Kahr CW9 9mm vs. S&W Airweight J-frame .38

[Joe the Redneck]

utos are only faster to relaod if you have an exrea mag. Otherwise they are much slower to reload.

Two things going for the revolver. YOu can shoot any ammo combo you like like. A nice smushy lead hp, followed up my a few wadcutters, maybe a few flatpoint fmjs, whatever strikes your fancy. Or if you are going into the back country, you can have a few shotloads for varmints and snakes.

The second is, they don't really jam. If you have to fire with the gun pressed up against your body or the bad guy (like in a scuffle) it won't jam up on you.

Yes, I know it only holds six rounds. Trust me, it will be settles by round 2, one way or the other.

As for the lazer, well, it's free country. I think they are a waste of money. It you can't hit a man size target at 10 feet, a lazer ain't gonna help.

Basically, I think revolver are "real world" guns, auto are more for the "what might happen" world. Yes, you might get attacked by a group of Tusken Raiders, but odds are it will be a lone crack head.

 

[brentfoto]

Without intending to offend the previous poster, the downside to the revolver is the limited number of rounds when attacked by multiple assailants. I think the scenario of finding oneself with two or more assailants (thugs and similar criminals are usually cowards and like to travel in groups) has to be factored into the equation-at least a 50-50 chance there will be more than one attacker...

There's 60% more firepower in the Kahr in the first exchange; and an additional 7 rounds in the extra mag or even 8 more rounds with the extended mag; max. 16 rounds total vs. 10 with the snubbie. And if you're really into protecting yourself add another 8 to the Kahr for a total of 24 vs. 15 for the snubbie.

The Kahr's also 9mm and has greater velocity and penetration, generally, than the .38 +P. These are things to consider...

Nevertheless, the Airweight snubbie vote is leading 2-1 over the CW9 with ~155 votes tallied thus far.

 

[beemerphile]

If you can't stop a fight or retreat to cover with five rounds, you need more skill, not more bullets. The tactical advantages of the revolver, especially in a close quarters encounter, are numerous. The recognition of that explains the score. As Charles Barkley used to say: "I could be wrong, but I doubt it."

 

[Firepower!]

kahr ..... 56 votes! hmmm those 56 voting for kahr should seriously check out SW before simply voting kahr just because they have it or have seen it at the gun store.

 

[FranklyTodd]

Give me the J-frame with Crimson Trace grips and some Speer +P GDHP's.

NO WAY! I'm not giving it, because that's exactly what's in my pocket everyday.

I have nothing against a Kahr (rented one - liked it, but didn't fall in love), but any knock on a j-frame I take with a grain of salt. For civilian CCW, there might be things you prefer for this or that reason, but I'll never buy that anything is "better."

When I dust off the j after a week's worth of pocket carry, I am alarmed at the amount of lint and debris all over the gun. It makes me uncomfortable to think an auto would have to cycle through all that stuff, while I'm 100% confident in the revolver. [EDIT - in a Desantis Nemesis, btw - Mika on order]

If you are carrying by another method, maybe that makes it closer - heck I sometimes carry an auto IWB, but my M&P340 with CT is #1 for me. The airweight is a touch heavier, but of those two, I still would pick it for me (it's also a lot cheaper than the Kahr or M&P - bonus!).

[EDIT AGAIN]

Without intending to offend the previous poster, the downside to the revolver is the limited number of rounds when attacked by multiple assailants. I think the scenario of finding oneself with two or more assailants (thugs and similar criminals are usually cowards and like to travel in groups) has to be factored into the equation-at least a 50-50 chance there will be more than one attacker...

If you run into multiple attackers armed and so motivated that they don't run away immediately after you shoot the first one or two, you are dead, period. If you think with a Kahr, or a Glock with a 33rd magazine you are walking away after gunning down a half-dozen BGs, you watch too much TV.

I like to think if I am ever attacked it will be for financial gain or just "mess with you" fun, I think 5 shots worth of deterrent will be sufficient, thank you. You are describing a hit squad - and as I said, my response to this kind of attack would be the same as yours: shoot one or two, then die bleeding on the street - whaddya gonna do? [/EDIT]

 

[brentfoto]

Thank you for your comments.

 

[krs]

One little 9mm has roughly 350 ft lbs of whack.
One big ol' .38 spec.+p has something like 250 lbs of whack.

Whack = thump.

Thump bad guys as hard as you can. Simple.

 

[brentfoto]

First Range Trip With My New Kahr CW9

Here are my INITIAL impressions.

At the outset, I field-stripped and reassembled the gun numerous times to get the hang of it...and cleaned the barrel with some Outers (first time I ever used it), sprayed some dechlorinated brake cleaner in the polymer frame, etc and got the residue off. Then I helped it dry quicker with some canned compressed air that one would use with one's computer.

I then lubricated the rails lightly with Mobil One Synthetic Oil-15W50 (I had read an opinion some time ago that 20W50 synthetic was best all-around, but could not get it at the local Wal-Mart). My experience with the synthetic oil-I lubricate all my semi-autos with it and they cycle and function remarkably well.

I also placed a drop on the barrel about midway to the muzzle. I left the Kahr magazine alone. That was about it.

Rounds fired: 50 UMC factory 9mm 115gr MC (L9MM3) and
50 handloads of 9mm Rainier 115gr CPB RN over 5.1gr Unique.

There were no FTF or FTE with these first hundred rounds fired. Gun shot perfectly with no hint of a problem.

Gun was a joy to shoot and recoil was minor with these loads, considerably less than I imagined. Though I had some slight tenderness in the web of my hand after firing the 100 rounds during the course of about an hour, this was due to the friction of the polymer tail against the web of my hand and the way I was gripping the firearm.

The following constitutes my opinion with these loads--KEEP IN MIND that I have not yet shot SD or +P rounds through the gun:

Quite accurate, much easier to shoot accurately than the J-frame. It almost got boring. Good groups with a lot of head shots and COM at 7yds. to ~12 yds. I was surprised that I shot so well, especially in comparison to the Airweight.

The gun has better sights than the J-frame and points better. It's slim. It's round capacity is 160% that of the J-frame (8 vs. 5)...and I feel more comfortable shooting it...ergonomically-it fits my hand well...a quite pleasant experience in comparison to shooting the J-frame... I SHOOT THE KAHR BETTER! DOES THAT MATTER?

Though I have not shot the SD/+P and/or +P+(inquiry: not recommended?), I am quite frankly amazed the J-frame has, for the most part, dominated this poll over the Kahr CW9 by a margin of appx. 2-1. Amazing. Perhaps a lot of voters have never shot the CW9...I think that shooting a x42 Airweight with the +P is almost ‘brutal’ when practicing with them to any extent-I don’t believe that I’ll feel the same with the Kahr, but that remains to be seen.

The ONLY advantage to the J-frame that I can see at this juncture would be lighter (empty weight of Airweight with the stock UM boot grips is 15.1 oz; the CW9 I have weighs 18.5 oz. with empty magazine appended), the J-frame arguably conceals better in the pocket, AND is arguably more reliable but that is subject to debate. (I amend this statement-the J-frame has the edge but I don't care-see post following).

The Kahr's flat, slim, lightweight, and has plenty of attributes. I’ve even thought about the future of my Airweight-whether I might sell it!

Now all this could change as I’m writing only three hours after my trip to the range. But, do you know that first impressions are important? And you don't get a second chance to make a good first impression...and this gun DOES make a very good first impression in my mind.

I’m deferring my vote at this time but I’d be less than candid if I said that I was not greatly favoring the Kahr CW9 over the J-frame Airweight 442/642. So much for nostalgia and the past...shoot this gun and see if you agree with me.

Be sure to thoroughly read the owner's manual on this one...that's important,,,and maybe you'll have 100% reliability, like I did.
http://www.kahr.com/DL/kahrmanual.pdf

(I have no interest or affiliation with Kahr or S&W, though I do like the CS at Smith & Wesson and love to shoot revolvers).

 

[mjrodney]

I voted earlier for the J-frame, as that's what I carry today, but reading about the PM9 and CW9 makes me think that I ought to at least try one for myself, and chances are, one of these will come home with me from the next gun show. There's one coming up this month and I still have room in the safe.

For now though, my suspicion is that the J-frame will retain several advantages over the Kahr that will keep the J-frame as my carry arm of choice.

One is loaded weight. I exclusively carry holstered in a front pocket. More weight equates to either an increased frequency of tugging on my beltline to hike my britches up.....or additionally, if I am wearing cargo slacks or shorts, the pocket swings back and forth while you walk with the added weight acting as a pendulum. Even with the J-frame, I've had it swing a cargo pocket forward a bit and smack a cashier's counter with an audible "clunk".

The second, and perhaps it's biggest advantage, would have to be the Crimson Trace Laser Grips that the J-frame sports.

Using a J-frame's open sights leaves a lot to be desired. I have no doubt that the Kahr beats the J-frame using open sights. Probably by a wide margin.

But with the Crimson Trace Grips, I have no need use the sights. And that handgun hits where that Laser is pointed. At 24 feet, I can easily manage a 4" group in semi-rapid fire.

And perhaps the best advantage would come if you were knocked down and couldn't bring the sights to bear. You could hold the handgun on top of your head and still bring home the bacon. Just put the laser on target.

In any case, I'll will pick up a PM9 or a CW9 and that will enable me to come to a personal conclusion on what's best for me.

If I don't like it.....I'll just turn around and.....keep it.

That's why we have large safes.....

 

[FranklyTodd]

the J-frame ... is arguably more reliable but that is subject to debate

No it's not (subject to debate, I mean). I'm not calling the Kahr unreliable, but don't elevate it to S&W revolver reliability because of your 100 jam-free rounds...

No auto is that reliable. It does sound like a great gun, and I'm glad for you that you like it.

 

[Dismantler]

I only voted for the 442 because I am an old wheelgun shooter, and I have a 442 with me most of the time.

Nothing against the Kahr, or other autos, but I cannot seem to get the hang of them. The muscle memory is ingrained in me to operate revolvers, and I am not really interested in readjusting to autos.

 

[brentfoto]

I've had personal experience with trigger studs breaking, which renders the gun useless once you remove the slide plate to do a TJ or flush and lube. The most recent was with my new Airweight, I am sorry to say-have had it one month with perhaps 1000-1500 dry-fires and maybe 300 rounds through it. Discovered this surprise doing a routine inspection of the innards....the interesting thing is the gun at that time was firing fine, and might have continued to do so had the sideplate not been removed. Then again, it could have failed at the worst possible time, you never know.

I've also had problems with revolvers' binding of cylinders (GP-100 some years ago), poor triggers, timing, etc.

When one considers possibility of use of such a gun in a life/death scenario vs. failure probablility it's insignificant in my view. For purposes of reliability, I do indeed give the edge to the revolver over the Kahr (or any other semi-auto), but I'm not concerned about it, and that's why I said reliability was arguable. But I'm amending the statement. It's really not an issue for me. ( It's similar to the ebay seller who has 24,582 positive feedbacks. They give him a 100% feedback rating even though he's had 5 or 6 negative feedbacks in the past year. Why? Because those negatives are considered to be statistically insignificant).

The probability of a miss with the J-frame is far more likely than the probability of a failure with the Kahr in the one time that I might conceivably have to use such a weapon. And if you practice TRB (Tap Rack Bang), it should solve the jam almost every time. I don't see it happening but anything's possible.

The probability of a 'hit' with the Kahr vs. one with the J-frame is higher-FOR ME. YMMV.

I must say this-I shot 8 rounds semi-rapid fire (~4 sec.) to head at 7 yds. and was surprised at accuracy-made the J frame a 'joke'. Maybe I'll post a pic of my targets, which I did happen to save from last night (something I rarely do). And I was shooting it leisurely.

It's like 'apples n oranges'. Suggest that you rent one if you can (and make sure that it's clean) and see if you agree.

I simply shoot The Kahr CW9 better and at a much higher confidence level in doing so than the J-frame. Isn't that what it's all about in a SD weapon?

Combine this with its caliber and round capacity in comparison to the J-frame and it's impressive. The Kahr is not so much a 'belly gun' as the J.

My opinions may change if I experience to the contrary. I have deferred my vote for that reason, and, as I stated above, these are my iniitial impressions-they are not set in stone.

Today I'm likely to return to range and shoot another 100 rounds for break-in. Then I may shoot some JHP's SD ammo. The gun has not been cleaned since last night's range trip-I did run a .35 cal BoreSnake through it a few times and wiped the exterior.

 

[brentfoto]

Kahr CW9 Targets

Here are targets shot last night. I do not consider myself a marksman, nor do I shoot competition. This is my first time shooting the CW9. Do note that I never took more than a second between shots, many times faster. Most targets shot at 7 yds unless otherwise noted.

 

[Owen Meany]

brentfoto said:

I simply shoot The Kahr CW9 better and at a much higher confidence level in doing so than the J-frame. Isn't that what it's all about in a SD weapon?

No, not necessarily. In fact, I would say that - provided we're talking about guns that are going to be discreetly carried (you didn't say this in your original post, but the comments of numerous posters reflect this assumption, with no correction from you) - your level of comfort in shooting and handling the weapon is far less important than the size and weight of the gun and how effectively it conceals in your planned carry position.

Once again assuming that you will be carrying, I think you'll have to agree that concealability is the absolute most important factor to be considered here. Everything else - even reliability, if you think about it - is subordinate to making sure that the gun is of such size, weight and shape that you will be able to carry it on a regular basis, because if you don't have the gun with you, nothing else is going to matter much. The most reliable gun in the world isn't going to do you any good if it's out of reach when you need it. On the other hand, a gun of dubious reliability - but one that is carried all day, every day - just might save the day if it functions properly at the crucial moment.

Of course, in this particular case, I don't think reliability factors in too much, since both the Smith and Kahr are high-quality firearms. But I just wanted to explain why I place a gun's concealability at the very top of the list of relevant factors in choosing a carry gun.

In my opinion, after concealability is considered, then comes reliability, then caliber, then capacity, and finally, how well you shoot the gun.

There is a good reason why I place one's shooting ability last. It's the only thing in the list that you are actually empowered to do very much about! If you find a gun that is perfect in all respects except how it feels to you and how capably you can use it, then take heart, because virtually every time, you can, with sufficient practice and patience, become very competent with the weapon, in many cases eventually bonding with it in a way that you never would have anticipated.

Now, if both the Kahr and J-frame carry equally well for you, then of course the Kahr is going to be the logical choice, based on your evident satisfaction with it. The only reason to go with the J-frame at this point would be the concealability issue. I will admit that there really isn't a big difference between the two choices in the poll, but I believe that there is enough of one to possibly affect the choice of which to carry.

The above should not be construed as an argument for the J-frame, but just an explanation of my priorities. Sounds like you have a winner in the Kahr.

Thanks for posting the pictures of the targets. Good shooting!

 

[brentfoto]

Thank you for your comments. I appreciate them.

I've cast my vote, but one really can't go wrong with either, and that's why I set up the poll-to make it challenging and to help all with selection of gun/carry options (discreet). I chose the...


...




...





...








...


...


...


...











AND NOT THE:







BUT IMHO, AND AT EXPENSE OF BEING REPETITIOUS, ONE CAN'T GO 'WRONG' WITH EITHER!

regards,

 

[MCgunner]

Nothing against the Kahr, or other autos, but I cannot seem to get the hang of them. The muscle memory is ingrained in me to operate revolvers, and I am not really interested in readjusting to autos.

On the draw and shooting, a DAO auto works JUST LIKE a revolver, draw gun, squeeze trigger.

 

[kanderson586]

i voted for the j frame but another fact about my old pm40 is that the cw40 mags seated in it also which gave my backup mags 8 rounds at the ready. But i gotta warn you BRENTFOTO, you should start calling kahr now for spare followers as they are cheap plastic and WILL fall apart. kahr was generous sending me spares as they are well aware they are junk.

 

[DawgFvr]

For a pocket weapon...I'd vote the revovler over a pistol. Did not even have to think about that one.

 

[brentfoto]

Assuming a thought did enter your mind , what was your reason in coming to such an easy conclusion?

 

[NWdude83]

Welcome to the CW club.

 

[brentfoto]

Is NPH who I think it is?

TV personality/star or something? 'Doogie Howser'?

Anyway, thanks for the welcome to the CW Club, I think... <g>

 

[DawgFvr]

brentphoto: All my small autos have failed, at one time or another, my J frame has not. Now...I can slide a S&W 642 into my front pocket and carry it anywhere, all day and almost forget it is in there. It has never failed. I must admit, it kicks like a mule with 110 grain Corbon DPX + P, but at close range, I can put all five rounds into a small, tight circle. For me, that is all I want for a self-defense weapon. One that presents very fast...and works every time...no safety, no problems, point, pull the trigger...do it again. Autos? I want Commander size or larger.

 

[philbo]

I voted for the Kahr and then read the thread. I came to the same conclusion you did some time ago. The CW9 was so easy to conceal and shoot well that I sold my 642 and replaced it with a PM9 for pocket carry. Never a regret.

 

[brentfoto]

Dawgfvr-

Have you ever shot the Kahr CW9?

If not, suggest that you do. Maybe it'll change your mind. If not, I certainly can see your point of view but I don't agree with it and think the benefits of the Kahr greatly outweigh the perceived risks.

Five rounds ain't much with two or three attackers in a difficult gun to shoot accurately.

I think the Kahr is so much better to shoot accurately that it clearly wins out on that ground alone.

First round in the chamber will fire even in the worst of scenarios-a subsequent FTE, stovepipe, etc. TRB. I'm not worried about it. My lifestyle may differ from others. Anyway, chances are that I will never, ever need to pull it never mind shoot someone, but you never know...

However, I'm willing to take the 'risk' in choosing it over the j-frame Airweight.

 

[brentfoto]

Philbo--

On all said, I'm with 'ya, man.

re pocket carry- the DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster compatible with the Kahr K9, etc. works nicely with the CW9.