Glock 27 vs Kahr PM40

fruitbat

fruitbat

Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
1,275
I have a Glock 27 that I now use for CCW. I used to carry a Kel-Teck 3AT until it was stolen out of my truck a few months ago. I do like the Glock 27, but it is a little bit bulky compared to the Kel-Tech that I'm used to. I've been looking at the Kahr PM40. I know the PM40 is a little smaller and a little lighter. Also it only holds 6 rounds (IIRC) in the mag compared to the 10 rounds in the Glock. I'm wondering if the PM40 is that much more comfortable to carry over the Glock 27.

I also have a Walther PPK that I could carry, but I think the 40S&W would do a better job over the .380 if I ever needed it.
 
My Walther PPK 380 jamed at least once or twice every range visit with factory load. I have the G27 and like it. Go to the range and rent a Kahr PM40 and compare.
 
no comparison, the kahrs will carry much better than the glocks.

on paper, the differences may seem small, but those differences make the carriability of each vastly different.

i have the p40, and it carries wonderfully. im not a big fan of the trigger system. it is a long pull, though mine has been very reliable.

ive shot the pm40, and i find it extremely jumpy. i get bit by the slide stops on kahrs, so have rounded them on the ones ive owned.

for an overall defensive pistol, the glock is better. for concealablity, the kahr is better.

i have problems concealing any model of glock, they are just too boxy for my build and print horribly. i can conceal a full sized 1911 far more completely than a glock 27.
 
I own both the G27 and a Kahr K40. I do prefer my brother's Kahr in 9mm as the .40 is pretty snappy in the little pistol. That being said, if I had to choose between the two, I would reccomend the Kahr. Im a huge fan of glocks and own several, but the Kahr is a better choice between those 2. Fit/finish, concealability, and size make it a better fit for the day2day. Im a good size guy (6'2"/205) and can easily carry either but the Kahr is the better choice, imo.
 
I have both as well. The Kahr is much easier to wear. At least in Vegas there seems to be a lot of P40s and PM40s available (used). Me thinks many folks find they don't like the "snappy" pulse recoil. I shot mine over a week ago and the skin is steal healing were the Kahr broke it on my thumb.

I have yet to see a 9mm PM9 for sale used. That might mean something.
 
I am fortunate to own a G26, G27, PM9 and P9.

I used to be a big Glock fan - and still am. But I never carry a Glock anymore because smaller guns like the PM9 are adequate for my needs.

I have a PM9 in my pocket now, and it shares time with a S&W 442 and a P9. I carry a Ruger LCP when dressed up and wanting to avoid any pocket bulge.

The Kahrs are a little snappy, but more important they have been 100% reliable. With each gun, I took a dremel and gave the ramp and chambers a good mirror finish before firing. Don't know if this helps reliability, but it makes me feel better.

The PM9 (PM40) has no room for the pinkie on the grip, but it also takes up less space in the pocket. I can pocket the P9 in loose pants, and it does allow for a full grip. But both are very thin and EDC-able, which matters a great deal to me.

I consider 7 rounds of hot 9mm to be adequate for my needs, but thats an individual decision.

I also have a blade-tech IWB holster for the PM9, which makes for very easy carry if one is so inclined. I do only pocket carry these days, though.

982.jpg

PM9. Uncle Mike's pocket holster not shown.
 
I pocket carry a Taurus revolver (model 85?) Over a kahr mk9 because of the weight difference. I am searching for a kel tec pf9 (?) 9 mm with the pocket clip attachment so I can carry IWB without a holster.

I know this probably doesn't help but I guess what I'm getting at is take the one that is comfortable and you will carry. It won't do you any good at home on top of the dresser because it is uncomfortable to carry.
 
I own both a Kahr MK9 and Glock 27. There's no comparison of concealability. The only drawback to the kahr is it's capacity when compared to the Glock. But I find 7 rounds of 9mm to be more than enough to address any defense situation I may find. Toss in a spare 6 round mag and I really can't think of any real world defense situation that the little bugger couldn't handle. I keep a loaded Glock 21 in my bag so if things ever got really bad I could fight my way to that. But most gun fights happen within 10 feet and consist of less than two rounds before people start running. A stand a fight gun battle like you see in the movies is extremely unlikely to happen. So my little 13 round carry complement for the MK9 is more than enough IMHO. I suggest the MK series if you're looking at Kahrs. The heavier frame really helps absorb the recoil a little better. But I owned a PM9 for a while and it was also a good little gun.

I carry in either a smart carry when in gym clothes or a Mitch Rosen Clipper when wearing a belt. The gun disappears and is right there when I need it. The Kahr 40 cal is gonna be a handful but if you're not sensitive to recoil it's a great EDC piece.
 
I just received a Taurus PT 7-45. Wow! It's the same size in profile as my Kahr PM40 but slightly thicker. Holds six plus 1 rounds of 45 and is a sweet little shooter, also as easy to carry concealed as the PM40. Wicked, wicked pistol. BTW, the Taurus 1-45 is the same pistol but, again, slightly thicker in the grip and holds ten plus 1 of 45. A lot of firepower in a concealable pistol.
 
fruitbat said:
I have a Glock 27 that I now use for CCW. I used to carry a Kel-Teck 3AT until it was stolen out of my truck a few months ago. I do like the Glock 27, but it is a little bit bulky compared to the Kel-Tech that I'm used to. I've been looking at the Kahr PM40. I know the PM40 is a little smaller and a little lighter. Also it only holds 6 rounds (IIRC) in the mag compared to the 10 rounds in the Glock. I'm wondering if the PM40 is that much more comfortable to carry over the Glock 27.

I also have a Walther PPK that I could carry, but I think the 40S&W would do a better job over the .380 if I ever needed it.
Click to expand...

Just be a man and carry a 1911 :D

I'll toss out my two cents, for me 9mm is more then adequate for CC, I've been wanting to get a subcompact glock but no places near me stock them so I can't pick one up and see how it fits in my hand. I stick with a CZ P07 Duty if I need to pocket something...but I digress.

When it comes to CC I'm a fan of something with some form of "passive" safety on it as well as a your standard safety. With proper carry and knowledge it shouldn't make a difference but for me I like to have piece of mind that it isn't going to go boom unless I want it to. For that reason I'd pick the glock over the Kahr. Your thoughts and opinion on this will vary, but for me personally the glock trigger makes the difference for me.
 
IMO if you wanted to go smaller than the G27 I would go with a 9mm like the PM9 or PF9 for two reasons. One is recoil and the other is capacity. My two CCW's are a G23 or the Kel-tec P3at. The Kel-tec gets carried 99% of the time.
 
hoopster said:
IMO if you wanted to go smaller than the G27 I would go with a 9mm like the PM9 or PF9 for two reasons. One is recoil and the other is capacity. My two CCW's are a G23 or the Kel-tec P3at. The Kel-tec gets carried 99% of the time.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean about the Kel-tec 3AT. It's a GREAT little pistol!!! I carried it in a FIST pocket holster in my right pocket and an extra mag in my left pocket. (I also have the same pistol in .32 AUTO.) If 3AT had not been stolen I would not have given any of this a second thought.

Right now I'm still undecided. Here are some of my thinking:
  • I think something bigger than .380 would be better
  • I figure 9mm is good enough then .40 would be a little better.
  • The cost of the gun,mags and ammo is pretty much the same when comparing 9mm to .40.
  • Recoil has never been a big issue for me. But I didn't know about the bitting of the web of my hand. I shot a knock-off of a Browning that did that once. I hated that thing.
  • Seems that the Kahr is esier to conceal. How does reliablity, accuracy, etc compare.

You guys are giving me lots to think about. I wish they could make something like the Kel-tec 3AT in .40 and I'd be a happy boy. That thing would be a handful to shoot!!!! Keep the opinions coming. Thanks everyone.
 
I find it funny ppl think the G27 is hard to conceal compare to other 40cal?? Yes the Pm40 is a inch shorter a 1/4 more narrow of course you will able to conceal it easy. But a G27 is 6 1/4 long 4.17 ht and 1.18 wide??? Thats a small gun. To be hard to conceal I don't have that problem. A 1911 is alot bigger and just as thick?? Personally I would ratch carry a gun that is alittle bigger and easy to shoot. I use to carry a 380 but I like to have more gun to grab. But the Pm40 looks interesting I think I'm going to shoot that at the range.
 
ironmike86 said:
I find it funny ppl think the G27 is hard to conceal compare to other 40cal??
Click to expand...

I don't recall anyone saying that it was hard, but rather the Kahr is easier to carry. ;)


_______



fruitbat said:
  • Seems that the Kahr is esier to conceal. How does reliablity, accuracy, etc compare.
Click to expand...

I find both easy to shoot.

Personally, the Glock in 40 is easier to shoot. The Kahr takes more practice but is well up to shooting straight if you do it right, but again for me it takes more practice. Likely due to it being that much smaller and the 40 being snappy, I had to adjust my grip a bit.

For reliability every thing I read about Kahr is they are just as reliable after you break them in. (there is a published break in period in the manual) For my break in period, the pistol never had a problem, but one follower on one Kahr magazine did break :confused:. I have at least four glocks and none have had any problems. Take that with a bit of salt as personal experience isn't statistically significant. That is just a fancy way of saying I probably got a bum mag. :p
 
zenheretic said:
I don't recall anyone saying that it was hard, but rather the Kahr is easier to carry. ;)


_______






. :p
Click to expand...

Yeah your right on this "thread". Sometimes I carry previous thread from other forum to another forum and end up sounding like a NOOB :eek::foot:
 
I carry a G27 in a Sigtac coat. Summer is quite a bit harder as far as carry goes. I have a Keltec 32 that I usually toss in my pants pocket.
 
I would choose Kahr over Glock. I have. I have sold all my Glocks, and kept my 2 Kahr's.
 
ironmike86 said:
I find it funny ppl think the G27 is hard to conceal compare to other 40cal?? Yes the Pm40 is a inch shorter a 1/4 more narrow
Click to expand...

That makes a big difference, though. Big enough that most folks can easily pocket carry a PM40, and very few can honestly say they carry a baby Glock on their pocket day after day, in all kinds of clothing.

:thumbup:
 
powernoodle said:
That makes a big difference, though. Big enough that most folks can easily pocket carry a PM40, and very few can honestly say they carry a baby Glock on their pocket day after day, in all kinds of clothing.

:thumbup:
Click to expand...

Yes to some . But personally I don't want anything that big in my pocket. Not even my SMALLER Walther. I IWB carry or have it in my jacket. But I don't wear baggy clothes or have big pockets so that may have an advantage. Go to the range. Somedays the range in my area lets you rent any gun for $10. But most days it's $10 each for rental. A gun to me shouldn't bite or be modified to shoot. But not all ppl like to shoot or the feel of the same guns. That's why I try to shoot before I buy. JMO
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top