CT380 slide on a CW380 frame? Will it work?

[STORMINORMAN]

Simply put: will this configuration work? Not concerned about the other combination (i.e., the cw380 slide on the bigger frame).

Thanks in advance for your kind consideration!

[STORMINORMAN]

Let's try THIS Forum: will a CT380 slide work on a CW380 frame?

24 hours and 29 views on the CW Forum and no answer: is this not a pretty straightforward question?

Not asking about the reverse (CW380 slide on a CT380 frame), BTW...

Thanks!

[Bawanna]

I generally don't respond if I don't have an answer. I have no 380 experience and don't recall anyone who has both those models.

An email to Kahr customer service would probably yield a good answer although I suspect they would not recommend doing it. Probably a lawyer bandaid on the back side kind of a response.

Been a might slow lately, guess folks are busy with life. Someone will most likely be along in time.

[STORMINORMAN]

I generally don't respond if I don't have an answer. I have no 380 experience and don't recall anyone who has both those models.

An email to Kahr customer service would probably yield a good answer although I suspect they would not recommend doing it. Probably a lawyer bandaid on the back side kind of a response.

Been a might slow lately, guess folks are busy with life. Someone will most likely be along in time.

Thank you, sincerely, for the courtesy of your most prompt reply!

Hopefully you'll prove to be correct about an eventual answer.

Can't believe this has not come up before, as I'd opine the same question may also apply to the 9mm, 40 S&W and 45 acp calibers...?

THANKS, AGAIN!

[dirtkicker]

Based on size alone I wouldn't see how it would be possible. But if you try it I would wear a helmet and 'tac' glasses

http://www.handgunhero.com/compare/k...-vs-kahr-cw380

[gb6491]

Based on size alone I wouldn't see how it would be possible. But if you try it I would wear a helmet and 'tac' glasses

http://www.handgunhero.com/compare/k...-vs-kahr-cw380

That right there is the rub. The front rails on Kahr poly pistols are located in the dust cover.


At first blush, I was tempted to doubt the dust cover of a CW380 is long enough for the CT380 slide to engage the front rails.
Following hoto from https://ontargetmagazine.com/2015/03/kahr-arms-ct380/
CT380 with P380 (slightly shorter than a CW380)


However, after looking at the two slides on Kahr's website, I see the CT380's slide is longer where it engages the front rails. I think the possibility exists that that additional length might be enough to engage the rails on a CW380 frame.
Photos from Kahr's website


I think this would be best determined by actually trying a CT380 slide on a CW380 and checking for short rails:
http://www.kahrtalk.com/showthread.p...968#post306968

If the slide does fully engage the front rails (and the bottom barrel lugs are the same) then I think there is a good chance that a "conversion" would work. Hopefully a member will have both and can make the comparison.

Otherwise, one could always chop a CT380 grip to CW/P380 size.

Regards,
Greg

[STORMINORMAN]

I'm confused: is not the point where the longer slide (CT380) engages the rails on the shorter frame measured from the bolt face, not from the end of the slide/barrel? There are no voids in the longer slide. What I see is a longer slide and barrel (extending by 1/2" ) from the dustcover.

[gb6491]

I'm confused: is not the point where the longer slide (CT380) engages the rails on the shorter frame measured from the bolt face, not from the end of the slide/barrel? There are no voids in the longer slide. What I see is a longer slide and barrel (extending by 1/2" ) from the dustcover.

I don't have a CT380 so I'm not speaking with authority on it, but let me try to explain my thoughts differently.

Looking at the photos on the site dustkicker linked, it appears to me that the CW380 has a shorter dustcover than the CT380.


As the front rails are located in the dust cover,


The portion of the slide that engages the front rails,


...must extend far enough to the rear (compared to the front of the slide) to engage the rails when the slide is in battery.



From the photos, it appears that the CT380 slide may be long enough to engage the rails on the CW380's shorter frame, but I don't know for sure.

Regards,
Greg

[STORMINORMAN]

Greg: Your response, especially with the photos, is most appreciated. I believe I now understand, exactly, the physical length and engagement to which you refer. I think another way to look at it would be the measurement from the rear of the longer CT380 slide to the beginning of the rail on the shorter CW380 dust cover. It would not appear to me that much "overlap" would be required?

The last image from your 1st post does give me hope: now, to find a store with both models available. This may proove easier said than done...?

Yor pictures were amazing! Thanks, again!

[markman]

I can't believe I'm the only one here who has both pistols. While the dust cover is longer on the CT, the frame rails are located in the same position as the CW. The frames appear to be the same with just the polymer dust cover being longer. I hope this helps.

[yqtszhj]

Good info right there.

[gb6491]

Excellent post markman!!

[markman]

I guess now I'm curious if the CM9, CW9 & CT9 frames are the same. I just have the CM9. Even the P series or the steel framed, do the rails run the entire length of the steel frame? Surely we have enough members here to check!

[DavidR]

I guess now I'm curious if the CM9, CW9 & CT9 frames are the same. I just have the CM9. Even the P series or the steel framed, do the rails run the entire length of the steel frame? Surely we have enough members here to check!

P9 slide will not work on my CM9 frame. The rails are too short.

[markman]

Thanks, it appears it is just that way on the 380’s.

P9 slide will not work on my CM9 frame. The rails are too short.