Walther Forums banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I use a Kahr PM9 as my ccw and was hoping the pps would be a good replacement since I love all my Walthers. But it is looking like the pps is not going be beat my Kahr in the deminsion battle. My Kahr is a bit big for me for deep concealment as it is and I don't want to go larger(the gun that is). Does any one have "hands on" experience with both the Kahr pm9 and the pps that could give me their opinion on the differences from a ccw perspective? I am a little dissapointed in the Walther designers, I think they could of matched the size of a ppk in 9mm. Last week I held a Model 9 in my hands. This is a tiny .25 cal Walther from the early 1900's. It is amazing how Walther started out as a mfg of tiny, high quality hand guns and has now ended up producing large chunky handguns. I will stop ranting, I just think they could of made the pps smaller. Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I own a brace of PM9's and carry one as a BUG on occasion. One of my PM9's is 99% reliable. In over 1000 rds it has stovepiped once. The other is about 95% reliable.
I think the little Kahrs are good little BUGS. They are not designed for heavy use and are estimated to have a useful frame life of about 2500 rds. I change recoil springs very often because I use only +P ammo in mine.

PPS is engineered to higher standard and has much higher accuracy and reliability potential.
Frankly I don't think either should be your primary weapon. Both are designed as hide-outs first.
I would not carry anything less than a G19 as a primary. The difference in energy of a 9mm out of a 4" barrel and a 3" is very substantial and the additional sight radius of a longer barrel make a great deal of difference in a pressured shot.

Size is less important than reliability and the PPS will exceed the PM9 in that dept, particularly if you have a poor grip and weak wrist. Remember the greater the slide velocity and momentum the better the chance of reliability. That's why G19's don't jam and little 9's do.

Dress around the gun instead of choosing a gun for your style of dress !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Size is less important than reliability and the PPS will exceed the PM9 in that dept, particularly if you have a poor grip and weak wrist. Remember the greater the slide velocity and momentum the better the chance of reliability. That's why G19's don't jam and little 9's do.

Dress around the gun instead of choosing a gun for your style of dress !

Thanks for your input, but I am really more interested in how the PM9 and PPS compare in size from a carry standpoint. Do you find that the PPS feels thicker or thinner in your pocket? Is the length of the slide or heighth of the frame make a big difference. I should of been more clear in my OP that I am asking for comparisons for pocket carry. There are some instances when I can only pocket carry, which leaves my G19 at home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Thanks for your input, but I am really more interested in how the PM9 and PPS compare in size from a carry standpoint. Do you find that the PPS feels thicker or thinner in your pocket? Is the length of the slide or heighth of the frame make a big difference. I should of been more clear in my OP that I am asking for comparisons for pocket carry. There are some instances when I can only pocket carry, which leaves my G19 at home.
PM9 is much smaller in every dimension. I think width is about the same,at least it appears so to the eye. Length and height of PM9 are close to an inch smaller
Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
The frame service life of a PM9 Kahr is only 2,500 rounds?? That would mean that it would last about one to two years for me as a primary CCW. If that number is true I don't see why anyone would purchase a PM9. For the same price you could have a wide assortment of longer lasting small firearms.

Dave:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
The frame service life of a PM9 Kahr is only 2,500 rounds?? That would mean that it would last about one to two years for me as a primary CCW. If that number is true I don't see why anyone would purchase a PM9. For the same price you could have a wide assortment of longer lasting small firearms.

Dave:confused:
That is the price of having the lightest 9mm. It is designed to carry not to shoot . Find yourself a heavier 9mm like a G19 to shoot and save that PM9 for carry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
I'm sorry but I'm a big proponate of practice with what you carry. I try to shoot my carry weapons in practical shooting competitions in order to learn about their personalities. For example I've seen a very reliable production division handgun that would only malfunction in hot weather and further it was specific only that particular handgun. Others that were identical in terms of comapny, caliber, and model didn't have such problems. Why this is true I have no idea. He sure was glad to learn about that problem shooting at cardboard that doesn't shoot back.

This is of course all assuming that you're correct about the frame service life being only 2500 rounds. I've been looking all over the internet and have not found the service life listed for this firearm. Many reviews commented on it being "overbuilt" and "durable" looking. I found one review that commented on his being used in the BUG catagory of IPSC competition. I also noticed that the Kahr Arms Corp. has a limited warranty that repairs or replaces the firearm within five years from the date of purchase. They didn't list how many rounds that you could shoot before you would void the warranty.

Would you care to post a link or reference a magazine that shows where you read that such a short frame service life is expected for this firearm?

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I going to do the math out loud here, because I never thought about this before:

practice @ 200 rds per month = about 1 year + service life
practice @ 100 rds per month = about 2 yrs + service life
my actucal practice :p is 50 rds every 3 months = 12.5 years of service life

I can live with that and dry fire practice would be very beneficial on the pm9 since the long trigger pull is the main factor in accuracy. I still think the service life of a PM9 is longer that 2500 rnds, it is a sturdy built pistol with metal reinforcement in the frame. But the recoil spring must be changed religously every 300 rds or it will start getting battered. That is the trade off in all pistols, the smaller the slide and recoil spring, the more it needs to be replaced, that is why Sigs use the wound recoil springs. Colt OACP, Kel Tec P32 & Kahr PM9 use a two stage recoil spring to help them last longer, but they still need replacing often due to the short cycling slide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Kahr's Tech Director
I was advised to change recoil springs at least every 750 rds and that useful life before frame distortion affected reliability was around 2500 rds.
I have 2 of them for that reason. I also use 127 +P+ , Win 124 +P and DPX exclusively for carry and practice as I am a proponent of practicing with what you carry.
These are plastic tools and 2500 rounds before distortion is pretty darn good. Try using a S&W Jframe sc for 2500 rds with fullhouse 357loads and check its tolerences and measure flamecut.
PM9's are good little pistols but there is a difference between them and HK MK 23's which are designed for 50,000 rds minimum.

My point is only that the PPS is likely designed from the ground up with the intention to shoot more often than a PM9.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
jhiller,

I copied your last posting and forwarded it to the Kahr Arms Corp to inquire as to it's accuracy. Please find below the response.


Hi David,

Not sure where you got that (miss) information but it is not any where close to being accurate. First, I am the Director of Customer Service for Kahr Arms / Auto Ordnance and I would never have made those comments. They are not true. The PM9 and associated parts last much longer then what this person has claimed. Lastly it is very clearly stated in the owners manual that Kahr pistols are only rated up to +P ammo. Shooting any type of +P+ ammo in a Kahr pistol is no at all recommended.

Unfortunately, you can't always depend on information sourced on the internet

Bob​

His name is Bob Holmes. His email address is [email protected] if you wish to ask him anything else.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I certainly can't disagree with what the Customer Service guy said in his email to you. But I stand by what I said. I was told that 2500 rds of use with high pressure ammo was considered useful life.
I suppose that one way or another the truth will have its way. I have about 1500 rds on my PM9's and they are still going strong.
I still prefer the PPS in any event.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Guys, don't forget that it is impossible for Walther to build a PPS the size of the PM9 due to the stupid point system from GCA of '68. The GCA of '68 is why the PPK had to be made in the U.S. and why the PPK/S was born.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Guys, don't forget that it is impossible for Walther to build a PPS the size of the PM9 due to the stupid point system from GCA of '68. The GCA of '68 is why the PPK had to be made in the U.S. and why the PPK/S was born.

Thanks, I realized that later in another post. I am so glad that our government enacted the GCA '68 to stop those street gangs from buying $1000 German made PPKs:rolleyes: . You would think with all the CCW states that someone would amend that part of the GCA!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Jim,

Ok. I sure hope that you're wrong though and get years more service out of them. Please be careful with those +P+'s I would want to here about anything Kb!'ing.

Respectfully,
Dave
Dave,
Yesterday I called and spoke with Kahr. You were absolutely correct !
This time I was told that frame life with standard pressure ammo would be on order of 8,000 rounds. The gentleman with whom I spoke was Javier and responded to my question about 127+P+ and it's acceleration of useful life.

BTW.... no pistol manufacturer will approve +P+ even though it is LEO issue for many Departments.Those using Glocks which issue the round have found greatly reduced lifespan of their weapons and many have changed to 124+p Ranger instead. I do not think that K'boom is issue with a NEW weapon designed for high pressure but it will shorten weapon's life for sure.

Than you for the correction of my misinformation
Cordially
Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Jim,

I agree with you that most likely the net result of using +P+'s is going to be accelerated frame wear. What I worry about is what happens when that last round fired before the worn frame lets go. Will the frame just gently crack and you'll find that damage when cleaning or will it completely let go? I've seen and heard of Glocks having problems when the unsupported bottom of the round has had a case failure. Usually it blows the magazine out the bottom and doesn't harm the shooter. In fact usually the firearm is checked out, found safe, and put right back in the mix. But this example is with a lighter loaded .40 s&w in a Glock not a 9mm +P+ in a Kahr so I don't really know how valid it is to this particular instance . I personally just wouldn't want to risk the possible injury to myself or others by needlessly abusing a firearm. This is of course only my opinion.

Respectfully,
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Good question ! I think that reliability will suffer before a catastrophic failure... at least that is the experience of the Depts and Agencies that used 127+P+. I think the 40cal Glock failures had to do with unsupported cases while in battery but I sure wouldn't want to be holding one when it decides to give up. Isn't the same true of standard pressure at the end of it's useful life ?
Regards,
Jim
BTW... my PPS sems to digest CorBon DPX 115gr with ease and it is very accurate to boot. Because I do not have a holster for the PPS I'm not using it as a BUG but I will with that ammo !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
PM9 and PPS photos

Check out this thread in the GlockTalk/Walther forum: http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=736243

Scroll down and you'll see some side-by-side pics of the PPS and PM9.

The PPS looks like a nice little gun, but I honestly don't see what niche it's supposed to fill. It's longer, wider and significantly heavier (5 ounces) than the PM9. It's even longer and thicker than the Kahr P9 and CW9.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
I understand the desire to have a tiny pistol with a lot of power for "deep concealment", and think if that is your main goal, nothing can beat a Seecamp .380 for small/powerful.

But there are a lot of tradeoffs for that small size and power. One of the biggest is your ability to make effective use of the piece.

Looking at the PPS, being slightly bigger than the PPK, seems just about right. I have always felt the Walther PP series was the perfect size for a handgun, and to have it in the 9 m/m seems a good development. Especially so if it is reliable and accurate.

I think the PPS size will meet all but the most extreme need for concealment. It might not be something you can smuggle around in your jockey shorts, but then again - should you need it, you will find it alot more effective.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top