CW45 or XDs45?

[mr surveyor]

As bad as I hate plastic, I still want a compact/subcompact DA .45 acp, and Tupperware seems to be the only real option.

Having read all the problems with the CW45, I danced around algore's internet super highway and found just about as many "bad reviews" on the Springfield XDs 45. I put very little faith into most of the so called reviews as many are plants to tear down competitors, and just as many are first time gun owners that couldn't pour p1ss out of a boot if the directions were written on the heal. There's about $100 difference in the two which isn't ordinarily a major difference to me (that's just a body part to include extra with the trade a gun plus cash deal). As far as pros and cons, they sound close to equal, although some of the more respected reviewers seem really hyped about the XDs..... particularly Hickock45 (one that he personally bought and wasn't paid to "review").

Looks like the XDs would fall somewhere between the size of my CW9 and CM9 and have 5+1 rounds of happy bang. I bought the CM9 last year for a "boot gun", but have since returned to a j-frame for that duty, so the CM is no longer a "must have". The CW9, on the other hand is most likely gonna stay as it has been excellent, although I would most likely be carrying the .45 of which ever the final choice may be.

I just can't decide between the two .... main concern is reliability - from start to "eol".

Anyone experienced with both that could give a true unbiased opinion?


surv

[yqtszhj]

I have both. They are two completely different guns though. The xds is a bit smaller but heavier. My xds has been flawless from day one, I like the trigger, and it shoots really well.

I had trigger reset issues initally with my cw45 but after I fixed those not one problem and I shoot it well too.

The xds is the same thickness as the cm9. The cw45 is a litter thicker, but lighter. You can get a full grip on the cw45 but the xds leaves the pinky dangling.

If you,like the kahr trigger and the extra round, get the kahr. If you like more compact, get the xds.

All this is my opinion only. I will never get rid of my cw45 or my xds. I love them both.

[rjt123]

I would vote for the CW45 on the basis of operating system, which matches, of course, your other Kahr pistols and your J-frame. No external controls, just a long DA trigger pull.

Just a question, though...did you eliminate the PM45 on a price basis?

[XDGenerate]

The trigger on SA pistols are different than the KA pitols. My opinion is it's (XDS) an easier trigger to get down. XDS is a tad smaller. Maybe heavier, but dimensionally smaller. You can't go wrong with either.

Good luck picking between these 2 fine firearms.

[mr surveyor]

I have both. They are two completely different guns though. The xds is a bit smaller but heavier. My xds has been flawless from day one, I like the trigger, and it shoots really well.

I had trigger reset issues initally with my cw45 but after I fixed those not one problem and I shoot it well too.

The xds is the same thickness as the cm9. The cw45 is a litter thicker, but lighter. You can get a full grip on the cw45 but the xds leaves the pinky dangling.

If you,like the kahr trigger and the extra round, get the kahr. If you like more compact, get the xds.

All this is my opinion only. I will never get rid of my cw45 or my xds. I love them both.


So, you've had no issues with the XDs?

I've put quite a few rounds through an XDM 40 and love the overall quality and reliability. And I do like the fact that there are no extra externals on the XD series other than the grip safety. Being a 1911 fan, I have no problem with the grip safety, and I could bring a 1911 out of the safe for carry but I'm trying to keep life simple now with the plain old "point and click interface" style of shooting. As far as manual of arms, I see very little difference between the two - both DA striker fired, but one with a short trigger reset. The slimmer profile of the XDs is pretty appealing since I carry semi-autos IWB most of the time .... weight isn't a factor to me at all (my daily field carry is a 3" stainless SP101 .357 mag). I know the XDs is somewhere between the CW9 and CM9 series in "footprint", although somewhat slimmer than both, which makes IWB a bit more comfortable. But, then again, my old Kimber Stainless compact was one of the most comfortable (and comforting) carry guns I've ever owned .... but it's SA, and I'm trying to simplify life.

The CW45 is considerable larger than the XDs, and I have no knowledge of the CM45 ... other than it's probably still thicker than the XDs. The issues we see here on KT concerning the 45's aren't very comforting either.

As for the PM series...... nope ..... I don't want anything with a polygonal barrel. I load too much cast boolits.

[b4uqzme]

Have you checked out sig p250? Seems like quality and not too much $$. And you can switch out frames and calibers... Could be an interesting option. I just checked. It is DAO too. I haven't shot one but handled the compact frame and it felt good. The subcompact is indeed tiny.

[b4uqzme]

Sorry. I know you didn't ask about a third gun....

[yqtszhj]

So, you've had no issues with the XDs?

I've put quite a few rounds through an XDM 40 and love the overall quality and reliability. And I do like the fact that there are no extra externals on the XD series other than the grip safety. Being a 1911 fan, I have no problem with the grip safety, and I could bring a 1911 out of the safe for carry but I'm trying to keep life simple now with the plain old "point and click interface" style of shooting. As far as manual of arms, I see very little difference between the two - both DA striker fired, but one with a short trigger reset. The slimmer profile of the XDs is pretty appealing since I carry semi-autos IWB most of the time .... weight isn't a factor to me at all (my daily field carry is a 3" stainless SP101 .357 mag). I know the XDs is somewhere between the CW9 and CM9 series in "footprint", although somewhat slimmer than both, which makes IWB a bit more comfortable. But, then again, my old Kimber Stainless compact was one of the most comfortable (and comforting) carry guns I've ever owned .... but it's SA, and I'm trying to simplify life.

The CW45 is considerable larger than the XDs, and I have no knowledge of the CM45 ... other than it's probably still thicker than the XDs. The issues we see here on KT concerning the 45's aren't very comforting either.

As for the PM series...... nope ..... I don't want anything with a polygonal barrel. I load too much cast boolits.

I can honestly say I have NEVER had one single problem at all with my xds since the very first round. I have probably 500 rounds through it and never had a FTanything. The trigger has a short reset for follow up shots and fiber optic front sight GLOWS in the daylight. In my opinion you can't go wrong with the XDs 45.

It is about 1/4 inch longer than the cm9, it is .9 inch thick just like the cm9, and the grip w/ mag installed is almost just like the cm9.

Recoil is not bad just like the cw45.

[phil413tx]

I went through the same thing but with a P45 and XDS and shot many shots through both. I ended up with the XDs purely on size. However I also like the quick trigger which is very similar to my Glocks. I have several Kahrs in 9mm but the the P45 was too wide for me. I have shot 250 rounds thru the XDs now and it has been flawless.

[Bawanna]

We're about 350 to 400 mark on my son's XDS and have had no issues with it either.
Side by side with my PM45 I would stick with the PM45. But the XDS is appealing. If I had one I'd have to do some minor grip mods, kind of bit me but nothing major and yes I want one someday too.

[mr surveyor]

I would love to try both, side by side ... but neither are "popular" in my neck of the woods. I didn't see my first Kahr on the range until 2006 or 2007 when a buddy brought his new CW40 out. Even though he had a mag follower break that day I was still intrigued with the pistol in general and bought my first CW a couple years later. I guess I'm still concerned with the issues of the CW45 ... I no longer have any desire to work through DIY fixes. My CW9 (with the trij sights) has been flawless, though only having seen a couple thousand rounds ... it will stay for mrs surv's use. She don't care to shoot much, so the ammo budget won't be that great, and I don't reload 9mm. On the other hand I do reload .45 acp and I do like to shoot, so whatever I get will get range time and about 10% of the carry time.

Heck, I'm still young ... not even really 60 yet .... there's still time :D

[otium]

My xds .45 has not had any issues either. Had a couple of issues with my cw45 in the first few rounds, but seems to have worked out with no problems since.

Am comfortable with carrying either, but for me, the xds gets significantly more holster time than the cw45, mainly for one reason, the grip height.

While the cw45 has a full grip and that is nice at the range, the xds grip is noticeably shorter and that is an attribute I prefer for concealment.

I would imagine it would be much more of a toss up if I had either a pm45 or an elusive cm45.

[gb6491]

I've had an XD-S since they first came out. My first one did not like Hornady XTP; failures were that the slide would not return to full battery. A sharp slap to the back of the slide would fix this. I pulled the barrel and dropped the Hornady XTP into the chamber, it seems the OAL of it and the bullet shape keep it from chambering properly. I sent this gun back to SA for a cosmetic issue (probably my fault), but as they could not redo the Melonite finish they replaced the gun. The second one has not had any issues with ammo. My one complaint with the pistol is probably a non-issue, but it is something I believe could have been done better: the right rear frame rail is not captive of the slide when the slide is in battery. I've replaced the very good stock sights with a set of Ameriglo "Hack" sights (Tritium). I've also installed Powder River springs which improved the trigger some.

My CW45 had issues early on (most documented on the forum), but it has been perfect since.


...
All this is my opinion only. I will never get rid of my cw45 or my xds. I love them both.
I agree.

Some photos:
http://i45.tinypic.com/2gv1z5i.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/1zmgmq1.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/5u1s2r.jpg
G27, XD-S, Kahr CW45
http://i45.tinypic.com/cp5p5.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/2n1zxqf.jpg
All the above photos are with the larger back strap on the XD-S. I tried the smaller one, but didn't like it and put the larger one back on after about 20 rounds.
http://i47.tinypic.com/wcmiiq.jpg
The slides widths are:
Glock - 1.1 something" (sorry my caliper doesn't have better resolution)
Kahr - 1"
XD-S - .91 something"

Regards,
Greg

[gb6491]

Some more photos:
XD-S stock sights:
http://i47.tinypic.com/znobkp.jpg
Ameriglo sights:
http://i48.tinypic.com/2ytz391.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/c7pmp.jpg
Here's the first ten rounds through my first XD-S at ten yards/two hand standing (second one shoots about the same):
http://i47.tinypic.com/35ivxoj.jpg
Here's three magazines worth of Blazer 230 gr. ball from my CW45 (two mags at 10 yards and one at 25: all two handed standing):
http://i50.tinypic.com/333kdnm.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/6ih92r.jpg
Regards,
Greg

[mr surveyor]

Greg

Thank you very much for the time you took to put together the comparison pics. That helps me at least visualize the size differences. Since I carry S-A's iwb the width is a big factor, and my having very little natural padding on my hipbones (and cinching my belt pretty tight), thinner handgun profile fits better in general.

For the moment, the XDs seems to have the edge in both overall width and concealable grip length.

I had thought about the CM45, but see that as dancing near the edge of the reliability curve .... not unlike most of the micro-subcompact .380's.

Maybe I'll have the opportunity to give one or both a try before I pull the Kimber Compact out and recondition my muscle memory to the 1911 again.


surv

[Barth]

I vote for a HK45C.
About the size of a Glock 19
45 ACP goodness.
And BTW it's pretty darn reliable.
https://www.t-mobilepictures.com/myalbum/thumbnail/photo14/39/c6/55a97f78d17c__1351376354000.jpg?tw=0&th=720&s=true&rs=falsehttps://www.t-mobilepictures.com/myalbum/thumbnail/photo41/fa/bc/0951dcad5465__1351605817000.jpg?tw=0&th=720&s=true&rs=false

[Longitude Zero]

Shoot both and then decide. I would prefer either the Kahr or the Springfield over any HK pistol.

[O'Dell]

I vote for a HK45C.
About the size of a Glock 19
45 ACP goodness.
And BTW it's pretty darn reliable.
https://www.t-mobilepictures.com/myalbum/thumbnail/photo14/39/c6/55a97f78d17c__1351376354000.jpg?tw=0&th=720&s=true&rs=falsehttps://www.t-mobilepictures.com/myalbum/thumbnail/photo41/fa/bc/0951dcad5465__1351605817000.jpg?tw=0&th=720&s=true&rs=false

I very much like my HK45C, and if I knew that I was going to be in a war, it would be with me. However for everyday "wear" the CW45 is most often in my holster because it's a great deal lighter than my other 45's. I had an compact XD45 some time ago. I never cared much for it, and traded it on a Kimber UC II.

[Barth]

I very much like my HK45C, and if I knew that I was going to be in a war, it would be with me. However for everyday "wear" the CW45 is most often in my holster because it's a great deal lighter than my other 45's. I had an compact XD45 some time ago. I never cared much for it, and traded it on a Kimber UC II.

USP45 Tactical - This is my going to war gun. Guess everything is relative...
http://i1361.photobucket.com/albums/r678/barthunderwood/Mobile%20Uploads/Photo0925_zpsb78b297c.jpg

[picketpin]

Like the others here have said I have been quite happy with my XDS and it also has been 100% since new, malfunction free. It even gobbles through 200 gr SWC's without a hiccup.
http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu183/picketpin/IMGP0040-1_zpsf1f12186.jpg (http://s646.photobucket.com/user/picketpin/media/IMGP0040-1_zpsf1f12186.jpg.html)
The trigger is Glockish with a better more consistent/predictable release. And it has a nice solid feel that my pm9 and cm9 do not have (kind of intangible and probably meaningless but pick both of them up and compare). I unfortunately can't compare with a p or c 45 as I haven't seen either of those creatures here in Montana.
james

[jeepster09]

I vote for XDs.

[Harleyrider]

I have a .45 XD-s and a Kahr CM9. I don't know if the CW series Kahrs break down the same way as the CM/PM's, but if the breakdown procedure is anything similar, it is a royal pain that really could use 3 hands, and I would choose the XD-s over the Kahr even if everything else were equal, just because of the ease of field stripping and cleaning it.

[XDGenerate]

Not a fan of the CM breakdown either. My XD/XDMs break down for cleaning like a dream. It took me some work to get the CM strip down.

[hardluk1]

never mind

[O'Dell]

This is my going to war gun. Guess everything is relative...
http://i1361.photobucket.com/albums/r678/barthunderwood/Mobile%20Uploads/Photo0925_zpsb78b297c.jpg

I have a FS USP40 for home defense because of it's 14 round mags and excellent night sights, but it's to large to carry. I can carry the HK45C okay, but the CW is lighter.

I still don't understand the love of XD's here. My compact 45 took forever to break in and perform reliably, [about 500 rounds] and even then it never did anything to impress me. I'd take the the CW's over five XD's. At least they worked from the first round.

[Barth]

I have a FS USP40 for home defense because of it's 14 round mags and excellent night sights, but it's to large to carry. I can carry the HK45C okay, but the CW is lighter.

I still don't understand the love of XD's here. My compact 45 took forever to break in and perform reliably, [about 500 rounds] and even then it never did anything to impress me. I'd take the the CW's over five XD's. At least they worked from the first round.

The full size USP Tactical is totally a HD / Range Toy.
Depending on attire, my HK45C or P2000SK 40 are my carry guns.
Sometimes I'm carry a P30 40 or P2000 357.

Personally, I get the Heebie Jeebies with less than 9+1 on a carry gun.
Even with the HK45C, I run 10 round Elephant Foot mags in the gun and twin re-loads.

If I'm running a low capacity gun?
Like a MK40 or J-frame?
Then I'm carrying a MK40 AND a J-Frame.

Actually, on the weekends, I almost always carry a HK45C AND a S&W 342 ti.
Plus double re-loads for both.

It's funny what you can get used to.

[mr surveyor]

finally I put my hands on a XDs45 today .... didn't buy it, but sure wanted to take it home. That is one fine looking, solid feeling pistol. There won't be any gun/fun funds available until well after "the trip" in just a few short weeks.

My son also had to pull a rifle down off the rack that we both began lusting for. A Ruger M77-44 .... then he had to handle a used, consignment, BlackHawk in .44 mag.

We both left the shop with something though .... I picked up another .357 mag reload box, and he actually talked our shop owner in to dipping into the secret stash of small pistol primers that were recently acquired and hidden behind the counter. A brick of spp's will last him most of a year most likely.

My guy is a bit high on the XDs45 at $625, but that is the total OTD price.

[Harleyrider]

... My guy is a bit high on the XDs45 at $625, but that is the total OTD price.
That's what I paid in DE, but that was earlier this year, when the XDs45 buying frenzy and the anti-gun fears were at their peak.

[certified106]

I don't have a CW45 and have never had the pleasure of shooting one so I can't make a fair comparison between the two but I can say I love my XDS. I have around 600 rounds through it at this point and it has never had a hiccup. Surprisingly it is very mild mannered for having such a large round in such a small package. I am sure you woudl be happy with either one.

[Barth]

To the OP,
Even though I know you are set on a 45.
My MK40 Elite is an all stainless micro that's like a mini DOA 45 to me.
If you really want a solid feeling, all steel, DOA compact/Micro carry gun?
IMHO the Kahr K40/MK40 Elite models should not be overlooked.
http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r89/PlayboyPenguin/Semi-autos/KahrMK40-1.jpg

[Harleyrider]

...IMHO the Kahr K40/MK40 Elite models should not be overlooked.
That may be so, but those are guns that list for almost $1K, not $600+.

[mr surveyor]

To the OP,
Even though I know you are set on a 45.
My MK40 Elite is an all stainless micro that's like a mini DOA 45 to me.
If you really want a solid feeling, all steel, DOA compact/Micro carry gun?
IMHO the Kahr K40/MK40 Elite models should not be overlooked.
http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r89/PlayboyPenguin/Semi-autos/KahrMK40-1.jpg



Barth

I've had 40's, and sold my last (Sig P239) a couple of years ago. I don't want to reload for 40. I liked my P239 but just didn't carry it enough to want to keep it. I don't keep a lot of guns around just for the sake of owning them. I can justify some "practical use" for every gun I own, and they all get used or don't stay long.

As for the MK .... I would love to have had the opportunity to buy an MK9 when I bought my first Kahr three years ago (CW9). As it stands right now, I would trade both my CW9 and CM9, as well as a small bit of green, for a NIB MK9 ... if I knew it would be as perfect out of the box as my CW9 was (and still is after a few thousand rounds). But, no 40.

If I could see and handle a CM45, and read enough positive chatter about them, it would still be on my radar.

Now, if Kahr would build me a MK45 there would be no question about my choice.

[O'Dell]

That may be so, but those are guns that list for almost $1K, not $600+.

I got my MK40 [not Elite] new in the box with factory night sights for $599. Although I prefer 45 ACP, this is one fine shooting pistol, and one of the last I'd ever part with. It's too heavy for the pocket, but makes a fine belt carry.

[b4uqzme]

To the OP,
Even though I know you are set on a 45.
My MK40 Elite is an all stainless micro that's like a mini DOA 45 to me.
If you really want a solid feeling, all steel, DOA compact/Micro carry gun?
IMHO the Kahr K40/MK40 Elite models should not be overlooked.


+1. I looked at the CW45 first but a used K40 was a clear choice for me. EDC. IWB. It's a very personal choice but, like Barth, I feel those who don't even consider a K or MK are missing out.

[mr surveyor]

I had to go back and look to see for sure if I was the "OP" ....yep, and I still don't want another .40 s&w. If it had to be .40 cal, I'd have to go with 10mm, and I ain't wanting to go there either.

I load .45 acp to feed my old 1997 Kimber (only .45 acp I have left), and I want a DAO .45 acp to carry. The simple DA platform is what I've become most accustomed to in the last 7-8 years.

Like I said, if Kahr made an MK45, I'd be all over it. For that matter if they made an MK22, I would find a practical use for that as well. Since they make neither, I'll weigh the alternatives.... within my purchasing power.


surv

[CJB]

Again, my 2c for the PM45

If the CW is small enough for ya... sure a CW. If price is a thing, wait for the CM45... upcoming... but it might be a wait, as the exsiting production is at capacity.

The XDs has a trigger more like the Glock... shorter, maybe a little lighter. The Kahr trigger is essentially a DA trigger in feel. Longer, totally smooth without stacking. It takes a little getting used to - hello... breakin? - and after that is very very intuitive for defensive shooting. But not for precision target shooting. IOW, hitting a BG in their middle at defensive ranges, ie anyplace from Point-Crayon to 25-30 feet, not terribly hard to master.

You can, if you want to, safely pocket carry the Kahr, while that would be inadvisable with the XD series of pistols, with their Glock-n-speil triggers.

[mr surveyor]

....You can, if you want to, safely pocket carry the Kahr, while that would be inadvisable with the XD series of pistols, with their Glock-n-speil triggers.


If we recognize that "pocket carry" without a holster is inadvisable itself, then what makes the Springfield, Glock, Kahr, Kimber, Ruger, etc, any different? That's a moot point for me, regardless, as I do not like pocket carry (at least not as a primary).

Until I am able to recover financially from the upcoming (three weeks and counting until blast off) trip to Alaska, the subcompact 45 will have to wait. By then, the CM45 will probably have been in circulation long enough to have been thoroughly beta tested. But, if Kahr is looking for a pre-release beta tester and would allow me to do a thorough break-in test with reloads, I would gladly give one at least a 500 round test .... and if it's successful I would write a glowing review .... and pay used gun prices to save them return shipping costs :D. How could they refuse?

surv

[O'Dell]

Like I said, if Kahr made an MK45, I'd be all over it. For that matter if they made an MK22, I would find a practical use for that as well. Since they make neither, I'll weigh the alternatives.... within my purchasing power.


surv

An MK45 has been the "Holy Grail" for many of us for years. It would seem a no brainer, but evidently it's not to be. I'm not fond of the 40 cal S&W either and only have two, the MK40 and a full-sized USP 40 for home defense. I have ten 45's including an UC II among my five 1911's.