CM9 vs LC9

[Ridge]

I own a CW9/ carry PM9 and am happy with both. This post is for a friend that is looking for a small carry and he is on a tight budget. $50 is not much but it does factor in on his decision. I have no experience with the Ruger besides holding one at the shop.

Do you have experience with the LC9? Perhaps with both? Obviosly I expect a great review on the Karh from this site, but tell me about the other so I can give a unbiased opinion to him.

[MW surveyor]

Have you looked at or know about the Beretta Nano? Price is pretty similar to the LC9 and just may be a better gun on a budget.

Held one today in my evil local gun store. Pretty small plus you get two mags. Trigger seems a bit harder but that may be because it is new out of the box with no lube.

[TucsonMTB]

Do you have experience with the LC9? Perhaps with both? Obviosly I expect a great review on the Karh from this site, but tell me about the other so I can give a unbiased opinion to him.
Two weeks ago at our local range I had a conversation with a lady who was getting ready to shoot her Ruger LC9 in the bay next to me. She asked about my PM40. So, I gave it to her to try.

After firing it, she said she was surprised at how much shorter the trigger pull is in the PM40 compared to her LC9. Watching her shoot a couple of magazine, it was clear that she found the Kahr easier to shoot accurately. Her groups were easily half as large with the Kahr. I'm convinced the trigger helped. So was she.

When I left, she was mumbling about brow beating her husband, who suggested the Ruger LC9, into buying her a Kahr. I recommended the less expensive CM9 and left before her husband could walk over from the rifle range where he was sighting in a new rifle. ;)

[Micha2u]

Last July before I purchased my CM9, I was at the pistol range and the guy next to me was shooting his new Ruger LC9 for the first time. He was having quite a bit of difficulty understanding the mechanism and handling it properly. After noticing that I was watching him he asked me if I could give him some help. We went through safe handling, loading, grip, etc. and I stood back to watch.

The long trigger pull was amazing and he pulled up short of firing thinking that something was wrong with his gun but I assured him that the LC9 was made that way. He finally shot a few round down range but the target was a virgin after three magazines.

He asked me to fire the gun to see what luck I could have and I shot it 3 times. I didn’t like the long trigger pull but all of my shots hit the target a bit left of center in a nice group.

After shooting the LC9, I sat back and thought about thumb safety, magazine disconnect, long trigger on the Ruger LC9 and made a decision at that time to purchase a Kahr CM9 that I was contemplating.

I like a gun that is simple to operate and goes bang when you pull the trigger without all of the other “safety” mechanisms. I had my new CM9 within about a week of shooting the LC9 and haven’t looked back since.

[cw45fan]

One thing no one has mentioned in this thread is that the LC9 is bigger...

The LC9 is closer in dimensions to the CW9 than to the CM9...

I guess some people see pics and the "name" and think of the LC9 as similar in size to the LCP. (It's not.)

[les strat]

I own both (wife carries the LC9). The CM9 is in a different class. The trigger pull and recoil is more brutal on the LC9. Now it is a great gun, but it is what it is. It has a plastic long-pull trigger like the LCP, whereas the Kahr has a metal, smooth-pulling trigger. It is definitley a little larger than the Kahr as well. Funny thing is, at 15 yards, my wife and I both shoot 6" low consistently with the LC9. And I am used to long triggers with my LCP (sold), CM9, and 642. It just shoots low.

Saddle up the CM9, and we are both tearing a ragged hole at 15 yards.

IMO, it's worth the extra cash.

[CJB]

I don't think you need to be Einstein to figure out the CM9 is a better... "value"... that is: Yo' gettin' mo' fo' yo' money!

[FLBri]

Echoing what every one else here has said ....

I am a big fan of Ruger quality and service. But a Ruger will NEVER have a Kahr trigger ... and for me the trigger is the heart of a guns 'feel'... and certainly it's accuracy.

[Doc Holliday]

I looked at the LC9 and didn't like what I saw: loaded chamber indicator blasting its message across the top of the slide, heavier weight, magazine disconnect, manual safety...
Overengineered, too much stuff.

Made for the California crowd. Next.

[TheTman]

I had a LC9, it was totally reliable. The trigger had a much heavier pull than the Kahrs do. I liked it cause it had a safety and could ride in my pocket without a holster. I ended up trading it for a rare Dan Wesson 357. Guy didn't know what he had.
I wasn't near as accurate with it as with my Kahr's due to the trigger. It was okay for combat accuracy though. The trigger was a lot closer to DA on some of my revolvers. Some folks are having them reworked to lighten the trigger pull.

[mightymouse]

I avoided the LC because of all the safeties. A good DAO carry piece only needs the safety between your ears. I love my LCP for the same reason. There is no doubt in my mind that the Ruger is a reliable gun, and I bet the mags are better than the Kahr, still I made the right decision going with the CM9 and would do it again.

[GKC]

I had a LC9 until recently, and I didn't have any problems with mine. There are growing reports of issues with the LC9, which concern me, but I also know how that goes. I finally decided that I just didn't care for the LC9 because of the safety, the LCI, and most of all, the more difficult trigger, so I sold it and bought a CW9. I liked it much better, with the only issue being the grip size for my intended purpose (pocket carry.)

I plan on getting the CM9 for pocket carry. I would like to have a PM9, but I really can't see spending that much more for essentially the same gun, just for me to carry in my pocket. If my wife likes my CM9, she may decide on the PM9 because it's fancier...and well, she's worth it. ;)

[KMA]

I do not have any experience with the LC9, but below is an interesting video about it; who knows, perhaps it might help your friend:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeLxP6Kywzk

[TriggerMan]

I own a CW9/ carry PM9 and am happy with both. This post is for a friend that is looking for a small carry and he is on a tight budget. $50 is not much but it does factor in on his decision. I have no experience with the Ruger besides holding one at the shop.

Do you have experience with the LC9? Perhaps with both? Obviosly I expect a great review on the Karh from this site, but tell me about the other so I can give a unbiased opinion to him.
Had both an LC9 and a Kahr PM9. Sold them both after a few months.

The LC9 was 100% reliable. It can be improved with a Galloway trigger kit. I only learned about it after it was sold to a friend. The deal breaker for me was the long trigger pull. The ergos and recoil made it very hard to shoot at 15 feet.

The PM9 has a shorter trigger and has slightly less felt recoil. It was not 100% reliable, but darn close.

I prefer not to pocket carry, so I won't comment on small size differences.

I prefer my Nano but I am still breakin it in. It is 100% with Gold Dots but not with FMJ range ammo. The ergos are better, recoil softer and has clean sides (no slide release, no take down lever, no thumb safety).

[Ridge]

That you to all for the replies. I will forward him a link so he can make his own decision.

[tv_racin_fan]

I had a LC9 until recently, and I didn't have any problems with mine. There are growing reports of issues with the LC9, which concern me, but I also know how that goes. I finally decided that I just didn't care for the LC9 because of the safety, the LCI, and most of all, the more difficult trigger, so I sold it and bought a CW9. I liked it much better, with the only issue being the grip size for my intended purpose (pocket carry.)

I plan on getting the CM9 for pocket carry. I would like to have a PM9, but I really can't see spending that much more for essentially the same gun, just for me to carry in my pocket. If my wife likes my CM9, she may decide on the PM9 because it's fancier...and well, she's worth it. ;)

My wife has the CW9.. I believe if I wanted to have the CM9 instead I would just shorten the grip on the CW and drive on. Trouble is the CW works fine for a pocket gun for me... now that may change as I lose weight but if it wont work in my pocket I'll swap to IWB or OWB and drive on as I don't really want less grip. (I much prefer my K9 anyway)

[LaP]

My wife has the CW9.. I believe if I wanted to have the CM9 instead I would just shorten the grip on the CW and drive on. Trouble is the CW works fine for a pocket gun for me... now that may change as I lose weight but if it wont work in my pocket I'll swap to IWB or OWB and drive on as I don't really want less grip. (I much prefer my K9 anyway)

I'm real comfortable with the CW9 carried IWB at the 1:00 postion. It's thin and light-weight enough that I really don't notice it all day. Although, if I go out to Buffalo Wild Wings for lunch, that IWB holster reminds me to not order the Platter Special.

[TucsonMTB]

I'm real comfortable with the CW9 carried IWB at the 1:00 postion. It's thin and light-weight enough that I really don't notice it all day. Although, if I go out to Buffalo Wild Wings for lunch, that IWB holster reminds me to not order the Platter Special.
Now that's funny!

However, that may also be another health benefit of carrying. ;)