Kahr .9mm vs Kahr .40mm

Kahr .9mm vs Kahr .40mm

This is a discussion on Kahr .9mm vs Kahr .40mm within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I'm sticking with Kahr but I can't decide on the CM9 or the CM40. I heard that the CM40 doesn't have much muzzle flip like ...

Results 1 to 13 of 13
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By tokerblue

Thread: Kahr .9mm vs Kahr .40mm

  1. #1
    New Member Array papadork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    3

    Kahr .9mm vs Kahr .40mm

    I'm sticking with Kahr but I can't decide on the CM9 or the CM40. I heard that the CM40 doesn't have much muzzle flip like other 40's. Does anyone have an opinion on the CM40? They are both about the same size. I'm thinking what the heck, go for the bigger bang.


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,355
    Welcome to the forum.

    I don't have the CM series, but I have shot the PM9 and the PM40, which should be identical to the CM9 and CM40. The recoil in the PM40 is greater than something like the Glock 27 since it's smaller and lighter. It also has more recoil than the PM9, but it's not unmanageable. I don't think you could go wrong with either. I picked the PM9 simply because it holds one more round than the PM40.
    surefire7 likes this.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." ~ Benjamin Franklin

  3. #3
    New Member Array papadork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    3
    Thanks!

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array smolck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    3,298
    I had a CM9 and it was reliable. Not an overly accurate pistol compared to others, but I suppose for what it was it was fine. I personally wouldn't try and shoot a smallish pistol in .40 cal. The CM9 had enough recoil as it was. And I am no weak handed or small handed guy if that is your thought, it just wasn't fun to shoot and in the end was traded for an M&P9c, this was before the Shield came out.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Array bandrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    S.E. Wisconsin
    Posts
    848
    I have a CM9 and a Beretta PX4 SC .40 I like both but for EDC I prefer the CM9 with Hornady Critical Duty +P ammo. I find the CM very accurate (the Beretta is too) but at 16oz I can carry it all day with comfort. Also remember the cost of practice ammo 9mm vs .40
    BA
    Kahr CM9, Beretta PX4 SC .40, Ruger LCP/LM, Dan Wesson .357, Beretta 21A .22, Four Aces .22, H&R .22, Marlin .22 rifle and 1946 Remington 12 gauge.

  6. #6
    Distinguished Member Array hardluk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    nc mountains
    Posts
    1,411
    tokerblue covered it well. I cc a cm9 and helped a friend with shooting in his cm40. recoil is more than a g27 . That puts in a class for me where recovery between rounds becomes longer than I want. Also a bit of regripping between ever couple shots even with a piece of inner tube on it for added grip. Diderent sized hand may be very different. My buddy has thin fingers and the cm40 works well for him.

  7. #7
    Member Array Rxdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    74
    I alternate between carrying my CM9 with a Ruger KLCR. Really like the CM9, lightweight, highly concealable, 6+1 capability, very accurate for me, even at longer distances. It can be "snappy" with +P ammo, but still is very manageable for second-third shots. I used to carry a Taurus PT740 Slim, very nice, reliable pistol BTW, which did have more "kick" to it than the CM9, but not really a great ballistic advantage. Also, any ammo-practice or PD-in 9mm, is less expensive than most others.
    Yes, stick with Kahr, but in 9mm, IMO.
    Best Regards,
    "Doc" aka Bill
    SLAINTE VAR!!

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array ghost tracker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ky Backwoods
    Posts
    4,879
    I've had a K40 & a T9. I know I'm bucking the trend but I like the steel-framed models over the poly-frames. I also found that, with hot .40 ammo, the K40 was a whippy little handgun. Nothing unmanageable, but a substantial difference. IMHO, if I was goin' poly, it would certainly be a 9mm.
    There are only TWO kinds of people in this world; those who describe the world as filled with two kinds of people...and those who don't.

  9. #9
    Member Array vodekz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    pewaukee, wi
    Posts
    113
    It is about recoil. 9mm has less. I have P9 in 9mm and it is great choice. Great shooter. If you can deal with sharper recoil of 40SW go for it.
    Vodek

  10. #10
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    11,069
    I shoot about a case of ammo per month, so the difference between 9mm and .40 caliber for me would be about $65/month. That is the main reason I don't own a .40.
    "If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast."
    William T. Sherman

  11. #11
    Member Array neverenough's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Henderson, Colorado
    Posts
    64
    Hi papadork.......(hmmmmm......odd username)! Anyhow, I ran into the same delemma between 9mm and .40 S&W. I think it really depends on what you want out of your handgun. As pointed out here 9mm has it's advantages (price, recoil etc).

    If you main desire is to watch ammo costs, then yes 9mm is less. But if you are concerned with more "horsepower", you may want to check out the ballistics of 9 vs .40. Some performance .40 S&W rounds (such as Remington Golden Saber in 165 or 180grs) give some pretty devistating results.....(again, depending on your needs or desires).

    I went with .40 S&W based on those ballistic comparisons....not a thing wrong with 9mm, but my desire was to have a bit more "ponies".......'course, I actually LIKE stout recoil as long as it's managable throughout a quick emptying of a magazine.


    If there were an opportunity to try out both Kahr's you may respond well with the .40 especially with the right load.....

    Either way, consider your main purpose for the gun.

    neverenough

  12. #12
    New Member Array papadork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    3
    Thanks to all for the comments.

  13. #13
    Member Array Angry Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    235
    I own both. The 40 is definitely more snappy, even with 180 gr rounds. I've owned and own several 40's (two xdm's, xdsc, taurus pt99) and the cm40 is definitely the snappiest of the bunch so I don't know where you're getting your info lol. It's the lightest and smallest so what would you expect? I carry the 40 more than the 9mm even though I favor the lighter recoil of the 9. I Can handle the 40 and it is very accurate for a small pistol.
    Whitestone Castle Armory, Austin TX
    http://www.wcarmory.com/
    Stuff For Sale http://forsale.wcptexas.com

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

.40mm gun
,
cm9 vs cm40
,
kahr 40mm
,
kahr 9mm price
,
kahr 9mm vs kahr 40
,
kahr cm 40
,
kahr cm 40 recoil
,

kahr cm40

,
kahr cm40 vs cm9
,
kahr cm40 vs glock 27
,
kahr cm40 vs shield 40
,

kahr cm9 vs cm40

Click on a term to search for related topics.