Kahr PM Series Recoil

[jwalker497]

Is there anyone out there who owns or at least shot all three main calibers? The PM9 (9mm), the PM40 (40sw), and the PM 45 (45acp)?? If so, can you please compare the recoil form these gunss and advise whether or not one is to be avoided? The reason I ask is I got to shoot a PM45 with some hot Ammo and man did it kick!! Keep in mind, I like the 45 round and feel it's very controllable, but I was suprised to say the least. My worry is - I cant imagine how bad the PM40 would kick?? Anyone out there get an oppertunity to compare these, at least the 40 and 45?

 

[JasonblkZ06]

I have shot the PM9 and the PM40. Neither is bad, the PM 40 is harder for a doubletap follow up, but not too bad. Might take a little more practice, but I like the .40 for what it is.

 

[NWCP]

I went with a PM9. It has less recoil and is easier to bring back on target after each shot. The PM40 is a nice weapon, but does have a really snappy recoil. Follow up shots aren't as easy to make as with the 9. I haven't had the opportunity to shoot their PM45, but I would assume the recoil is once again less friendly than that of the PM9. All three are remarkable sub compact pistols and each that I've fired has a really smooth trigger. Folks may say what they will about Kahr pistols, but they are well made and their DAO trigger is touch to beat.

 

[txgolfer45]

I've shot the PM9 and PM40. I own the PM9. IMHO, the PM40 recoil is bordering on violent. The PM9 with +P carry ammo is a handful but very manageable. Haven't tried the PM45. It wasn't available when I was shopping. Get the PM9.

 

[Guns and more]

I call the PM-9 "snappy". It flips up, but is not unpleasant.

 

[M1911]

I have a K9, K40, MK9, and PM9. The K9 is fine for an extended range session. The K40 is downright unpleasant for me -- I feel a significant impact in the web of my hand, between thumb and forefinger. The MK9 has more recoil than the K9, but is still less than the K40 and eminently doable. The PM9 is noticeably more recoil than the MK9. The PM9 is not something that you want to put 100 rounds through at a go, but I still find it easier than my S&W 642.

There is simply no way in heck that I would try a Kahr MK40 or PM40. Get the PM9.

 

[coppermouse]

I have the PM9 and it's not bad at all, as someone said kinda snappy. 300 rounds through it without a malfunction

 

[Shawn Dodson]

I call the PM-9 "snappy".

That's a very good description. I installed Pearce grip extensions on my PM9 magazines which aided in recoil recovery kept my grip from shifting.

 

[JasonblkZ06]

The PM40 isn't bad. I like it.

 

[musicman]

PM 45 is surprisingly mild with normal rounds, Plus P is a slightly differnt story but more than manageable...but what do you want for a tiny 45

 

[9MMare]

I have a K9, K40, MK9, and PM9. The K9 is fine for an extended range session. The K40 is downright unpleasant for me -- I feel a significant impact in the web of my hand, between thumb and forefinger. The MK9 has more recoil than the K9, but is still less than the K40 and eminently doable. The PM9 is noticeably more recoil than the MK9. The PM9 is not something that you want to put 100 rounds through at a go, but I still find it easier than my S&W 642.

There is simply no way in heck that I would try a Kahr MK40 or PM40. Get the PM9.

Interesting! Isnt the MK9 the all steel pistol? I would think that would have less recoil. And what is the composition of the PM9? Thanks very much, this kind of info is helpful...when I've saved, I'd like to get a compact 9mm and I'm leaning towards Kahr. I want the 9mm with the least recoil (that was still a compact)....or at least manageable recoil...I am a person who practices tho, so may be able to compensate for some of it.