- Messages
- 2,245
- Reactions
- 466
JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
G-27 or Kahr MK40?
- Thread Starter glockguy
- Start date
- Messages
- 4,996
- Reactions
- 2,279
The kahr is smaller, more easily concealed, all stainless steel, and quite a bit finer made than the G27...but it is also heavier and has less capacity so it could be considered a toss up.
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
Just got my new MK 40 today... so I can't really speak from a long and close relationship with it yet... BUT... when I was looking, I compared the MK 40, PM 40, and the smallest Glock (along with a few others in that category).
Yes, the MK series is a lot heavier.... almost half again the weight compared to the PM series. BUT, size was the main factor, not weight. And both of these Kahrs are significantly smaller than the smallest Glocks.
I chose to go with the all stainless frame, rather than plastic (Kahr PM, Glock) for two reasons: first, far greater likelihood of it lasting a lifetime. Plastic has a way of, well, not lasting..... Second, the heft, fit and finish, and overall sense of quality led me to the MK. And third, no CT grips are available for the PM series, but are for the MK, something I think will help better suit the small pistol as a defensive anywhere anytime weapon. As far as I could learn, no CT grips for the Glock, either, but I may be wrong. Since I rejected the pistol for my specific use, I did not investigate this further.
The most significant way the Kahrs are smaller than the Glocks is in the thickness..... at Cabelas I was able to compare all three of these side by side.. measuring tape in hand. Not only does the Kahr fit my smallish hands far better than any of the Glocks, the thinner profile means easier to make it disappear on my person.
Like I said, I only got the Kahr today, haven't fired it yet.... but I anticipate the heavier weight will reduce felt recoil significantly, compared to the lighter weight plastic framed guns, or the S&W Airweight/lites, which I also own.
Just a few of the things I considered, keeping in mind my specific intended use and preferences. And my smaller hands..... My advice.. find a store that has the three of them in stock, and compare each to the others.
Yes, the MK series is a lot heavier.... almost half again the weight compared to the PM series. BUT, size was the main factor, not weight. And both of these Kahrs are significantly smaller than the smallest Glocks.
I chose to go with the all stainless frame, rather than plastic (Kahr PM, Glock) for two reasons: first, far greater likelihood of it lasting a lifetime. Plastic has a way of, well, not lasting..... Second, the heft, fit and finish, and overall sense of quality led me to the MK. And third, no CT grips are available for the PM series, but are for the MK, something I think will help better suit the small pistol as a defensive anywhere anytime weapon. As far as I could learn, no CT grips for the Glock, either, but I may be wrong. Since I rejected the pistol for my specific use, I did not investigate this further.
The most significant way the Kahrs are smaller than the Glocks is in the thickness..... at Cabelas I was able to compare all three of these side by side.. measuring tape in hand. Not only does the Kahr fit my smallish hands far better than any of the Glocks, the thinner profile means easier to make it disappear on my person.
Like I said, I only got the Kahr today, haven't fired it yet.... but I anticipate the heavier weight will reduce felt recoil significantly, compared to the lighter weight plastic framed guns, or the S&W Airweight/lites, which I also own.
Just a few of the things I considered, keeping in mind my specific intended use and preferences. And my smaller hands..... My advice.. find a store that has the three of them in stock, and compare each to the others.
- Messages
- 4,996
- Reactions
- 2,279
You are in for a treat. One of the other advantages the Kahr has over the Glock is that they have one of the best, if not the best, DAO triggers in the business. It is smooth and consistent every time with just enough travel and resistance on it to make you feel safe against ND's.
The extra weight of the gun does make it a lot easier to shoot too. Not to mention it is just prettier than the Glock.
- Messages
- 1,254
- Reactions
- 187
Aw, Mr. Penguin, you're just on about all that shiney stainless steel....... that's YOUR thing. Come on, admit it!!!
well, it seems its a thing we share..... and admittely a part of why I wanted the MK instead of the PM. I've also got a stainless Ruger Super Red Hawk, a Ruger Security Six in stainless, a S&W 651, all stainless, a S&W Shorty Forty, (performance center, never fired....) all stainless, and a Browniing White Gold Medallion.
I'll get used to this one for a while, and it may well be the extra weight will become an issue for at least some of how I intend to use it. In that case, I suppose I'll just have to sell something (hopefully other than a firearm) and get one of the PM models as well. Sometimes utility trumps beauty, but not often.
Perhaps I will take the time to write up a personal review/evaluation once I've had some time with this piece. Having checked out the entire field of small carry guns, I settled on this one for a lot of reasons, and I'm certain I'll be more than pleased. Oh, you mentioned the trigger pull... yes, as I checked out all the options, this feature DID impress me a lot. As you say, the new gun at the counter at Cabelas had an incredible smooth and predictable feel, and I was amazed to find it thus and realise it is DA. It is as smooth, but a bit heavier, than the trigger on my Hi Power GP Comp.... which I am certain has had a trigger workover done on it. Now if ONLY Browning had made some of those in stainless...........
well, it seems its a thing we share..... and admittely a part of why I wanted the MK instead of the PM. I've also got a stainless Ruger Super Red Hawk, a Ruger Security Six in stainless, a S&W 651, all stainless, a S&W Shorty Forty, (performance center, never fired....) all stainless, and a Browniing White Gold Medallion.
I'll get used to this one for a while, and it may well be the extra weight will become an issue for at least some of how I intend to use it. In that case, I suppose I'll just have to sell something (hopefully other than a firearm) and get one of the PM models as well. Sometimes utility trumps beauty, but not often.
Perhaps I will take the time to write up a personal review/evaluation once I've had some time with this piece. Having checked out the entire field of small carry guns, I settled on this one for a lot of reasons, and I'm certain I'll be more than pleased. Oh, you mentioned the trigger pull... yes, as I checked out all the options, this feature DID impress me a lot. As you say, the new gun at the counter at Cabelas had an incredible smooth and predictable feel, and I was amazed to find it thus and realise it is DA. It is as smooth, but a bit heavier, than the trigger on my Hi Power GP Comp.... which I am certain has had a trigger workover done on it. Now if ONLY Browning had made some of those in stainless...........
- Messages
- 4,996
- Reactions
- 2,279
You think???
The MK40 is very manageable with a decent belt, but for those times when I want to just wear a light belt and holster he PM9 does have a distinct advantage due to the fact it is lighter and even thinner.
- Messages
- 2,245
- Reactions
- 466
- Thread Starter
- #7
How Much Does a MK40 run?
Similar threads
