Kahr MK9 vs. Kahr PM9

[Jiml3]

Does anybody out there have any experience with both of these guns to do a comparision?
Pro and cons on weight? Does the steel on the MK9 absord the recoil better than the polymer?
What about the tradeoff of the shorter grip on the MK9 vs, the full grip of the PM9?
Which is easier to carry?
Which has the better quality control?
Between the two which would you buy?
Thanks for any input.

 

[CleverNickname]

I own a PM9, and had a chance to shoot another guy's MK9 at the range a few weeks ago.

Recoil is a bit more manageable with the MK9, but that's not to say the PM9 is bad at all. You could tell the diference though. The grips on both guns are the same length. I have no issues with the quality of my PM9. A couple FTEs the first few magazines, no problems in the ~600 rounds since then. I assume you're not going to use the gun for target shooting, but mainly carry (?), so I'd go with the lighter gun, the PM9.

 

[gbelleh]

I have owned a PM9 and an MK40. The PM9 is noticably lighter than the MK9 (a big plus for concealed carry).

The recoil of the PM9 is not bad. I haven't shot an MK9, but the PM9 is not hard to control. The grip on the MK9 and PM9 are the same size. The guns are the exact same size, the only difference is the weight.

I would recommend the PM9 if it's going to be carried. The MK9 is too heavy for front pocket carry for most people. The PM9 is much more comfortable to carry.

Quality between the two shouldn't be any different. Kahr had some problems with their early polymers, but those problems seem to have been fixed.

 

[Coot]

I have to agree with Cleaver...except my PM9 has yet to have a FTF/FTF in over 500 rounds. Great gun...forget I'm wearing it.

 

[DeltaElite]

Sadly, I have owned both and both have jammed using new defensive ammo.
I have sold them both.
I really liked the guns, but reliability is what I really like.

 

[denfoote]

MK9 Elite all the way!!!

 

[Kahr carrier]

I have shot them both but I do prefer the Mk9 .My Mk9 is real reliable,but my friends Pm 9 is kind of dicey but that might be just inherent in his, its an earlier version.

 

[cratz2]

For the 9mm, I'd rather go with the poly gun, and I have. I doubt I'll be putting 100 rounds through it each range trip so I'd rather have a light weight gun, make sure it is completely reliable with my carry ammo and forget about it. Put maybe 25 or 50 rounds a month through it.

I'd rather have the light weight gun. With the 40, I've never shot the polymer gun but the metal guns have enough recoil with defense loads that I'm not sure I'd like the poly version very much.

 

[mini14jac]

I started with a MK9.
Really liked it.
If you are going to belt carry, they are easier to find, and maybe cheaper than a PM9.
Recoil was no worse than my full-size Ruger P95, and it was a very accurate, reliable gun. I had well over 500rds through mine.

I can only pocket carry most of the time.
The MK was too heavy for pocket carry, for me.
I traded it on the first PM9 that I saw.
(I really hated to get rid of the MK. I liked it, and had just added night sights.)

Around 300 rds through the PM9 so far.
No failures of any kind.
It is a little more "frisky" than the MK9, but recoil is not uncomfortable at all.
I wouldn't have any problem shooting 100rds at a range session, if someone else would keep my mags loaded.
It is just as accurate as the other gun, and easy to control.

The weight makes it perfect, for me, for pocket carry.
In a belt holster, you really forget about it.

The biggest problem I have with the gun, is not enough time to go shoot.