[Michigan Dan]

Saw a S&W99 Compact Frame .40 at a dealer yesterday. Seemed nice. Came with 3 different front site blades and two different width backstraps. 8 plus 1, 22.5 oz and highly concealable. He didn't have one in as a range gun to try, but did have one in 9mm. The wife was with me, so I didn't get a chance to try it. Any thoughts on these?

Also saw a PM40 Kahr (.40). This thing looks like it will disappear in a pocket pretty good. Came with two Magazines, one five round, one 6 round extended mag; small and very light (16.9 oz), and THIN. Wasn't what I was looking for, but I bet you would forget you were carry it in the right holster.

Dan

 

[Flyer]

I'm gonna confess to a bit of prejuidice here...
If you're going to get a plastic-framed pistol, stick with the original and best - Glock.
As for the Kahr, they perform very well, and are very concealable, as you noted. Having said that, I think they're overpriced and haven't gotten one. The Kahr's shooting characteristics are best described as a mini-Glock.
Oh, yeah: Glock SUED S & W over stealing design elements of their pistol. Glock won, yet Smith/Walther is still making the guns... don't know the full story on that one.
However... if I had to run into a gunstore and pick one gun I'd trust to go bang without testing, it'd be straight to the Glock section.
Flyer

 

[gazpacho]

I'd only choose the PM40 if your really needed a tiny CCW gun. Yes it will perform well. But it ain't gonna be fun. Probably like shooting 38Spec +P out of a scandium J-frame.

 

[cal45]

I agree with Flyer on the Glock instead of the S&W based on their proven track record. If your looking for a single stack that can also fit in your pocket - the Kahr PM40 is the way to go! I can say this from experience. I own a PM40 and just had it out to the range for the first time yesterday. Put a box of 50 downrange without any problems at all. Like all .40's - it does kick a little more but not unmanagable. Having 5+1 .40SW in your pocket is pretty comforting.

 

[SgtB]

What do you guys think of the Kahr K40 in stainless?
All metal instead of polymer.

 

[Midiman]

I like the Kahrs outside of the PM series. The all metal frame models are solid, well built guns. If I was looking for plastic, I'd look at something else. They're a little on the high side, price wise, for what they are. They still aren't QUITE small enough to lose in MY pockets. The MX9 doesn't quite fit the front pocket and the back strap protrudes from my rear pocket... which is why I went with a 3AT.

 

[Guest]

I have accumulated both the Kahr's and the Glock's and here is my opinion for what it is worth. The Kahr's are nice, fit into a pocket well and will digest anything. The MK9's are heavy for a small gun but they are controllable. The PM9's are also small but are a bit more "stout" to shoot due to the weight. I would imagine that the PM40's are much like an earlier poster replied, like shooting a scandium 38 or 357. Yeah they are lightweight and easy to conceal but if they are a torture to shoot than you probably wont very often and then what is the point. The Glock's are nice as well, they are a bit more concealable than the SW99 compacts and probably have a nicer trigger. But your comparison was between the Smith and the Kahr. I would have to look at what was the original mission of this pistol. Carry alot, shoot a little, go with the KAHR. If you want the best of both worlds than get the Smith. If you are like most of us and have a P32 or P3AT, or both than get the Smith. If you need something smaller you have the KT. I have the MK9 and the PM9 along with a Glock 26 and 27. I find that I carry the P32 over my P3AT daily and hardly carry the Kahr's or Glock's.

Decide what the mission of this pistol is, condiser the alternatives and then make your decision.