Compare Ruger SR9c and Kahr PM9

[Working 4 U]

Hi Guys and Gals


I have done some reading and I was looking at getting a Kahr PM9, But then I started reading about the Ruger SR9c. There is a big difference in price, the Kahr being over 600.00, but the Ruger under 400.00. Am I comparing apples to oranges here, Is there a big size difference between the two? I like alot of the feature that the ruger has, but why so much cheaper?

Thanks


Working 4 U

Read More

 

[stmcelroy]

The size difference of the two is quite considerable.

The SR9C is a small belt gun, the PM9 is a pocket gun.

 

[Working 4 U]

The size difference of the two is quite considerable.

The SR9C is a small belt gun, the PM9 is a pocket gun.

Thanks

So would the SR9c about the same size as a springfield XD compact?


Thanks

 

[MountainBear]

The trigger pull is significantly better on the Kahr guns. If you are more in the budget range of the SR9c, then mayhaps look at the CW9?

 

[stmcelroy]

Thanks

So would the SR9c about the same size as a springfield XD compact?


Thanks

Feels a little smaller than the XD compact, but probably fairly close.

The suggestion for a CW9 or CW40 would be a real good one too if you don't absolutely need to carry in the pocket.

 

[numbnutz]

The SR9c is close to the same size as the sc xd but is alot thinner. It doesn't seem to bad for the price, but for a bit more coin I would be looking at the KHAR CW series.

 

[mattg521]

+1 on CW9 or CW40
Flat and easily concealable.
Affordable and small but not too small.

 

[cwegga]

You have to try them in person. For me the Kahr is too big for a pocket gun and has a trigger that I can't stand. The SR9c has a more comfortable grip and is also too big to be a pocket gun for me. I'm not sure about its trigger.

Try them both before you buy or be ready to compromise or resell.

 

[ArmedUrbanArtist]

Shot an SR9c tonight and loved the trigger! Felt quite slim, not quite as slim as a Kahr but better then any Glock or Springfield.

I think I will be getting one sometime soon.

 

[absoluterik07]

The sr9c all the way! If you don't need it in the pocket then that is the way to go. It has a nice crisp trigger, adjustable sights and at 20 yards I can easily make 5" groups without even trying. It also comes with a 17 rd magazine with an extended grip so if you aren't carrying concealed it gives it the feel of the full size sr9. It is also slimmer than the xdm subcompact. My $.02 from an actual owner of one.

 

[8ball]

Ruger, founded in 1949 by William B. Ruger and Alexander McCormick Sturm, American gunsmiths.

Kahr, founded in 1995 by Rev Sun Myung Moon, operator of crazy Korean religious cult.

 

[atypicalparkie]

Ruger, founded in 1949 by William B. Ruger and Alexander McCormick Sturm, American gunsmiths.

Kahr, founded in 1995 by Rev Sun Myung Moon, operator of crazy Korean religious cult.

Ha! +1 for truth, and for the Kahr cw9 both . I admit I felt a bit nauseous the day after I bought it when I found out that Justin Moon was son of that Moon! Ah the dilemmas of reality... glad though that it's made in the States like the Ruger...

I've only shot one magazine through an SR9C, and it sure does trump the Kahr in capacity. I'd gotten pretty used to the trigger on my cw9 (and it does take some getting used to), so my limited use of the SRC was different. That coupled with my relatively limited experience compared to most people on this board makes it hard for me to compare the triggers. Which isn't to say I didn't like the SR9 trigger, just different. The weight difference is about 7oz(?), so the heftier SR9 definitely had less subjective recoil.

I'd gotten a cw9 for carry just on size, weight, and recommendations from people who know way more than I. And I've been 100% happy with it through a couple/few thousand rounds now, after the break-in of course. Dang easy to strip & clean too. I waaaay preferred the sights on the Ruger, I need to change out the Kahr bar/dot... If I was bigger in stature I might well've gone with the SR9... hoo boy I've been of no help at all I think

 

[Working 4 U]

Hi all

Just wanted to say I appreciate the time you all took to reply. I did finally get to a shop and compare and it is apples and oranges.

Thanks

Working 4 u

 

[gehrheart]

learn something new everyday. Never had the desire for a Kahr, had no idea though the moonie background. I didn't even know the moonies were still around.

 

[oasis618]

The SR9c would be more comparable to the Glock 26.

 

[CanCanCase]

I've owned an SR9c for about 8 months now, and sadly, work, family, etc time has kept me from getting to the range at all. Boy did I get lucky this Thanksgiving! Had to take the Mom-in-law to the airport in Eugene, and by the time I finished our forced-march driving marathon, everyone but me was whipped and ready for a late afternoon nap. I took the opportunity to haul the range bag to the tommy-gun store (more dangerous than a casino with no reference for daylight or time!)

I had heard from my cardiologist that the SR9c "hurt his hand" with the recoil, and he much preferred his Kahr PM9. I ponied up for a Baron's Den club membership so I could rent a few pieces to play with for the afternoon. Oh, and I forgot to mention that Crimson Trace was there doing demos and pushing some of their new model lasers... I slapped one on my SR9c, and I honestly don't know if I can ever go back to any of the rental guns, PM9 included!

Light recoil, smooth operation, no jams in 450 rounds fresh out of the box... (I did experience 3 FTF, but they were just dud rounds... gun worked fine.) That, and now that it has the CT laser integrated, I'm hooked! After the day was over, I really felt like the PM9 was running out of ammo "too soon", and I often lost count with the 10 rounds available in the SR9c.

One annoyance: when dry-firing and fondling, the finger-hook mag baseplate feels WAY better, but it prints noticably at my 4:00. When live-firing, I actually preferred holding the gun with the standard mag base, but I miss the fingerhook when paying attention to the draw.

-Case

 

[phathom]

Comparing a SR9C to a compact glock or subcompact XD is a more fair comparison.

Comparing a PM9 to a Kel-Tec PF9, or Rohrbaugh R9 is a more fair comparison.

Quality and features differ some, but at least they are in the same class to compare.

Comparing the SR9C and the PM9 is comparing apples to oranges. They both have their strengths and weaknesses compared to each other, for those two, it is really based on what you are going to use it for.

Figure out what you're going to use it for and go from there, they each have their different application. As said in the first reply. The PM9 is a pocket pistol, the SR9C is a holster pistol.

 

[atypicalparkie]

I've only shot one magazine through an SR9C, and it sure does trump the Kahr in capacity. I'd gotten pretty used to the trigger on my cw9 (and it does take some getting used to), so my limited use of the SRC was different. That coupled with my relatively limited experience compared to most people on this board makes it hard for me to compare the triggers. Which isn't to say I didn't like the SR9 trigger, just different. The weight difference is about 7oz(?), so the heftier SR9 definitely had less subjective recoil.

I'd gotten a cw9 for carry just on size, weight, and recommendations from people who know way more than I. And I've been 100% happy with it through a couple/few thousand rounds now, after the break-in of course. Dang easy to strip & clean too. I waaaay preferred the sights on the Ruger, I need to change out the Kahr bar/dot... If I was bigger in stature I might well've gone with the SR9... hoo boy I've been of no help at all I think

Jeeeesh, my original post there was all screwy-- I was thinking of the SR9 and not the SR9C, even though I mistakenly referred to 'em interchangeably. I wasn't aware at the time of the difference-- thought the 'C' denoted just a different finish or something

NOW, only 6 weeks after that post, I've sold the CW9 and purchased an SR9C (yep, the 'compact'). It all comes down to what best suits you yourself; I've found that personally, I prefer the trigger feel of the Ruger to the Kahr-- they're just different-- and the difference in trigger feel between the (recent)SR9 and SR9C is pretty noticeable. The SR9C and CW9 def. are not pocket guns like the PM9, but even on a small guy like me (5'7", 140), the SR9C is a piece of cake to cc, either in my 'man purse' or in an inexpensive owb Blackhawk holster.
True, I think the SR9C somehow feels slightly 'cheaper' than the Kahrs (and they are!), but for my needs I do prefer the Ruger. Dunno if any of this is helpful...

 

[PhysicsGuy]

I'd wait until after the recall

 

[vico512]

learn something new everyday. Never had the desire for a Kahr, had no idea though the moonie background. I didn't even know the moonies were still around.

That's surprising about the Kahr pistols. However, the Moonies are definitely still around -- they own the Washington Times newspaper.