Poll: Sig P239 vs Kahr P9/CW9 for CC

Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by JQP, Oct 26, 2010.

?

Poll: Sig P239 vs Kahr P9/CW9 for CC

  1. Sig P239

    40 vote(s)
    47.6%
  2. Kahr P9

    21 vote(s)
    25.0%
  3. Kahr CW9

    23 vote(s)
    27.4%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Primary and simple factors in order of importance are:

    1) Reliability
    2) Concealability
    3) Durability
     
  2. InkEd

    InkEd Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,575
    Location:
    Parts Unknown
    The Sig and Kahr platforms are very different. You're comparing guns that aren't really meant to fit the same bill. The P9 is great but IMHO not that much more refined than the CW9 for the price. The Sig is great too. You need to decide what type of pistol you prefer. Good luck.
     
  3. lions

    lions Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,204
    Location:
    Kansas
    I voted CW9. Mine has been 100% reliable through over 700 rounds so far. I see no signs to indicate any issues with durability either. Concealability goes to the CW9 in all dimensions, particularly in weight which I certainly appreciate while carrying all day.
     
  4. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Kind of apples vs oranges ... a better comparison would be Sig P239 VS Kahr K9.
     
  5. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Right now, the Sig P239 has the lead.

    I'm a Sig sort of guy, I guess.

    I regret selling my P239 now. Big mistake. It was a tack driver and dimensionally, was great for IWB carry - but heavy (quality has its price, and the robust build of the P239 showed up in the weight).

    But then again, the virtue of the CW9, if I do decided to not get another P239, is that it weighs just over 1/2 as much, making concealment easier.

    I am more comfortable with the Sig's hammer and 2nd strike capability, and I've grown to inherently trust the quality and reliability of Sig, so the Kahr thing would be a new thing for me.

    Also, it's sort of weak that Kahr only ships one magazine with the CW9.

    Anyways, thanks for your feedback.
     
  6. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    I guess given those choices I'd go with the Sig. But turn the Kahr into a K9 and it gets the nod over the Sig.
     
  7. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Zundfolge:"I guess given those choices I'd go with the Sig. But turn the Kahr into a K9 and it gets the nod over the Sig."


    The CW9 is about 17 ounces unloaded, whereas the K9 is closer to 23 ounces unloaded.

    I see the weight of the CW9 as the most primary advantage it has over the extremely reliable and (IMO) more durable and accurate P239. The K9 nullifies this weight advantage to a large degree.
     
  8. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    I somewhat expected the Sig to win this one, but not by such a wide margin.

    After doing some research, and this is not a 'hate on' comment, I have grown somewhat leery of the polymer framed Kahrs, and this is based on even a lot of things I've read on Kahr.forums.

    It seems the metal frame Kahrs are solid, but there's been more complaints about the P and CW series.

    I can't remember the last time I've heard or read any problems about the P239 anywhere.
     
  9. oletymer

    oletymer Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    366
    Location:
    North Central Washington
    My Sig P239 has never had a malfunction of any kind. It is not a tack driver though. It's accuracy is acceptable for a carry gun but certainly not great.
     
  10. millertyme

    millertyme Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    686
    Location:
    MESA, ARIZONA
    P239's are heavy. Period.
     
  11. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    You didn't list weight as a primary concern.

    Again I'm comparing the metal SIG to the metal Kahr, not metal Kahr to plastic Kahr.

    If you're considering the SIG it weighs 25.2oz empty.


    From a Reliability/Concealability/Durability standpoint: Kahr K9 > SIG P239 > Kahr P9 > Kahr CW9
     
  12. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    The SIG is a good shooter, but I've always been disapointed in the P239.

    In handling them I've always found them to seem larger than they should. They LOOK like they should be svelte, compact carry pieces but in the hand they're much bulkier and brick like than one would expect. In all honesty I'd rather just add a little weight and bulk and pack a P229 instead and get 5 more rounds (I know on paper the P229 is a LOT larger than the P239, but in the hand they really don't feel that much larger ... or rather the P239 doesn't feel that much smaller).

    The Kahr is just hands down one of the best designed CCW pieces ever made. Its thin, feels lighter than it is, doesn't have a lot of levers and other controls and the Elites have triggers that can only be described as Pythonesque (look ma, I invented a word!).
     
  13. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Got a chance to shoot a CW9 at a range tonight.

    Let's just say that it's not for me at all.

    The extra weight of the P239 is a non-issue for me at this point.

    2 lessons:

    1) Always rent or borrow the firearm you think you might want to buy before doing so, if possible, and put some lead down range.

    2) Never sell a firearm that was absolutely reliable and a pleasure to fire.
     
  14. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    I fired the CW9 again along with the Walther PPS tonight.

    I might come around on the CW9 because it's so damn light and concealable. I could not get a comfortable grip on the PM9 because it's just too short (for me).

    Does anyone have any reliable information about the durability of the Kahr polymer frame used in both of these (the frame is the exact same)?

    I am concerned about polymer framed pistols with the exception of Glock, due to the utter reliability and longevity of the G17 and G19 (some guy has over 130,000 rounds through his G17, I do believe) with original frame.
     
  15. InkEd

    InkEd Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,575
    Location:
    Parts Unknown
    I have over 1500 rounds through a cw9 and it shows no signs of wearing out. Have an mk9 with over 5000 rounds and no problems for wear.
     
  16. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Good to know, and thanks for the feedback.

    Some guy with username jocko on Kahrforums claims he has fired 30,000 rounds through his PM9, with original frame and barrel.
     
  17. NWdude83

    NWdude83 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    386
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    Of course a Sig, with a match grade barrel, is gonna win.
     
  18. usp9

    usp9 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,922
    Location:
    Bowling Green, Va
    The concealability factor is really the only one that differentiates the Kahr from the Sig.

    Of those three I'd choose the Kahr P9 for these reasons;
    * It's lighter than the Sig.
    * It's thinner.
    * I prefer the polygonal barrel, (CW9 doesn't).
    * Comes in all black, (CW9 doesn't).
    * Offers a choice of night sights, (CW9 doesn't).
     
  19. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Just my .02, but I don't think that conventional vs polygonal rifling in the barrel of a small CCW pistol, meant for short distance defense, is going to be that important, and also, reloads can be fire through the CW9 barrel (if one was so inclined) but not the polygonal P9 barrel.

    Also, the CW9 now can be fitted with night sites (a relatively new accessory for it).

    I do agree about the two tone thing - I much prefer the all black, down to business aesthetics, myself.
     
  20. Random Discharge

    Random Discharge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    196
    Try a K9 Before You Decide

    I've shot both. I second the already stated opinion that the P239 just seems too blocky for what it is. The K9 may only be a few ounces lighter, but it packs, handles and shoots so very well due to its form. I've also shot the P9 and did not like it at all compared to the K9. Sure, its lighter. But I found the K9 no harder to deal with IWB, and easier and smoother to use for getting shots on target. Also, the P9 just did not have the quality feel of the K9.
     
  21. Jbabbler

    Jbabbler Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Location:
    Atlanta
    For daily CCW I would go with the Kahr. I love shooting Sigs but the P239 is overkill in terms of size/weight vs capacity in my opinion. Sigs new P290 looks interesting though.

    IACPOrlando038.jpg
     
  22. Madcap_Magician

    Madcap_Magician Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,198
    Location:
    MN
    The P239 is a quality gun, but so is the P9, and the CW9 only sacrifices a little quality for a big price drop.

    I think the P9 gets the edge, it's thinner, with basically the same capacity as the P239, slightly less shootable, but very much more concealable.
     
  23. evan price

    evan price Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    5,514
    Location:
    http://www.ohioccw.org/ Ohio's best CCW resour
    I like the weight of the P239, because second shots are more controlled (I own a KelTec PF9 for comparison). Also the DA/SA action with decock and no safety imho is great. Just draw and fire like a revolver. But I am a Sig luvver so go figure, I carry a P220 or P225 sometimes without a problem. A GOOD holster makes all the difference.
     
  24. Jbabbler

    Jbabbler Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Location:
    Atlanta
    I have a P225 and really enjoy shooting it. However, its larger, thicker and heavier than my Glock 23 with half the capacity so I don't carry it very often. When I first got it I carried it quite a bit but my CW40 is so much easier to conceal and doesn't get left behind locked in the truck like the Sig seemed to in lighter clothes.
     
  25. JQP

    JQP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    J, my G23 was and did feel a lot thicker in the slide and grip than my Sig P239.

    Is the P225 really that large?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice