pm9, cm9, p380 is there a difference??

[kerby9mm]

It seems there is give and take in this discussion so I thought what if the bad guy got the drop on me and grabbed my mk. He could shoot me with it right awsy but if I was carrying my p238 he might not know about the safety. If he stuck something in my back it could be a gun or could be something else. This happened to a guy at work as he was getting in his car at work. The guy from work was armed. Luckly the bad guy only took his $40. Just one of my crazy thoughts

[JFootin]

I guess it could be carried in a holster cocked and unlocked (Condition 0), but it is not a decision that I would carry a single action pistol with, and it goes against the advise of every 1911 person on the web. Some of the P238 threads advocate carrying it in condition 2 (hammer down) or 3 (no round in chamber), both of which are useless for a sellf defense situation. These guns don't have a grip safety either. As for the 8 lb trigger, although Sig won't do it, a quick google search shows many threads about reducing it to 4.5 lb.

Regardless of the condition carried, the beavertail and cocked hammer still do not lend themselves to a clean draw from a pocket, IWB, or concealing garment.

Good points. Just shows what a good solution the Kahr pistols are for self defence and concealed carry. That lo-o-o-ong trigger is a simple and effective solution for carrying safely in condition 0.

[BroncoAZ]

It seems there is give and take in this discussion so I thought what if the bad guy got the drop on me and grabbed my mk. He could shoot me with it right awsy but if I was carrying my p238 he might not know about the safety. If he stuck something in my back it could be a gun or could be something else. This happened to a guy at work as he was getting in his car at work. The guy from work was armed. Luckly the bad guy only took his $40. Just one of my crazy thoughts

I'm really not sure how to respond to this bundle of thought, but I'll try anyway.

It would be more difficult for a bad guy to shoot you with your own gun if you used a keyed trigger lock at all times, but that is not in the realm of possibility for someone carrying for self defense. The bad guy should not be aware that his target is carrying, giving you an element of surprise as you draw and fire 1-2 shots center of mass to stop the threat. With or without a thumb safety, if the bad guy has your gun you're already dead.

An unarmed robber should not find your gun as you hand him your wallet, your gun and your wallet should not be in the same place. Ideally you want your wallet on your weak side so you can reach for it with your weak hand, keeping your strong hand available to fight or draw and fire.

[chrish]

about the time the P380 was coming out, fall 2008, i was in the market to transition from a revolver to something more concealable. at the time, the smith airweight j frames were the only thing out there in a lightweight revolver and they weren't all that light and you were stuck w/ a .38 at the time. my search lead me to Kahr and i was pretty much decided on either the P380 or the PM9. i opted for the PM9 for all the reasons everyone opts for the PM9, cartridge, small enough for pocket carry, etc. but i then found what many folks feel (or seem to) which is that the PM9 is only pocket carry in certain pants...others it just doesn't work, too heavy even in a good pocket holster.

by this point in time, i had ultimately shifted to IWB and the P9 and sold my PM9.

i think today, if i were to want to shift BACK to a pocket carry, i'd be looking at one of the polymer revolvers (bodyguard or LCR) or a smith scad .357. all of these way ounces less than the last gen airweights, carry enough rounds for a pocket SD gun, and are not subject to the P380 issues w/ short feed ramps, slide releases on tiny frames, etc...they are revolvers and always go BANG.

so, to sum up, i would still skip the P380 today and decide IWB = CM/PM/CW/P ... or pocket = lightweight revolver.

my 2 cents.

[BroncoAZ]

i think today, if i were to want to shift BACK to a pocket carry, i'd be looking at one of the polymer revolvers (bodyguard or LCR) or a smith scad .357. all of these way ounces less than the last gen airweights, carry enough rounds for a pocket SD gun, and are not subject to the P380 issues w/ short feed ramps, slide releases on tiny frames, etc...they are revolvers and always go BANG.

so, to sum up, i would still skip the P380 today and decide IWB = CM/PM/CW/P ... or pocket = lightweight revolver.

my 2 cents.

Some people swear that hammerless revolvers are easier to conceal because of the less boxy shape, but not too many thinkg I've read advocate them being carried in the pocket. I'm not disagreeing with your logic or choice, but the lightweight revolvers like the LCR are huge for a pocket compared to the P380/LCP/P3AT. I can't find a comparison picture to the P380, but here is the LCR to the PM9:

[Cokeman]

Left handed PM9?

[BroncoAZ]

Left handed PM9?

Good catch, and don't I wish... There was a disclaimer on the post I got the picture from that the PM9 was mirrored.

[chrish]

no, i completely agree that the 'pocketable' revolvers are physically bigger in every dimension than the PM9. but i found the PM9, loaded, ammo weight in the handle, to just be too top/grip heavy. with the revolver, the weight goes center/down once loaded, particularly w/ the polymer ones where the barrel, cylinder, ammo are the only weight there.

the smith .357 scad (i think its the 340?) is only 11.5oz if memory serves, so shave another 2 oz off and you have a pretty pocketable gun.

as far as concealing a revolver, don't really have a thought either way. i personally don't worry about occasional 'printing' but i would imagine the revolver would print WAY MORE than a PM9 or P380. so in that regard, definitely either Kahr choice would conceal better IMO.

for pocket carry, revolver or auto, i wouldn't carry w/o a holster of some kind. if that's what you meant about people not pocket carrying a revolver. for me, any pocket carry = pocket holster.

[JFootin]

I have a CM9 and a S&W 638 Snubby. Here are my observations regarding pocket carry and concealability.

First of all, no matter where you carry, your careful choice of the right holster for a specific carry situation is critical. For pocket carry, some holsters hide the shape of a gun better than others.

In the pocket, I find that the shape of the revolver contributes to an easier draw than with the CM9. Of course, my 638 has the shielded hammer, which is helpful. But the small, thin frame in the back and the angle of the grip on the 638 make it much quicker and easier to get hold of the gun and to pull it out without it getting caught in the pocket opening.

I have been looking seriously at appendix carry for the ease of access to and drawing the gun, even from a seated position. I have been experimenting at AIWB position using an Uncle Mike's #3 pocket holster (which works well in the pocket, staying put when I draw). The UM holster has a 1" wide rubber grip strip that, when put in the waist under belt tension, keeps the holster where I put it.

I tried both guns. I learned some interesting things. First, the 638 conceals there MUCH better than the CM9. While the cylinder is wide on the 638, the rest of the gun is just 1/2" wide or less. The grip is about as narrow as the Kahr grip. So, it makes an overall thinner package in the holster. A big difference that really affects concealment, though, is that, like all semi-autos, The CM9 has a wide, boxy slide that is an inch wide all the way from the front to a point well behind the top of the grip. In comparison, the 638 has a narrow barrel up front and a 1/2" frame up top that starts curving downward 1 1/2" forward of where the chunky slide ends on the CM9. And it is that chunky slide extending backward that gets pushed out by my belly and prints terribly.

By contrast, there is nothing in that location but air with the 638. I found that, with a 10-12° backward cant, the grip of the 638 lays down horizontally just above my belt and hides under the 'ledge' of my modest middle aged spread, making for no printing under an untucked shirt. I am going to get a tuckable holster so that I don't have to alter my style of dress. And in that up front location, my weak hand can easily pull the shirt up when I draw.

To give credit to the CM9, being flat sided it rides more comfortably and conceals very well behind my hip—an ideal gun for carry at that location.