Curious about magazine capacities

[Coppertop]

Curious why Kahr does not offer any high-capacity firearms. I wouldn't mind seeing one of the polymer framed models offered in a 10 or 12 round magazine. Might make for a decent law enforcement sidearm (or personal protection gun) if they were reliable.

[b4uqzme]

Because thin is in...

[CJB]

They have their niche, and do it well.... some would say they do it best.

[AJBert]

Thin equals single stack, plain and simple.

[CJB]

Sherman, set the WABAC Machine to the year 1988. Here we'll find a frustrated Justin Moon, having recently gotten his carry permit, and having nothing which he felt suitable for concealed carry.

Advancing the lever to about mid 1990, we see Justin working out the design details of what will become the Kahr pistol in a few years time. As you can see, he is working on the dual lobe cocking cam being rotated by the trigger bar, and the trigger being pulled as its nestled under the offset feed ramp, in order to keep the pistol as thin as possible.

Small, reliable, accurate, thin, and finally... light weight are the design goals.

[Coppertop]

Just thought it was interesting that many handgun manufacturers offer a range of handguns with mixed capacities and Kahr does not.
Nothing wrong with having a limited selection. For the longest Glock only offered high-cap handguns.

Oh and I realize single stacked equals thin. Plus, I cannot agree that Kahr does this well or the best.
Kahr has some nice designs, but they are a long way from doing it well with all the out of the box issues customers have experienced.
Requiring a 200 round break-in period is unique and really shouldn't be necessary.

[SlowBurn]

Sherman, set the WABAC Machine to the year 1988. Here we'll find a frustrated Justin Moon, having recently gotten his carry permit, and having nothing which he felt suitable for concealed carry.

Advancing the lever to about mid 1990, we see Justin working out the design details of what will become the Kahr pistol in a few years time. As you can see, he is working on the dual lobe cocking cam being rotated by the trigger bar, and the trigger being pulled as its nestled under the offset feed ramp, in order to keep the pistol as thin as possible.

Small, reliable, accurate, thin, and finally... light weight are the design goals.

+1
one more very important quality - simplicity. You squeeze the trigger.

[b4uqzme]

Just thought it was interesting that many handgun manufacturers offer a range of handguns with mixed capacities and Kahr does not.
Nothing wrong with having a limited selection. For the longest Glock only offered high-cap handguns.

Oh and I realize single stacked equals thin. Plus, I cannot agree that Kahr does this well or the best.
Kahr has some nice designs, but they are a long way from doing it well with all the out of the box issues customers have experienced.
Requiring a 200 round break-in period is unique and really shouldn't be necessary.

Your curiosity is justified. But Kahr has done very well being specialized. At some point, in order to keep growing, they may have to expand into double-stacks. IIRC our own Jocko predicts that to be soon.

I cannot ignore your last statement as much as I tried. Any sound shooter requires a break-in period of their firearms regardless of what the manufacturer recommends. Anyone who complains about the break in is lacking some experience IMHO. It's good for the owner = work thru any bugs in the pistol or themselves. And it's good for the company = filters out those pistols that didn't need to come back = all they needed was for the gun and owner to mate up. That last point is good for everyone. Imagine how backlogged the service department could get. Then you'd all be complaining about that.

[Bawanna]

I'm with b4 on this. Every gun needs a break in period. Kahr is one of the few that openly admits it.
As stated Glock was the other end of the spectrum, nothing but wide bodies. The jury is still out as to weather they are in the thin is in game. Some say yes, some are undecided. Don't matter to me, I'm not partial to them myself although I've owned probably 10 at one time or another. To some they are the cats meow and that's good.

I have a brand new MRI 1911C, it has about 300 rounds through it with not a single issue but it's not broken in by me. I have not shot one round through it.
Until it gets a couple hundred shots with my finger on the trigger, we're not mates. I have to content myself with just fondling it. Hopefully we mate up soon, I want to carry it badly.

[yqtszhj]

Requiring a 200 round break-in period is unique and really shouldn't be necessary.

For what its worth word is out that unless your gun blows up or something Kimber wont talk to you abount warranty work on one of their high end 1911's until you have 500 rounds down the pipe. Just call that $200 worth of break-in.

[Coppertop]

I cannot ignore your last statement as much as I tried. Any sound shooter requires a break-in period of their firearms regardless of what the manufacturer recommends. Anyone who complains about the break in is lacking some experience IMHO. It's good for the owner = work thru any bugs in the pistol or themselves. And it's good for the company = filters out those pistols that didn't need to come back = all they needed was for the gun and owner to mate up. That last point is good for everyone. Imagine how backlogged the service department could get. Then you'd all be complaining about that.

Lacking experience? Been around firearms all of my life of 50 years, shot competition and carry/train with a firearm in my profession. Kahr is the first firearms manufacturer I have dealt with that requires a 200 round break-in period. I cannot remember any of the firearms I have owned ever needing any break-in period at all.

And I am not talking about the shooter getting used to the firearm. I have had to spend time at the range to get used to the action or aim point of a weapon, as well as train with the weapon. I have never had to spend time at the range to let the weapon get used to operating.

Kahr makes decent firearms but the break-in period is not present with other manufacturers because other manufacturers do a better job of post-production quality control than Kahr. I don't buy a gun to work the bugs out and send it back to the manufacturer to make it right. Kahr should do a better job of things and if you think that a break-in period is acceptable, more power to you but understand not everyone agrees with your blind loyalty.

[Coppertop]

I have a brand new MRI 1911C, it has about 300 rounds through it with not a single issue but it's not broken in by me. I have not shot one round through it.
Until it gets a couple hundred shots with my finger on the trigger, we're not mates. I have to content myself with just fondling it. Hopefully we mate up soon, I want to carry it badly.

That is you getting used to the firearm, which is understandable. We shouldn't have to run 200 rounds through a handgun so it will operate reliably. Reliability should be present the second you take it out of the box.

[CJB]

Lacking experience? Been around firearms all of my life of 50 years, shot competition and carry/train with a firearm in my profession. .....post production quality conrol...

Careful Coppertop, your inexperience is showing. That guy shown above was around cars his whole life.... and always wanted to fix a trans-miss-shun.

Let me explain it to you. Everyone else has beaten around the bush.

Kahr design parameters - small, accurate, well made, simple, reliable, etc.

Because they are small... very small, they have small recoil springs. And Coppertop, its all about the spring in this case.

"You've not got much spring there!" is what my GF told her last BF. His pistol didn't have much either, it was a Kahr!

The recoil spring(s) are short. Not much spring to work with. But first consider two constants:

1. No manufacturer can make a spring that will act, off the maufacturing floor, as it is designed to act under conditions of flex and speed of operation, as found in the mechanism in which it will be placed.

2. Pistol designs that are larger, with more spring length, and heavier parts, as well as other design elements (ie, breech face overrun of the cartridge pickup point), are more forgiving in both initial spring performance, and performance after the spring has taken its operational characteristics (its "set") after initital use.

Keep this also in mind, and its a matter of metalurgy, that no amount of locking back the slide, or hand cycling of the action will come close to giving that spring the "set" it should have. Case in point - in the 1960's the NRA tested some Colt .45 Auto magazines (and the ammo) that had been stored fully charged since 1918, or about 40 years. The springs, compressed as they were, were just fine, and the ammo went bang. The former is a matter of how spring metal works, the latter attributed to the tarlike sealant on the bullets and lacquer sealant on the primer.

Ok, back to springs. Kahr makes that recoil spring (or assembly) not as is ought to be, but to become as it ought to be after it takes it set, and that set must be accomplished by firing.

Yes, a few rough edges, and such to get smoothed as well, but not much really. Its all about the spring(s). Small light parts, short spring(s), lack of overrun of the cartridge pickup spot.... you gotta have those springs "just so".

What Kahr does, to its credit, is make pronouncements in its manual that serve to warn the customer and to sidestep liability. To the best of my knoweldge, Kahr has NEVER left a customer high and dry. Some customers have been frustrated and lack proper understanding and have all sorts of issues.... and, Kahr pistols are not for everyone either. Some folks just don't do well with them.

So before you spout about your vast experience, maybe you need to get some experience with Kahr, and some understanding "all things Kahr" before you spout the negativity.

[Coppertop]

What a fanboy.

You won't convince me that Kahr is so unique from any other firearms manufacturer to justify the break-in requirement. It's just not so. How is it that all the firearms that I have owned functioned properly right out of the box? Some of which were also small, well-made weapons with very small parts.

And don't judge my experience with firearms. You don't know me, as I don't know you. You like Kahr firearms without any reservation. I like them but have reservations on their production line. It's called a difference of opinion, not a lack of experience.

[CJB]

What a fanboy.

You won't convince me that Kahr is so unique from any other firearms manufacturer to justify the break-in requirement. It's just not so. How is it that all the firearms that I have owned functioned properly right out of the box? Some of which were also small, well-made weapons with very small parts.

And don't judge my experience with firearms. You don't know me, as I don't know you. You like Kahr firearms without any reservation. I like them but have reservations on their production line. It's called a difference of opinion, not a lack of experience.

No, not a fanboy, Kahr has its shortcomings. No fan of the miniscule over run, and no fan of the slide stop retention setup. But its a good design. I like Kahr firearms after careful consideration of their design, and operation, as well as the quality of their manufacture.

I don't know you, but this I do know. You haven't the slightest clue when it comes to mechanical design or the properties of springs. I tried to be nice and explain it in a way that most folks could easily understand it. But you know better. I suggest you call Kahr and offer to solve their problems for them.