Kahr K9 or Glock 27 for CCW????

[GunNut]

I currently carry a Glock 27, but have been drooling over a Kahr K9 for quite a while.

First off, I see no appreciable difference between the better 9mm ammo and .40S&W for defense purposes. My main, desire is a gun that is easy to conceal.

For you who have carried both, or carry the K9, how do you like it?

Is it any easier to carry than a Glock 26, 27, 33?

So would I be better off keeping the 27, or should I change to the Kahr?


Thanks,
Steve

 

[Graystar]

The Glock carries more ammo, is shorter (which helps greatly with concealment,) and is lighter. To me, that adds up to a gun better suited for concealed carry.

As you don't list any complaints against the Glock, it seems like you just want another gun. So go buy it!

BTW, get a Pierce +1 extension for you Glock. That gives you 10 rounds, a place to put your pinky, and no decrease in concealability.

 

[ChristopherG]

On the other hand: the K9 is considerably thinner, which is mui importante in a CCW; highly reliable; and, in my hand, more ergonomically pleasing than a Glock (which I also have). If I were gonna CCW one of them, it'd be the Kahr (though I'd prolly split the difference & get a polymer P9 or PM9)
cg

 

[denfoote]

Is it any easier to carry than a Glock 26, 27, 33?

The K9 would not be, but the MK9 is!!!!!

I used to carry the G26, until it was confiscated by my wife. I now carry the MK9 Elite and am happier for it!!! It fits the pocket better, is specifically designed for +P+ ammo, the Elite version already has a factory trigger job, and at combat distance, it will put rounds through the same hole!!! At 25 yards, it's supposed to be able to print 2" groups, although, my bifocaled middle aged eyes will not allow me to do that any more.

Get the MK9 Elite!!!!

www.Kahr.com

 

[tlhelmer]

I am partial to the Glock 27. I carry it as a back up gun on my ankle.

 

[Graystar]

On the other hand: the K9 is considerably thinner, which is mui importante in a CCW; highly reliable;

The Glock is also highly reliable, and I wouldn't go so far with the thinness. The Kahr thickness is for the slide, not the entire gun. The Glock thickness is for the entire gun. The Glock slide is actually a hair under 1" thick, while the Kahr grip adds a bit to the overall thickness of the gun.

 

[dairycreek]

Both are excellent guns!

My personal preference is the G27 because it is, IMHO, considerably lighter. But, in the final analysis, it is whatever you feel good about. Good shooting

 

[chief]

I have both firearms and I must carry every day. The Kahr feels better, looks better, and feels like it shoots better. I carry the Glock. Nuff said.

 

[Stay Low]

I have a Glock 27 and a MK9. I feel better with a 27 over the lower capacity MK9. In fact, I just kinda came full circle on this rationale having carried a MK9 for a while then deciding on the 27 for its increased fire power and only minimal increase in size.

 

[GunNut]

Yeah, I think that I'll stick with the Glock 27.

I might order a comp-tac c-tac IWB holster for the 27. I just recently received one for my Colt Combat Commander, and all I can say is WOW....

If you're looking for some thing comfortable and highly concealable the c-tac is for you, it even is tuckable.

Thanks for all of the great responses,

Steve

 

[harrydog]

I own or have owned several Glocks and I like them but I really dislike the G26/27 Glocks. I hate the way they feel in my hand. I just can't get a comfortable grip on them. They're an ergonomic disaster in my opinion.
I carry a K9 and I love it. It just feels good in my hand and I can shoot it very well. In fact, 300 round range sessions are no problem with this gun. It's very comfortable and very concealable in an Alessi WSDT IWB holster. It's my first choice for carry, regardless of cost. If you're in love with the .40SW try the K40.

 

[PCRCCW]

Lots of Glockophiles out there. Honestly both have merit...but the Glock is thicker than the Kahr...the Glockers can scream from the highest tower....but those who have carried both will "feel" the Glocks thickness where you wont on the Kahr.
The 26 holds 10 rnds without an extension...actually 11 with one chambered...So you loose on 2-3 rnds depending on what mags you have, 9mm anyway.....carry with the shortest one and have the longest one for a B/U.
Both are absolutely the best mini's to carry...but Id take the Kahr.
I like the way it feels...it has the most versatile grip on a gun....period. It fits monster mits like mine...and my son, 7 at the time, could shoot my K40 with no problem of limp wristing...he could grip it well.
The G27 is a nice gun and would serve you well...seriously. But if you get the chance..shoot a nice K series gun and make up your own mind...
The trigger, ergonomics, thinness, absolute stone reliability etc...all sway me to the Kahr everytime...
Shoot well

 

[Greybeard]

Periodically, I've carried the baby Glocks, which simply feel "bricky" in my hands, IWB and on ankle.

I've had a K9 for 6+ years. In fact, I traded a Glock 23 for it primarily because of the Kahr's slimmer profile. I recently got a PM9 since the K9 worked out so well - except for the carry weight of 32 ounces!

New PM9 with 6+1 goes at a much lighter 19.4 ounces (with 115 grainers). It simply conceals more easily (and comfortably). Over the years, I've decided that, for some of us that carry all day every day, even 1/4" increments (and ounces) do matter.