that's far more difficult to quantify is comfort level.

For example, many will claim (accurately, perhaps) that the mere presentation of a firearm is deterrent enough to defuse an impending assault. Some will continue along these lines and state that the psychological factor of having been shot (IE "Oh holy crap I'm bleeding/dying) allows for the use of less potent cartridges.

I also don't object to the whole 3-shot average of a shootings. However, who would feel comfortable carrying a .25acp with two in the mag and one in the pipe?
Sure, it may possibly fit the bill according to the stated statistics, but doesn't appeal to me as it leaves zero margin of error and thus provides me with zero confidence (comfort).

For me, packing a pistol provides me with a little peace of mind when out with my wife and daughter. This comfort factor is completely subjective and doesn't necessarily conform with any documented statistics. Personally, I think the K9 does offer enough rounds for my defensive needs but understand that my preferences aren't a universal standard.

So, yeah... I have no problems with someone saying 7+1 of 9mm isn't enough for them.

 

[Ben86]

I see both sides of the argument as being logical. It just depends if you are more performance based or comfort based in your decision.

Personally a big o'l gun IWB doesn't bother me, I value high round count and shootability, so I carry my favorite gun: S&W M&P9 FS

Some people choose comfort over advantage or performance and there is nothing wrong with that.

My line of thinking is that the big gun doesn't bother me and conceals just fine so why not? Even so I don't discourage people from carrying less. I do discourage 2 shot derringers as a primary, but that's a different story.

 

[Redlg155]

I've owned several Kahr pistols in one form of another. They are good quality weapons, however, I would caution you to make sure you conduct a thorough break in period.

My only complaint is that when Kahr introduced the CW series, the value of a used PM went down. Just try checking the for sale boards for a used Kahr. Folks have been struggling to sell a $700 (new) handgun for $450 used. Most folks didn't understand the rationale of spending $200 more for an Elite trigger and a couple of other options when you can get a new CW for less than a used PM series.

 

[IdahoLT1]

I've owned several Kahr pistols in one form of another. They are good quality weapons, however, I would caution you to make sure you conduct a thorough break in period.

My only complaint is that when Kahr introduced the CW series, the value of a used PM went down. Just try checking the for sale boards for a used Kahr. Folks have been struggling to sell a $700 (new) handgun for $450 used. Most folks didn't understand the rationale of spending $200 more for an Elite trigger and a couple of other options when you can get a new CW for less than a used PM series.

All Kahr pistols, with the exception of the K series, have the Elite trigger.