This is how I feel about my Kahr CW 45. It was so thin, so light weight, so PERFECT for conciled carry. It was everything I wanted in a pistol, except for one thing... It didn't go boom everytime I pulled the trigger. On top of that, after about 30 rounds, it would stovetop, jam, and give other issues. I went shooting yesterday, and the thing had a complete breakdown. I am so depressed. Tomorrow I will go and try to buy a Glock. I am not a huge fan of Glock, but they go boom no matter what.
So here we have the comparison:
Kahr Arms CW 36:
This is Kahr's compact .45 ACP. I don't say subcompact, because they have one smaller.
This is Glock's .45 ACP subcompact "slim" pistol. Slim because it deviates from Glock's standard double stack magazine. This pistol would be the direct competitor to my Kahr CW45.
This is Glock's subcompact .45 APC. It has a double stack magazine, so it can carry twice the ammo. It pays for that in added width.
This is a subcompact that uses Glock's very own .45 GAP round (ACP stands for Automatic Colt Pistol, GAP is Glock Automatic Pistol). The GAP was introduced to find a medium between the stopping power of the .45 ACP round and the controlability of the 9mm Parabellum and .40 round. Difference:
GAP on the left.
I am not sold on this round, and if I want to get a full frame pistol, and want to keep the same ammo for all, it would mean buying another Glock (Ok, Springfield XD has a .45 GAP, but Beretta and HK do not, and those would be the ones I would buy.)
Anyway it is an option.
So what do we come off with?
|Kahr CW 45||Glock 36||Glock 30||Glock 39|
The things that are the most important to me are length, height, and weight. This is my CCW pistol, so I need it to fit in to my man purse, or murse for short (heehee).
So we have the Glock 30 being actually 0.002 inches shorter than my Kahr. The 30 and 36 are both 0.45 inches longer than the CW45. This is important becuase my Kahr just barely fits in to my gun pocket the way it is, I don't know if I can handle another half inch. This makes the 39 an atractive prospect.
The big looser in the width catagory is the 30. That double stack is going to force the pistol to have a fat ass, but that junk in the trunk is very important to have... I am surprised that the 36 is thinner than the 39. They have the same single stack mag, but the 39 is 0.05 inches wider. Where does the extra come from?
Every body wins in the height catagory. This pleases me, as the most room I don't have to spare is in the width. The Glocks being a mite shorter means that they will be eaiser to draw from the murse (heehee).
Weight... The 36 is only 0.21 oz heavier, and the 39 is actually is actually 0.57 oz lighter. Again the fat ass is the 30 coming in at 4.09 oz heavier. That sucks, because when you factor in the weight with a full magizine the 30 weighs 33.86 oz. That is 2.1 pounds of metal, with an additional 9.87 oz if I take a long an extra mag... and I always do. That means hauling around 9 more ounces than I am used to. It means a sore shoulder after a long day.
So what do? I am going to take a close look at the 36 and the 30 tomorrow, if I can find them. I can understand a store carrying one or the other, but two Glock .45 ACP subcompact models? Unlikely, espically since they are so similar in look and feel. Right now I am leaning heavily towards the 30. Despite the extra weight and width I realllllly like the idea of having 7 extra shots with me (6+1 in the Kahr, 7 round extended mag reload. 10+1 in the 30, 10 round reload). Those extra rounds are simply worth the extras.
I will have an update tomorrow.