Why no K45?

[dao]

Anyone have an opinion on why Kahr has never produced a steel .45? Or did they, and I just haven't encountered it?

[gb6491]

I've no idea why they haven't, but it seems to me that the 45 guns are the bastard step-children of the line up (IE, there is still no metal base plate for the 45 mags). I think they need more love. My P45(cw) is certainly my favorite Kahr pistol and one of my favorite semiautos in .45ACP.
Regards,
Greg

[O'Dell]

That question has been ask by many including me, but no answer was even given.

[dao]

Well, I'm glad I didn't miss one that they had. I would love to have a K45, and to have Kahr also make extended mags for them. To me it seems that it would be a no-brainer. But then I've never started a company and made it successful.

It also seems to stand to reason that the "justification" of carrying such a heavy weapon with so few rounds would make its availability in .45acp all the more logical. If the PM45 works well, and has sold well for them, it's almost unfathomable why they haven't produced a steel version.

[wyntrout]

I would LOVE to have 6-round mags with flush-fitting steel base plates for my P45. I tried MANY different 1911 officer mags, even with Kahr followers and springs, but nothing would reliably feed and hold the slide back on empty.

I kind of gave up after bad .45 magazine springs from Kahr and then they switched to the shortest mag springs for all .45's... 12 versus 16 coils. I put some Wolff 16-coil 9mm/.40 mag springs... the 8-rounders... in my 7-round Kahr mags... seems to work or have enough strength. 12 coils gave me fits in 7-round .45 mags.

[Scott321]

K45 would definitiely be on my to-buy list if it popped up.

[O'Dell]

I would buy one in a second if they were made available. My MK40N is already my favorite Kahr of the eight I have owned, [Still have four] even though I don't care for the caliber. It's my smallest pistol but it is still, for me, the most accurate of my eight Kahrs.

[dao]

The MK40 which also one of my favorites begs another question. Why no MK45? With perhaps a slightly longer grip than the .40, to still allow for 5+1 capacity in .45?

[berettabone]

I would buy one in a second if they were made available. My MK40N is already my favorite Kahr of the eight I have owned, [Still have four] even though I don't care for the caliber. It's my smallest pistol but it is still, for me, the most accurate of my eight Kahrs.

It's your favorite Kahr, most accurate, but you don't like the caliber? Wish I would have known that. I would have traded you an MK9 for it. Don't understand the caliber thing. My favorite caliber. If you get all of that with a firearm, how could you not like the caliber????? After all, it's not a range gun, so there was no need to punish your hand, if that was the issue. I think that anyone who thinks that an MK in .45 would be any/much different than .40 is really asking/hoping for more than what's there. Small gun, big caliber, mucho recoil. That's it. Only advantage would be if you shoot or own many other .45 cal firearms. A K model would definitely be a different story.

[O'Dell]

I own fifteen pistols, one 9mm-a gift, two 40's, and twelve 45's. One 40 is a high capacity HK USP with night sights which makes a good HDW, and of course, the MK40N. I have been a fan of the 45 APC since the sixties when I shot a 1911 on a military pistol team. The 45's are three SIG's, Three HK's, one S&W, Two Kahrs, and a Kimber, Detonics CM and a SA 1911.

From my experience with the 45, I think a MK45 would have less recoil than the MK40, or at least a smoother and less violent one due to the much lower speed bullet.