Small 9mm
I am (considering) a small 9mm. Thinking either SA EMP or Kimber Aegis! If anyone has one of these or any other suggestions please let me know!
0
-
WALTHER PPS! 0 -
Small = Kahr PM9 - Excellent quality in a small package.
Smaller = Kel-Tec 9mm - Light, tiny - packs a punch!0 -
Small-Kahr P-9
Smaller-Kahr PM-9
Both are smaller than the Kel-Tec [;)]0 -
quote:MORTONCA: I am (considering) a small 9mm. Thinking either SA EMP or Kimber Aegis! If anyone has one of these or any other suggestions please let me know!
Well, if you are looking at single-action 1911-like guns, Para-Ordinance also has some small 9mms you ought to check out too. Para makes good guns (now made in the USA) and FWIW, I think they are less pricey than the other makes you are looking at.
My personal feeling is that there is nothing wrong with any of these, but if you're going to be carrying a 1911-like gun, why not carry it in 45ACP? There are lots of really small ones available nowadays.
If you are enamored with the CARTRIDGE, then there are smaller/lighter GUNS you can pick from (see below).
quote:Originally posted by dcs shooters
Small-Kahr P-9
Smaller-Kahr PM-9
Both are smaller than the Kel-Tec [;)]
That depends on what you mean by "smaller".
The P9 is NOT smaller than the various Kel-Tecs in overall size. The PM-9 is smaller in overall size, but falls short in other areas (see below).
See here for "tale of the tape" comparisons between various pocket pistols: http://www.mouseguns.com/PocketAutoComparison.pdf
Note that the specs listed in this image are slightly DIFFERENT than the ones listed by the manufacturer. I've also seen other slightly different specs listed in various reviews. I don't know if the differences are because of sloppy measurement on the part of the reviewers, the manufacturers shading the truth a bit, or maybe a little of both. But they are relatively minor.
Anyway, according to the manufacturer the smaller Kahr PM-9 is up to 5.3 inches, 0.9 inches wide at the slide, and weighs 15.9 ounces with magazine (14 oz unloaded).
Per the manufacturer, the Kel-Tec PF-9 is up to 5.85 inches, 0.88 inches wide, and weighs 15.5 ounces with LOADED magazine (12.7 oz, unloaded).
In other words, comparing the smaller pistol from each manufacturer, the Kel-Tec is 0.5" longer, a tiny bit thinner, and 1.5 ounces lighter.
Further the Kel-Tec also holds one more round (7+1 vs 6+1), and costs less than half of what the Kahr costs.
Would you rather have one Kahr or two Kel-Tecs? (And that's irrespective of the ownership of Kahr arms, which some find objectionable). In my opinion, the weight, capacity, and cost advantages of the Kel-Tec make up for the slight length disadvantage.
The comparison shakes out a little differently if you compare to the double-stack Kel-tec P11 (which has a nice side benefit of accepting high cap Smith and Wesson 9mm mags).
The P11 is a tiny bit shorter than the PF-9, wider (1") and heavier (20 ounces loaded). On the other hand, the reason for the increased weight is that it will hold 10+1, plus can accept high cap Smith 9mm magazines (to bring it up to 15+1, if necessary).
From experience, the trigger on the P11 isn't as good, and the overall gun is "blockier" making it less comfortable to shoot and carry.
The Kahr P9 measures 6.5", weighs 20 ounces unloaded, and holds 6+1 (or 7+1 with the mag extension). So its bigger and heavier than all of the others. On the other hand, its probably not a fair comparison, either, since this one is not really meant for pocket-type carry.
Of the other super-small "pocket" 9mms, probably the only other worth considering is the Rohrbaugh pistol. See the above link.
Dimensionally, the Rohrbaugh compares favorably to both the Kel-Tec AND the Kahr, being lighter, thinner, and smaller than the others with 6+1 capacity. Its also nice and smooth, designed from its inception to be the smallest possible 9mm luger gun intended for pocket carry. The problem is that at over $1000 real world cost, its FAR more expensive than either of the above.
The Rohrbaugh also has marginal sights (if you get the version with sights) and lacks a slide lock. In practice. . .who cares. Sights snag in the pocket, and if you need to shoot this thing, you're probably pointing (not aiming) at a man-sized target at 5 yards, making sights effectively irrelevant anyway. You're also unlikely to reload it under pressure making a slide lock irrelevant.
EDIT: Long trigger pull on the PF-9 is the gun's "safety". It acts essentially like a double-action only revolver.0 -
quote:Originally posted by mortonca
I am (considering) a small 9mm. Thinking either SA EMP or Kimber Aegis! If anyone has one of these or any other suggestions please let me know!
I have an EMP - well, actually Springfield has it because the gun has a primer flow (into the FP hole) problem & they're correcting it. I really like the gun, it appears well made, excellent fit and finish with a clean, crisp trigger. I look forward to its return & mention that it's being repaired because there have been more problems with EMPs in general than I think warranted for a $1,300.00 gun. If you float around 1911 specific sights you'll find the EMP fairly well represented.
On the plus side, mine fed flawlessly and was quite accurate. Very light recoil in 9mm. It is amazing how much smaller than a 45 ACP designed gun the EMP is through the grip area - being designed around the smaller dimensions of the 9mm cartridge makes quite a difference. I have a Defender and two Detonics and a P10, the EMP is the most concealable, but of course it's in the 9mm not the ACP.
Springfield will "bobtail" the EMP and that will make the gun even more concealable, I'm really undecided about using the EMP or the Defender as my CCW gun.
Kimber or Para would be a great choice also, so long as you stay with an alloy frame to minimize weight. I think Smith is coming out with a 3: scandium 1911.
I'd stay away from any double stack, especially in 45 ACP. Carrying lots of heavy bullets, espcially above the belt line, is kind of a pain.0 -
I'm not a big guy and especially in the summer I need something small to carry. I love my PF-9. I hardly know it's there and more importantly, no one else does either!
I wouldn't own a Kahr for the very reason that bean mentioned.0 -
I know they are not "in print" anymore, but I carry a Colt Pocket 9 daily in my front pocket of my slacks; tucks right away, and is a genuine Colt. Not as light as some of the others (compares to the Rohrbaugh), but frankly, the little extra weight helps when shooting some hot 9mm loads like the Corbon, and you forget the extra weight as you get use to it. Nice gun, and custom grips are available from Haken Pek (that alone makes me like em' better than the Rohrbaugh!). 0 -
dont know much about Khar, but I love my PF9 its slim frame makes it nearly invisible with just shorts and a tee shirt. In addition to that it will fit just fine in a front pocket. The trigger is a little long in the pull and its not something you will want to shoot all day at the range because of the grip, but its a nice little shooter. You wont win any competitions with it, but you will be able to hit a silouhete center mass with little problem.
The best part about the PF9 is that it is light, it wont bounce around in a pocket like a heavy revolver and it can be carried all day comfortably.
Did I mention that they are affordable as well?0 -
I'd go with the Pf-9 from Kel Tec...the only real negative is the trigger is LONNNNNG...and mushy..otherwise the size and quality is spot on....this gun is designed to shoot the distances of a derringer...not a 25 yard shot. In a crisis situation at 2 yards I'll be happy to pullout a PF-9... 0 -
+2
I also recomend that you look at the Para ordnance line of handguns.
few examples examples of sub compacts. you can get them with wood grips also.
single stack, LDA, light double action
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=130438064
double stack
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=1304727750
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments