Ah, the uber 9. Much maligned, praised, decried and honored- all within moments of one another as it falls in and out of fashion. The 9mm parabellum cartridge is not one that can be “just fine”, a gunman either must be all in or all out with it.
I have been both- all in and all out- and find it interesting that it is possible to dwell in both camps at the same time. I like the cartridge, and the pistols that use the cartridge, and I always have. Do I think that it is as effective on self-propelled humanoid threat actors as larger and more worthy calibers? Well no, no I do not. Do I hit with it as well as I do a 1911 or a K frame smith? No- not even close. But, in the hands of a competent and fearless fighting man or woman it is certainly adequate, and in some odd times and circumstances, ideal. Have I carried one in harm’s way and been satisfied? Absolutely. Will I do so again? Nearly every day.
My last count tells me that one full quarter of the pistols that I currently own are Uber 9s, and that I have previously owned and shot, and carried well in excess of a dozen. Below I am going to review a list of a dozen from least preferred to most preferred of 9mm handguns that have passed through my hands or that I still keep and work. I am intentionally excluding two of the odd ones that I owned, one a DWM P-08 Luger (with all matching serial numbers) that I bought in a pawn shop outside of Ft Campbell Ky, and the second is a Smith and Wesson model 547 K frame revolver bought outside of Ft Huachuca Az in a pawn shop. The two of those are so sufficiently odd that they really don’t deserve mentioning, but they were interesting pieces. Both of them worked pretty well too- despite the oddness of their designs.
With that, this is the list of the 9mm handguns that I have owned or carried and my feelings about all.
12. Ingram Mac 10, 9mm. It didn’t work. I mean, when I pulled the trigger, the
hammer said “clunk”, and the round didn’t go off. Looked like it should have, but it didn’t. Friend of mine had one similar, it worked- sort of- but a standard sized silhouette target was in no danger at 25 meters. Mag of 32 or so, I think I hit it twice. Never have picked up another one, thought it was a piece of junk. The pawn shop gave me a refund.
11. Smith and Wesson model 940 J frame revolver. On paper, this pistol had a great deal going for it. It made sense to carry a backup gun in the same caliber as your primary, being the first. The second thi
ng it had going for it was that the rank and file 9mm is and was more effective than the stoutest 38 offering, and in a pistol that size performance matters. Even with the uptick in performance, the recoil was not tremendous, actually it kicked less in a 20 oz gun than standard 38s did in an airweight. This gun should have been a champion. It shot fairly well too- at least as accurate as the long suffering 38s.
What went wrong with it, was those cockamamie moon clips. Much too fragile, those things would bend and tie up the gun. Also, some of the bullets here and there would not seat deeply enough into the chamber, push back the base of the moon clip against the back plate, and tie up the gun. Because it was a Centennial, there was no way to see if the cylinder would rotate except firing the gun, and at that point one would be surprised to find it stuck fast. Or not- depended on what phase the moon was in, or if the ogive of the round fit too snugly, or if you had bent the foolish moon clips the last time you loaded it. If you have one, and it works good for you, you have my best wishes and compliments. Mine did just about 90% of the time, and when it let me down it let me down hard. Not good enough.
10. Kel Tec P11. This little gun came to me just over 200 dollars US in the 90s, and I thought the good folks at Kel Tec had figured something out really well. The gun did work, and would feed nearly everything put through it, which was a plus- 
except those rounds that were a plus- as in +P ammo would not work too well. The accuracy of the little piece wasn’t bad either. My shooting buddies and I could hit the metal man at 100 yards nearly every time with this gun- but ok, admittedly, we had to hold about a foot to the right. It weighed an astonishing 9 or 10 some ounces, lighter than the air weight smith of yore. I look at the EDC pieces that have found favor today, and the little Kel Tec was truly ahead of its time.
The negatives were that the trigger was an abomination, accuracy at distance was only obtained by stopping the hammer just before it would release, steadying, and then letting it fall. Not totally unknown competency by revolver shooters, but difficult to master. Trigger bite was extreme on that little gun as well. That gun was just plainly uncomfortable to shoot. The thing that caused the most falling out with the little Kel Tec, was that no decent holster could be found for it. I ended up constructing one out of a Walther PPK holster, and after I was done this Frankenstein holster held the little gun all right but was worn like a colostomy bag. I think if I would have known of the Galco ankle glove then, I would still own this piece. Wouldn’t shoot it very much, but I would still own it.
9. Smith and Wesson model CS9. The little Chief’s special was a brilliant little gun, and ran very well. I think it was the chopped version of the chopped version of the gen 3 Smiths, and while it was fairly ugly it was very reliable. Sights were fairly good and the quality was there.
It did have the same issue with holsters as the Kel Tec, and likely the CS9 was the last iteration of the Gen3s. Likewise, magazines- I don’t think I had ever seen a single spare for the CS9. The size of the gun was awkward- too big to ride on the 
ankle- so it was a chopped service piece, but much bigger guns- i.e. Glock 19- would conceal as well than this little Smith. I think it would have been a very decent gun to wear under a BDU shirt, which I would have done and often- if a holster could have been found. My main problem with this little gun is that it did not shoot exceptionally straight. Decent, but it should have shot much straighter than it did. It was if Smith decided that this gun could either be accurate or reliable, and reliable won the trick.
8. Smith and Wesson SVE9. Smith’s entry service sized minus 9mm, designed to be just enough. It was really a very nice pistol, reliable and accurate even though Smith did intentionally make this one their bargain sidearm. It does have this aura of non-expense, lowest bidder quality about the gun, which I don’t think Smith tried to avoid.
I think that aftermarket issues would impact this pistol- holsters, magazines, etc. but it didn’t stay around long enough for me to find out. My daughter needed a gun and this is hers now. She was taught properly the quality of the compressed surprised break- demonstrates excellent trigger control, and this gun needs it. The trigger is nothing but plain awful, but other than the aftermarket being lacking, and the lowest bidder aspect of the gun, I was really very favorably taken with it.
7. Smith and Wesson Shield. Everybody and their brother started buying these guns when they came out, and I did the same. Paid a shade over 300 US for mine, 
it was the first gen, with a thumb safety, and the gun ran fine, although a shade muzzle light, and what an old shooting mentor would call “whippy.” Still, the gun looked like quality, and did its job, which late in its time with me was spent in the drawer of my desk.
This gun went to my brother- so literally now everyone and my brother have one- and I can’t advise how good he manages a trigger, because I have not shot with that man in years- but on this gun he will need to manage the trigger. It is really the largest disappointment, on otherwise a fairly credible sidearm. I also question the capacity for the gun’s size, it carried like it should carry 15 rounds, while it managed just about half that. Those guns- like this one that are in that awkward size where they are not as large as a true mid-sized carry piece, but are much too big to be worn anywhere but on a belt holster, they just don’t do it for me. Smith I think knew that their trigger was in the crapper and out came the 2.0. I am hopeful that Smith did better with this, as there is no question that their lackluster attentions to the details of proper trigonometry have turned your humble correspondent away from Smith, except for J frame 38s, of which I can’t seem to pass by without picking up. At any rate, owning old school and new school Smith pistols, and comparing them side by side- makes me wonder who is doing QA at Smith.
Still, about the Shield, fine little gun. I would say that everyone should have one, but I think literally that is near the case.
6. Kahr PM9. This little gun will really shoot, and I carry it all the time. It does have just a quirk or two- but when the PM9 came out from Kahr 
those guys could make a good gun. Mine would and could routinely outshoot my early gen Glock 19 and do so comfortably. Lately, I do worry some about the QA, have heard some disparaging things about the contemporary models- but this gun of mine is excellent, does exactly what it was designed to do, and exactly what I need it to do.
This gun would and will work with +p loadings, although they tend to be uncomfortable. It is also not particular about what it prefers to shoot well, and that can only be said for one or two other pistols on this list. My only problem that I have had with this little gun is that it will tend to hang up when the “rack” portion of “tap-rack-bang” is being conducted. I have noticed that to chamber a round positively every time, requires that the slide be locked to the rear- and when released by the thumb on a live mag, will work every time. This is not really a killing issue for this pistol, but it would complicate the application of corrective action in case of a malfunction. I have only had one- but that malfunction was cleared by treating the issue as if it were a double feed- and I have to remind myself to do exactly that.
This is the only true micro/ ankle holster worthy gun on the list, other than the Smith 940, and it will get worn on my ankle often. Interesting to say that a ankle gun that will shoot with a mid-sized belt holster sized pistol? This one will. Best thing that I can say about this little gun in fact.
5. Glock model 19. WHAT? ONLY 5th!? Yep, only fifth. With this weapon and all of its Glock siblings I have the second most practical experience, – so rest assured from the onset that this is not some sort of uninformed protest vote. The fact of the matter is that I own four of these guns at present, (2 in 9mm) have owned shot and carried twice that many, and while I respect what this platform is and does, I really don’t like it all that much.
It is the first weapon in either 9 or 40 that I will choose to pack up and tuck away in the auto for a road trip, and if there is a consummate glove compartment gun this one happens to be the one. Glocks are just always around. I would say that every pistol man needs to own at least one, and be proficient with the thing because if there is a really really big fight, they are going to be all over the ground, available for use by the survivors.
The ubiquitous nature is something that I like about the gun- the fact that everyone has one means that you’ll always be in good company. The simplicity is something else that I like about it, and this goes hand in glove with its commonality. A friend of mine loaned me one for a month long overseas job years ago, and the one thing he didn’t attempt to do was explain to me how the gun worked. He just assumed that I was checked out on the Glock and he was right- because if you think about it, anyone that has ever ran any auto-loading handgun is checked out with a Glock, right? It carries easily, lightly- and is a very dutiful duty sidearm. If I was headed to the same overseas gig as the one described previously, I would opt to take my model 19. Sure it works. Sure it’s everywhere. Sure it is simple, and near universal.
So, why don’t I like it? The trigger is only tolerable and doesn’t work for me that well. I can hit with it, but I disappoint myself at the range with this gun. I do not care for the slide release as it seems like it was put in the wrong place and as nearly a useless afterthought. My guns have always been incredibly particular about what they wished to feed, the first- the gen 1- would only shoot Rem 115 gr JHP, and 147 gr Fed Hydra Shoks. The Gen 3 that I am running now is somewhat better, and the Gen 4 with a Storm lake barrel better still, but……STILL, not great.
I also do not find these guns nearly as reliable as their reputation promotes. I bought my first one in 1993, and with many many rounds downrange, it will cough on occasion. Limp wristing, bad mag spring, short cycle, double feed- happens for me a great deal more than I prefer to admit in the last near 30 years. So, if I am combining pedestrian accuracy with B minus reliability, I think I’d rather shoot something else. All said the biggest reason is that I do not think that these guns are exceptionally fun to shoot, and if they didn’t hang out in the truck as much as they did, I doubt I’d shoot them very much at all. Unless I am training with a bunch that says, “bring your Glock”, I always bring something else.
I have carried these weapons into harm’s way, and have no complaints. They are good guns, and none of my deep seated Glock neurosis would keep me from carrying one or adopting on as my workaday piece- they just cannot go any higher on my list than number five.
4. Browning Hi Power. The main attraction of this gun is how well it is made, and how well it points. Once a shooter has his hands on a Browning Hi-power, most everything on this list seems like you are trying to point a bar of soap. It is an elegant piece, classy in fact, and borrows liberally from JMBs functionality, while still being something attractive enough to generate notice. I have found mine to be exceptionally reliable- but I am not sure they are inherently so, the clones that I have prior where not- mine was worked on by a master gunsmith.
I don’t care much for the safety- the extended factory version is not extended 
enough, and is not as positive from the holster as the non-extended standard GI 1911 thumb safety. It can be particular about what it likes to work with, and another pistol that I have notice that can harbor troubles using the higher pressure stuff. The magazine disconnect should be, well- disconnected- as mine is, which means that the hi power is only at its most functional at the over $1000 price point, adding modifications. The sights are low profile and can be difficult to pick up in a hurry, for this aging General and his half century + year old eyes, at least, anyway. Looking at these sights show that they are about the size, maybe a tick smaller than the other offerings, but I have trouble picking up these sights as fast as the others. May be that there are no white dots our outlines, rather black on stained orange.
But, all told- the hi-power will do everything that the Glock will do, and do so with class. As a gun that generates this level of pride of ownership vs the Glock that is all and nothing more than a tool, I doubt there are many BHPs in packs or in truck holsters in the US these days. The Browning points much better as well, and its trigger is a shade better, but I would hate to have to live on the difference with that one. Reliability is about the same, maybe the Browning is a shade better, but I’d hate to have to live on the difference there, too. Pride of ownership is the big difference, though- and I am proud of mine. It is an elegant piece that will still run.
3. Beretta 92/ M9. I have spent more time behind a Beretta M9 than any other pistol, which is actually quite an understatement. I’ve owned them since 1986, and have been issued them since 1993, and my group really would train often with 
these pistols. The most impressive thing about these guns are that they work, and work every time. My observation tells me that there are no others that can compare to the Beretta 92 design for reliability- having literally witnessed at least a hundred thousand rounds, and possibly hundreds of thousands of rounds downrange, and can count exactly 2 malfunctions, one an ammo problem, the other a mag problem. Quite a record to stand on, 2 malfunctions out of a hundred(s) of thousands rounds- neither the gun’s fault- in 34 years. That impresses me all to pieces.
They are big guns- and until this moment I did not realize or appreciate that the 92 Beretta is the only duty sized gun that I have ever owned in 9mm, the others all being mid or micro sized. I have carried it concealed but not easily. As such a big gun for such an intermediate cartridge, it seems that the M9 is over engineered, and it seems that way because they are. I don’t think it points exceptionally well, but it’s not as poor as it could be.
In terms of accuracy or shootability, it is not terribly good at either, especially on the first round. Rounds number 2-16 could be placed very well by a shooter with skill, but with me and that first DA round, it was anyone’s guess at about 25 meters or greater. It can be managed, and life hacks applied to make it more usable, but I would think because of this very weak DA first round, to a very workable and fairly crisp SA, if one uses a Beretta 92, than he mightn’t ought entertain any other sidearm. I’ve been never able to stick with just one, but with this one I managed at least to be semi-faithful. Before there was anything that resembled an EDC, it was my “primary”, and has been for longer than all of the other offerings combined.
The original group of M9s issued to the Army from 86-94 were wonderfully accurate, and if a man can find one of those, which today generally have been very rough handled in those years and look like eight kinds of hell, one oughtn’t worry- except for the first round and even that I think is much better on the old, original issued guns. Commercial 92s and second issue M9s not so much, but I think that is highly dependent on the gun. My GO issued and now purchased M9 is the worst shooting M9 that I have ever had in my hands, and it is nearly a new gun. It does work though, and did so every time.
I have carried a Beretta into harm’s way, many many times, and for the record, I am totally satisfied. I think it would have taken the number one spot had my specimen(s) shot as straight as I know they can be made to shoot, carried a little easier, and had something done with that double action trigger.
2. Sig Sauer 320/ M18. Sig finally did it. Competition grade for service prices. I have not handled or fired the full size m17 equivalent, but having two 320 guns in my possession, a commercial 320 compact and a M18 GO issued sidearm, it is my opinion that the Army finally has a sidearm that firstly, will work every time, and secondly, that people will be able to hit with.
I think that the secret to this is in the trigger, and also some danger within the same. Both triggers on my guns are excellent, superb in fact, and both guns with 
superb triggers produce outstanding shootability and accuracy. To date, reliability has not been an issue either- with about a 1000 rounds fired through both pistols. Training is going to be exceptionally easy based upon the simplicity of the pistols, which is one of the prime factors in choosing a sidearm with merit to a large institution.
The trigger, while it does make the whole platform, gives me a case of the fuzzy nuts when I am holstering the piece. I am concerned with clothing or some other obstruction that gets in the holster and magically wraps around the trigger and causes said trigger to engage during the re-holstering phase, a man may shoot one down his leg. To this end, my process with the 320C is to look into the holster while placing the gun back- something that I was trained not to do- and with the model 18, secure the safety, holster the weapon, and while the weapon is in the holster, disengage the safety.
This is a great little gun though, all the way around, and to date I consider it superior to the Glock 19 and the Beretta 92 in all respects.
1. Walther P99- I think because this is a double action gun, it doesn’t get that much or that good of press, but this gun is my favorite. I think if one is to look at the negatives first, he will find a few- so we’ll get those out of the way. This mid-sized, carry gun is complicated and non-standard. Double action decocking…..lever? no, more like a deck, a de-cocking deck is the only one like it that I have ever seen- but it is in a good place, and easy to get to- while also being easy to stay away from should you need.
The mag release is odd as well, a pull down paddle arrangement that will require some time to master. It also has a semi- dark horse status so the after-market aspect of finding magazines, holsters, etc. can be a little dicey and a little more pricey.
What this gun does well (at least for me) is just about everything else. An honest pull and go with a one piece trigger, putting into double action mode eliminates and holstering ND concerns as above with the 320. The DA trigger pull is longish, but straight back, manageable and accurate, and the SA is excellent. The gun is reliable, and has run for me without a single hitch for over 10,000 rounds. It also shoots just about everything well, from the uber cheap stuff to the high end, and its recoil impulse is minimal, thanks to the superior grip angle.
The grip angle deserves mentioning, because it is my favorite thing about this gun. It points better than any of the others mentioned on this list, and has a handshake feel to it in my hand at least. The goodness in a fact so situated, is that when the gun is presented on target, the sights are aligned- and this is the only of the 9s that I can do this consistently.
This guns carries like a champion, points like a dream, and runs like a thoroughbred. I run this gun when I need to shoot to impress. It is a full on beauty of a zombie apocalypse sufficient EDC.
Uber 9s, part of the whole gun loving world like it or not. You’ve read what I think.