Which gun to purchase?

[jeepster09]

My local dealer has great deal on 2 different Kahrs:

A. A "like new" MK40 with night sights.
B. A new PM45 with standard sights.

My choice for either one at a price of $549.00, I am at a loss on which one to get. The deal is only good tomorrow.

[Thunder71]

I have a PM9 and MK9, while the PM9 is sweet - the MK9 is incredible.

[rjt123]

My local dealer has great deal on 2 different Kahrs:

A. A "like new" MK40 with night sights.
B. A new PM45 with standard sights.

My choice for either one at a price of $549.00, I am at a loss on which one to get. The deal is only good tomorrow.


I've never shot a Kahr in .40, but I can't say enough good things about my PM45. That's my sweetheart. Also, you know what you're getting with a new gun, but the used MK40 is an unknown. JMO

[Bawanna]

Nothing to consider in my book. PM45 all day long.

I like 40's but not in little pocket rockets. The MK is a perfect 9 but not a good 40 in my book.

People will call me a woos, ok, I'm a woos but to much dragon in the 40 for a small package. Course my choice in any comparison with one being a 45 would be a 45. Why settle for skinny little fast bullets when you can toss meaningful bricks that really hurt and leave a mark.

I got along just fine with the factory sights too. I put the XS Big dots on after awhile but only cause I got a really good deal.

[wyntrout]

Ditto what Bawanna said. The PM45 is a really nice size, throws a big bullet, and probably is more manageable, recoil-wise. New means a warranty, too.

Wynn:)

[kahrseye]

Hands down go with the PM45. I shoot mine better than any other gun I own.

[rjt123]

I'd also say that $549 for a PM45 is a really good deal. I'd jump on it if it was me.

[mr surveyor]

If it was an MK9, I'd jump all over it. I've come to the conclusion that the .40 S&W is to the .45 acp, what the .380 acp is to the 9mm. For the most part, the .380 CC sized handguns are much snappier and much more problem prone than their counter parts in the 9mm CC sized handguns. Substitute the .40 for the above .380 and the .45 for the above 9mm and you get about the same, in my opinion. In the steel framed MK40 it's probably not as big an issue as in a comparable sized polymer frame, but I'm really getting leery of all these high powered micro guns.

Dang, now I want to shoot an MK40 just to feel the recoil.

[kerby9mm]

Ballistically speaking tha 9mm is superior to the 380 just as the 40cal is superior to the 45 Not all 380s are snappy It depends on the type of action whether blowback or locked breech As far as recoil to achieve superior ballistics the 40 is snappier than the 45

[Mr_D]

I'd also say that $549 for a PM45 is a really good deal. I'd jump on it if it was me.
I agree, local dealer wants $650 and it's just the standard model, no night sights even.

[jocko]

well now it seems some of u guys are slowly coming around to the fact that when these sub compacts like the Kahr cw or PM40, THEY ARE A HAND CANNON. Sure some of you guys will say , heh I have no issues with my 40 cal kahr lightweeight, Most though don't say that. A 200 round 40 cal kahr polymer range shoot is brutal, compared to the 9mm.

I still in my lilttle mind think alot of issues witht he kahr 40 cals to are shooter related. If u don't get a grip on that kahr 40 cal, IT WILLGET A GRIP ON YOU.

I don't own a kahr 40 cal, so I might be just pissin in the wind, but from hundred of posts on this forum, I do think most here will agree that the 40 calkahrs are brutal compared to the 9mm and the 45.

I think the great one even has a K40 ported and will tell u it is still a handful, now reduce that gun in weight and size dwown the the PM40 or CW40 or even the MK40???

[jeepster09]

Well today is the day......the hard part is I know I prefer the 45, but holding them both yesterday the MK40 "feels" much better to hold, very sleek and seductive.
I guess I will have to re-fondle them and decide. Common sense is yelling 45! [Plenty of ammo as opposed to no 40 ammo].

[mr surveyor]

that's gonna be a personal decision all the way. Now you're back to where I would be .... choose platform, or caliber. From your last post, it seems you have rationalized the ammunition factor into the equation.

[WMD]

Good luck in your decision jeepster! I would go with the 45 but that's me. The gun has got to to feel good in your hand, and if that is the 40...., so be it.

[Bawanna]

Ballistically speaking tha 9mm is superior to the 380 just as the 40cal is superior to the 45 Not all 380s are snappy It depends on the type of action whether blowback or locked breech As far as recoil to achieve superior ballistics the 40 is snappier than the 45

Superior means different things to different people. In my humble day to day stumblings the 40 is NOT superior to the 45. I'm sending you a packet of bawanna kool aid. Cherry flavor. Drink it up, it mixes well with most hard licker, the 45 will look much superior to you.

[MW surveyor]

Well, the 45 still makes a bigger hole!

[kerby9mm]

The 4 5 does make a bigger hole but is the bag guy going to notice either the bigger hole from the 45 or the extra ft lbs of energy from the 40cal

[jeepster09]

Well thanks for the feedback........
The winner was:








http://i691.photobucket.com/albums/vv276/jeepster09/IMG-20111221-00089.jpg

[Thunder71]

Nice choice!

Now go back and buy the other one, just because I know you want that one too. :)

[O'Dell]

I have yet to be convinced that the 45 is inferior to the 40. If given a choice, I'll always go with the 45. I have ten 45's and three 40's so I put my money where my mouth is.

[Bawanna]

Nicely done Jeepster.

[mr surveyor]

And the Winner Was........ Jeepster

As much as I prefer steel over polymer..... I too prefer the .45 acp over the .40 S&W. And, unless it's the gun I really, really lust for, I'll take new over used most any day.... given equal quality.

[jocko]

WOULDN'T have either caliber but if I must choose it would have been the 45, just to much turmoil from 40 cal owners of lightweight kahrs.

[mr surveyor]

WOULDN'T have either caliber but if I must choose it would have been the 45, just to much turmoil from 40 cal owners of lightweight kahrs.


that was the exact point I was making in my first post. Today's concealed carry offerings in both .40 S&W and .380 acp, mostly way too small for the (cartridge) power to weight (handgun) ratio, are iffy at best. Most of the 9mm and .45 acp handguns that are designed for concealed carry do tend to be better engineered.

I have a buddy with a CW40 (actually the gun that turned me on to wanting a Kahr) that dealt with the typical .40acp issues. Even though he experienced problems, I still knew that the 9mm in the same platform would be ideal... thus my trusty CW9. I know that Jocko and Kel-Tec mix like oil and water, but I know he would remember that KT tried the 40 acp in the P11 platform (also experimented with the .357 Sig), and found that the power to weight ratio was just too much for their light platform. Regardless their other faults, they at least knew when to bail out on that one;). Now, the MK40, being steel framed, would probably be able to handle the 40, but I seem to remember even reading about some cracked frames....but may be wrong.

It is also true that in the same ammunition offering between the .45 acp and the .40 S&W, that the .40 does deliver more fpe than the .45, which also means that it stresses the projectile launching device more. When you consider that most .40's are built on 9mm platforms, which are typically somewhat smaller than their .45 acp counterparts, you generally have less material holding that "projectile launching device" together.

Just rambling.... as usual....... back to the basement now.... time to find my dirty tequila glass....


surv

[TheTman]

I have 2 .40's and 3 .45's. I consider them pretty much equals, except the Beretta Cougar holds 12+1 while my 1911's hold 7 or 8 +1, and the CW45 6+1. If I have to travel through the rough parts of town I usually take the Cougar because of the extra rounds. I usually have a .44 special 5 shot snubby in the console as backup with 2 speedloaders. So I consider myself pretty well defended.

[Barth]

Both are great guns at great prices!

For CC the MK40 rules -
If you can deal with the 2 finger grip and 3" fire breathing 40
It's not for everybody...

I think everyone is going to have a different personal fav between the two.
My MK40 Elite is one of my most comfortable belt guns.
And totally disappears under a light shirt.

My G27 isn't bad, but I can tell the extra thickness of it when carried.

[jeepster09]

I so liked the MK, but the fact of ammo on hand etc., just out weighed the lust. Also the fact I knew I would want XS sights......
The MK feels real good in the hand and would of pocket carried for me or an IWB.

[Barth]

I so liked the MK, but the fact of ammo on hand etc., just out weighed the lust. Also the fact I knew I would want XS sights......
The MK feels real good in the hand and would of pocket carried for me or an IWB.

Yup, Yup.
I use a Superfly in the pocket.
It's perfect other than a little heavy.
But with a good belt - no problemo