small single stack 9mm for cc

[B18C5-EH2]

Another vote for the Kel-Tec PF-9. It's the smallest, lightest 9mm commercially available at a reasonable price (unlike the Rohrbaugh).

Exactly how is a Kel-Tec PF-9 smaller than the Kahr PM9?

Kel-Tec PF-9 Specs:

Length: 5.85"
Height: 4.3"
Width: .88"

Kahr Arms PM9 Specs:

Length: 5.3''
Height: 4.0''
Width: .90''

The PM9 is smaller in both length and height, and comparatively speaking when shooting each back to back the Kahr has a trigger that is to die for, whilst the Kel-Tec's trigger leaves much to be desired. The fit and finish on the pistols is also not comparable with the Kel-Tec having rough edges and feel-able plastic seams even on the TRIGGER which gets annoying for extended shooting. Also felt recoil is also not even comparable when it comes to shooting a Kel-Tec PF-9 or a Kahr PM9. Kahr does a much better job of soaking up the recoil.

"Well the PM9 also costs twice as much..."

Yes, yes I've heard that before, and for the most part this is true. I only paid $465.00 brand new for my PM9 due to a mislabel, but I'd have paid double the price for a PM9 still over a PF-9 because the PM9 is truly nicer all around IMO.

If you want a more comparable pistol from Kahr in terms of size and pricing look into the CW9. It's 5.9'' long, 4.5'' tall, has 7+1 capacity, and can be purchased anywhere from $350.00-$450.00 and still has a buttery smooth trigger and good overall craftsmanship.

So cliff notes:

PM9 is certainly smaller than the PF-9, and the CW9 is almost as small as the PF-9 and is bargain priced as well.

Oh and BTW:

If you don't fancy the 9mm version, Kahr offers the exact same pistols in .40 S&W. I chose to buy one of each:

 

[rkammer]

My vote goes to the Kel-Tec PF9.

 

[billib]

keltec

i have a pf9 with the belt clip, perfect for hot weather, hides under a t shirt. check out KTOG for more info on them. 3913 is my cool weather cary.

 

[David the Gnome]

My beat up old 3914NL fits your description, with night sights to boot. It's slim, lightweight (25oz), 8-round magazine, 3½" barrel, DA/SA pistol.

Not that I dislike the S&W 3rd gens but, a full-size Glock 17 with a 17+1 capacity is only 22oz. Comparatively speaking, that doesn't make the 3913/4 look all that lightweight, especially when you consider the PM9 is a mere 14oz.

 

[BillCA]

Dave,

You are correct, except that the Glock could never be called a "slim" gun. One reason I stick with single-stack autos is that almost none of the double-stack guns are concealable (for me) due to the fat grips.

The Kahr is a good pistol - I have a K9 - and a fair choice. I've never fired the PM9 so I can't comment on the pistol. The S&W is an 8+1 while the PM9 is a 6+1 capacity. Everything is a compromise.

Remember, the OP makes the decision of what works best for him. It's not a contest to find him the smallest, lightest, thinnest, 9mm. Hell, just suggest a Rohrbaugh and be done with it. But he might choke on the $1300 MSRP. Springfield's EMP-9 is a fine, dandy 9mm, but floats around $1050-$1100.

 

[orionengnr]

My CC 9s are a HK P7, a SA EMP and a Kahr PM9. Of the (3) I find it easier and prefer to carry the PM9.

I have owned all three of them, and others as well (P-11, S&W, etc.)
All are gone except for the PM9, which will stay.

 

[Gary L. Griffiths]

Length: 5.3''
Height: 4.0''
Width: .90''

The PM9 is smaller in both length and height, and comparatively speaking when shooting each back to back the Kahr has a trigger that is to die for, whilst the Kel-Tec's trigger leaves much to be desired. The fit and finish on the pistols is also not comparable with the Kel-Tec having rough edges and feel-able plastic seams even on the TRIGGER which gets annoying for extended shooting. Also felt recoil is also not even comparable when it comes to shooting a Kel-Tec PF-9 or a Kahr PM9. Kahr does a much better job of soaking up the recoil.

You're relying on the published size figures from Kahr, which are inaccurate. The actual dimensions are 5.6" x 4.3" x 1.1." Check Bobo's Pocket Auto Comparison Chart for true measured dimensions.

Agree Kahr's trigger is better, and add'l weight absorbs recoil, but the PM-45 I bought was inferior in finish to the Kel-Tec -- had very sharp edges, and I wound up with dozens of metal shavings, some pinhead sized, when I detail cleaned it. Then again, there's the issue of my having to send it back to the factory to get it to feed a full magazine of ammo. Traded it when it still occasionally jammed.

Plus, the Kel-Tec uses a 7-rd magazine vs the Kahr's 6-rd. Personally, I don't wish to spend more then double the cost of the PF-9 on a weapon I consider no better than, if not slightly inferior to it. YMMV.

 

[psyshack]

I looked long and hard before I bought the PF-9. It is thin and light weight. The PF-9 is not a range pistol. With that said I have put over 5k rounds through mine. Only one issue. The firing pin / extractor screw backed out a tad. A drop of LT-Blue and that is fixed. And do not dry fire them!

25 yards fast fire.

Good enough for me seeing it will be a in your face to 7 yard weapon.

 

[M3 Pilot]

Another vote for the PPS (see the post above). I've shot the Kel-tec a few times & it's not (for me) a pleasant gun to shoot.

 

[hawk727]

The Kahr MK9 is my summer carry.....single stack and thin.