I'd say yes, basically same pistol except for capacity.
I think I have small hands - from tip of my middle finger to first crease at wrist I measure 7.5 ".
First held a 59 in early '80's and thought "
Boy, this thing is fat !". Ended up with a 439, which I traded in '98.
Remembered my 439 in 8/2011 and the DA / SA with decocker / safety which I really favor (I do not like SA pistols, particularly with light triggers - that's why I sold our 2 Kimbers).
Long story short - a 439, beautiful nickel 39-2, 5906 with CT laser, 4566, and most recently a really nice 59.
My point - none of them are really "fat" -
it's what you get used to - it's like recoil -
mostly in the mind of the holder / shooter.
I used to have a KAHR PM4544 - that's a .45 polymer frame - Weight: Pistol 17.3 oz., Magazine 2 oz. - some say they kick like hell - I loved to shoot it one-handed - if you asked me if it kicked, I'd have to say "
I guess so, that's what others say" - you see what I'm saying - it all comes down to "
mostly in the mind" (except maybe for a .454 Casull
).
The 39 series with the arched backstrap have that great feel.
The 59 with flat backstrap feels just as good - much like a 1911.
I have to argue with myself over whether the 439 or the 59 (both with stock grips) feels "fatter". If I kept only one, probably the 59.
You won't go wrong with either. Good luck.