thought about the kel-tec pf-9 but the ruger lc-9 fit and finnish are much better,what are the pros and cons ?
Printable View
thought about the kel-tec pf-9 but the ruger lc-9 fit and finnish are much better,what are the pros and cons ?
Taken directly from the LC9 user manual table of contents.
Operation of Manual Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Operation of Internal Lock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Operation of Loaded Chamber Indicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Operation of Magazine Disconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
The LC9 is so "safe" im betting when the time comes to use it in a defensive situation one of these "safeties" will render the gun so "safe" it will not even fire.
I mean the "safest" gun is the one you can't shoot after all?
I know that was a little tongue-in-cheek. But personaly I would not buy a firearm with those features. Now both of the autos I own have loaded chamber indicators via a peep hole but not a mechanical one like the LC9.
I like the Kahr CW9 over the LC9.
http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-CW9.asp
For a bit more fit and finish and replaceable sights, but at a more premium price is the Kahr P9.
http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-P9.asp
Also comes in all black or all black with night sights
http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-P9-Black.asp.
http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-P9-...ght-Sights.asp
I have read allot of reports from people who own the PF9 love them and if I absolutely only wanted to spend $250 or this would be a secondary weapon I would consider it. However in my opinion Kel-Tec is one of the lower tier manufactures vs. S&W, Glock, Springfield, Ruger, Kahr, Beretta, Sig, H&K, etc.
Dozens upon dozens if not hundreds of police agencies all over the US used the 3rd Gen S&W autos for decades, and they had all of those features. I owned several myself over the past 2 decades.
Can't say i've ever once read an article where a cop or any citizen was killed because he had a magazine safety. A LCI is just plain smart to have on a gun, and many top designs have also employed an LCI for decades. There is really no reason at all NOT to have an LCI on an automatic pistol. Manual safeties are fine so long as they're reasonably located, and the user practices his presentation enough to make swiping it off as it's drawn a matter of muscle memory. You might note virtually every weapons system in the US military has a manual safety on it. If they really were so hard to remember to take off, and were costing the US battles, the military would have gotten rid of safeties decades ago. However, what the real world shows, is that training and administrative handling and cleaning accidents are far, far more common than battles, and that safeties make weapons far more forgiving to handle when you are tired, stressed, inattentive, or distracted.
A mag safety almost totally eliminates cleaning accidents, which are sadly far too common.
My only problem with the LC9 is it's size. It is much larger than an LCP .380 (which i have, and which is a damn solid little pistol). I would go with the Kahr PM9 or CM9 if you can afford to.
PS: You're going to see more and more guns offered with these safety features, as they're now mandated by law in a couple US states.
From what I have seen and read about them, I like the LC9. I would have bought one over my LCP if the LC9 was available at the time. Not knocking the LCP, I like it a lot, but I would prefer the 9mm.
I shot the LC9 at the range and it shoots nice. Its accurate enough for typical self defense. The trigger pull is long, but you will have the same issue with the Kel Tec. Ruger makes decent guns that a lifetime.
But I agree with QuackXP...The Kahr P9 is a wonderful gun.
I just hot the cm9 and its a sweet pistol....and not much more than the lc9....better trigger than the lcp I have plus it uses all same holster and mags as pm9....435 otd from budsgunshop.com .....
Agreed. I'd take the Kahr over the LC9. They just put too much junk on the LC9. The Kahr is as simple as the LCP was, with a better trigger.
I get that a Manual Safety, LCI and Magazine Disconnect are a matter of personal taste.
The internal lock though in my opinion is completely useless. They are not uniquely keyed and anyone who would use that feature would have already used a external lock or safe that has a unique key/combination.
The internal lock's only purpose is for feel good legislation and to add extra failure points to a firearm.
I use my peep-hole LCI to double check that my firearms are loaded before carrying them. But rule #1 of firearms safety is that every gun is always loaded so no LCI is going to convince me otherwise, epically a mechanical one that could fail.
My personal prefrence is to train for a long trigger pull vs a two step action of a manual safety, especially on a firearm with an already long trigger pull.
It seems to me that the magazine disconnect came from requirements of LE agencies to render a weapon inoperable in a gun grab scenario. Again this is a matter of personal taste/department policy.
By the time I'm ready to purchase a firearm in this segment if Ruger releases a model without these features ill consider it. But its still tough competition from the Kahr CW9.
^^^^ Win^^^^
My real gripe with the LC9 is a thumb safety on a DAO pocket pistol. Huh? Why? The LCP seemed to work just fine without it...
Stupid. And before anyone tells me it's because there are states where these things are required, I say fuck em. Ruger insists on compromising its guns to kowtow to Massachusetts... Really? Not like Ruger has a long history of compromising its integrity to please the government... :rolleyes:
Plus the Kahr is just a better gun. :D
But those guns were never billed as a personal protection pocket pistol. (Say that five times fast.:D)
Like I said, LCI, mag safety, whatever, not a huge deal. But imo the manual safety is. I think application is what makes it an issue for me. Drawing from the pocket and disengaging a safety sounds like a process which is overcomplicated. This inevitably leads to the wisdom of pocket carry period, but I suppose this isn't the place for that discussion.
Anyway, JMO. I'll be buying a Kahr PM9 or CM9, probably as my next gun. Just depends on which one I find a better price on first.
I already have one Kahr and am absolutely pleased with it. I won't hesitate to get another.