As many members of TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia predicted, the fashionability of .380 calibered pistols is starting to wane. Not to wax lyrical, but in its stead we have the perfectly pocketable crop of small nines from Ruger, SIG SAUER and now Kahr Arms. Their new CM9093 is based on Kahr’s most popular 3″ barrel 9mm handgun, the PM9093. According to the presser, “The CM Series takes the value priced features from Kahr’s CW series (3.6″ barrel 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP models) and incorporates these features into a smaller 3″ barrel package.” Just in case that’s too easy to understand, Kahr notes that the CM9093 has the same external dimensions as the PM9093 . . .
That would be an overall length of 5.3″, with a height of 4.0″. The CM9 (for short) weighs in at 14 ounces. Add another 1.9 ounces for the six-round stainless steel magazine. So, again, what’s the diff?
The CM9093 has a conventional rifled barrel instead of the match grade polygonal barrel on Kahr’s PM series; the CM slide stop lever is MIM (metal-injection-molded) instead of machined; the CM series slide has fewer machining operations and uses simple engraved markings instead of roll marking; and finally, the CM series are shipped with one magazine instead of two magazines
Kahr’s seven patents are incorporated into the CM9093 resulting in benefits not available in other compact semi-autos on the market today. The black polymer frame features patented 4140 steel inserts molded into the frame in the front and back for added rigidity and strength, which can withstand firing thousands of rounds.
So Kahr CM9 tackled two main problems with smaller nines: reliability and manufacturing cost. The result is, they claim, a better gun that costs less. Ain’t competition grand? Now if they could only figure out a way to get rid of the genre;s numb, all-day-long trigger pull . . .
Kahr’s incomparable cocking cam trigger system employs a patented cam to both unlock the firing pin block (passive safety), and complete cocking and releasing of the firing pin. The system provides a “safe-cam action” and unbelievably smooth double action only trigger stroke, fast to fire in critical defensive situations. Many lower cost compact semi-autos on the market today do not have firing pin blocks in their design.
What more could you ask for?
Kahr’s two patents covering the offset recoil lug and the trigger bar attachment allow Kahr’s barrel to fit lower in the frame, and since there is no hammer, the shooter’s hand is further up the grip resulting in less felt recoil and quick follow-up shots. The CM9093 does not have a magazine disconnect, nor does it have double-strike capability.
The CM9 boasts real sights, which are drift adjustable in the rear and a pinned-in polymer front sight featuring a white bar-dot configuration. Finally, the slide does lock back after firing the last round – another feature missing on a number of lower cost compact semi-auto pistols.
Now how much would you pay? How about $565? Just in case you’re wondering, the PM9 runs $786.
Bummer. Seems I bought my CW9 about 4 months too soon. This looks like a little gem. The only way to improve my CW9 would be to make it smaller. Apparently they’ve done just that.
At those prices ….I’d still rather have a Glock! 😉
I have had a CW9 for about 7 months now and I absolutely love it. After the 200 round break in period, I have not had a single mis-feed or failure to fire and I have put over 1000 rounds through it since then in a variety of FMJ and HP. Some people complain about the long trigger pull. If it was as stiff as the double action pull on say the Beretta 92FS, I could see a reason to hate it. However, despite the length of the pull, it is by far the smoothest double action on any the pistols that I have ever handled. Practice makes perfect. It is nice and slim and looks pretty good too. As to performance, I can get 2-3 inch groups at 15-20 yds on a good day. Any variance is operator error. Again, practice makes perfect.
I purchased the gun for use as a small, light weight, compact pistol that carried more punch than .380. (As a side note, I doubt I will ever go back to .380. I owned a Bersa Thunder .380 once that was an accurate enough little gun. However, after tiring of paying roughly the same amount for .380 practice ammo as I could for .45, the pistol and the caliber became an annoyance to me. I sold it to my Dad for $200 along with an extra magazine, an IWB holster and all of my .380 ammo…a total value of $400. He wanted a small gun to keep under his work bench in the garage.)
Anyway, with the gun ($425), the addition of two extra 7 round magazines ($60), Trijicon Night Sights ($90), a Crossbread Minituck holster ($65), and a Hogue Jr. grip ($10 and does wonders for comfort and recoil…the stippling texture gets uncomfortable after 50 rounds or so) I had a nice little carry gun for a grand total of $650. If you search for kydex/molded style belt/paddle holsters for the CW9, you won’t find anything for under $70. However, there are many holsters out there for the Kahr P9 from all the major manufacturers that will also fit the CW9 as well. (The P9 is to the CW9 what the PM9 is to the CM9, a more expensive, better tooled/engineered version)
My only frustration is that the CW9’s grip is just a little too long for ankle carry. It works ok with jeans or BDU’s, but it leaves a noticeable imprint with slacks. I wanted a PM9, but the extra $200 put it out of my budget. My brother-in-law carries the PM9 on his ankle all the time without the slightest problem. Being the same size as the PM9, if the CM9 performs as good as the CW9, this may be the answer to my ankle gun issues, just within my new-gun budget.
Small, lightweight and affordable, I want one! – the question is where can I get a thirty round magazine for it?
Personally, I would buy the PM9. It would be a carry gun, and I would prefer not to rely on a cheaped-down gun when the chips are down.
It is “cheaper” quality and price by camparison, but that is only relative. Just because the PM9 is better quality does not mean that the CM9 is a poor quality gun. If it is on par with the CW9, then it is more than adequate. Like I said, over a thousand rounds without a single hiccup and no issues with accuracy. To each his own.
I own four kahr guns 2 380s and a pm9 and the new CM9.I love them all.I have over 300 rounds thru my CM9 with problems at all which is true for all of my kahr guns.I feel that kahr makes the best gun for the money especially the CM9 I am a retired law eforcement officer and recommend kahr guns highly.I use speer gold dot bullets as my carry round in all my kahr guns and love the round
Robert, should that be “Not *to* wax lyrical …” in the second sentence?
And in case you were wondering, anal-retentive is hyhenated or not depending on its usage.
Got it. Thanks! I mean the “to” part.
Keep an eye out for the Kimber Solo.
I wouldn’t call the Ruger LC9 perferctly pcoketable. Its the size of the Cw/P9 kahrs. If they were perfectly pocketable then Kahr never would have had reason to build the PM9 or this CM9.
There is no quality difference between the PM nine or the CW nine. The differences are in finish. Materials and tolerances are the same. C’mon people.
The only major difference is that one has polygonal rifling and one doesn’t. If that’s a quality issue for someone then they should probably buy a Gucci Gun.
And if you really think that the type of rifling in a gun is going to make a difference in how dead you can make someone then you should probably return your diploma from Tactical Teddy’s University.
And for Petes’ sake. Don’t start comtemplating putting + P ammo in one of these things.
Thing is, Glock doesn’t make a highly-concealable single stack 9mm. Glock has missed the boat on the market niche, and given that is would be a total new design for them, it would have bugs to work out just like any other comapny. So “Glock reliable” probably wouldn’t be the case for a while. Kahr built their company around the single stack gun.
The PM9 and CM9 differences are nedligible. Poly vs button rifling? On a 3″ barrel at SD distances, rifling type is a non-issue. A pinned front sight on the CM9? Glock has done it for years. ROlled vs stamped engraving? Has nothing to do with quailty and savings one’s life in a SD situ. Slide beveling is trivial as well. I think the MIM slide stop would be the only big difference and can be relaced with a non-MIM for $25.
Everything else, especially internally, is the same as the PM9. Both are great guns, but they are super tight and do need that 200 round break-in.
‘Bought a CM9 a few weeks back after handling and researching the 3″ barrel pocket 9mm pistols. After several hundred rounds, I am very happy with it. No misfires experienced, accurate and comfortable recoil even with 147 grain loads for such a small light gun. It’s very easy to conceal and can truly work as a pocket pistol. Granted Glock is a great choice if size isn’t an issue, but not so easy to conceal one wearing just shorts and a T.
I like the trigger on the CM9. Trigger pull is essential in accuracy. This is especially true in a small short barreled semi auto. I can’t see how the higher cost rifling in a short barreled pistol would make any difference in performance and accuracy ~ especially in such a small pistol. Since the trigger in the pull on the CM9 is so good, and since the difference in the rifling is negligible, I would choose the CM9 and save some money. It’s not about the rifling, it’s about how well you shoot the firearm.
I purchased the CM9 3 months ago, and love it. By far, the easiest 9mm to conceal. I added the Crimson Trace laser (trigger guard mount), and followed the directions for the 200 round break-in period. The gun performs flawlessly. I wear shorts, t-shirt and flip-flops everyday, and this gun never leaves my pocket.
Have you shot 115gr. ammo in your CM9 and if you have how well does this gun work with the lower price 115 gr. ammo. I have just purchased a CM9 and have not yet had a chance to shoot but will soon. Thank you