is slimness in a concealed carry firearm overrated?

[anonimoose]

Shooters,

I've been heavily debating switching my concealed carry firearm (the SW 6906) to something slimmer/lighter like the Kahr CM9/CW9/PM9, the Kel-Tec PF-9 or the Ruger LC9 (good luck finding any of these! but that's for another thread....)

Am wondering though, with single-stack 9mm's becoming all the rage lately, is slimness in a concealed carry firearm overrated? Yes, I understand that the Glock 26 is heavier and thicker (especially in the grip) than the Kel-Tec PF-9.

(Pictures courtesy of nippr.) But let's be blunt -- we're talking about three to seven? eight? ounces in overall weight and tenths of an inch in overall width. I've done some informal experimentation with my SW 6906 and my Walther P22 (vastly different firearms, of course...just doing a rough size comparison/contrast), and while the weight difference is obvious, this can be compensated for using a good holster/belt. Moreover, I only saw marginal gains in concealability with the P22 over the SW 6906. Of course, the former was also more comfortable, but how does that saying go? "Your firearm should be comforting, not comfortable."

If (like me) you're carrying IWB in a good holster, are the small gains in concealability found in the "newer" single-stack Kahr CM9/CW9/PM9, Kel-Tec PF-9 and Ruger LC9 really worth the trade-off in capacity and (arguably) reliability found in the "older" double-stack Glock, SW M&Pc, etc? In other words, is the perceived "thickness" of the Glock (and other double-stack sub-compacts in their class) a matter of psychology rather than physiology?

Stirring the pot.

Very Respectfully,
Moose

 

[kingkeoni]

My conceal carry weapon is a Glock 23.

I will happily trade 1/4" for 6 more rounds.

There's nothing scarier than running out of ammo in a gun fight.

 

[Don Glock]

^this

 

[Daryl]

Depends on how I carry.

I have a Glock 23, but the only way I can truly conceal it is with a loose fitting cover garment of some kind. A leather vest works fine, and fits in with the western type clothing I normally wear.

But for IWB under a tighter fitting and tucked in shirt? It absolutely makes a difference. For such times, a J-frame revolver disappears; no way I can do that with a G23. Same would be true for a slimmer type semi-auto.

It makes little or no difference if you're willing to dress around the firearm, but for very discrete carry, it matters.

Daryl

 

[dean1818]

I tried to IWB CCW a 1.45 inch thick pistol.........

It wasn't comfortable, in fact, i hated it.

I went with one of the most comfortable pistols to IWB.... a Kahr k9
.9 inch width

8 rounds to me is plenty.

I have read that the average LEO shooting encounter (remember, many cops NEVER fire a single round in their career on duty) entails expending 3 rounds.


To me, heavy is ok, but thick is bad.


If I hate carrying, I may leave it home one day when I may need it

 

[BlueTrain]

I tend to agree with the previous post. Thirty five ounces doesn't seem like too much, yet 45 ounces seems heavy. Don't ask me to explain it.

Slim is fine, too, but there is the grip and then there is the slide. A flat slide like on a Ruger P345 seems very comfortable to me in an IWB holster and that gun has a particularly thin grip for a .45 auto, although it is still one of the longer ones. But any .45 auto will have a long grip if is has a seven round magazine.

I got a chance to handle an LC9 the other day, which they only started receiving this week, supposedly. I thought the pistol had much to like but they did it again with that grip. That has to be the thinnest grip I've ever felt on a gun (this one had the little magazine extension) and I'm wondering if it is thinner than it needs to be.

Yet more temptations.

 

[rodfac]

IWB...two pant waist sizes bigger...if you go the thick route...Hmmmm. I can make it with a 1911 with one pant size bigger. Have never liked double stacked pistols for that reason, and the fact that the grip feels too fat in my hand. Rod

 

[Jimmy10mm]

I live in a tropical climate so shorts and a t-shirt are frequently my cover garments. My usual carry is a Kahr MK40 or P380. Slim enough to avoid printing IWB. I'd like to carry my S&W 386PD but the 7 round cylinder would have it sticking out like a sore thumb.

 

[Hunter2678]

To me thinness is a must for a few reasons...main one being that it allows me to pretty much keep my jeans and shorts sizes the same so I dont have to buy a size or 2 bigger in the waist forcing me to wear suspenders if I dont decide to carry that day...I dont feel the need to carry something that holds 10+ rounds for EDC, at least not in the area I live in currently....now if I were living in a rougher neighborhood that might change..

 

[Dashunde]

I have 3 main iwb carry guns; LCP, PM9, G27 and the difference beween each one is remarkable.
I'm not really even aware that the LCP is there anymore, its just that thin and light.
I do notice the PM9, its heavier and thicker but not uncomfortable, mostly it just tugs on my belt a little more.
The G27 is a different matter, its very noticable loaded up with 9+1 of .40, and its thick everywhere. I carry this one at 4 o'clock (the others at 3) and usually only clip it in when I'm in a nasty part of the hood (work).

The difference in comfort between the PM9 and the G27 is substancial.
For me, the PM9/CM9 & CW's are about the best balance of firepower, round count, weight and all day comfort.

 

[Boats]

"Your firearm should be comforting, not comfortable."

Why can't a slim firearm be both?

Some sayings outlive their usefulness and the one you are invoking was coined long before polymer framed single stack nines came into existence.

Carrying a totally vetted K-T PF-9 allows me to not look out of place in the summer by letting me dress pretty much however I'd like.

7+1 aboard and a a seven round reload which also disappears wherever you need it to is more than enough if one practices double tapping with this class of pistols.

 

[Skadoosh]

I carry one of two guns: a Colt Detective or a Sig P6 (with a P225 barrel) both of which I appendix carry IWB. For me, grip length is more of a factor.

 

[C0untZer0]

Don't forget the Rohrbaugh !

Rohrbaugh R9
Caliber:9mm
Barrel:2.9in
Length:5.2in
Height:3.7in
Weight:13.5oz
Magazine Capacity:6 Rounds



A lot of people on the Rohrbaugh forum will tell you that the slimness and light weight are very important to them - the highest priority for them.

http://www.rohrbaughforum.com/


.

 

[redrick]

Slimness and I will add grip height do make a big difference. I went to a baseball game last night and the grip would not let me sit back in the seat comfortably in those hard plastic seats.

 

[priler]

imo, the new slim breed of pistols(there have been many other slim pistols in the past though) has been a boon to those who've carried for a long time or for new permits. i say this specifically for certain attire options that it can bring where as before the need to dress around it was much greater and i'm specifically referring to non-mouse calibers(9mm,.40s&w,.45acp). polymer frames,and therefor lighter weight,is also very helpful.

i'm not saying you can't carry a full size,more "normal" model,..just that the "slim breed" greatly adds to what you can do.

imo,a few tenths of an inch in thickness can make a massive difference to whether it is more noticable and therefor what sacrifices in clothing you don't have to make. new permit holders are usually very enthusiastic about carrying at first but after a while,it can become routine but possibly also tedious. a slim,light weight pistol can drastically increase comfort in several ways.

imagine if you will that your out with your girl or your freinds and everyone is dressed in jeans and a regular shirt(lets say it's a "hot" state) but there you are,the only one with some kind of jacket(possibly sweating like a pig),baggy cloths(or some other way to print less) or simply being alot more self-conscience that your carrying(weight and thickness can be a constant reminder).

again,not saying you can't carry full size(many time i do) but that a slim and light weight pistol can add to your options and even comfort.

the only problem that i have with this "new breed" is finding one with a combination of certain features that i demand of it,..specifically a minimum of a 3.5" barrel(maybe just a hair less if it has polygonal rifling) for 9mm(4.5" if it were .45acp),a grip in which i can get all three fingers on easily(pinky extension may be ok) and one that has a quick reset(my definition of quick reset) with no safety(or the option not to have to use the safety).in other words,no C&L.

sure,my demands may add a tiny bit more length,height and weight but there's a reason for them that i don't wish to argue.

i'd prefer DA but even DAO would be ok IF it had a quick reset. most of these new slim pistols are all DAO and while there triggers may be smooth and even relatively light weight pulls,i still have not found what i'm looking for.

this is why i'm waiting on the bersa BP9CC to pass judgement on what bersa means by "quick reset DAO",..meanwhile,i'll keep using my p7m8 for those time a really need something slim(it's relatively heavy though).

 

[CWKahrFan]

Now you're talking my language... Thin is in!... LCP with 10-Rd. ProMag (10+1 .380)... Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

 

[catnphx]

I like options and my 3 carry guns are all different from each other:

- M&P 9c w/ Crossbreed Supertuck IWB holster
- Kahr CW9 w/ Kholster Crescent IWB holster
- S&W 640-1 .357 w/ Galco Kingtuk IWB holster

Love them all and wear them all (at different times) based on my activity, the season and my clothing choices for the day. I really do notice the differences between the 3 in weight, slimness and holster.

Good luck!!

 

[rml4uk]

I like the new breed of thin 9mm firearms. As a visual person, a lot of them have a very nice design aesthetic (they look cool) and they carry a decently potent round in a small form factor. You have to ask yourself if the concealability advantage is worth the shooting feel in your hand though. I was recently in the market for a carry weapon and the main contenders were a Kahr P9, Ruger LC9, S&W M&P9c, and a Glock 26. I loved the thinness and feel of the Kahr and was all set to buy it, but once I shot it I hated the feel of shooting it (kicked like a mule). I really liked the overall thinness and shape of the LC9, but couldn't get over how tiny the grip was. I have big hands so it kind of felt like holding a 9v battery and there was no way I'd be able to accurately shoot something that disproportionate to my hand. I ended up with the M&P9c and it absolutely disappeared in a High Noon Hidden Ally holster (carried at 1:00). Long story shorter, I ended up trading the M&P9c for a Glock 23. Yes, it's bigger and I definitely notice it on my belt, but it is way more fun to shoot and it still disappears in the same High Noon holster I used for the m&P9c. (AIWB is the only way I'll carry)

The way I see it, if you aren't specifically looking for a weapon you can hide underneath a tucked in undershirt, might as well get the biggest gun with the most firepower that you can bear to carry and still conceal well.

 

[Mudinyeri]

My conceal carry weapon is a Glock 23.

I will happily trade 1/4" for 6 more rounds.

I'm not sure that comparing a Glock 23 to something like a Kahr PM40 is exactly apples to apples. Not only is the G23 thicker, it's a larger gun overall.

With that said, I agree with carrying as much ammo as I can. That desire, however, must be balanced with carrying a gun that I will ... carry. If the gun is thick enough or heavy enough that I'm tempted to leave it at home, the number of rounds it holds will make no difference.

IMO, each individual has to find the right balance between just enough and just a bit too much. When making that decision don't forget that LE statistics suggest that trained officers have approximately a 10% hit rate in firefights. If you're not carrying ten rounds ... well, you can do the math.

 

[Dragline45]

Slimness to me is everything in a concealed carry pistol