Curious about magazine capacities

[O'Dell]

CJB got it right. All eight of my Kahrs were 100% 'right out of the box', but I certainly don't fault Kahr for being conservative. Kahrs are small and the tolerances are tight when new. Any pistol will perform better once it has a chance to loosen up and find its own levels.

As far as hi-cap mags are concerned, there are plenty of pistols out there with them, so if that's what you want, buy one of those. Those extra rounds add weight and size, and I guarantee the gun won't be as comfortable to carry. Carry guns just happen to be Kahr's niche. I have 15 pistols including Kahrs, SIG's, HK's, S&W's, and a Kimber, an STI, and a Springfield. Only one has a mag capacity of more than eight rounds and that's fine with me. That one is a 14 round HK and it's my HDW because it's far to large to carry.

BTW, if you would feel better with a REALLY big gun, Try a 50 cal Desert Eagle from Kahr's Magnum Research Div.

[Coppertop]

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.

There you go again, making assumptions.

I may not be an expert on springs as you are but I know that every firearm I have owned functioned properly right out of the box except the Kahr CW380. It took 200+ rounds and a trip back to the manufacturer to get to the same performance level of any of the other guns I own or have owned.

It doesn't take a mechanical engineer to see that something is wrong with Kahr's manufacturing process to cause such problems. I don't need to call Kahr because their warranty repair gunsmiths know how to correct the problems. Maybe these guys should share what they know with management and production measures could be altered to increase out of the box reliability.

What a fanboy.

[Coppertop]

As far as hi-cap mags are concerned, there are plenty of pistols out there with them, so if that's what you want, buy one of those. Those extra rounds add weight and size, and I guarantee the gun won't be as comfortable to carry. Carry guns just happen to be Kahr's niche. I have 15 pistols including Kahrs, SIG's, HK's, S&W's, and a Kimber, an STI, and a Springfield. Only one has a mag capacity of more than eight rounds and that's fine with me. That one is a 14 round HK and it's my HDW because it's far to large to carry.

All good points. Wouldn't be interested in a high-cap handgun for concealed carry but rather for on-duty/open carry. As I get older, the weight of my Sig Sauer seems to increase and a lighter weight option has appeal. Glock is always an option but while I think Glocks are excellent firearms, I never have liked the trigger design with the safety (prefer smooth trigger surfaces). I wouldn't mind just going with an air-weight Smith but it doesn't meet regs.

[SlowBurn]

This thread seems to be going in circles. Not much about magazine capacity either. Just sayin

[b4uqzme]

^^^ yeah. My bad. I shoulda known better.

[ripley16]

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.

That about sums up my thoughts as well, and I'm certainly no rookie either. Bought my first pistol 47 years ago... and began shooting before then. Off topic but worth chiming in I thought. A gun should function properly when it leaves the factory - period. No qualifiers, no excuses.

[SlowBurn]

That about sums up my thoughts as well, and I'm certainly no rookie either. Bought my first pistol 47 years ago... and began shooting before then. Off topic but worth chiming in I thought. A gun should function properly when it leaves the factory - period. No qualifiers, no excuses.

Every pistol is a balance of compromises. If "no break in period" is YOUR most important criteria, well... its America. There's lots of other pistols to choose from and many of them function about as well out of the box as they ever will. In my list of handgun priorities, other criteria are higher up.

As it happened, I first bought a used Kahr; the original owner broke it in. My CW380 I bought new and never did have a problem but I accepted that it might at least at first. Such a fine weapon for the money, it was well worth it TO ME even if it had needed tweaking.

[ripley16]

Every pistol is a balance of compromises. If "no break in period" is YOUR most important criteria, well... its America. There's lots of other pistols to choose from and many of them function about as well out of the box as they ever will. In my list of handgun priorities, other criteria are higher up.

Actually a breakin-in period never enters my mind as I shop for guns. That the gun be reliable and well made, thus a good value is my main priority. A gun that won't work properly is almost useless. You're correct; there are many other pistols that function right from the box. Is that attribute more desirable than not?

[SlowBurn]

Actually a breakin-in period never enters my mind as I shop for guns.

Don't know how you'd buy the gun and not know. Its mentioned in almost every review of the CW380. For example from the American Rifleman:

"The owner’s manual provided with the CW380 recommends a 200-round break-in period before the pistol is to be considered fully reliable. Our example, however, ran without any malfunctions throughout the entirety of the function and accuracy testing process, through the first 200 rounds and beyond. The CW380 proved to be dependable with a variety of loads ranging from value-priced full-metal-jacket practice rounds to defense-grade hollow points."

http://www.americanrifleman.org/arti...pistol-review/

[ripley16]

I didn't say "I didn't know". I said it isn't a priority. I'm pretty familiar with Kahrs. I've put thousands of rounds through the eight of them I've bought over the years. Knowing the manual says to put 200 rounds through the gun before you bother them for service is not an endearing feature of the Kahr line. I'd buy a HK, any HK, load it at the completion of the sale, holster it and carry with confidence. I'd never do that with a Kahr. Quality and reputation for reliability are both good to have in firearms. Do you argue that?

[berettabone]

I realize that there can be issues with smaller firearms.............................I have been shooting for over 40+ years, and my Kahr is the ONLY one that has ever had any issues. I consider the issues to be ammo related, as in too long, but, we need to be honest here. They DO have issues. Most issues can be dealt with if you have any firearms experience, so I don't consider it a big deal. To those that have little to no experience in any gunsmithing, a Kahr purchase can be exasperating. Hence, the pissed off people who type in. I can't blame some of them. We all work for our money, and don't want problems with any purchase. This forum has helped many with their simple problems. If you don't have any experience with firearms, a Kahr might not be a wise first choice............................

[diablo53]

I'll throw in my .02, "breaking in a pistol" is not designed to work out PROBLEMS that cause malfunctions. If the gun functions from the factory, it is a working machine. If it fails reliably, there is a problem that must be addressed and not by shooting it until it no longer fails.. The definition of insane is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome.
Break in, however, can and does allow for the user to adjust to the gun, as well as the gun's friction surfaces to "bed in" and run with much tighter tolerances than machining can provide.

I will also add, Kimber, a higher end 1911 manufacturer also suggests a 500 round break in period before considering their firearm reliable!

[SlowBurn]

I'll throw in my .02, "breaking in a pistol" is not designed to work out PROBLEMS that cause malfunctions. If the gun functions from the factory, it is a working machine. If it fails reliably, there is a problem that must be addressed and not by shooting it until it no longer fails.. The definition of insane is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome.
Break in, however, can and does allow for the user to adjust to the gun, as well as the gun's friction surfaces to "bed in" and run with much tighter tolerances than machining can provide.

I will also add, Kimber, a higher end 1911 manufacturer also suggests a 500 round break in period before considering their firearm reliable!

I don't disagree with any of that, except I believe there's more to the break in process with Kahrs. For example it also involves the springs taking a "set." They're unusually stiff at first and some don't settle in right and need replacing. But those extra heavy springs are part of the design that allows the tiny Kahrs to operate like much larger weapons. To ME the trade off is worth the potential hassle.

What I don't believe is that the necessity for a break in reflects a lack of quality control.

[wyntrout]

Magazines... Kahr... high capacity. The single-stack magazines don't get very high in capacity... 7 for .380, 8 for 9mm, 7 for .40, and 7 for .45, but that's what I carry as a spare for my CC Kahrs. I carry the flushest fitting mag in the pistol for max concealment and the largest capacity reload for the caliber. This approximates what my Glocks carry with one stock internal mag, but much thinner and easier to carry concealed. It works for me.

I did just acquire a Glock 30S and will see if I can carry it with 9+1+13 230-gr Gold Dots, Short Barrel version. That's quite a load, but I might welcome the extra firepower in some instances... actually, any requiring self defense or of others.

For the one I have on now and my most versatile Kahr... the P380 with night sights, I carry 6+1+7 with Underwood's +P 90-grain Gold Dots. See my avatar. I used to use Buffalo Bore's +P 90-gr Gold Dots, but they no longer use the Gold Dots and Underwood does... with a tiny bit more oomph.

Wynn

My youngest brother retired from the California Corrections about 3 years ago and is STILL living there, though they had plans to leave the state until he and his wife had medical problems. I worry "they'll" come after his guns... he has never gotten rid of a gun and has accumulated quite a few.

[diablo53]

I don't disagree with any of that, except I believe there's more to the break in process with Kahrs. For example it also involves the springs taking a "set." They're unusually stiff at first and some don't settle in right and need replacing. But those extra heavy springs are part of the design that allows the tiny Kahrs to operate like much larger weapons. To ME the trade off is worth the potential hassle.

What I don't believe is that the necessity for a break in reflects a lack of quality control.

Agreed. If you want a $2000 hand fit pistol, dont expect a break in period. But a <$500 CW series, it's gonna be mass produced and need some break in.