Curious about magazine capacities

[Coppertop]

Curious why Kahr does not offer any high-capacity firearms. I wouldn't mind seeing one of the polymer framed models offered in a 10 or 12 round magazine. Might make for a decent law enforcement sidearm (or personal protection gun) if they were reliable.

[b4uqzme]

Because thin is in...:)

[CJB]

They have their niche, and do it well.... some would say they do it best.

[AJBert]

Thin equals single stack, plain and simple.

[CJB]

http://files.tested.com/uploads/0/5/19350-wabac_machine_teaser.jpg

Sherman, set the WABAC Machine to the year 1988. Here we'll find a frustrated Justin Moon, having recently gotten his carry permit, and having nothing which he felt suitable for concealed carry.

Advancing the lever to about mid 1990, we see Justin working out the design details of what will become the Kahr pistol in a few years time. As you can see, he is working on the dual lobe cocking cam being rotated by the trigger bar, and the trigger being pulled as its nestled under the offset feed ramp, in order to keep the pistol as thin as possible.

Small, reliable, accurate, thin, and finally... light weight are the design goals.

[Coppertop]

Just thought it was interesting that many handgun manufacturers offer a range of handguns with mixed capacities and Kahr does not.
Nothing wrong with having a limited selection. For the longest Glock only offered high-cap handguns.

Oh and I realize single stacked equals thin. Plus, I cannot agree that Kahr does this well or the best.
Kahr has some nice designs, but they are a long way from doing it well with all the out of the box issues customers have experienced.
Requiring a 200 round break-in period is unique and really shouldn't be necessary.

[SlowBurn]

http://files.tested.com/uploads/0/5/19350-wabac_machine_teaser.jpg

Sherman, set the WABAC Machine to the year 1988. Here we'll find a frustrated Justin Moon, having recently gotten his carry permit, and having nothing which he felt suitable for concealed carry.

Advancing the lever to about mid 1990, we see Justin working out the design details of what will become the Kahr pistol in a few years time. As you can see, he is working on the dual lobe cocking cam being rotated by the trigger bar, and the trigger being pulled as its nestled under the offset feed ramp, in order to keep the pistol as thin as possible.

Small, reliable, accurate, thin, and finally... light weight are the design goals.
+1
one more very important quality - simplicity. You squeeze the trigger.

[b4uqzme]

Just thought it was interesting that many handgun manufacturers offer a range of handguns with mixed capacities and Kahr does not.
Nothing wrong with having a limited selection. For the longest Glock only offered high-cap handguns.

Oh and I realize single stacked equals thin. Plus, I cannot agree that Kahr does this well or the best.
Kahr has some nice designs, but they are a long way from doing it well with all the out of the box issues customers have experienced.
Requiring a 200 round break-in period is unique and really shouldn't be necessary.

Your curiosity is justified. But Kahr has done very well being specialized. At some point, in order to keep growing, they may have to expand into double-stacks. IIRC our own Jocko predicts that to be soon.

I cannot ignore your last statement as much as I tried. Any sound shooter requires a break-in period of their firearms regardless of what the manufacturer recommends. Anyone who complains about the break in is lacking some experience IMHO. It's good for the owner = work thru any bugs in the pistol or themselves. And it's good for the company = filters out those pistols that didn't need to come back = all they needed was for the gun and owner to mate up. That last point is good for everyone. Imagine how backlogged the service department could get. Then you'd all be complaining about that.

[Bawanna]

I'm with b4 on this. Every gun needs a break in period. Kahr is one of the few that openly admits it.
As stated Glock was the other end of the spectrum, nothing but wide bodies. The jury is still out as to weather they are in the thin is in game. Some say yes, some are undecided. Don't matter to me, I'm not partial to them myself although I've owned probably 10 at one time or another. To some they are the cats meow and that's good.

I have a brand new MRI 1911C, it has about 300 rounds through it with not a single issue but it's not broken in by me. I have not shot one round through it.
Until it gets a couple hundred shots with my finger on the trigger, we're not mates. I have to content myself with just fondling it. Hopefully we mate up soon, I want to carry it badly.

[yqtszhj]

Requiring a 200 round break-in period is unique and really shouldn't be necessary.

For what its worth word is out that unless your gun blows up or something Kimber wont talk to you abount warranty work on one of their high end 1911's until you have 500 rounds down the pipe. Just call that $200 worth of break-in.

[Coppertop]

I cannot ignore your last statement as much as I tried. Any sound shooter requires a break-in period of their firearms regardless of what the manufacturer recommends. Anyone who complains about the break in is lacking some experience IMHO. It's good for the owner = work thru any bugs in the pistol or themselves. And it's good for the company = filters out those pistols that didn't need to come back = all they needed was for the gun and owner to mate up. That last point is good for everyone. Imagine how backlogged the service department could get. Then you'd all be complaining about that.

Lacking experience? Been around firearms all of my life of 50 years, shot competition and carry/train with a firearm in my profession. Kahr is the first firearms manufacturer I have dealt with that requires a 200 round break-in period. I cannot remember any of the firearms I have owned ever needing any break-in period at all.

And I am not talking about the shooter getting used to the firearm. I have had to spend time at the range to get used to the action or aim point of a weapon, as well as train with the weapon. I have never had to spend time at the range to let the weapon get used to operating.

Kahr makes decent firearms but the break-in period is not present with other manufacturers because other manufacturers do a better job of post-production quality control than Kahr. I don't buy a gun to work the bugs out and send it back to the manufacturer to make it right. Kahr should do a better job of things and if you think that a break-in period is acceptable, more power to you but understand not everyone agrees with your blind loyalty.

[Coppertop]

I have a brand new MRI 1911C, it has about 300 rounds through it with not a single issue but it's not broken in by me. I have not shot one round through it.
Until it gets a couple hundred shots with my finger on the trigger, we're not mates. I have to content myself with just fondling it. Hopefully we mate up soon, I want to carry it badly.

That is you getting used to the firearm, which is understandable. We shouldn't have to run 200 rounds through a handgun so it will operate reliably. Reliability should be present the second you take it out of the box.

[CJB]

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eDj3uxAxrRg/maxresdefault.jpg


Lacking experience? Been around firearms all of my life of 50 years, shot competition and carry/train with a firearm in my profession. .....post production quality conrol...

Careful Coppertop, your inexperience is showing. That guy shown above was around cars his whole life.... and always wanted to fix a trans-miss-shun.

Let me explain it to you. Everyone else has beaten around the bush.

Kahr design parameters - small, accurate, well made, simple, reliable, etc.

Because they are small... very small, they have small recoil springs. And Coppertop, its all about the spring in this case.

"You've not got much spring there!" is what my GF told her last BF. His pistol didn't have much either, it was a Kahr!

The recoil spring(s) are short. Not much spring to work with. But first consider two constants:

1. No manufacturer can make a spring that will act, off the maufacturing floor, as it is designed to act under conditions of flex and speed of operation, as found in the mechanism in which it will be placed.

2. Pistol designs that are larger, with more spring length, and heavier parts, as well as other design elements (ie, breech face overrun of the cartridge pickup point), are more forgiving in both initial spring performance, and performance after the spring has taken its operational characteristics (its "set") after initital use.

Keep this also in mind, and its a matter of metalurgy, that no amount of locking back the slide, or hand cycling of the action will come close to giving that spring the "set" it should have. Case in point - in the 1960's the NRA tested some Colt .45 Auto magazines (and the ammo) that had been stored fully charged since 1918, or about 40 years. The springs, compressed as they were, were just fine, and the ammo went bang. The former is a matter of how spring metal works, the latter attributed to the tarlike sealant on the bullets and lacquer sealant on the primer.

Ok, back to springs. Kahr makes that recoil spring (or assembly) not as is ought to be, but to become as it ought to be after it takes it set, and that set must be accomplished by firing.

Yes, a few rough edges, and such to get smoothed as well, but not much really. Its all about the spring(s). Small light parts, short spring(s), lack of overrun of the cartridge pickup spot.... you gotta have those springs "just so".

What Kahr does, to its credit, is make pronouncements in its manual that serve to warn the customer and to sidestep liability. To the best of my knoweldge, Kahr has NEVER left a customer high and dry. Some customers have been frustrated and lack proper understanding and have all sorts of issues.... and, Kahr pistols are not for everyone either. Some folks just don't do well with them.

So before you spout about your vast experience, maybe you need to get some experience with Kahr, and some understanding "all things Kahr" before you spout the negativity.

[Coppertop]

What a fanboy.

You won't convince me that Kahr is so unique from any other firearms manufacturer to justify the break-in requirement. It's just not so. How is it that all the firearms that I have owned functioned properly right out of the box? Some of which were also small, well-made weapons with very small parts.

And don't judge my experience with firearms. You don't know me, as I don't know you. You like Kahr firearms without any reservation. I like them but have reservations on their production line. It's called a difference of opinion, not a lack of experience.

[CJB]

What a fanboy.

You won't convince me that Kahr is so unique from any other firearms manufacturer to justify the break-in requirement. It's just not so. How is it that all the firearms that I have owned functioned properly right out of the box? Some of which were also small, well-made weapons with very small parts.

And don't judge my experience with firearms. You don't know me, as I don't know you. You like Kahr firearms without any reservation. I like them but have reservations on their production line. It's called a difference of opinion, not a lack of experience.

No, not a fanboy, Kahr has its shortcomings. No fan of the miniscule over run, and no fan of the slide stop retention setup. But its a good design. I like Kahr firearms after careful consideration of their design, and operation, as well as the quality of their manufacture.

I don't know you, but this I do know. You haven't the slightest clue when it comes to mechanical design or the properties of springs. I tried to be nice and explain it in a way that most folks could easily understand it. But you know better. I suggest you call Kahr and offer to solve their problems for them.

[O'Dell]

CJB got it right. All eight of my Kahrs were 100% 'right out of the box', but I certainly don't fault Kahr for being conservative. Kahrs are small and the tolerances are tight when new. Any pistol will perform better once it has a chance to loosen up and find its own levels.

As far as hi-cap mags are concerned, there are plenty of pistols out there with them, so if that's what you want, buy one of those. Those extra rounds add weight and size, and I guarantee the gun won't be as comfortable to carry. Carry guns just happen to be Kahr's niche. I have 15 pistols including Kahrs, SIG's, HK's, S&W's, and a Kimber, an STI, and a Springfield. Only one has a mag capacity of more than eight rounds and that's fine with me. That one is a 14 round HK and it's my HDW because it's far to large to carry.

BTW, if you would feel better with a REALLY big gun, Try a 50 cal Desert Eagle from Kahr's Magnum Research Div.

[Coppertop]

I don't know you, but this I do know. You haven't the slightest clue when it comes to mechanical design or the properties of springs. I tried to be nice and explain it in a way that most folks could easily understand it. But you know better. I suggest you call Kahr and offer to solve their problems for them.

There you go again, making assumptions.

I may not be an expert on springs as you are but I know that every firearm I have owned functioned properly right out of the box except the Kahr CW380. It took 200+ rounds and a trip back to the manufacturer to get to the same performance level of any of the other guns I own or have owned.

It doesn't take a mechanical engineer to see that something is wrong with Kahr's manufacturing process to cause such problems. I don't need to call Kahr because their warranty repair gunsmiths know how to correct the problems. Maybe these guys should share what they know with management and production measures could be altered to increase out of the box reliability.

What a fanboy.

[Coppertop]

As far as hi-cap mags are concerned, there are plenty of pistols out there with them, so if that's what you want, buy one of those. Those extra rounds add weight and size, and I guarantee the gun won't be as comfortable to carry. Carry guns just happen to be Kahr's niche. I have 15 pistols including Kahrs, SIG's, HK's, S&W's, and a Kimber, an STI, and a Springfield. Only one has a mag capacity of more than eight rounds and that's fine with me. That one is a 14 round HK and it's my HDW because it's far to large to carry.

All good points. Wouldn't be interested in a high-cap handgun for concealed carry but rather for on-duty/open carry. As I get older, the weight of my Sig Sauer seems to increase and a lighter weight option has appeal. Glock is always an option but while I think Glocks are excellent firearms, I never have liked the trigger design with the safety (prefer smooth trigger surfaces). I wouldn't mind just going with an air-weight Smith but it doesn't meet regs.

[SlowBurn]

This thread seems to be going in circles. Not much about magazine capacity either. Just sayin

[b4uqzme]

^^^ yeah. My bad. I shoulda known better. :(

[ripley16]

Lacking experience? Been around firearms all of my life of 50 years, shot competition and carry/train with a firearm in my profession. Kahr is the first firearms manufacturer I have dealt with that requires a 200 round break-in period. I cannot remember any of the firearms I have owned ever needing any break-in period at all.

And I am not talking about the shooter getting used to the firearm. I have had to spend time at the range to get used to the action or aim point of a weapon, as well as train with the weapon. I have never had to spend time at the range to let the weapon get used to operating.

Kahr makes decent firearms but the break-in period is not present with other manufacturers because other manufacturers do a better job of post-production quality control than Kahr. I don't buy a gun to work the bugs out and send it back to the manufacturer to make it right. Kahr should do a better job of things and if you think that a break-in period is acceptable, more power to you but understand not everyone agrees with your blind loyalty.

That about sums up my thoughts as well, and I'm certainly no rookie either. Bought my first pistol 47 years ago... and began shooting before then. Off topic but worth chiming in I thought. A gun should function properly when it leaves the factory - period. No qualifiers, no excuses.

[SlowBurn]

That about sums up my thoughts as well, and I'm certainly no rookie either. Bought my first pistol 47 years ago... and began shooting before then. Off topic but worth chiming in I thought. A gun should function properly when it leaves the factory - period. No qualifiers, no excuses.

Every pistol is a balance of compromises. If "no break in period" is YOUR most important criteria, well... its America. There's lots of other pistols to choose from and many of them function about as well out of the box as they ever will. In my list of handgun priorities, other criteria are higher up.

As it happened, I first bought a used Kahr; the original owner broke it in. My CW380 I bought new and never did have a problem but I accepted that it might at least at first. Such a fine weapon for the money, it was well worth it TO ME even if it had needed tweaking.

[ripley16]

Every pistol is a balance of compromises. If "no break in period" is YOUR most important criteria, well... its America. There's lots of other pistols to choose from and many of them function about as well out of the box as they ever will. In my list of handgun priorities, other criteria are higher up.


Actually a breakin-in period never enters my mind as I shop for guns. That the gun be reliable and well made, thus a good value is my main priority. A gun that won't work properly is almost useless. You're correct; there are many other pistols that function right from the box. Is that attribute more desirable than not?

[SlowBurn]

Actually a breakin-in period never enters my mind as I shop for guns.
Don't know how you'd buy the gun and not know. Its mentioned in almost every review of the CW380. For example from the American Rifleman:

"The owner’s manual provided with the CW380 recommends a 200-round break-in period before the pistol is to be considered fully reliable. Our example, however, ran without any malfunctions throughout the entirety of the function and accuracy testing process, through the first 200 rounds and beyond. The CW380 proved to be dependable with a variety of loads ranging from value-priced full-metal-jacket practice rounds to defense-grade hollow points."

http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/6/13/kahr-arms-cw380-pistol-review/

[ripley16]

I didn't say "I didn't know". I said it isn't a priority. I'm pretty familiar with Kahrs. I've put thousands of rounds through the eight of them I've bought over the years. Knowing the manual says to put 200 rounds through the gun before you bother them for service is not an endearing feature of the Kahr line. I'd buy a HK, any HK, load it at the completion of the sale, holster it and carry with confidence. I'd never do that with a Kahr. Quality and reputation for reliability are both good to have in firearms. Do you argue that?

[berettabone]

I realize that there can be issues with smaller firearms.............................I have been shooting for over 40+ years, and my Kahr is the ONLY one that has ever had any issues. I consider the issues to be ammo related, as in too long, but, we need to be honest here. They DO have issues. Most issues can be dealt with if you have any firearms experience, so I don't consider it a big deal. To those that have little to no experience in any gunsmithing, a Kahr purchase can be exasperating. Hence, the pissed off people who type in. I can't blame some of them. We all work for our money, and don't want problems with any purchase. This forum has helped many with their simple problems. If you don't have any experience with firearms, a Kahr might not be a wise first choice............................

[diablo53]

I'll throw in my .02, "breaking in a pistol" is not designed to work out PROBLEMS that cause malfunctions. If the gun functions from the factory, it is a working machine. If it fails reliably, there is a problem that must be addressed and not by shooting it until it no longer fails.. The definition of insane is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome.
Break in, however, can and does allow for the user to adjust to the gun, as well as the gun's friction surfaces to "bed in" and run with much tighter tolerances than machining can provide.

I will also add, Kimber, a higher end 1911 manufacturer also suggests a 500 round break in period before considering their firearm reliable!

[SlowBurn]

I'll throw in my .02, "breaking in a pistol" is not designed to work out PROBLEMS that cause malfunctions. If the gun functions from the factory, it is a working machine. If it fails reliably, there is a problem that must be addressed and not by shooting it until it no longer fails.. The definition of insane is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome.
Break in, however, can and does allow for the user to adjust to the gun, as well as the gun's friction surfaces to "bed in" and run with much tighter tolerances than machining can provide.

I will also add, Kimber, a higher end 1911 manufacturer also suggests a 500 round break in period before considering their firearm reliable!

I don't disagree with any of that, except I believe there's more to the break in process with Kahrs. For example it also involves the springs taking a "set." They're unusually stiff at first and some don't settle in right and need replacing. But those extra heavy springs are part of the design that allows the tiny Kahrs to operate like much larger weapons. To ME the trade off is worth the potential hassle.

What I don't believe is that the necessity for a break in reflects a lack of quality control.

[wyntrout]

Magazines... Kahr... high capacity. The single-stack magazines don't get very high in capacity... 7 for .380, 8 for 9mm, 7 for .40, and 7 for .45, but that's what I carry as a spare for my CC Kahrs. I carry the flushest fitting mag in the pistol for max concealment and the largest capacity reload for the caliber. This approximates what my Glocks carry with one stock internal mag, but much thinner and easier to carry concealed. It works for me.

I did just acquire a Glock 30S and will see if I can carry it with 9+1+13 230-gr Gold Dots, Short Barrel version. That's quite a load, but I might welcome the extra firepower in some instances... actually, any requiring self defense or of others.

For the one I have on now and my most versatile Kahr... the P380 with night sights, I carry 6+1+7 with Underwood's +P 90-grain Gold Dots. See my avatar. I used to use Buffalo Bore's +P 90-gr Gold Dots, but they no longer use the Gold Dots and Underwood does... with a tiny bit more oomph.

Wynn :)

My youngest brother retired from the California Corrections about 3 years ago and is STILL living there, though they had plans to leave the state until he and his wife had medical problems. I worry "they'll" come after his guns... he has never gotten rid of a gun and has accumulated quite a few.

[diablo53]

I don't disagree with any of that, except I believe there's more to the break in process with Kahrs. For example it also involves the springs taking a "set." They're unusually stiff at first and some don't settle in right and need replacing. But those extra heavy springs are part of the design that allows the tiny Kahrs to operate like much larger weapons. To ME the trade off is worth the potential hassle.

What I don't believe is that the necessity for a break in reflects a lack of quality control.

Agreed. If you want a $2000 hand fit pistol, dont expect a break in period. But a <$500 CW series, it's gonna be mass produced and need some break in.

[skiflydive]

What I don't believe is that the necessity for a break in reflects a lack of quality control.

Amen!

My CM9 was my very first handgun although I had shot handguns previously. I bought it because it was light and small and because most people spoke highly of it. In the first 100 rounds I had, if I recall, 5 malfunctions. A couple of feed failures and 3 stovepipes. In retrospect I think they were all my fault. Since then the gun has been flawless except for the broken follower. Kahr immediately sent me 2 free replacements. I fixed it with a rampectomy and never had a problem since.

IMHO the break in was the gun breaking me in. It didn't require 200 rounds to be broken in or the springs to take a set - it's cycled perfectly since the first 70-75 rounds. The overly long ramp tang? THAT might have been a quality control issue. It seems Kahr figured that one out and I haven't heard of broken followers in new guns in quite a while.

My entire 40+ working career has been in manufacturing, process, precision machining (.0001" and less), and quality control. Requiring a break in is not a lack of QC.

[Coppertop]

My entire 40+ working career has been in manufacturing, process, precision machining (.0001" and less), and quality control. Requiring a break in is not a lack of QC.

Maybe the lack of QC is the wrong term. Maybe it is just a case that Kahr needs to do more post-production testing or re-think their spring tolerances.

Regardless of how you phrase it, a break in period should be so exhaustive and the burden should not be placed on the consumer.

Personally, I don't think it should be required at all. Right out of the box, a firearm should function with reliability. Yes, there is a break in period for the shooter to get used to the gun but that's entirely different.

Not everyone will agree with me and that's fine. We all don't have to agree with each other and that doesn't mean one person is right and the other is wrong. No matter how much it pisses someone off, it is just a difference of opinions.

[TheTman]

Any semi-auto pistol I own, must achieve a 200 round streak of trouble free shots, before it's considered reliable or carry worthy. I don't care if it's Glock, Beretta, S&W, 200 trouble free rounds is a must.

I don't think Kahr should ever introduce a double stack pistol. The market is flooded with them. What would be the point? They should stick to what they do best, single stack concealable pistols, and strive to make them the best in their class. Kahr would be far from my first choice in a double stack pistol, There are too many other well established brands, that I would choose above a newcomer to the field.

Out of the 4 Kahr pistols I've owned, only 1 was trouble free out of the box. One required a trip back to the factory to get the trigger to function correctly. Another straightened it's self out during break in, and the 4th I never got a chance to shoot before it got traded for some unexpected repairs to my daughters car. All but the one that was trouble free, my first one, I followed the advice on the stickys about prepping a new Kahr. The first one I just cleaned and lubed and went to the range.

[b4uqzme]

really, really sorry I started this.

[Bob T]

Regardless of how you phrase it, a break in period should be so exhaustive and the burden should not be placed on the consumer.

Guess you've never purchased a brand new motorcycle...:D

Never really considered 200 rounds to be "exhaustive" or a "burden"...That's like what? Two trips to the range or less?:)

I for one, admire Kahr's honesty in the matter....