PM40 or PM9 ?

[QuercusMax]

When I bought my Kahr (MK, not PM), I chose the 9mm over the .40 version simply because I didn't want to bring in yet another caliber of ammo to deal with. Since I already had other 9mm and 45ACP guns (and stockpiles of ammo to match), it just didn't make sense to add something else in-between that I would need to buy in its various types, plus have to get used to a new set of ammo characteristics.

Some might enjoy endless variety - as do I in some things - but starting a collection of every caliber of guns and ammo didn't appeal to me.

Maybe I don't know what I am missing, but that's my strategy and rationale.

[x1wildone]

PM 40 all the way, unless there's a PM 45 around, everybody has a 9.
My wife loves her PM 40. Next time I will do the Pm 45 because there is less felt recoil.

[drgad]

I too have a pm40; fabulous gun! When deciding, I chose it like I did my Glock 27 - I figured, why not carry the largest round I can? Besides, if the pm40 is the same size as the pm9 - why not go with the larger caliber? I did the same when comparing a G26 and G27. If, God forbid, I ever actually had to use it, I want as much power as I can! And, by the way, I don't think the recoil is really bad at all; in fact, I like it! (aaarrgh aarrgh!)
Currently carrying Hornady Critical Defense in it, though also have Rem. Golden Sabers and Winchester Rangers. (Also have a hard chrome Kel-Tec Pf9 and a Ruger LCP - but the PM40 is just too close in size to them to not carry it almost exclusively. Once in a while, I pocket carry the G27 or carry it owb.) Gotta admit, I like knowing I've got a 40 cal in my pocket! Just my .02

[John Law]

Makes me want a PM40 now, just so I can have one of each. I still think the recoil is going to be nasty, although not enough to stop me from saving up for one.

[jocko]

it is

Makes me want a PM40 now, just so I can have one of each. I still think the recoil is going to be nasty, although not enough to stop me from saving up for one.

nasty compared to the PM9.

[Brent]

How does the PM40 compare to the P40? I'm guessing the shorter grip makes the PM a little more to handle.

[jocko]

both are still hand cannons, IMO. no doubt I would have to magna port my 40 cal, . I would think the PM40 would be more noticeable than the P40 in felt recoil. The 40 cal kahr can take any amount of rounds through it, but from reading this forum, many 40 cal owners DO report noticeable recoil and range time is normaly shorter.

[Ljutic]

Having now shot both, I am comfortable with either one. The PM40 wasn't horrible on the recoil front. After a few mags of get acquainted time, I really didn't even notice the recoil as I was too focused on seeing where the shots were landing. Didn't try any speed shooting.

[robdnor]

I have a mk9 and a pm40, i love the mk9 due to its being all metal; making it beautiful and a good shooter... but i trust the pm40 to be in my pocket and weigh about the same loaded as the mk unloaded.. since we already know any kahr is awesome, then id say go for the pm40 hands down!!...
i will lay on the table for ya, its a handful. when i first got it, 200 rnds in 2 days and i had a spot on my trigger finger knuckle from the trigger guard. all that took was gettin used to holding on to that hand-cannon and i had no more problems..
i know some who have tried it and refuse to shoot, and others, like myself who love it. so it comes down to preference
do you mind recoil? its got a bit, but nothing unmanageable. i would say that it is personally more comfortable than a g27, but the way those compact glocks fit in my hand leaves me with something to be desired.
i definitely prefer a 40 to a 9 any day.. if you are ok with a little more recoil and one less shot in the magazine (like i and all the other pm40 diehards). then you cant beat that pm40 as the best pocketable 40 cal available!!


good luck with making your decision, im sure your have a great new PM series either way

[PCollen]

My solution - bought the PM9 first with XS Big Dot night sights. Friend had a PM40, shot it and liked it. Bought a PM40, added a Crimson Trace laser, Agrips.

Deciding which was better for me - PM40. I have several guns in 40 (Glock, H&K, and Kahr). Just standardized on the 40 since I can shot it as well as the 9 round from the PM frame.

IMHO - PM40 is the best power package you can find today. "Best" is the gun that is not a pain to carry so you take it with you ever time you leave the house.

If you are already invested in 9mm (or .40cal), go with the PM9(or PM40). If you have weapons of both calibre's, flip a coin. Personally, at typical 'close encounter' distances 20 feet or less, either will perform just as well with the right defensive ammo. I find the 9mm (CM9 in my case) has easier recovery for accurate follow-up shots than does the .40. But I don't shoot 150-200 rounds a month of .40cal. My home defense weapon is and XD9. If I had an XD40, I'd have the .40cal Kahr. I like the lower cost of 9mm target ammo, and at $25/50rds of Speer Gold dot 124g +P HP ammo, that's pretty reasonable as well.

[jocko]

range fodder at wal martr 9mm 100 pak 115 fml $20.50