Kahr PM9 vs. MK9
I am pretty sure I am wanting a Kahr, but I have been going back and forth wither not to get the heavier MK9 or just go with the PM9. I have not seen an MK9 in any gun store I have been in, but they usually have a couple PM9s. I just wonder if recoil warrants getting a little more weight or if the lighter gun is controllable enough. I haven't shot one but I am fairly certain I can handle recoil of a 9mm even in a small gun. I plan on carrying mostly in a holster outside the pant but maybe sometimes pocket carry. Any info from someone who has shot them both would be helpful.
I've been carrying a MK9 for about 1yr now and with out a doubt it is the best carry gun I've ever owned. I used to carry a .45, but feel completely safe with the MK9 loaded with Gold Dot 124 +P. My only gripe is the grip is a little short for my hands. I may switch to the K9 someday. BTW I don't care for plastic or alloy framed guns. I don't knock em, just my personal prefence.
Years ago I was in the same predicament. I wound up going with the PM9. I am very happy I did, esp. considering I pocket carry it often. If you plan on pocket carrying the extra weight of the MK9 will make a significant difference. The steel Kahrs have had a reputation of being more reliable than the polymers. There are some horror stories on the web. My PM9 has been just fine. I gotta think most are. I have shot both the MK9 and PM9 before. I don't remember the recoil reduction w/ MK9 being enough to warrant the extra weight. Overall, the PM9 just carries better. That's my vote.
MK9 on belt
For belt carry I would choose the MK9, as it weighs 25 ounces compared to 17 ounces for the PM9, and the recoil is considerably less because of the half pound weight difference. I believe the steel MK9s are also less prone to functional problems than the polymer PM9. I find my MK9 to be accurate and easy to shoot because of its weight. I carry it on the belt in a Comp-Tac 2 O'clock appendix holster.
The MK9 is too heavy for most pocket carry, however, and the PM9 is better for that purpose.
If you plan on pocket carry, go with the PM9.
If you'll be carrying on the belt I'd go with the MK9 Elite. Costs more but so much nicer. :yup:
I carry the big(ger) brother to the MK9, the K9, and don't find the extra weight to be an issue at all as far as carry comfort and I enjoy the stability that comes from the steel frame when it comes to shooting.
You won't go wrong with either one though.
Just a note that you can get Lasergrips for the MK9, not so for the PM9. If you are so inclined. I don't have either, but am considering them both for my next purchase.
I've had both, and they are quality guns.
I cherish lightnesss in carry guns, so I traded my MK when the PMs came out.
My PM9 started showing signs of barrel peening around 2200 rounds so I sold it.
This issue has dogged the PM guns since they were introduced.
Some believe that the peening issue is resolved, but I've not seen enough guns with a high round count to convince me of that.
If you do some browsing on GlockTalk.com, you'll find lots of info on this.
In my opinion, just because Kahr says the problem is solved, doesn't mean it's solved. :nono:
If you belt carrry, the MK9 should be fine. It would never work for me as a pocket gun. Way too heavy.
The PM9 is simply a joy to carry on the belt, or in the pocket.
I haven't shot any 9mm gun that had enough recoil to talk about (yet).
The MK shoots like a .22, but you know you are shooting a real caliber with the PM. There's a little more snap, but I never had any difficulty getting back on target.
Certainly no pain involved.
Both guns were surprisingly accurate considering how small they are, and both of mine fed whatever I could stuff in the magazines.
Hope that helped.
Thanks for the feedback. I may have to hunt down an MK or just order one.
I pocket carry a PM45 so pocket carrying a PM9 would be a piece of cake as far as I'm concerned. Of course, with my size, if I could build a holster around a Volkswagon Bug I could probably pocket carry it too. I've even considered trading the PM45 off for a PM9. I do like them Kahrs.
Dang it, Pogo!
Originally Posted by pogo2
There you go again. Just when I thought I had it under control, you have to go and display a fabulous photo of a great handgun, tricked out just the way I'd like it! Now, where's my piggy bank . . .
+1, I'm with David on this one. I had an MK9 I couldn't part with until my daughter received her CCL. Then it went to a greater cause and I thought I was going to have withdrawals. Lucky for me I found a used K9 in my gundealers showcase. He thought since it was a 2003 model, he would sell it to me for $499. Turns out it was an Elite 03 that listed for over $1,000 and s/n indicated it was 3-4 months old. I could not believe it. I really love this gun!:danceban:
Originally Posted by David in FL
I wish the MK9 came in black. For those times when concealment really is an issue, I think a black gun is preferable. I know there's always Duracoat or something, but it would be nice to be able to order it.
In order to help your decision, here is another photo of the same gun, taken from the opposite side of the gun:
Originally Posted by rodc13
I had a PM9 for a while. It was one of the lemons and had lots of issues. I know a number of people who have had their PM9s for a long time and had no issues. So no I'm not harping on the PMs. But I traded the PM9 for an MK9 and am much happier.
It's just a bit more refined and handles better when shooting. The slightly thicker grip on the MK fits my hand a bit better. I had an A-grip on the PM9 and it helped, but it always felt too thin.
Yes, the MK9 is a little heavier, but I pocket carry mine a lot and don't feel that it's awkward at all. I do have a good belt though.