The Rohrbaugh Forum
Miscellaneous => Other Guns => Topic started by: flyandscuba on November 20, 2005, 04:21:28 PM
-
I love my R9s, but had an opportunity to make a great trade deal today on a NIB PM40 for my NIB 642 plus $100 (I only paid $250 for the 642).
I'm totally new to the Kahr, but liked the size of the PM 40 for a .40 S&W gun. Doubtful that I'll make a pocket gun out of it (already use the R9s and LWS380 for that), but I can see me slipping it in the waistband when running up to the local "stop-n-rob" for a gallon of milk.
Any experiences, thoughts, feelings or tips associated with this gun will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
-
My wife got me one for Xmas and after I examined it I did not like the size or feel of the gun. I did not shoot it. I had a Glock 27 and it was a very good piece in all respects but I liked the 9mm 26 better. If I were you I would look at the Glock 27 also but they are both fine guns.
-
You'll find some reviews on the Kahr PM40 here with other smaller Kahr pistols.
http://www.kahr.com/review.html
-
Today, I took my PM40 to the range to run the break-in period and see what, if any, problems were encountered. Well, 250 rounds of WWB 180gr went down range with ZERO problems. Every round fed, fired and ejected. Absoultely no problems whatsoever.
To me, the recoil was not that bad -- though the cross-hatch on the backstrap does cause some discomfort after 250 rounds in an hour or so at the range. I took my R9s to fire as well. To my surprise, the percieved recoil was worse in the R9s, it was more uncomfortable to shoot, and I performed worse with it.
The accuracy (minimum shooting distance at this range is 15 yards) in the PM40 was much better than I expected. All rounds in the target, and most within a palm-sized group.
My PM40 was test fired on 6/23/2004 -- so, it has been sitting on the dealer's shelf for some time and may not have benefited from later tweeking at the factory.
In summary, I am well pleased. The PM40 may oust the R9s as my favorite pocket carry pistol.... :o
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/flyandscuba/PM401strangetrip.jpg)
-
Fly -- althought it undoubtedly works for some, dont you find the PM40 to be large for pocket carry? I can pocket carry a G26 too, but its not a pocket gun. To me, the PM40 pushes the limits a bit.
-
It's not really any more difficult to pocket the PM40 than it is the R9s for me. I was carrying the R9s in a Hedley front pocket holster, but because I had an Uncle Mike's available for the PM40 -- been carrying it in the rear pocket like a wallet.
It is actually easier to draw from the rear pocket than my R9s from the front -- at least in blue jeans. Dress pants/khakis may be a different story.
-
I found that the smaller PM9 was too much for pockets. It had to be IWB carry in my case.
Actually, it would go in the rear pocket, but it was a major production getting it out.
Bill
-
I recently sold my PM9, but not because it wasn't an awesome little gun. I never had ANY kind of failure with it in about 400 rounds. I carried it in a rear pocket holster, but it really isn't a pocket pistol. I spoke to someone at Kahr about three weeks ago, and they are working on a .380 about the size of the P3AT. It is supposed to be out in about a year or so. That will be a pocket pistol to have. Since the PM9 wasn't really a pocket pistol I opted for a Springfield Micro Compact .40 S&W that Fireblade Systems is working on for me. It will work in a coat pocket, etc. but I still need a real "back pocket" pistol. Still holding up on the R9 until I'm totally convinced. ;)
-
We all dislike making mistakes, but after buying two R-9s'
from Tom at IrishGuard, I have to say that it is the only
gun that meets all of my expectations for a concealed carry weapon. There are no compromises, i.e., weight, size,
calibre, reliability, tactile feel, etc.---period.
-
I am curious as to how a Kahr in .380 will be better than a Kel-Tec P-3AT -- other than being more expensive. I think the pocket .380 market is pretty well filled between the Seecamp, Guardian and P-3AT. And the R-380... ;)
-
Could someone post some pictures of the R-380?
Isn't it time for the SHOT show yet?
Bill
-
I see the SHOT show will be February 9-12, 2006.
Are we getting close to an announcement?
-
The R-380 comment was some speculation on my part, I guess... I don't think its a secret that Rohrbaugh plans to make one. I held, photographed, and even fired the .380 prototype on my factory tour over a year ago. The gun will be identical to the R-9, but with a barrel designed for .380 ACP.
I would post the photos, but I don't want to be a spoiler. Picture an R-9 with the designation R-380 on the slide and you will get the general idea...
-
So, no smaller in size -- just a rebarreled R9? Without a size advantage, it may be difficult to justify a purchase compared to the LWS380
-
I had planned to trade my R9S for the expected R380S because of recoil.
But now, tape has tamed the beast. No problems.
Still, the .380 may be impossible to resist.
-
So the R380 will be a locked breech pistol, like the R9? Most .380s are blowback design. Smaller, lighter, (cheaper).
Like flyandscuba said, just a rebarreled R9? Without a size advantage, it may be difficult to justify a purchase compared to the LWS380
I guess there'll be diehards who must have one of every model Rohrbaugh produces. Not me. Some guys are collectors, others are shooters, still others are accumulators. I must be a "shooting accumulator". Already have a .380 NAA, don't need another .380...
Now if I hit the lotto 8)
-
Well... not to bash the Seecamp...
I have never fired one and don't know that much about them. Do Seecamps have no cast, MIM, forged or plastic parts? I am not sure.
Most important, however, is the difference mentioned above. The R-9 is a locked breech, while the Seecamp and most (all?) other pocket .380 out there are retarded blowback. This makes a HUGE difference in shootability. Have you ever shot a larger, heavier Bersa Thunder in .380? Snappy little gun. Blowback.
When Eric and Karl showed me the R-380 prototype at the factory, my reaction was the same -- Why bother? Eric smiled and handed me his R-9 and the R-380 and let me shoot both. I saw the light. The R-380 is a complete pussycat. The nicest .380 I have ever shot. Recoil becomes almost a non-issue. Now I am a believer in the need. This will be a great pocket gun.
Also -- Rohrbaugh anticipates selling a lot of R-380s in the overseas markets where 9mm is prohibited as a "military" caliber.
-
I can see the .380 being marketed overseas. Here in the US, if you want locked breech in a .380 pocket pistol -- look no further than the very reasonable KT P-3AT. Mine has been reliable out of the box, and was my daily pocket carry since it replaced the P-32.
I've come to feel that the smaller (less powerful) cartridges are not sufficient to be considered effective as a self defense pistol. (I know, better to have something than not).
The R9s (or other 9mm) to me, is the minimum for self defense. I now prefer something stronger -- .40 or .45
Thr R-380 will sell, and I expect it will be the Cadillac of pocket .380s -- but if the price is expected to be in the same $900-1000 range, I'll not be adding one to my collection. Too many suitable, lighter, and less expensive .380s on the market.
-
That will be a tough one. I love the size of my Seecamp .380 and am willing to live with its recoil since it's not a gun I blast away with at the range-nor is my R9, for that matter.
The only reason to have the Seecamp .380 (or .32) from my perspective is to gain a smaller gun that just disappears in pockets and can be carried very easily. Otherwise, I'd only have the R9 for pocket duty.
Perhaps if recoil is much less than other .380's it will attract buyers who appreciate quality and want an easier to shoot platform.
-
Duane,
Since you have actually held a R-380 prototype, I am curious about your perception of the weight vs. the R9. I carried a P3AT for a year or so before I obtained a R9. For me the R9 is superior in every way save one: weight. The P3AT is ~ one-third less weight and that little 4 oz does make a difference. Based on your comment about recoil of the R-380, I am a little concerned that the R-380 may not deliver a meaningful reduction in eight over the R9. Thoughts ... ?
-
Any reduction in weight would be minimal or perhaps non-existant. It is literally the same gun with a different barrel, recoil spring and slightly modified magazine.
The additional weight, I am sure, contributes to the shootability.
To me, the R-380 was far more pleasant to shoot than a P-3AT.
-
My hope is that the R-380 and R9S can share the same holster.
-
Absolutely they should.
-
Oh boy. I have a comment and then a question. Comment - the Kahr trigger is superb and if the size is down close to the P-3AT, I think the Kahr will be the Cadillac of the 380s. The price will still be say $300 less than a Rohrbaugh. Can you tell I'm a Kahr fan? Question - What is the trigger like on the "high priced" Seecamp 380?