New recoil spring for cm9

[Scoundrel]

I am counting 14 1/2 loops on the old spring and 15 on the new one. You should email Kahr CS with this pic and ask them what's up. I'd like to know.

I could e-mail Kahr and bust their balls about it (politely), but I am sure they get enough of that from other people, and I dunno if my complaint(?) would get to the ears of the people who matter.

So, emboldened by the accounts of others who have worked this issue before me, I went ahead and chopped the spring this morning. I rotated both springs side by side until the closed end was at the same angle, then marked the spring with more coils at the appropriate spot, and hit it with a wire cutter.

The result is that the weird "catch" I was feeling in the slide when assembling it is gone, and I can lock back the slide OK when it is assembled now. It still feels stiffer than the old spring, but I think that is perfectly normal. It needs to be broken in.

So I'm off to the range to make sure it really works right, and break it in.

Oh, and here's a new pic:



Note: When cutting the spring, I accidentally bent it, and the coil was "out of round", which looked funny but did not seem to be a problem. I tried to correct that anyway, over-corrected, and it got in the way of the guide rod, preventing it from coming out the front of the slide properly. I bent it again, and the coil now follows a perfectly round shape and everything seems to work. Springs are fiddly things, and I'll rest easier once I have another 100 rounds through it.

[jocko]

kibnda looks from some of the reports that 14 coils does the trick. I would say if u have a 15 coils spr9ng andit won't lock open cut a half coil off first and retest, go slowly, as u know u can't glue it back on... Probalby which makes no sense if one managed to get in the 15 coil spring and went out and shot it a 100 rounds that slide would lock open with no problem.

[Scoundrel]

Yeah, I wondered about that. It's possible that leaving the extra 1/2 coil in there might have worked OK after I'd put 100 rounds through it, but I preferred to make it work "out of the box" rather than wait for 100 rounds before I got proper slide lock.

I'll wait to report anything more until I've been to the range with the new spring. Probably this evening.

[jocko]

probably either way would have made no differencein over all operation and reliability. Kahr needs to get this sh-t right though. I guess os older PM9 owners with the blunt noxe version, u see we never have these issues, as the old style takes a 13 coil outter spring and I can buy um all day long from wolffs without buyinbg the complete recoil assembly. Yes life is good for us "old version blunt nose, IMO best PM9 ever made guns..

course I am prejudice I don't like illegals either..

[Steeltoes]

I'd like to see Kahr use a closed ended spring on both end a spring that was specifically made for the model...instead of a chuck of spring cut off to whatever dimension works...other manufacturers are on track...just saying

[Scoundrel]

I'd like to see Kahr use a closed ended spring on both end a spring that was specifically made for the model...instead of a chuck of spring cut off to whatever dimension works...other manufacturers are on track...just saying

That would increase manufacturing costs. Lower mfg cost is what brought the price down in the CM9. I can live with making sure my spring fits once in a while.

Speaking of that, I went to the range and fired 100 rounds with my new spring. The second shot (first one out of the magazine) took a nose dive, and I was thinking "aw, crap" - but then I didn't have any other problems.

I cannot be 100% sure that the nosedive was not a result of the bullet not being shoved all of the way to the back of the magazine. I had, after all, been fiddling with the gun a lot the night before, removing and re-inserting the magazine and such.

So now I'll take this new spring out, clean it, lube it, and put it in a ziploc baggie for later use. I'll keep using the original spring until I have reason to change it out.

[wyntrout]

The closed end grips the guide rod and the other end must be large enough to NOT BIND on that end of the guide rod... by design and on purpose.

Wynn

[Steeltoes]

So manufacturing cost is the issue whether or not they use a closed end or a just a chunk of spring....OK I'll buy that...so charge $1 more the spring...

Glock has been using that technology since the mid 80's lol...I'd say that is tried and proven

[JBarbaresi]

So manufacturing cost is the issue whether or not they use a closed end or a just a chunk of spring....OK I'll buy that...so charge $1 more the spring...

Glock has been using that technology since the mid 80's lol...I'd say that is tried and proven

is the question whether to use a spring with closed ends on both sides or to use a captured guide rod where the spring is not separate from the guide rod like on a glock?

the 1911 platform is still primarily using uncaptured springs, and they've been around for 100 years that way. not trying to bash on glock because i'm mostly a glock guy (at least was until i purchased the cm9) but both versions of spring/guide rod setup have been proven over the years. there's not wrong answer, until you start getting springs with different lengths and coils, and that is an issue.

[bonjorno2]

Update:

took the cm9 out and shot a box of ammo with the new recoil assembly without issues. I love this little 9!