Lowest Profile Sights

[Karla]

Hello.
I am a new forum member but not yet a Kahr owner. I recently had the opportunity to fire 50 rounds through a PM9 and I was really impressed. The gun felt smooth in operation, the trigger was remarkable, bringing it back on target was easy, tight grouping, and none of the discomfort of other compact 9x19 pistols.
My use for this gun would be as a pocket pistol to replace my Walther PPK, and to that end I have some concern about the sights. I am looking for any opinions or direction for removing/lowering the sights to something more akin to a Seecamp or Rohrbaugh, where at the most the sights would be minimal and very low profile. More like a bump. If I just removed the sights, what would I put in their place?
(PS: I did search previous posts but really did not see this question. If I missed the answer, please accept my apology.)

[gb6491]

Karla,
Welcome to the forums:)
A clever smith could mill/shape the OEM sights to a lower profile.
If you remove the sights completely, I don't think the dovetails would present any problems except be a place to catch dirt/grime; then again, a good smith could probably fashion a "dutchman" to fill either dovetail.
All that said, I think the OEM sights will serve you fine as they are and I would leave them as such. I've found my Kahr pistols to be accurate at extended ranges and good sights a plus at those ranges.
Regards,
Greg

[garyb]

Welcome Karla. I pocket carry a PM40 and have no problem with the sight profile of night sights. For ME, One of the advantages of the Kahr PM models is that they have good sights. The sights on the Kahr PM was ONE of the reasons I selected this gun. My opinion and it is only my opinion, is that removing the sights to put those bump profile sights, defeats one of the advantages of the Kahr PM. It is an accurate pistol with the sights that come on it and I would not want to take away from that accuracy. Secondly, the sights that come on it will not interfere in any way with pocket carry....in my opinion. My opinion is that you might want to reconsider if removing the sights for "bump" sights, is a real need or a perceived need. Try pocket carry with the standard sights (of course selecting the style of sight you want - night or tru glow, etc..). If you don't like them, then you can pursue your issue. I doubt very much that the sights will be an issue. In fact, I tend to believe you will appreciate the Kahr's sights and the accuracy they bring to the table. Third, select a good pocket holster that makes carrying that PM comfortable. If you do, the sights are, once again, a non issue for pocket carry. Just my opinion. Hope this helps and welcome to the forum.

[dirksterg30]

Welcome to the forum, Karla. I'm with garyb on this one. I don't think the Kahr's sights should be an issue for you, and I certainly wouldn't remove them from my PM9. If you want low-profile, check out the Novak ramp rear sights on Kahr's website: http://www.kahr.com/Sights/Sights.asp

[joshh]

sights havent been an issue for me when pocket carrying either but i dont see why you couldnt become proficient @ defensive shooting close range w/out sights. i once saw a guy drawing then firing a seecamp .32 at about 15' and he was consistently hitting center of mass with it. those are much smaller pistols and have no sights.

[dirksterg30]

sights havent been an issue for me when pocket carrying either but i dont see why you couldnt become proficient @ defensive shooting close range w/out sights. i once saw a guy drawing then firing a seecamp .32 at about 15' and he was consistently hitting center of mass with it. those are much smaller pistols and have no sights.

My issue with the kind of thinking (pistols without sights) is that it assumes a defensive encounter will be at very short distances. While statistically, that may be more likely, I'd rather not be handicapped by my firearm if I need to make a longer-distance shot.

[jocko]

are sights needed at 7 yards NO, are they nice to have on a gun at 7 yards YES. Having never bene in a sh-t hit the fan situation at any yardage, I would not be qualified to say whether sights was a necessity or not. I think the general consesous is that people do like sights on a gun, be it a damn nub on the end of the slide or a nice dovetailed sight system..

[earle8888]

Welcome!!! Think about a CTL!

[garyb]

+1 on the CTL suggestion..

[Karla]

Interesting idea on the CTL. I haven’t really considered that option because of size and weight. I have been hoping to find a reference to reduced height sights.

[gagnejs8]

Interesting idea on the CTL. I haven’t really considered that option because of size and weight. I have been hoping to find a reference to reduced height sights.

I just got my CTC today and the thing is amazingly small. About as light as a paperclip. Probably just a hair more after the battery is installed.

[DKD]

Karla,

Welcome to the board. I pack my PM9 and or PM45 on a daily basis....sometimes both at the same time...you will find it quite comfortable even in your front pocket, just leave it as it is. The site picture it presents is one of the best of the breed.
Just leave them in place and if you wish, just look for the front sight and squeeze the round off and you will hit center every time at 3-7 yds.

[Karla]

Karla,

Welcome to the board. I pack my PM9 and or PM45 on a daily basis....sometimes both at the same time...you will find it quite comfortable even in your front pocket, just leave it as it is. The site picture it presents is one of the best of the breed.
Just leave them in place and if you wish, just look for the front sight and squeeze the round off and you will hit center every time at 3-7 yds.

Okay, I will give it a try. The 3-7 yards is exactly the range distance for which I normally practice.

[garyb]

Again, most agree that the nice sights on Kahr PM's are a very nice feature, but please take the time to check out the Crimson threads and go to their site to see their video on the CTL: OR order their free DVD. It is entertaining, if for nothing else. But be prepared to be sold. You WILL be convinced that it is a useful little self defense tool. Works great. Great for dry fire practice. It weights less than 1 oz even with the (free) batteries (for life) installed. You will barely notice that it is on the gun, until you see the little dot on the target when you engage the grip. Automatic on when your hand is on the grip. Batteries last about a year, unless you dry fire practice as much as I do. Crimson will send you extra batteries when you need them. You'll have your sights for bright days outside when you target practice for accuracy and fun. You'll also have a nice aiming dot that is fast to acquire from any position, even shooting backwards. Hope this helps.

[Rotorflyr]

While I've never tried them myself, and have read mixed reviews of them, these are about the lowest profile sights on the market (that I'm aware of anyway):
http://www.t-a-s.co.il

Don't know if they will fit a PM9 or not, but might be worth contacting the company and inquiring.

[Jeremiah/Az]

Karla, what kind of sights did the PM9 that you shot have on it? The standard sights are beveled & angled so as to not hang up.

[TheTman]

Welcome to Kahrtalk. I'd try practicing drawing from your pocket to see if the sights are a problem for you. I've never had mine snag on anything when pocket carrying my CW40, (in a jacket pocket). Have fun with your new gun!

[joshh]

My issue with the kind of thinking (pistols without sights) is that it assumes a defensive encounter will be at very short distances. While statistically, that may be more likely, I'd rather not be handicapped by my firearm if I need to make a longer-distance shot.

i agree w/ you 100% i would always want to have a form of sight on my guns. from what im told the seecamp has a ridge in it that u can use as a basic sight or more for quick alignment. i dont know how usefull a 32 or 38 would be at greater distances anyhow but the pm9 has proven to be effective and accurate at a decent range for sure. so a proper sight would be useful.

[enrico]

While I've never tried them myself, and have read mixed reviews of them, these are about the lowest profile sights on the market (that I'm aware of anyway):
http://www.t-a-s.co.il

Don't know if they will fit a PM9 or not, but might be worth contacting the company and inquiring.

Hi Rotorflyr.

I checked out the site and what a great idea. I wish they had some kind of demo on how good they are at night. I sent them a msg to give some dimensions on them, i'd hate to have them stick out of a .90" wide pistol. (PM9)

Enrico

[JodyH]

My issue with the kind of thinking (pistols without sights) is that it assumes a defensive encounter will be at very short distances. While statistically, that may be more likely, I'd rather not be handicapped by my firearm if I need to make a longer-distance shot.
Aimed fire can degrade into decent point shooting, but point shooting will never upgrade to good aimed fire.

[enrico]

Hi Rotorflyr.

I checked out the site and what a great idea. I wish they had some kind of demo on how good they are at night. I sent them a msg to give some dimensions on them, i'd hate to have them stick out of a .90" wide pistol. (PM9)

Enrico

No go on the TAS, they are making them only for Glocks and they will stick out on the PM9 like wings according to the rep.
E

[Squib]

Majorly bummed!:(

[Pender1]

I don't know that I'd do it, but I saw someone remove the back sight and just have the front sight. I guess you could do that then file down the front sight to your liking...just a suggestion.

[Rotorflyr]

Majorly bummed!:(

Who knows, if there's enough interest (and the business doesn't go under) they may eventually make sights for Kahrs. It may also be possible to file the sides down so there aren't "wings", but can't really say without seeing a set in person.