Looking for a pocket pistol in 9mm -what do you guys recommend?

Kel Tech PF9 all the way. Had most of the others including Kahr, and I like this one best of all by quite a margin.

I checked out a Ruger LC9 today. I didn't buy it (yet). But, it looked and handled well. Small, narrow and a decent trigger pull for a pocket auto. Tagged at $359.00. Might be worth a look. Mike

Daughter & son-in-law swear by the Kahr, she has a PM9 he has the P9. I had the KT P-11 & then PF9 but went with the Colt Gov't .380 & a Sig P238. I had been using a Colt pocket .32 & KT P32 for a long time. When I want more horse power I carry the Commander.

I retired my bobbed hammer S&W 60 finally as she was getting pretty loose after 45+ plus years.

I have had a Ruger Lc9 for about two weeks now. I think Im going to like it.

Take a look at the Seecamp 380. I know, not a 9mm, but it is a fine, American made sub-compact pistol that is utterly reliable. I really like mine.

OK thanks guys.

Would you guys consider a 6" length pistol to be getting a little big for a pocket pistol ?
I see some pistols around 5" in length -looking at a tape measure a 6" "pocket" pistol looks like it might be kind of hard to conceal ?

T Lee i'm looking at a 380 pretty hard now -they seem to be more " pocket pistol " size.
I know from doing a little reading on the subject that if a pistol is bulky you will tend to carry it less -so the "small" pocket pistol might be more what i need.
I live in nw florida so shorts t-shirt attire makes you need a small pistol.
Thanks again..
Mike

Blueduck and tnrifleman -i was sipping coffee and hadn't seen your replies -will give them a look thanks.

I have to agree with TNrifleman-- if you are looking for a pistol to keep in your pocket, as opposed to holstered at your waist, then your best choice-- setting aside the issue of caliber-- would be the Seecamp in either .32 or .380 auto.

Why the Seecamp over a KelTec, or similar? I think that can best be summed up in one word: durability. To become even reasonably proficient with a small pistol requires a great deal of practice; I would suggest that it takes about 500 rounds to "learn" any handgun, and the pocket auto is no exception. This is where the advantage is clearly with the all-stainless steel Seecamp, as opposed to the uber-light (some might say flimsy) polymer framed competition.

There is another word that also needs to be remembered, and that word is "controllable". The smaller the pistol, the more difficult it is to control when fired. The greater the caliber, in proportion to the weight of the pistol, the more difficult it becomes to control the recoil. Here again, due to its all-steel construction, the slightly heavier (by about 3-ounces) Seecamp has the edge over other pistols in this class.

The only place where I step back from TNrifleman's recommendation is caliber. I personally find the .380 Seecamp less pleasant to shoot than the .32 and, human nature being what it is, I would probably put in less practice (50 rounds every two weeks) with the harder to control .380 than I would with its slightly weaker .32 caliber twin. Certainly this would be the case with any of the plastic pocket pistols which lack the ability to soak up recoil to the same degree as an all-steel pistol. And if you are not going to "run the gun" at least once a month, your defensive effectiveness will be less than acceptable.

Old Writer,

It is good to read that someone else appreciates the Seecamp pistol. Your thoughts on the subject are spot-on. I also agree that the 380 version is harder to gain proficiency with that the 32 version. That fact may cause some to shoot it less than one should to establish and maintain the desired level of skill. Every handgun is a compromise, like any tool, and choices should be made with careful consideration. In either 32ACP or 380ACP, the Seecamp remains an excellent specialized tool.

I live in SW Florida, I know what you mean. 'Cept I don't wear shorts.

A S&W small frame .38 Special revolver in a pocket holster