PM9 has a way smoother trigger
Which of these is better for CCW? Please provide me insight as to why in addition to voting. Thanks!
How are you going to carry it?
If I was looking to pocket or ankle carry, I'd go with the PM9 because of its smaller size & weight.
If I was looking to carry IWB or OWB, I'd go with the PPS, as its larger size & weight should improve shootability.
But why compare the PM9 to the PPS? They are in different size categories. A more valid comparison would be between the P9 and the PPS. And even then, the P9 is smaller and lighter than the PPS, even though the P9 still has a longer barrel.
I believe the PM9 to be better suited for deep concealment, while the P9 and/or the PPS are better suited for traditional CC.
Cannot vote since I have both. PPS for owb carry and PM9 for pocket carry in hot weather. I like them both for their separate purposes.
You really think the difference in size is that significant between the PPS and PM9? I know there is a difference but I never found it to be THAT significant.
But for my personal use, I would likely choose the Walther, simply because of the ability to change the grip size, and therefore lengthen the trigger reach. The reach on a Kahr is very short, which makes it ideal for people with medium or smaller hands.
However, I have largish hands with long fingers, and all of the Kahrs require me to adjust my grip and shooting technique to accommodate that. I have never had the opportunity to try the PPS with the large size grip insert, but I think it would work because my P-22 with similar setup works.
As for quality, I would rate the Kahr slightly higher...just my personal opinion.
I voted Walther, for similar reasons as Bisley. I prefer the feel of the Walther over the Kahr, although both are good guns.
Had a Kahr PM9 and had feeding problems and a peening issue. Sent it back to the factory and they replaced the barrel, but never seemed right.
Walther no feeding problems at all. The Kahr has been sold, still have the Walther.
Last edited by Sonny Boy; 10-13-2009 at 10:08 PM.
I considered and handled both. I went with the PM9. No regrets. Very smooth trigger, as accurate at 7 yards (considered max confrontational distance) as my 4" FNP9. Out of the box a champ. 700 rounds not a FTF, or any other problem. Low recoil for it's weight and size. I just plain love this gun
The PPS hands down for me. I've got a PPS in .40 s&w, and I've shot a PM9. PPS has better ergos IMO, shoots more accurate for me. And I just prefer the Walther name over Kahr TBH.
This is tough, both guns are very reliable and excellent shooters, I am not sure
I had a PPS and it was a good gun, but the grip was not right for my hand. It also had a good bit of recoil that I did not like. I have since purchased a Kahr CW9 and it is an easier gun to shoot, better trigger and that equals better groups. Both guns are very good, the Kahr just works better for me.
I went with the PPS, very pleased with it and no regrets.
I love my Walther PPK/S
It's a dream to shoot and I've carried it concealed a lot.
I've never carried the Kahr - I've heard good things about it (light / smaller, etc,)
This is the first time I've ever heard anyone say the recoil on the PPS was bad. I dont own one, but shot 100 rounds through a range rental and was very surprised at the low recoil for a small and light gun. If you shoot a PPS compared to a PM9, recoil should be noticeably snappier with PM9. I own a PM9 because Walther wasn't out yet when I bought it.
Only problem I see with PPS is lack of choices for night sights. Only one source that I know of.
I picked the Kahr....for CCW it is small light and accurate. Conceals easy and still feels like a gun in your hand. I am a big fan of Kahr so this is not an unbiased opinion.