Kahr PM9 or J Frame snub? Leaning to snubby.

[depicts]

For E. Coyle and Dwarven1 and others who used to carry revolvers.

I see now that Jim and Ross are carrying 9mm semi-autos nowadays.

I'm wondering if anyone else, like me, has tried a micro 9mm pistol, and find the snub gun still has more advantages. I guess I could ask, "Why do you think a 6 or 7 shot semi-auto is a better carry gun than a small revolver"

I've owned my PM9 for awhile now, and have come to the conclusion that the revolver is a better choice for me for several reasons.

What are your pro's and cons about carrying a pistol vs a revolver?

Same power.

Revolver doesn't make me pick up brass.

No heavy slide to pull on a revolver. The Kahr can be tough as I get older, and my arthritis gets worse.

I "Feel" the revolver is more dependable. That remains to be seen.

Auto faster to reload... how important is this is self defense.

Weigh the same.

Same basic size, revolver slightly wider.

Both hide pretty easily.

So bottom line Eddie and Ross and others, why do you like your new semi-auto carry guns? Do they offer any real improvement over a J frame?

I've been carrying the Kahr (and my 442) for a while now, and the only advantage I can really find is the sights are better, especially the night sights.

Any thoughts. I know I'm an old fart and the revolver comes naturally to me, but is there something I'm missing about the Micro-pistol?

 

[BossHarley]

I also prefer the revolver, and my J frame has a crimson trace laser grip installed - no sights needed, although they are there in case the laser fails...

Even though I only carry self defense commercial ammo in my 640PD I like the idea if I hear a click I can just pull the trigger again, don't have to rack a slide....

Of course they are a little wider, but I think a little lighter. And of course only have 5 shots. Reloading is a little slower, but speed loaders help.

It is probably an endless debate, go with what you are more comfortable with carrying.

 

[whatluck]

I have a Glock 27 and a Ruger LCR. I shoot the 27 better, so that's what I carry.

 

[June4th]

Why not both? J-frame can do the job for the first five BG's and PM9+2 extra mags to shoot your way to the long guns.

 

[appraiser]

nope. you are not missing anything.

The good old reliable J frame snubbie is as good as any sub compact, as long as you can hit your target.

I have 4 different sub compacts semi auto's and my favorite small gun is still my model 60, even over my 642.

Now I will say if the SHTF I'd rather have my Glock 26 with the 33 round magazine slid up into it, but for normal everyday use, I'm still a fan of the model 60.

 

[strangenh]

If you want faster reloads, you can have a J-frame recessed for full moon clips. Then you can carry two reloads in a little belt pouch, a lot smaller than two speedloaders and (I think) less chance of dumping rounds in a fumble.

A semi lets you do a reload while one's still in the chamber, which has its advantages; that said, I am told that in most fights, that never happens, that people aren't usually counting rounds and wind up reloading when the slide goes back anyhow.

 

[economist]

I go back and forth between a Walther PPS and a S&W 340 (with occasional pocket carry with my Ruger LCP). I have spent a decent amount of time shooting the PPS and S&W 340, and the primary difference is accuracy. The PPS is as accurate for me as a Glock 26 -- very accurate. I know when I have the PPS in my hands that I can put rounds where they need to go. With the J-frame, I know that I have a great gun if the target is inside of 7-10 yards and I am just point shooting. Beyond that, the groups will open up - a lot. So, maybe it's just me, but the semi-auto is by far the more practically accurate gun, and I favor it when possible. As for the LCP, the sights are terrible, so it is just a very slim / very light carry option with no other particular advantages.

 

[Tim94gt]

If you are comfortable and accurate with a j-frame, why change anything. Stick with what you know.

 

[gerrycaruso]

With which gun can you draw and put 3 rounds in the center of the target faster?Thats the one. There's no such thing as "the best". There's only what works for you and what you're willing to carry.

 

[dwarven1]

For E. Coyle and Dwarven1 and others who used to carry revolvers.

I see now that Jim and Ross are carrying 9mm semi-autos nowadays.

I carry both at different times. I prefer the K9 simply because I shoot it better than the snubby. (I'm planning on taking Michael's DeBethencourt's course sometime next year, though). The 637 is easier to conceal in a pocket, which means I can wear a t-shirt with no fears of printing.

However... I've got an IWB on order for my 2" Mod 19 - for some reason (grips, probably) I'm far more accurate with that, even with full-power loads.

But basically, it comes down to what I can conceal better depending on what I wear, and what I shoot better.

For example, I discovered, to my dismay, at Lodge last week that the pocket in my tux pants isn't deep enough to conceal my J-frame - the grip sticks out!! May have to go with the NAA Mini while I'm wearing my tux.

 

[Jose]

I cannot conceal a J frame in any trouser pocket that I have with any of the pocket holsters that I have tried. It simply prints like a BRICK and it is painfully obvious that there is a pistol in my pocket. As such, it remains a specialty pistol for IWB carry when I need the ultimate in concealment (i.e. cannot be made under any circumstances) or for athletic pursuits such as running or biking (in a fanny pack).

I used to carry predominantly full sized service revolvers (mostly K frames, occasionally N frames) mostly because they are so easy to conceal with their shorter, rounded grips and rounded countours. They basically disappear under the lightest of clothes and only an extreme pose will make them print. They are very powerful for their size. They are heavy, but a good holster and belt makes all day carry relatively comfortable. Reloading is slower than a semi, but as an avid IDPA shooter I became quite fast at reloading them once I found the right speedloaders (Safariland Comp II).

The major problem is capacity. Revolvers are just fine when it is a one on one fight, but even then they dry up awfully quick.

As I kept searching for holsters that would allow me to conceal a semi auto's blocky grip, I finally found FIST holsters' #20 IWB. Its design forces the butt of the gun to rotate into the hollow of your side under the ribcage and eliminates butt printing unless you bend over while arcing your back out. I can now conceal a full-size, standard capacity (15 to 17 rounds of 9x19) pistol without concern under most situations. And since I have full size and compact versions of the same pistol, I can use the same holster to carry the compact model when wearing clothing (like a sport coat) that still highlights the grip of a full size pistol.

So in summary, I now normally carry what amounts to a full size police service sidearm and two reloads for it in total concealment and relative comfort unless the situation calls for absolute concealment.

 

[depicts]

I carried a J frame for years before getting worried about "Capacity" of the gun.

It made me start thinking I needed to carry something with more than 5 shots. The solution for me was to carry 2 J frames, as well as speed strips for reloads.


Listening to all you young pups going on about semi-autos, I thought I should look into updating.

I have no trouble completely hiding a J frame in a front pocket with a Mika holster. Hiding the gun hasn't been an issue. I'm very seldom without my pants so I have a pocket with me.

I shoot J frames well. I probably shoot the PM9 better with its better sights. Either way, I'm confident the first rounds will go where I want them.

Maybe I need to carry a larger capacity semi-auto to find all these benefits over my revolvers. When the difference is 5 shots or 7 shots, it doesn't seem to matter much. I've always felt pretty covered when I carry my High Power though, with 13 +1.

I think the fact that the PM9 is not an approved gun in Massachusetts made it even MORE attractive to me. Enough so that it blinded me to the value of the tools I already use.

The darn PM9 is Soooooo easy to carry in an IWB holster, that I may just continue to carry it, AND my J frame as my primary self defense gun.

Just having a cool new gun like the ultra slim Kahr's, Walther and Taurus doesn't seem isn't as important as I thought when I first bought the semi-auto.

There is something to be said for tried and true.

 

[paulie walnuts]

I have been interested in getting a pocket pistol, but the choices are limited for people in mass and the only logical choice would be a J frame and now the new mass pm9, which is pricey. Also, the boberg xr9, looks pretty interesting and should be coming out soon. If proven to be reliable, 9 mm , 7+ 1 capacity, 4.2 inch barrel making it have power and accuacy of a full size pistol, it would be a better choice over all the current pocket pistols out there now!

http://www.bobergengineering.com/penetration.htm

 

[Jose]

I have been interested in getting a pocket pistol, but the choices are limited for people in mass and the only logical choice would be a J frame and now the new mass pm9, which is pricey. Also, the boberg xr9, looks pretty interesting and should be coming out soon. If proven to be reliable, 9 mm , 7+ 1 capacity, 4.2 inch barrel making it have power and accuacy of a full size pistol, it would be a better choice over all the current pocket pistols out there now!

http://www.bobergengineering.com/penetration.htm

I like the looks of that.

 

[PaulD]

I have been interested in getting a pocket pistol, but the choices are limited for people in mass and the only logical choice would be a J frame and now the new mass pm9, which is pricey. Also, the boberg xr9, looks pretty interesting and should be coming out soon. If proven to be reliable, 9 mm , 7+ 1 capacity, 4.2 inch barrel making it have power and accuacy of a full size pistol, it would be a better choice over all the current pocket pistols out there now!

http://www.bobergengineering.com/penetration.htm

Interesting, it's sort of like a bullpup pistol

 

[M1911]

I have a S&W 642 and a PM9. The sights on the 642 just plain suck. The PM9 has real sights. The trigger on the 642 is only fair, even after a trigger job. The PM9 trigger isn't great, but it is better than the 642.

As you said, the PM9 is faster to reload. How important is that? Well, if you are only carrying 5 or 7 rounds in your gun, it seems to me that reload speed is far more important than if you are carrying 18 rounds in your gun.

The PM9 is noticeably smaller and easier for me to conceal in my pocket. Weight is similar. I also find that the 642 has noticeably more recoil than the PM9.

As a result, I haven't carried my 642 since I got my PM9.

Ross, the PM9 is a lot smaller than the K9, and much easier to fit in a pocket. I never pocket carry my K9 or K40.

 

[dwarven1]

Ross, the PM9 is a lot smaller than the K9, and much easier to fit in a pocket. I never pocket carry my K9 or K40.

Having picked up a UBG holster, as long as my t-shirt is a bit loose, I can conceal the K9 just fine. I am thinking of looking for a PM9, though.

Unfortunately, my income has taken a huge hit since being laid off, and I don't have as much disposable cash for toys these days with the new job. I expect that that will change as I get better at this whole sales thing, though.

 

[George D]

I go back and forth between a mod 60 snubbie and a M&P9c.
The revolver has half the capacity but its size and simplicity make it my preferred choice.