Sig P239 vs. Kahr P9

This is a discussion on Sig P239 vs. Kahr P9 within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I have came to a decision on which my next carry gun will be. Trouble is, it came down to two different guns. Out of ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: Sig P239 vs. Kahr P9

  1. #1
    Member Array KYmxracer52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nicholasville,KY
    Posts
    97

    Sig P239 vs. Kahr P9

    I have came to a decision on which my next carry gun will be. Trouble is, it came down to two different guns. Out of the two, which do you like and why? I am 6'1" and 190lbs athletic build. I know I can conceal the Kahr a lot easier, but I've heard troubling things about them. The Sig is a lot beefier, but I feel it might be more reliable. I don't own either, so I'd like to hear from those who do. If you have pics of yourself carrying either of these guns, please post them. I'd like to see how well the Sig disappears especially.
    Glock 27
    Para LTC 1911
    Kel Tec P-3AT
    Ruger LCP

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array pogo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    3,149

    Big size difference

    I have Sigs and a Kahr, but not the two models you mentioned.

    The Sig P239 is a lot bigger gun than the Kahr P9 - I believe the Sig runs about 27 ounces empty while the Kahr is about 17 ounces empty. They are both single stack guns with about the same capacity in 9mm, but the Kahr is thinner, especially in the grip area.

    I think I would rather shoot the Sig because of its weight and good trigger, but would rather carry the Kahr because it is very concealable. I think your decision comes down to how important concealability is to you. If concealability is paramount for your application, the Kahr is probably a better choice. But if you are going to shoot the gun a lot at the range the Sig will probably hold up better over time and be more accurate.

  4. #3
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,665
    I came here to answer your question, but Pogo said it all for me.

    Both are good guns, you just need to decide what kind of use your going to get out of it.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Redneck Repairs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,133
    You wont go wrong with either of them . That being said i personaly own and carry Kahr , both the p9 and the pm9 . I am 6-0 190 with a 34" waist and either of them simply vanish carried iwb .
    Make sure you get full value out of today , Do something worthwhile, because what you do today will cost you one day off the rest of your life .
    We only begin to understand folks after we stop and think .

    Criminals are looking for victims, not opponents.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array bzdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Seattle(ish), WA
    Posts
    749
    I went through this a while back and picked the 239.

    I prefer the DA/SA mode of operation, the exposed hammer, the side decocker. Having used the Beretta 92FS a fair amount, I felt very comfortable with the Sig.

    Admittedly, in some ways the Sig just gave me more warm fuzzies in terms of reliably. Not sure if that is justified or not, but that's the way I feel.

    As far as concealability goes, I think this is hard to say. There are some skinny people here that don't seem to have a problem toting around a full size handgun. Personally, I think the 239 is very doable, but I'm very paranoid about printing or other telltales and perhaps put more work into it than needed.

    Body style and dress are probably big factors. I'm about 5'4" & 175 lbs so I suppose I could stand to lose 25 lbs or so, but not hugely overweight.

    With untucked shirts it is pretty easy. I find a Kramer ITW #3 at about 2:00-2:30 puts my extra 25lbs to good use, and if I position carefully (barrel just nudging to the outside of my leg) I can sit comfortably as well.

    A Comp-Tac C-T.A.C. works well at 3:00 set to maximum FBI cant. It has a slightly higher profile here, but with a dark printed shirt it would be pretty hard to make out, and only if you printed while turning or something. The upside to this configuration is comfort. You can sit, stand, walk all day long and not fell burdened.

    The C-T.A.C. is also very comfortable at about 4:00-4:30, but on me the butt pulls away from the body slightly making it more likely to print.

    Personally, I won't wear in this positions tucked. While I haven't played with trying to blouse my shirt to keep everything hidden, I refuse to have clips showing.

    For tucked, the C-T.A.C. works with a sports jacket at 3:00 and 4:30 as described above. You just can't take your jacket off which can be a problem in the summer.

    I picked up a SmartCarry and it seems well designed. For me, I find it works with some of my pants and doesn't for others. Part of the problem I think is my build. I tend to need to keep my belt fairly tight to keep my pants secured which in addition to making access to the SmartCarry difficult, tends to accentuate it. I haven't played with this a lot, and probably should try using it higher, but haven't gotten around to it. In any case, it seems like a quality product and you can position things where they are fairly comfortable, but it does make walking and sitting less comfortable for me.

    I recently picked up one of the UCComfort holster shirts (actually two, trying to determine correct size was a bit of trial and error), and they seem to be all that FedWifASig says they are. Well thought out and well constructed. I tried both a medium and a large, and the medium is slightly uncomfortable (although it keeps the 239 tucked in there like it was cemented in!). The large seems best for me. It puts the handle just about in my armpit and avoid printing really well, both front and rear. There are a few movements that open you to printing somewhat, but not too bad. With a dark printed shirt, slightly oversized (remember, I'm a stickler to avoid printing) I'd feel comfortable wearing this way w/o a jacket. With a jacket you'd have to do something really stupid to print. I find with the large, you can feel some movement of the firearm when doing things like going up and down stairs quickly, but not much. With the medium, no movement, but again, was somewhat uncomfortable.

    Downsides? First there is speed of access. Steve may be able to draw quickly from this setup, but I see a LOT of practice in my future if I hope to do so reasonably. Also, I don't like the v-neck style. It shows if I leave my shirt unbuttoned (and tend to peak out from the collar of t-shirts). This isn't so bad if it is cold, but if it's hot, people will wonder why you are wearing a "t-shirt". At least they will mostly think something is weird, and it doesn't scream firearm. I'd like to try their tank top, but they didn't have any in stock when I ordered.

    What doesn't work for me?

    The Kramer doesn't work as well at 3:00, mostly because the attachment doesn't hold a strong FBI cant and makes it more likely for the butt to print.

    The C-T.A.C. doesn't work as well at the 2:00-2:30, mostly because it holds the gun higher which turns my bit of belly into a liability. This might be OK if you don't have a belly.

    I have a Galco "Ultra Deep Cover IWB" (older model than shown). While it tucks the gun nice and deep, for some reason it creates the hugest bulge (at the belt, not the handle). While it doesn't print the gun itself, I don't like it. This would be a killer rig if made in a think kydex format.

    I also have a Galco shoulder holster (can't remember if it is the Jackass Rig or the Miami Classic - I don't even care enough to remember where I put it) and while it is a decent product, it doesn't conceal well because both the gun and the mags can move around, and that isn't counting you need to wear it under a jacket in the first place. It's not a bad rig, it just doesn't have any advantages that I can see vs. the other options.

    OTOH, lest you think I hate all the Galco products, I love my tan 1.25" Galco SB9 dress belt. At only 1.25" with plain but classic design you can wear it full time and at worst be thought of as "classic but dull" and it doesn't say "gun belt".

    I got my 239 in 9mm because my other guns were 9mm, but if I were to do it over, I'd probably go with .40. I'd avoid the .357SIG as I've heard that constant unloading/loading (as you might with a carry gun) can unseat the bullet with that design.

    While I am not unhappy with the P239, I might also consider the Glock G26/27, H&K P2000SK and perhaps a few others if I were doing it again today.

    At the time, the P2000SK didn't exist yet. The main alternatives were the Kahr and the Glock G26. I admit when I was looking I had a bit of
    "polymer snobism" and felt a bit uneasy about the safety on the Glock. In hindsight, I don't have any qualms about the safety with a good hide or klydex holster, although I'm not sure I'd feel good about carrying in the UCComfort or SmartCarry setups.

    That said, the G26 weighs about 5oz less than the P239 and can accept mags from their full size. You lug a firearm around for a while, and 5oz becomes a lot more important than you thought at the gun store. I recently rented a G26 and it was very comfortable and shot well. I was still more accurate with the P239, but I was impressed. I think the butt of the G26 is wider and shorter than the P239 which sometimes is a plus and sometimes not.

    I haven't looked much at the P2000SK, but have read that some of these modern subcompacts are raising the bar. This may be. I haven't really looked seriously in quite a while and they weren't options then. But, the P239 is a seriously nice little gun. Accurate, reliable and plenty of warm fuzzies.

    The ironic part is that I can shoot significantly better with the little P239 than with my full size 92FS. Go figure.

    FWIW, I'm thinking about adding a Milt Sparks VM-2 and a KD Defender to the lineup, but I guess it takes a while.

    Good luck!

    -john

  7. #6
    Member Array TSquare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Glenpool, Oklahoma
    Posts
    66
    I would pick the Kahr over the 239 for a CCW weapon due to the consistant DAO trigger pull. The 239, unless it is the DAK model has a first pull double action with single action pulls after that. The Kahr has a consistant, smooth and light double action only pull. They are both excellent guns, both reliable and good carry pieces. The accuracy is all in how you shoot them. Some people have trouble with the Kahr trigger making it accurate. The Sig is accurate as long as you do your part. Try to rent both and shoot both at the range if you can. The Kahr will have much more recoil than the Sig due to its light weight.
    ...and the trees are all kept equal by hatchet, axe, and saw............RUSH
    www.okshooters.com

  8. #7
    Member Array KYmxracer52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nicholasville,KY
    Posts
    97
    As far as concealability, the Kahr would be my choice. After hearing a lot of stories of people having to send Kahr's back to be worked on, it makes me a little hesitant to buy one. I know I haven't heard hardly any stories of Sigs going back. I know I could conceal one, but the Kahr will be easier. I use to carry a Glock 26, but didn't like the short grip. The Sig isn't any wider than the Glock, so I know if can be done. I have other small guns I can carry as a BUG if I need deep concealment. I'd still just like to see some pics of people carrying the P239.
    Glock 27
    Para LTC 1911
    Kel Tec P-3AT
    Ruger LCP

  9. #8
    Senior Member Array bzdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Seattle(ish), WA
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by KYmxracer52 View Post
    The Sig isn't any wider than the Glock, so I know if can be done.
    The Sig is *less* wide and less blocky than the Glock which should conceal better in most cases.

    About the only counter-example is that a baby-Glock might work better in the UCcomfort since the width is hidden in your arm pit, and the shorter butt would hide better, front to back under your arm.

    Have you handled the P239 some? Basically it is very much like the G26, but a bit more narrow, a bit more rounded and a slightly longer butt. You should be able to translate your G26 carry to the P239 carry pretty well. In fact, I would think in most cases the Sig would be easier to conceal, although the Sig is heavier.

    -john
    Last edited by bzdog; July 30th, 2007 at 12:14 AM.

  10. #9
    Member Array KYmxracer52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nicholasville,KY
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by bzdog View Post
    The Sig is *less* wide and less blocky than the Glock which should conceal better in most cases.

    About the only counter-example is that a baby-Glock might work better in the UCcomfort since the width is hidden in your arm pit, and the shorter butt would hide better, front to back under your arm.

    Have you handled the P239 some? Basically it is very much like the G26, but a bit more narrow, a bit more rounded and a slightly longer butt. You should be able to translate the G26 carry to the P239 carry pretty well. In fact, I would think in most cases the Sig would be easier to conceal, although the Sig is heavier.

    -john
    The weight factor doesn't bother me so much as to know I have a reliable tool on my side. I did handle the Sig yesterday for a few minutes and do like it. It has the slim feel that I like and the grip was just long enough for me to get all 3 fingers on. I really liked the trigger even in DA. How easy can you conceal the P239 in under a t-shirt?
    Glock 27
    Para LTC 1911
    Kel Tec P-3AT
    Ruger LCP

  11. #10
    Senior Member Array bzdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Seattle(ish), WA
    Posts
    749
    I'd be fine with it at either 2:00 or 3:00 as described above as long as it is a darker t-shirt, preferably with some sort of print and loose enough. If it was a lighter, non-printed or esp. if it were a tighter tee, you can see printing with certain movements, but personally I suspect you'd see that even with the Kahr.

    Thin material drawn over a hard object is going to leave some artifacts.

    This is why in fact, I've recently ordered a number of darker printed t-shirts. It occurred to me that my existing selection closed off a whole mode of carry.

    I think, all in all, regardless what you carry, you are going to have to find out what holster, carry position and clothing work for you.

    And besides, didn't you want a new wardrobe anyway?! :-)

    -john

  12. #11
    Member Array KYmxracer52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nicholasville,KY
    Posts
    97
    Thanks for the reply. I have to keep telling myself that in order to carry anything, I have to wear the right kind of shirt. No matter how big, or how small the weapon. Unless of course its in an ankle holster or smart carry, but I don't really want it to be that deep. I carry my G26 before and concealed it fine under polo shirts that weren't that big. So, I guess what I'm trying to tell myself is that I can carry the Sig, since it isn't hardly as big. Thanks for the info.
    Glock 27
    Para LTC 1911
    Kel Tec P-3AT
    Ruger LCP

  13. #12
    Member Array ev239's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    491
    I love my Sig P239 and can totally recommend it as a solid EDC CCW weapon. bzdog did a great job outlining some of the options for carrying a P239, but there's a variation to the standard CTAC that he failed to mention. The use of V-clips on the CTAC or the K&D Cochise Defender will virtually eliminate the visability of clips on your belt when tucked. I've been using them for my p239 and have had great success.

    Where are the clips???
    Mine: Glock 36............Wife's: Ruger SP101 3"
    -------Ruger SR9....................Ruger SR9c
    -------S&W SW99 .45.............Charter Arms Undercover

    Hidden Defense - Personal gun & holster designs/reviews.

  14. #13
    Member Array KYmxracer52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nicholasville,KY
    Posts
    97
    Hey, thanks for the pic. That helps a lot. Looks like it isn't even there.

    What's the wait time for a CTAC?
    Glock 27
    Para LTC 1911
    Kel Tec P-3AT
    Ruger LCP

  15. #14
    Member Array inferno3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    35
    I have the p239 sas and have mixed feelings about it overall.That said I do not like the kahr at all. The slide of the Kahr requires too much effort and every example that I have fired had one problem or another.

    The p239 would be and is my choice between these two handguns. I wanted to like the kahr,due to it's size and trigger,but based on my time spent with them I would not own one.

    With the p239 I am positive when I pull the trigger it will go bang and it is extremely accurate little gun. I feel in a life or death situation I can count on my p239 and that is paramount to me in a handgun. That said the trigger of my p239(DAK) feels like an old S&W revolver and in hindsight I wish I bought one in sa/da.This however was not an option on the SAS version.

  16. #15
    Member Array ev239's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    491
    Not sure of the current wait time for the CTAC, but I know they are unusually fast compared to almost any other custom shop. I just ordered a Crossbreed to see just how comfortable that design is with the full leather backing and I was told it should be done in 4 weeks which is also pretty quick in comparison to the 12-16 week estimates other makers have.
    Mine: Glock 36............Wife's: Ruger SP101 3"
    -------Ruger SR9....................Ruger SR9c
    -------S&W SW99 .45.............Charter Arms Undercover

    Hidden Defense - Personal gun & holster designs/reviews.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Sig P239 or Kahr K9 for IWB?
    By druryj in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: February 10th, 2011, 07:22 AM
  2. Sig P239?
    By BigJerm80 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: May 26th, 2009, 09:38 PM
  3. Just got me a Sig P239 SAS DAK...
    By uflnuceng in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: January 26th, 2008, 08:21 PM

Search tags for this page

brommeland max con v

,
kahr k9 vs sig p239
,

kahr p9 reliability

,
kahr p9 vs sig p239
,

kahr pm9 vs sig p239

,
p239 reliability
,
sig p239 reliability
,
sig p239 vs
,
sig p239 vs kahr k9
,
sig p239 vs kahr p9
,

sig p239 vs kahr pm9

,
sig p239 wood grips
Click on a term to search for related topics.