You're not going to believe what the S&W rep told me yesterday!!!!!
- Thread starter WC145
- Start date
stantheman86
US Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2010
- Messages
- 2,479
- Reaction score
- 531
I'll take a 2" 64 in 9mm, so there's a little extra weight to make +P+ more manageable.
But......I would still buy a new 9mm J-frame when they come out
I hope they make one with a steel frame, how about a Model 60 9mm. I'll take a Scandium too, but would prefer steel. Not a fan of the polymer BG's.
But......I would still buy a new 9mm J-frame when they come out
I hope they make one with a steel frame, how about a Model 60 9mm. I'll take a Scandium too, but would prefer steel. Not a fan of the polymer BG's.
M2MikeGolf
US Veteran
And I'm so desparate to see that happen again, I wouldn't even complain about the IL. For reference, there's another thread currently going on about the stellar prices 547s are going for these days. Seems like there's a pretty good demand out there for both J-frame, and my very favorite K-frame 9mm's. I'd even settle for moon clip versions at this point.
I don't like the polymer frame thing either but I'm willing to take what I can get and the light weight makes it attractive to me. The 940 was just too heavy for a pocket or ankle gun. Yes, the weight helps with recoil but my gun is just over 13oz and, honestly, the recoil isn't a big deal, even shooting +P+.
Some 940's had extraction issues but the problem is not inherent to 9mm revolvers. I've never seen/heard any complaints about the 547's or any of the Rugers or even the Taurus. And the afflicted 940's were easily fixed by honing the chambers smooth.
David Sinko
Member
No matter what kind of fancy (or cheap) material they use to make this thing they will still have to properly finish off the chambers or they'll have the same problems they had with some of the 940s. I don't think they're committed to this kind of attention to detail. You guys who want one had better get one quick while the chamber reamers are still sharp.
Dave Sinko
Dave Sinko
Broker50
Member
Sorry Guys. I have never seen the attraction of a revolver in an autoloader caliber. The auto rounds were designed to work in self-loaders, & not in revolvers. There are inherent difficulties to overcome in revolvers. My question is, "Why"? The 9MM does nothing in a J frame the 38 Spl won't do better, without the problem of headspace & extraction. Sorry, I just don't get it. I own, shoot, & enjoy pistols in 32 ACP, 380ACP, 9MM, 40 S&W, 10MM, & 45ACP, all in auto's, I leave the revolvers for calibers with a rimmed cartridge.
Assuming it will be a "moon clip" ammo version. I have a 940, and with factory 115 gr, it has the "sharpest" recoil of nearly any of my revolvers. After 3 or 4 cylinder fulls of them, my hand needs a rest. I remove the attractive rosewood boot grips I have, and put on Pachmayer compacts when I shoot it now. Until I borrowed the chamber hone form Headknocker I had difficult extraction. I hope S&W puts a lot of research into the new one before they bring it out.
I know none of you want to here this..... BUT.. IMO... I would get a Kahr PM9 and be done with it.
It is 19+ozs. loaded with 7 rounds... It has a 3" barrel... It fits in your pocket... and it is totally reliable. A 940 weighs about 6ozs more and has two less rounds, and a much shorter barrel......YOMV
I sold my 940 to get the PM9, and have been very pleased with it.
It is 19+ozs. loaded with 7 rounds... It has a 3" barrel... It fits in your pocket... and it is totally reliable. A 940 weighs about 6ozs more and has two less rounds, and a much shorter barrel......YOMV
I sold my 940 to get the PM9, and have been very pleased with it.
I'm hearing the Kahr love 
, bought the no-frills version of the PM9, the CM9 a couple weeks ago. Around $400 to my holster
This gun is utterly reliable with everything and anything put into the magazine. Still have my 940, and my 3913, but this one has gone to the head of the class.
I know some have issues with striker-fired auto's, after firing this one, I have none. I'm as die hard a Smith fan as any, but you give credit where it's due. This gun will sell as many as Kahr can make.
, bought the no-frills version of the PM9, the CM9 a couple weeks ago. Around $400 to my holster This gun is utterly reliable with everything and anything put into the magazine. Still have my 940, and my 3913, but this one has gone to the head of the class.
I know some have issues with striker-fired auto's, after firing this one, I have none. I'm as die hard a Smith fan as any, but you give credit where it's due. This gun will sell as many as Kahr can make.
Last edited:
rck281
Member
I know none of you want to here this..... BUT.. IMO... I would get a Kahr PM9 and be done with it.
It is 19+ozs. loaded with 7 rounds... It has a 3" barrel... It fits in your pocket... and it is totally reliable. A 940 weighs about 6ozs more and has two less rounds, and a much shorter barrel......YOMV
I sold my 940 to get the PM9, and have been very pleased with it.
Hate to say it but I agree 100%. My carry guns are a Kahr PM9 and a Kahr 380. Small, lightweight, and reliable. I also carry a S&W 342 on occasion.
There's nothing wrong with Kahr, or Glock, or XD's, or Smeg...uh, Sigma's either. They are not Smith revolvers. Shoot what you like, like what you shoot!
We're not talking about a 940, we're talking about a 14oz revolver with the ability to function where your small auto won't, like stuck in someone's ribs. Small autos are great, and the Kahrs are good guns, but they do not fill every need. I like a small revolver for a BUG specifically because it works in situations where an auto would likely malfunction.I know none of you want to here this..... BUT.. IMO... I would get a Kahr PM9 and be done with it.
It is 19+ozs. loaded with 7 rounds... It has a 3" barrel... It fits in your pocket... and it is totally reliable. A 940 weighs about 6ozs more and has two less rounds, and a much shorter barrel......YOMV
I sold my 940 to get the PM9, and have been very pleased with it.
The round doesn't know what platform it's being fired from. The 9mm is more efficient than the .38spl and hotter in comparable bullet weights from the same barrel lengths.
I have revolvers in 9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP. I also have a Coonan .357mag auto. They're all great shooters, all accurate, and they all fill a need. The fact that they're chambered for the "wrong" calibers for the platform takes nothing from their performance or usefulness.
5Wire
Member
None that I've had which is both versions of the 547. Also the weight argument doesn't cut it, there's about an ounce difference between the alloy 642 and the polymer-on-steel BG38. I have both and the BG38 is a bit easier in the recoil department.
Well if I had the choice between a 9mm snub and a .357 snub.... hmm.... I would take the 14oz. .357 in a heartbeat... the 9mm will never outperform a .357 mag....... So I see no real use for a 9mm snub.....thats just me.................
But you're all about a small 9mm auto? Why not dump the Kahr and get yourself a 340?
I don't need or expect it to outperform a .357mag but I still want more than a .38spl offers and the 9mm snubby delivers that and does it with a fraction of the muzzle blast and recoil of a 2" .357mag.
I have a 340, and carry it when necessary
Also, I would carry a PM40 if Kahr could make a reliable one
which would be far superior to anything else IMO.
Last edited:
remat457
Member
Ok, I was excited about this until I started reading about the recoil. Is the recoil on a 940 really that bad? It's got to be less than a AirLite 357 right?
I have a 386sc and even though it is physically big, shooting it is no fun. The J AirLites are even more ridiculous.
Why the draw of the 9mm? Besides being available, inexpensive (357 prices are outrageous right now), matching a fullsize pistol, I think that the ballistics are pretty nice from a snub nose.
I have a 386sc and even though it is physically big, shooting it is no fun. The J AirLites are even more ridiculous.
Why the draw of the 9mm? Besides being available, inexpensive (357 prices are outrageous right now), matching a fullsize pistol, I think that the ballistics are pretty nice from a snub nose.
Dave T
Member
WC145 has hit the nail on the flat part. Do some chronographing or check out what others have done. Going from 4" down to 2" the 9mm looses less velocity than the 38 Special. Of course the 357 Magnum out performs it, but that's at the expense of loss of control and actual pain.
No one shoots these little guns (2" J-frames) well the first time out and many never shoot them well because they don't practice with them. Making one painful to shoot (chambering to 357 Mag) doesn't help this one little bit.
I recommended a 9mm Ruger SP101 to a friend who had one of the original 38 Special 101s. He bought it and did some chronograph comparisons. The 9mm has been his daily carry gun for all the years since. The numbers convinced him.
Dave
Dave
