Handguns, Rifles & Shotguns > Handguns

Question for Kahr PM9/CM9 Owners

<< < (2/3) > >>

SemperFiGuy:
Here's a FAQ w/response, straight from Kahr's website:

============================================
Q. My firearm fails to chamber the first round when I pull back the slide and release it. What is wrong?

A. It is likely you are either failing to pull the slide fully back or you are riding the slide as you release it.   We recommend that you lock back the slide, insert the magazine, and release the slide with the slide stop.   This will require that you carry a load in the chamber for self defense purposes.  However, the passive safety system will prevent the pistol from firing unless the trigger is pulled, even if the gun is dropped.   If you would prefer not to carry a round in the chamber, you may remove a round from the magazine. This alters the angle of the bullet and will allow it to chamber even if you ride the slide.
========================================

The PM9 does have a rather strong slide spring.   It appears that the Kahr factory got sick and tired of dealing w/problems caused by customers who did not slingshot the slide All the Way Back and came up w/the Great Load-From-Slide Stop- Solution.

Me?    Well, I used to make and use many a slingshot from forked tree limbs and old bicycle tubes as a kid.   Got used to The Method early on.

sfg

Bucket:

--- Quote from: SemperFiGuy on March 25, 2013, 10:15:10 PM ---whatsit:

I've have two (2) Kahr PM9s, both w/Crimson Trace LG-437 red lasers.   Nice CCW setup.   Use them for summer pocket carry  [Glock33/.357Sig for winter].   They don't take up much room and if you don't like the small 6-round magazine, you can get a 7 (w/Pearce extension) or an 8 rounder.

The Kahr factory admonition about a 200-round break-in requirement is a firm fact.    You can help punch through that hurdle by repeatedly racking the slide on a newly purchased PM9 that has not been fired (50-60 times, in several sets.)   It still takes a while for the parts to all work smoothly.   Tight tolerances [ain't no Rock Island 1911].   

They are sturdily built little guns and will spit out whatever you put into them.   However, they have a steep, offset feed ramp and can be picky about feeding and chambering just any old rounds.   Especially on the very first loading round.   I've learned to tap the bottom of the magazine sharply whenever the nose of a cartridge sticks on the feed ramp.   Always fixes the problem, but that kinda thing might make some folks nervous.

Also, I always slingshot the first round from a fully closed slide unless it's during a reload situation where the slide is already locked back.   In that case, I release the locked open slide w/my left thumb, maintaining a full control grip on the handgun w/my right hand.

Never could figger out that "use slide-release" thingy that Kahr so seriously espouses.    What's the difference whether I pull the slide all the way back and release it or whether I release a slide that's already all the way back.   It's all the way back, either way.    Perhaps Kahr is concerned that the user will pull the slide only partially back, not far enough to chamber a cartridge, and then release, failing to load.   Just dunno.

It's a rugged little sucker.   I've put 7-8000 rounds through one of mine and never had a mechanical failure.    Further, it's a barker, meaning that it jumps a bit when shooting, making double taps something that you can do but have to work on.   In addition, it does tend to tear up my sissy professor hands somewhat, such that I now put on the band-aids at the range before shooting, not after.   Over the previous scars.

All the above notwithstanding, I luv my Kahr PM9.   But then, I used to romance with slightly neurotic women and I've owned two Jaguars.   [Common Theme:   Lovely, but with special needs and maybe some extra care required. ]


After I bought the Kahr PM9 there were times I wished I had gotten the PM40 for more muzzle energy and firepower.   Also, after I paid about $650 for the Kahr PM9, they came out w/the CW9 and CW40, which are a coupla hunnert dollars or so less expensive.   For the life of me, I can't see the difference.

And--if you're gonna get a 9mm, better look at the Ruger LC9, which is Ruger quality, also considerably less expensive.

Me??   When you see me downtown, you'll see my right hand in my right pocket.    Could be holding a Kahr PM9.

sfgIf you live in Omaha or nearby and want to shoot mine for a while to see what they're like, you're welcome to do so.   Just gimme a PM.






--- End quote ---
I too am shopping for a subcompact 9mm, so was interested in this thread when I saw the subject line.  This may be one of the best responses I've seen on a message board anywhere.  Excellent work!

I may have to take you up on the offer to try out the Kahr.  I'm leaning heavily toward the LC9 or the Sig 290, mostly on price, but I do want to try the Kahr before I decide.

Mudinyeri:
I also have a PM9 and, like SFG, have had no problems when vigorously racking the slide after a re-load.  There's a really good break-in thread on kahrtalk.com to help you make sure your new pocket pistol performs like a champ.

whatsit:
Alright, I went to Big Shots and rented the PM9 and the Beretta Nano to compare them to each other.

A short review of the Nano:
I thought it felt a little funny in my hand. For being a "micro gun" you don't expect much grip, but it felt like a majority of the gun was sitting above my fingers. It was kind of like I couldn't get high enough on the gun.
It wasn't as accurate for me as the PM9 -- probably because I couldn't get a comfortable grip on it (it was definitely me; not the gun). However, it didn't seem to hurt (and I use the word loosely -- you know the sting that these little guns give you on recoil) quite as bad as the PM9.
One other small complaint: because of the strange base-plate on the mags (it sticks way back behind the actual mag body) I couldn't get a mag to drop free without changing my grip to get the palm of my hand out of the way.
I didn't really mind the lack of a slide lock / release. Because I don't use them anyway, I didn't notice it wasn't there. Controlled pairs were doable, but I would need to practice some speed / stress shooting with it before I would be confident they would all land where I want them.

The PM9
I liked it better than the Nano. The slingshot method chambered a round almost every time. I must have short-shucked it once because the slide stayed locked back. I tried it again and it chambered fine.
The tension on the slide release is significant. So much so that I think I would end up with a bloody finger if I tried to use my trigger finger's knuckle to actuate it.
The mags dropped freely for me. I will say that for such an expensive gun you would think they could make the mags fit a little better. They seem to dangle there; they're not flush -- but I digress.
Controlled pairs were ok. It stung a bit and I felt myself re-adjusting my grip between them. Shooting strong-hand-only was much better than with the Nano; I felt like I had control of the gun. Weak-hand-only was a little dicier, but I've never shot real well like that. The target got a whole put in it, but it was about an inch or two left of where it was supposed to be.

Anyway, I think the PM9 is doable for a lefty. The mag release is always an issue and will take practice. I think it's certainly viable for a pocket carry or backup gun.

Thanks to everyone for posting and please feel free to continue to leave your input.

bigmountainskiercfg:
I have had a cw9 and now currently own a pm9. To my understanding the pm9 has the polygonal rifling vs convential rifling which is supposed to affect accuracy. Couldn't tell ya if it did or didn't though as its my pocket gun not made to shoot long range. I haven't had any problems with it and recently put a crimson trace on it. I don't have any complaints with it. Small easy to carry, long trigger pull (has its advantages and disadvantages) that needs to get used to, easily done as kahr recommends putting a couple hundred rounds in it to break it in. Would I buy it again definitely.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version