Kel Tec PF9 vs Kahr pm9 worth the large price difference?

[martino]

thanks

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[GM]

Yes absolutely!

[crzy4guns]

IMHO - No. Kel Tec has cleaned up all of the issues that had plagued PF9 owners, and the small 9mm is now a pretty smooth running little pistol. So for about a $400.00 difference (YMMV) - I just don't see any justification, even though Kahr is a top brand.

[bunker]

No. Use the extra $400 or so dollars towards a good holster, reloader for pistol shells, and a local gun club membership where you can get good, safe practice. The kel Tec PF9 is one of the better Kel Tecs on the market. JMHO. Bunker

[azchevy]

x3. Keltec is good to go

[GM]

IMHO - No. Keltec has cleaned up all of the issues that had plagued PF9 owners, and the small 9mm is now a pretty smooth running little pistol. So for about a $400.00 difference (YMMV) - I just don't see any justification, even though Kahr is a top brand.

If you shoot a PM9 and then a PF9 you will see the justification.

[Der Alte]

I keep hearing about Kel Tecs problems with the PF-9. I bought one of the very first PF-9s and have never had it fail to fire or eject. Mine has served me well.

[tokerblue]

If you shoot a PM9 and then a PF9 you will see the justification.

I agree.

IMO, you should test fire each of them and you'll come to the conclusion of whether or not the PM9 is worth the price difference. They both can be reliable guns, but I much prefer the build quality and trigger of the PM9.

[LanceORYGUN]

thanks

The Walther PPS is worth the price difference.

[MichSteve]

I would say for me the PM9 is worth the price difference.

[jwhite75]

IMO for what most users will actually use a small 9mm like that for, the KT is perfectly fine. However, the Kahr is the price iti s and ahs the rep it does for a reason.

[Gideon]

I appreciate Keltecs and they're a decent value but the triggers are lousy. Shoot both and you'll know there's no comparison. The quality of the PM9 blows away the Keltec. The trigger on the PM9 is one of the best DAO triggers on the planet. the sights are WAY better, especially if you get night sights and I think you'll be surprised about the difference in felt recoil. The only thing I can say about the PM9 is the checkering is rough on my hands but I found the black pattern on the PF9 to also be hard on my hand. I can get three fingers on the Keltec and only two on the PM9 so that's another plus for the Keltec but I can shoot the PM9 a lot better and find it to be a more accurate gun. If I could only have one and was prone to keeping my guns, then I would definitely go with the PM9. If I had larger hands than I do and little money and no patience to save, I'd get the keltec but getting back to you question, are the differences worth the money? ABSOLUTELY...and then some.

Gideon

[jbr]

CW9 is a great alternative - Excellent quality and great value

[aag]

I've just replaced PF9 with PM9. For me, it's worth the difference, even though PF9 (unlike P3AT which I've owned before) hasn't given me a single problem. Yet, I've never liked it.

At the range PM9 is significantly more enjoyable to shoot. The recoil is manageable, and I don't feel like my hand is about to fall off after a 100 rounds. Also, PM9 can be pocket carried; PF9 is a bit longer -- still can fit in a pocket, but not as well. Fit and finish -- Kahr, unlike KelTec, doesn't look and feel like a DIY project (nor did I have to run sandpaper on Kahr grips to make it bearable to shoot -- something I *had* to do with KT).

KT has one thing going for it -- price. If the budget is tight, it'd definitely do well for $300. If you can afford it -- go for the Kahr.

[HandgunWorld]

PM9 definitely worth the price difference.