Kahr MK9 9mm Pocket Pistol

The MK9 is somewhat of an odd duck in the current state of pocket pistols in that it is a completely Stainless Steel pocket pistol. No Scandium, Aluminum, or Polymer here. To get a complete understanding of this pistol, let’s look at the specifications:

Model: MK9
Caliber: 9mm
Capacity: 6+1, 7+1 (magazine with grip extension)
Operation: Trigger cocking DAO; lock breech; "Browning - type" recoil lug; passive striker block; no magazine disconnect
Barrel: 3.0", polygonal rifling; 1 - 10 right-hand twist
Length: O/A 5.3"
Height: 4.0"
Slide Width: .90"
Weight: Pistol 22.1 ounces,Magazine 1.9 ounces
Grips: Wraparound, textured hard nylon
Sights: Drift adjustable, white bar-dot combat sights(tritium night sights optional)
Finish: Matte stainless steel (M9093), Polished stainless steel (M9098)
Magazines: 1 each: 6 rd flush baseplate and 7 rd with extended grip

At 22.1 ounces (without loaded magazine) this is a little heavy for a pocket pistol. One would think that the MK9’s svelte sister, the 14 ounce PM 9, would be a better choice but…not necessarily. Like most handgun purchases, deciding on the features you want is a compromise since there aren’t too many “perfect” handguns out there. I found the PM 9 to be too thin to shoot comfortably and if you can't shoot a pistol comfortably it is difficult to shoot it accurately. The stats from Kahr put both pistols with a slide width of .90. This maybe so, but the MK 9’s stainless steel grip is surrounded by the wraparound nylon grips that fill my hand better than the skinny, bare polymer frame of the PM 9. The extra weight of the stainless steel also lessens the recoil, but the 9mm recoil is not really an issue to me in the realm of pocket pistols.

And being a pocket pistol the MK 9 rides well in either an inside-the-waistband rig or a pocket holster. If you want to get an MK 9 for pocket carry you must make sure that the pocket is strong enough to hold it and that your pants are properly supported by your belt. The heavier weight of this pistol can cause the pocket and pants to sag if they are not help up properly. My only other complaint is that the grip is a little too vertical and I would appreciate a just a bit more angle (say, oh…11 degrees). That being said, the pistol is still pretty easy to hold onto during shooting and for me, the Pearce finger extension paid dividends during the handling of the handgun. My hands are small enough that the finger extension allows me get all three fingers on the grip.

The trigger pull is somewhat long but very smooth and not too heavy. Many feel that Kahr pistols have the best double action of any pistol on the market. They might be right, however due to the length of the pull it is important to be on guard against muscling the pistol and pulling or pushing the shots to the left or right.

Unlike many small pocket pistols the MK 9 has actual and useable 3 dot sights and I applaud Kahr for realizing that many people still want to be able to get a proper sight picture on target (However, I do wish there were night sights on the pistol).
As you will see in the targets included below the accuracy of the MK 9 is more than sufficient at reasonable distances.

24 rounds at 21 feet:

18 rounds at 31 feet:
24 rounds at 40 feet:
15 rounds at 50 feet:
20 rounds at 75 feet (16 hits and 4 misses):
Out to 40 feet I don’t think you could ask for greater accuracy that the MK 9 provides. So, if you’re looking for a small, but non-polymer pistol the Kahr has a lot to offer you.

Impressions of the Ruger LCR

OK, I know that the next review is supposed to be the Glock Model 36...and it will be. This is just kind of a "first look" informational piece. Yesterday I ventured over to the gun shop/range while I was waiting on my daughter to finish her sign language translation gig at a breast cancer awareness gathering. While loitering about the shop I spied a Ruger LCR in the range rental case. I was surprised that they would put such a hard to find handgun in the rental area but decided that it was devine provenance and there was a higher power that wanted me to put a box of bullets through the revolver and report back on my impressions. So here we go:

I did not have an opportunity to photograph the LCR so we will use this appropriated photo from Ruger's web site:

Grips

The 13.3 ounce LCR is obviously designed to take a bite out of the market share that Smith & Wesson has established with the scandium “J” frame models that have become so popular; so that was the benchmark to which I compared the LCR. At first blush the LCR felt much better in my hand than most of the stock S&W “J” frame revolvers. This is primarily due to the very well designed Hogue “Tamer” grip that comes standard on the LCR. Unfortunately, while the “Tamer” grip feels good and assists with controllability it is so large that it can be a hindrance to your ability to conceal the handgun in a pocket holster. The big advantage of these lightweight revolvers is the ability to slide them into the pocket holster of your choice, slip them in your pocket and go forth into the world. I am just afraid that the “Tamer” grip would print in your pocket and the tacky texture of the rubber material might catch and bind with your pocket material when you draw the revolver. If you are going to carry this revolver in some type of a belt holster then you are really not taking advantage of the light 13.3 ounce weight and go very easily with an all steel snub nose which would help dampen the recoil. Small revolvers are not easy to shoot well and the light weight models are absolutely no fun due to their heavy recoil. I am afraid that the challenge of grip versus concealability goes to Smith & Wesson. Their M&P model 340 is lightweight and the Crimson Trace laser grips are fairly flat making it very concealable in a pocket holster. The flat CT grips also make it surprisingly controllable. In the non-laser grip models S&W uses the Hogue boot grip which is still more concealable than the Hogue “Tamer” that Ruger is using. The fact that these grips are so large is really a shame since Ruger went to a lot of trouble to design a cylinder that is the smallest in the industry. If more concealable grips were on the market then the LCR would be a very good pocket revolver.

Sights

The stock Ruger sights are black on black fixed sights that are usable in shooting with good light, but no good in diminished lighting or complete darkness. S&W wins this one with the XS Dot night sights on the Model 340 M&P.

Trigger

The trigger pull is much better than the pull on most S&W “J” frame revolvers. I don’t know how heavy the pull was as I did not have my gauge with me, but the pull was probably around 7 or 8 pounds as opposed to many of the small Smith’s I have recently tried with pulls in excess of 12 pounds. The pull was also smooth with no stacking (another rarity in small revolvers) and seemed to be a shorter pull than most S&W small revolvers.

Accuracy

OK, it was sort of accurate. I only had time to put one box of bullets through the LCR and choose to send all of them through my favorite “Paul Rudd” target at 21 feet. My groups with my Smith M&P 340 are much tighter at this distance and have been since day one. Ammunition fired was MagTech 158 grain FMJ flat-nosed round which is generally pretty accurate in my M&P 340. The accuracy challenge goes to Smith & Wesson.

Lastly, the trigger guard bothered me. Now, this is not normally something to which I would even give a second thought but this trigger guard is large and kind of in the way. If it were smaller my hand might have gotten a higher grip on the revolver which would have resulted in better accuracy and handling.

The recoil caused by the heavy bullets did not really bother me at all however, I kept wondering how she would perform if it was a .357 magnum as many of the Smith & Wesson snub nosed revolvers are.

If you are dying to have an LCR it isn’t a bad choice and I’m sure with practice you can probably handle it very well. However I find my S&W model 340 is easier to shoot and shoot well. Also, my Kahr MK9 is even easier to shoot than either of the small revolvers and holds two additional rounds of 9mm ammunition. Also a fully charged spare magazine is easier to carry than a speed loader full of .38 special ammunition.

Guns That Were Not Blog-Worthy

Part I of II

Average Joe tries to be objective and I have no reason to be otherwise. No one is giving me free firearms to evaluate, no one is giving me any free ammunition (although I would welcome free ammo with open arms), and no one is advertising on this blog so I ain’t beholdin’ to no nobody. I recognize that someone else may have a completely different opinion about a particular rifle, pistol, or revolver reviewed but I call ‘em like I see ‘em. In reviewing this blog I noticed that most of my firearm reviews are pretty positive about the products tested; the only exception to this was an early review of an EAA compact Witness in 10mm and the S&W Nightguard in .45 ACP that I wrote about last year. However, I realized that there were a bunch of handguns I had shot that I had not written about because I couldn’t figure out anything interesting to say or I just plain didn’t like them. Some of these handguns I still have records on but some I don’t. All of these are long gone since it just doesn’t make sense to hold onto something which you have no interest in or can’t get to work right.

So, without any further ado, here are the guns I found to be non-blog-worthy:
1. Springfield Armory Micro Compact 1911 in .40 S&W.
2. CZ 75 Compact in .40 S&W.
3. Taurus 24/7
4. Colt Lawman
5. Smith & Wesson M&P 9C
6. Kahr P45
7. Smith & Wesson M&P .45 Compact
8. Wilson CQB

Springfield Armory Micro Compact 1911 in .40 S&W

This little pistol came my way in 2004. I don’t have any pictures of it and it is no longer in Springfield’s line-up but the EMP .40 S&W is pretty darn close to looking exactly like the Micro Compact. It was a small, two-toned, pistol with a three inch barrel and Novak low-mount type sights with Tritium inserts. This was a very handy little pistol and it was also very accurate out to about 40 feet. At 21 feet I was a surgeon with it (or at least that’s what I recall as I sit here 5 years later). But the pistol had two deal-breaking problems. The first was reliability. Every magazine had at least two failures to feed. I tried different magazine (which is expensive especially when it doesn’t solve the problem) and I tried scores of different ammunition.
The second problem was something that doesn’t have a catchy name. After about 70 rounds fired the pistol would heat up and when I fired a round it would go pop instead of bang. The bullet left the barrel but the recoil felt like I was firing a .22 and it did not produce enough energy to cycle the slide. This happened with all of the brands of ammo that the range carried (Magtech, Winchester, Remington, and CCI Blazer and Lawman). Neither I nor the gunsmith could figure out what was causing it. Whenever it would start the gunsmith would come out and observe what was happening. He would then tote her off to his shop, take her apart, find nothing wrong, put it back together and the pistol would shoot fine until it started to heat up again. So this one left the pack to find a new home and I hope someone more deserving picked her up and learned how to make her work.

CZ 75B Compact .40 S&W

This one came about a year later. At this time I had a full sized CZ 75 B, a 75 Compact D PCR, and a P-01, all of which were in 9mm. I loved the CZ design so I figured a .40 was a perfect compliment. The accuracy was exactly what I expected but unfortunately it also had reliability problems. Again I tried different mags and a variety of different ammunition but all to no avail. The gun continually jammed. Sometimes they were failures to feed but mostly they were the dreaded double feeds which just locked up the pistol. I had to force the slide in to the locked position and rip the magazine out with great force. Unfortunately this experience, along with the above mentioned Springfield left me with a sour attitude toward the .40 S&W cartridge and to this day there is not another one in my battery. (Although there is a Talo Glock 23 in .40 S&W in the display case that might tempt me into giving the .40 another chance http://www.taloinc.com/glock.htm)

Taurus 24/7 in .45 ACP

I found much to like with the Taurus OSS in .45 ACP, but it was a full sized service pistol. Thinking that smaller versions would be good for carry I acquired the 24/7 .45 ACP in both its 4 and 3.25 inch versions. The trigger was different but very similar. As it turned out the pistols were a little wide for concealed carry. They proved to be reliable and had about the same accuracy level as the OSS.

Target at 21 feet.

Target at 31 feet.
Target at 50 feet.
Target at 21 feet and fired using the Jim Cirillo method of indexing using the rear sight profile in close quarters when you do not have the time to line-up the sights.
I did not blog about them because I just couldn’t think of anything new to say that hadn’t already been said in the OSS review.

Colt Lawman

When I first became of age to purchase a handgun I would marvel at the Colt revolvers in the display cases. They seemed to have a richer, deeper blue than the Smith & Wesson products and there was something about the Colt Lawman .357 Magnum revolvers with a 2 or 4 inch barrel that seemed to call to me. The Lawman was certainly no Python, it even seemed to lack some of the refinement of the Colt Trooper, but it had a massive steel barrel and looked like it was all business. I imagined that looking down the wrong end of the barrel would be pretty intimidating. But Colt discontinued the Lawman in the 1980’s so there did not seem to be one in my future.

But Lo and Behold, one bright Sunday afternoon I stopped in at Gander Mountain to pick up some ammunition and there was a Colt Lawman Mark III .357 Magnum with a two inch barrel in 98% condition with box and papers.

The first thing I found while dry firing with snap caps was that, as with most revolvers (especially vintage ones), the stock grips did not enhance the shooting experience. I surmised that if they were bad for dry firing they were going to be many times worse with .357 Magnum cartridges launching from that 2 inch tube. I knew that not much in the way of aftermarket grips would be available, but I did have a Tyler T-grip adapter on hand to give me more to hang onto. The T-Grips adapter was also was a period correct accessory for the vintage Lawman.

However, even with the T-grip adapter, the Lawman was not fun to shoot and I eventually realized that it was not making it into the range bag whenever I ventured out to the shooting range. Below are some targets all shot at 21 feet using a variety of .357 magnum ammunition.

30 rounds of Remington .357 Magnum 125 grain Jacketed hollowpoint ammunition:

20 rounds of Speer .357 Magnum 159 grain Lead Swagged hollowpoint ammo.
20 rounds of Winchester .357 Magnum 110 grain Silver-Tip Hollow point ammo.
Unfortunately the Lawman did not make the cut for either “shootability” or inclusion in the blog and is now in someone else’s collection.

Part II Continued Below

Smith & Wesson Model 40, .38 Special +P

This extremely handsome revolver is a part of Smith & Wesson’s Classic line of discontinued models reintroduced to the gun buying public. The model 40 is built on S&W’s small “J” frame and was originally dubbed the Centennial during the period when S&W gave their models names rather than just numbers. The Centennial/model 40 debuted in 1952 and bowed out in 1974. As the moniker Centennial infers this model was introduced to commemorate Smith & Wesson's 100th anniversary.

The Centennial featured a grip safety and enclosed hammer which were first seen on the “Safety Hammerless” models first produced in 1887. The grip safety was added so that if the revolver was dropped there would be no concern with an accidental discharge. Additionally, one of the more poignant reasons for the grip safety was that Daniel B. Wesson heard that several children had been killed when they found their parent's loaded revolver and subsequently shot themselves, a sibling, or friend. Wesson asked his designers to make a revolver that would not be easy for children to fire. They removed the external hammer so that it could not be cocked. Therefore it could not be fired in the single action mode which has a very short and light trigger pull. They also added the grip safety believing that most small children would not have the dexterity and strength to both depress the safety and manipulate the double action trigger with its long pull. The Safety Hammerless was also a break-top revolver which, of course, was outdated by 1952 and the Centennial employed the swing-out cylinder that is still in use today.

The Centennial/model 40 became very popular with police officers in the late 1950's and 1960's as a back-up gun. By then the police were trained to only fire in the double action mode so there was no need to cock the hammer. The sleek internal hammer meant that there was no external one to catch on a belt, pocket, or jacket when presenting the revolver. They also like the grips safety figuring that if a bad guy got his hands on the handgun during a struggle, he would probably not realize that there was a grip safety to be depressed and it might save the officer's life.

The re-introduced model 40 is available in a more standard deep blue, the very beautiful nickel plated finish that I chose, or blue with a color case hardened frame. (S&W’s introduction of color case hardened revolvers in their classic line is somewhat strange since the revolvers were never produced with this finish treatment in their original runs. If memory serves me well, Smith also did this with their Heritage line several years ago.)

The 40 should be a very popular revolver, and judging by the difficulty I had in getting a hold of one I would say that it certainly is, due to its lack of the much despised internal lock which became standard on all S&W handguns in the early part of this century. With the external grip safety the hated internal lock is no longer needed.

Handling the Model 40

The grips on the 40 are rather flat and do not provide much to hang onto which impedes the gun’s inherent shootability as this affects both the comfort of shooting the revolver and the ability to shoot it accurately. Due to the design of the grip safety, most Smith & Wesson J frame replacement grips will not fit the model 40 and that it OK with me since the grips furnished with the revolver are very nicely done. The shootability was greatly improved by the addition of a Tyler T-Grip adapter which also keeps with the vintage appearance of the revolver as for many years the T-Grip was the most popular attachment to improve a revolver's grip.

Another problem with my model 40 was the trigger pull. I don’t know how heavy it was because my Lyman Digital trigger pull scale stops at 12 pounds and the model 40 produced error messages that the pull was over the limit. The heavy trigger was causing me to pull my shots and had a negative effect on accuracy. Again, there is a fix. While visiting a gun shop I met a retired S&W representative whose specialty is remedying trigger pull issues. For a very reasonable price he slicked up the action which in-turn tightened up the groups. The pull now measures a very nice 10.4 pounds and is very smooth.

The model 40 holsters up well in both a Galco pocket holster and a Blackhawk inside-the-waistband rig. I used to feel that I could only carry in the pocket mode but have recently become more comfortable with the IWB holster carry and the Blackhawk is probably the way I will go.

Range Targets

The first four targets were fired with standard FMC range ammo; either 130 grain or 132 grain cartridges from Remington, Fiocchi, or PMC.
25 rounds fired at 21 feet:

25 rounds fired at 31 feet:

25 rounds fired at 50 feet:

25 rounds fired at 75 feet-which for me is really pushing my limits:

The next four targets were fired at with different defensive rounds; all at a range of 21 feet.

Buffalo Bore 158 grain +P LHP:

CorBon 110 grain JHP +P:

Remington 158 grain +P SWLHP:

Winchester 125 grain JHP +P:

I really like this little revolver. It is handsome and with some aftermarket tweaking has become easy to shoot and accurate. It may just replace my favorite Model 340 M&P as my favorite “quick carry” piece.

Smith & Wesson Pro-60, Model 640, and Model 340
A “J” Frame Paradise
(Click on images to enlarge)

My personal favorite for carry has, over the past several years, been the small S&W “J” framed model 340. In terms of carrying a “J” frame Smith I must certainly be in good company because Smith & Wesson catalogued 36 different j-frame models for 2008. You can get one is .22LR, .22 Magnum, 38 Special +P, and .357 Magnum (their .32 H&R Magnum has apparently been discontinued). You can get them with a 1.7 inch barrel, 2.1 inch barrel, 3 inch barrel, and 5 in barrel. Most have fixed sights, but some of the 3 inch barrel models and all of the 5 inch models have adjustable rear sights. For the front sight you can get a traditional ramp (with or without the red ramp insert), Hi-Viz fiber optic, regular night sights or the larger XS Dot night sights. You can choose one in light weight Scandium, Stainless Steel or Carbon Steel that has been blued, nickel plated or a combination of blued and case color hardened. I suppose we should not leave out the grips; you can get several different styles of wood or rubber grips as well as Crimson Trace laser grips.

The main factors in making this selection for me (and I would imagine everyone else that carries a “J” frame revolver were the caliber, “carry-ability”, and short range accuracy. These are all important factors, especially the “carry-ability”—if it is uncomfortable or inconvenient to carry, you won’t.

The Scandium 340 rides very well in a pocket holster but I have found it even easier to carry with the Clip Draw device attached to it. First of all it leave my pockets free to hold the junk that normally goes in there. Secondly it did produce a somewhat noticeable but indistinguishable bulge. The linear designs of most serious semi-automatic pistols on the other hand, left a very distinguishable bulge. In three years of 340 pocket carry no one, including family, ever mentioned the bulge. The 340 with the Clip Draw carries ridiculously easy underneath an untucked polo shirt. In fact I have found that it is possible to tuck the shirt in and around the Clip Draw’s clip. Blouse the shirt slightly and the 340 is unnoticeable.

As I mentioned earlier, the main factors for carrying the 340 were also caliber and short range accuracy. Lately I have been thinking a lot about those two factors. .38 Special + Ps are fairly reasonable to handle in the Scandium frame and .357 Magnum loads are possible. I can actually shoot between one or two cylinders full of them with good short range accuracy before my involuntary muscle contractions begin to anticipate the shot and spoil the group. I would like, however to be able to shoot them well so that I can confidently move up the .357 Magnum carry. I would also like to be able to shoot well beyond the short range distances. At 21 feet I can keep the shots within the 8 ring of a normal bull’s-eye target. At 31 feet they begin to spread out and some are on the paper but off the target rings. I would like to be able to have all my shots hit a 10 inch target at 50 feet.

This led me to try the Model 360 Sc Kit Gun (reviewed on April 3, 2008). With its 3 inch barrel, Hi-Viz fiber optic front sight and adjustable rear sight I thought it might provide me that advantage. It didn’t. The accuracy was no better, in fact it was worse with some loads, than my 340 with its 1 7/8 inch barrel and fixed sights. .357s actually seemed more painful to shoot than in the shorter barreled 340.

Perhaps I needed more weight. The Scandium 340 was chosen because its 13 ounces would not weigh down my pocket. The Clip Draw attachment, however, allows me to carry a heavier handgun as the gun’s weight is supported by my belt which keeps it close in to my body. I then tried a model 640; all stainless steel and a 2.1 inch barrel.

It was easy to carry on the clip draw, shooting Magnum loads were easier, but the accuracy, while pretty good for a small revolver, provided no significant advantage over the light weight 340.

With that, I began looking for a Pro-60. This is a new revolver for Smith & Wesson this year and it took about 3 months to find one. The Pro 60 looks like the model 627 (8 round N frame .357 revolver) and the Pro 620 (6 round L frame .357 revolver) got married and had a child to produce this satin finished stainless steel 5 shot J framed revolver with a three inch barrel, front night sight, and adjustable rear sight.

This is a great looking gun; sleek and downright sexy. The extractor shroud/under lug is tapered to produce a very distinctive look that Smith & Wesson first used on their very popular model 627. The shroud also has a couple of cutouts to help reduce weight (I can’t imagine that it reduced it that much). Some gun publications are referring to this revolver as “slabsides” since the barrel is squared off and flat on each side and then rounded as it tapers up to the front sight and tapers down to the extractor shroud/under lug. I find this a very attractive, almost art deco feature. The grips are beautiful with a combination of laser etching and stippling. These are perhaps the largest grips Smith & Wesson has ever put on a J frame revolver, but alas, they are still too small for my meaty paws. With each shot of magnum ammo it was necessary to reposition my hand as the revolver has moved during recoil. This led me to replace them, as beautiful as they are, with a set of Hogue Rubber Monogrips.

Both the large original wood grips and the Monogrips are still easy to conceal with the Clip Draw device. If you decide to employ a Clip Draw attachment you need to do a little experimenting in front of the mirror and to find the spot along your beltline where the grip does not imprint as you sit down, bend over, etc.

On the range, the Pro 60 handles Magnum ammunition very well. A few loads like the Speer Gold Dot 135 grain Short Barrel .357 Magnums and the 124 grain Remington Golden Sabre Hollow Point rounds are actually pleasant to shoot. These rounds have shown good accuracy along with the traditional Remington 125 grain semi-jacketed hollow point ammo and Speer’s 158 grain Gold Dot Hollow Points.

The j-frame revolvers are still an attractive carry option. I look forward to working some more with the Pro-60 to improve my distance shooting.