Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I cant decide on the glock 27 or m&p 40c..any pros, cons on both would be helpfull just lookin for a small auto in .40
Yep, buy something that feels good. The Glock and M&P are both really good choices. I have had a Kahr P40 for 7 or 8 years I would guess and it is my go to carry gun. It has been very reliable, though it has needed magazine springs once. For what its worth, it has stayed loaded pretty much the entire time I have owned it. I would say it is more susceptible to "limp wristing" than a Glock 27 (and probably needs magazine springs replaced more often, which is weird since it is a single stack), but the only time this has been an issue is when others have shot it. I rounded a few corners on it to make it fit me better. It is pretty rude when shot, but manageable. I prefer the Glock or M&P triggers to the Kahr, but the fact of the matter is I prefer the "thinness" of the Kahr more. It is light and carries very well. It is down on capacity (6+1), but that is still one or two more than a compact revolver and it can be reloaded easier than a revolver as well.GunOneDown said:Glock 27. fit makes world of difference as stated above. However, I did hold a KAHR 40 that was really thin the other day. Have no test knowledge of the KAHR though. Glock goes Bang everytime plus you can carry it with any 40 cal mag they make in it. I carry a 27.
Kahr makes both polymer and steel frame models. The model I have is polymer, but the K and MK series are steel. Steel is a little more expensive and a little more weight.Doug Bowser said:Neither if they have a plastic receiver. Wouldn't have one in the house.