Kahr MK9 vs. MK40 - any comments?

J

JimR

New member
I've been looking at the Kahrs on the web, and looked at them more closely at a gun show this last weekend, and am interested in any comments anyone might have on the 9 vs the 40. I'm a little concerned the bite may be a little high with such a small 40 with a two-finger lower grip.

I like the idea of a 40 to complement my Glock 19, which I've found is just too big for year-round carry in the South. I like the idea of having a gun in every major ammo caliber, and I don't have a 40, hence my interest in the MK40. I'd keep the 19 for other uses.

TIA

JimR
 
Although I don't own an MK40 (yet), I have shot one, and I found it to be a fine little weapon. I wish I could give you a comparison between the MK40 and the MK9, but I haven't had a chance yet to shoot the smaller caliber. All I can say about the MK40 is that it shot accurately and the recoil was not bad at all. I liked it enough to want to drop more than six bills on one, which I'll do early next year, barring unforeseen circumstances.

Good luck in choosing the right one. If the MK9 handles anything like the MK40, you probably won't go wrong with either gun.
DAL

------------------
Reading "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal," by Ayn Rand, should be required of every politician and in every high school.
 
I have an MK9 and I like it a lot. I've never shot the MK 40, but I bet it's quite a handful. I use the Pearce grip extensions on my mags to give me a pinky rest. I would think that this would be even more helpful with the 40.
 
The MK40 is amazing - the recoil isn't bad at all. Try one. The only advantage I can think of to the MK9 would be one more round capacity.

Dave - over six bills for an MK40? Yikes! Try Tom and Joe's at 303/231-0998. He's a great guy, and just quoted me $475 for a standard (no night sights, not the Elite) MK40.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top