TexasCHLforum.com

The Topic about the new Beretta Nano got me thinking and--not to start yet another caliber war, please--I can see validity on both sides of the 9mm pocket pistol issue. Since tiny form-factor pistols have become so popular among CHL holders, I thought we might discuss pocket pistols and calibers.

A strong market niche has developed around the magic size of about 5" to 5.5" long, 4" to 4.25" high, and 1" wide or less. So let's keep the caliber comments to semiauto pistols in or near that size range, and not get off track with larger guns.

My two cents:

I think the last decade has absolutely proven that with the increasing number of concealed carry permit holders, pocket-sized handguns have became an expanding--and probably permanent--market segment. As often as old hands and LEOs will counsel going with a larger carry gun, the pocket pistols are here to stay.

While we've had blowback and tilt-barrel designs for .25 ACP and .32 ACP for decades, the tiny pistol selection remained pretty slim pickens...let's say the "adequately functioning" tiny pistol selection was slim; there are some that helped lead to the "Saturday Night Special" moniker that shouldn't be included, IMHO.

We started seeing small .32 pistol designs from Kel-Tec, Seecamp, and others, followed by .380s based on the same or similar designs around 2003/2004. The .380 rapidly became the pocket-pistol caliber of choice because that was what was available, and it's been during the past decade that the majority of concealed carry permit holders around the country first got their licenses. I wonder how many P3ATs and LCPs have been sold, just looking at one similar platform? And remember the long period of .380 ammo scarcity starting in late 2008?

But the .380 ACP didn't become popular because of the round's performance. It became popular because that's what the newest generations of pocket pistols fired.

The current trend seems to be a natural extension of the .32-to-.380 progression: many manufacturers are producing new pocket models in 9mm. Recently, in addition to Beretta's newest Nano, we've seen a variety of small form-factor 9s from Ruger, SIG, Kel-Tec, Kahr, Walther, Kimber, and Rohrbaugh, among others. There's even the interesting (though I'm not running out to put my name on the list until its had some boots-on-the-ground proof time) Boberg XR9.

Some argue that a 9mm does not a useful pocket pistol make. That if you want a mouse gun for ultra-easy concealment, you should get a mouse gun in .380; if you want a 9mm, you should step up to a larger form-factor "compact" size pistol. Some of those taking this stance are good sources of information, like Caleb at Gun Nuts Media, or Gunmart Eric over at The Truth about Guns.

Their principal argument is that if you think your P3AT or LCP isn't fun to shoot, just wait until you've tried a tiny, 12- to 20-ounce pistol in 9mm. The stance is that experienced shooters will not want to spend the range time necessary to become proficient with 9mm pocket rockets, and that novice shooters may try it only once. They point out that modern .380 defensive ammo is effective enough for non-LEO concealed carry.

I have mixed feelings, though. I own a PM9 and don't find it uncomfortable at all to shoot. I've shot the new(ish) Kimber Solo and found it quite smooth and accurate. I've shot the smallest of the lot, the Rohrbaugh R9s, and while it would never be a range plinker, it didn't threaten to fly out of my hand. If I ever found a new R9s at a time I'm willing to fork over $1,100 for it, that would become the replacement for my .32 BUG.

Fifteen or twenty years from now, if my hands are arthritic, will I feel the same about shooting a mini-9? Probably not. Are they suitable now for folks with weak hands, or who haven't put in the range time to become proficient with a larger pistol in handgun basics? Probably not.

But for those who can shoot them accurately and without discomfort, I personally think the mini-9s are a valid product for CHLers.

...I love the .45...but the small ones like Kahr would be a lot more bulk than a 9mm, and the 9mm ammo has really been improved, so that even with the shorter barrels, you can still pack a potent punch in a small package...a subcompact 9mm with a DAO trigger would be a good buy as a BUG...not, for me, a primary...having 2-4 more rounds than the 2" J in .38, and being as small or a bit smaller would be a plus...I wouldn't take a .380 as a gift...but the recoil of a subcompact 9mm would be worth what it would provide in a bad situation...there are 2 or 3 smaller than a Kahr that are quality...maybe one will be in my future....a good backup for a P95...

I carry a Sig .380 when my carry situation deems it necessary to have a small gun. I do practice with it often.

That said, I sure appreciate the point of view about mini-9s being so uncomfortable to shoot that people won't practice much. I had the opportunity to shoot a new Diamondback DB9 and if I never pick up one of those again, it will be too soon. But all guns are different. I've shot a Kahr PM9 and it wasn't bad as far as comfort.

I've seen a lot of ladies at various women's programs trying to shoot LCPs or Bersa Thunders. While they fit smaller hands better, a lot of women have trouble with the slide (not as much real estate to get your hand on) and do complain about their hands hurting after a few hours on the line.

But like you, Skiprr, I think the mini 9s are a viable option for some concealed carry situations. I would certainly consider one.

T.

My experience is that shooting my PM9 is subjectively about the same as shooting my 3" Kimber, in terms of perceived recoil.....that is to say, not bad at all. I have let a couple of different friends, plus my wife and son, shoot this gun, and they have all been surprised by how easy it is to shoot, for it being such a small and light (15.9 oz including one empty magazine) pocket pistol.

Now, some brands of manufacture are going to shoot easier than others by virtue of their designs, materials, and workmanship. But overall, I think the pocket 9mm is an idea whose time has come. Mine is only .90" wide and absolutely flat. Although I have greater faith in the power of my even lighter .357 snubbie, the PM9 is so flat and small that concealment is the best of any of the guns I've owned. For instance, for all practical purposes, it conceals pretty much as well as the Kel-Tec P3AT I used to own. That's pretty hard to beat. Obviously, if you can only afford one gun, the pocket 9mm is probably not a good choice for you. But if you are fortunate to own 2 or 3 different guns for different kinds of carry scenarios, then I think you should take a good look at the pocket 9mm pistols. I am personally partial to Kahr's products, but others may certainly be competitive.

I've already sold off my P3AT, and I intend to put my Colt Government .380 up for sale. I've never had complete confidence in the cartridge, and given that the ammo for it is often hard to find and overpriced, it doesn't make sense to invest in pocket pistols in .380 when you can get something pretty much as small and light with a MUCH more powerful cartridge. And modern pocket 9s are often +p rated. I carry Corbon 115 grain +P DPX in mine.

And by the way, there is also a somewhat smaller niche market for pocket .45s. I cannot afford another pistol at the moment, but if I could, I would take a very hard look at the Kahr PM45, which is only a tiny bit larger and an ounce or two heavier than my PM9. I love my 3" Kimber, but it isn't a pocket pistol.

AndyC wrote:The smaller the round, the more expert one should be in its use.

My 2c

Absolutely.

I like the idea of a pocket gun that uses the same ammo my big gun does. This makes a 9mm pocket rocket very intriguing to me. Weak hands and arthritis are factors to consider. They are factors that enter into every gun purchase decision.

...thank God, I don't have arthritis , but a note for those who do and ladies with weaker hands...it takes a lot more strength to hold the gun and yank the slide back and drop it than it does to hold the slide tightly with the weak hand and push the gun away with the strong hand till it pulls the slide out of our weak hand...try it and see the difference...hope it helps...the main thing is that the slide closes under full spring pressure and you don't ease it down...

I have a Kel-Tec PF9 as a primary carry now. It's fun to shoot until the trigger finger starts getting sore. That usually occurs somewhere between 70 and 100 rounds. I've now made a minor modification to prevent the soreness but haven't tried it yet. It is still a little large to carry in a pocket but I can do it when necessary. It is much easier to carry than my Bersa Thunder 380 due to it's lighter weight and smaller grip. I can not pocket carry the Bersa. The grip is too thick.
The small light weight 9's are not for every one. They are susceptible to limp wristing and require constant practice. I've seen people who have handled semi auto pistols all their lives give up on the little Kel-Tec, sell it to someone else who then have no problems with it.

I try to stay away from really compact 9mm guns. Truth is I try to stay away from really compact guns. The smallest I will go is a Glock 26 or other similar sized gun. Though I am looking at a Kahr in 9mm to try out.

I also make an exception for snub nosed revolvers.

I just did a quick comparison chart in light of my previous post, comparing the Kahr PM9 to the Kahr PM45, Glock 36, and 3" Kimber Ultra Carry II:



All data was taken from the respective manufacturers' websites. I included the 9mm pistol because it is a known value as a pocket pistol. When you compare the Kahr PM45 to it, you can see that it is still within the range of practical pocket-ability, although getting up there. The Glock 36 is perhaps marginally pocketable; and the Kimber Ultra is just not a pocket gun, by virtue of its 25 oz empty as much as anything else. In that light, 9mm is perhaps the most powerful self-defense caliber that is practically pocketable without beginning to make too many concessions. The PM45 is a very close second for me, and if some other manufacturer could produce a .45 of similar size/weight/shootability then I would give it a look. But it appears to be difficult to accomplish, or surely there would be more manufacturers attempting it; and the ultimate goal for us as CHLs who pocket carry is to pack as much power as we can into as easily pocketable as possible.

And by the way, I found my old Kel-Tec P3AT to be much more difficult to shoot than my PM9 or my 3" Kimber because every single round fired would bark the knuckles of my trigger finger...........the point being that there is such a thing as too light for caliber even in weaker calibers.

Skiprr wrote:But for those who can shoot them accurately and without discomfort, I personally think the mini-9s are a valid product for CHLers.

I agree. I think the situation is similar to .357 snubbies. If there's an advantage to .357 over .38 in a pocket wheelgun, then there should also be an advantage to 9mm over .380 in a pocket pistol, assuming the small semiauto cycles reliably and the shooter can manage the additional recoil.

MoJo wrote:I like the idea of a pocket gun that uses the same ammo my big gun does. This makes a 9mm pocket rocket very intriguing to me.

In addition to the 9mm being inexpensive ammo, it means one can stock up on a single caliber -- assuming both (or more) of your guns cycle the same ammo well. Cheaper, accessible ammo also means there's no excuse for not going to the range for frequent practice and ensuring proficiency, even with the smallest of 'em.

I find the recoil on my Walther PPS to be very manageable - I can shoot a couple of hundred rounds through it and not think anything of it.

My wife's .380 LCP, on the other hand - OW!

insightful thread. I recently bought a 9mm PX4SC, and it is pretty big when compared with some of the other guns mentioned. Its worth mentioning that there is no pain involved in shooting it though. It's actually fun to shoot.

I wonder though just how much energy isn't utilized in these short barrels. Are we losing enough power that the high tech bullets might not expand as designed. I don't believe the ballistics will be the same as from the same ammo shot from a P92 with its 4.9 inch barrel.

The PX4SC for Comparison with TAM's SpreadSheet:
Cal 9mm
Capacity 13 +1 with Spare Mag 13
Barrel 3.0 in
length O/A 6.2 in
Width at controls (The Safety bulges out) 1.4 inch
Weight unloaded w mag 26.1