Here are my 4 usual carry guns, with a couple comparison pics. Glock 26 9mm, Kahr PM9 9mm, S&W 642 .38, and Ruger LCP .380 . Usually I carry inside the waistband (IWB), so the pics show a cutoff line for that, and thus the portion that needs to be concealed under a t-shirt. The LCP is the easiest to pocket carry, although cargo pocket summer shorts work good with the 642 and PM9. The G26 is both a bit bulky and heavy for pocket carry, in my opinion, even though I have done it a few times. Here are the fully loaded weights, and number of rounds, and velocities with my chosen ammo, according to my home measurements: 26 with 10+1 = 26 oz, 124gr (fps not measured, guess 1090 or more) PM9 with 6+1 = 20 oz, 124gr 1090 fps 642 with 5 = 17 oz, 158gr 795 fps LCP with 6+1= 12 oz, 90gr 925 fps Personally, I think each has trade offs, and might be a good choice depending on what someone is looking for. The 26 has capacity, reliability, and is easy to shoot accurately, but is a bit blocky in double stack design. The PM9 gives up some rounds but is thinner and lighter, but maybe a little more persnickity such as being more difficult to rack the slide to chamber a round without issue. The 642 has reliabilty in all shooting positions no matter how it is held but only holds 5 rounds and is more difficult to be accurate with at longer distances. The LCP is the thinnest and lightest of the bunch, but shoots slightly less powerful rounds. All the semi-autos have the advantage of quicker reloads in my hands. I'm slower to reload the 642 from a flat pouch, but some others are pretty darn fast with a speedloader. The semi-autos also have less felt recoil than the snubby revolver. But the LCP can feel pretty sharp, and to my wife is uncomfortable to shoot, while she doesn't mind shooting the 642. Grip shape and individual perceptions have a lot to do with it. I've had to tweak my PM9 and LCP to get them to run reliably without jams. Experiences will vary, but most will agree that Glocks and snubby revolvers from S&W are unlikely to have jam problems. Thus I've never had an issue of any kind with the 26 and 642. One point I'd like to make about the 642 is that it does not have an external hammer to snag on anything, and the gun is mostly rounded in that area and doesn't have the squareness of a slide to print under a t-shirt. The cylinder is not very wide, not very big, and tends to be a non-issue for printing in my IWB carry. All 4 of these are what I think of as "draw and shoot" guns, with no thumb safeties to fumble with. The Glock and Kahr triggers are pretty light and make it easy to shoot. I am well aware of the trigger when holstering them, so the trigger doesn't catch on any clothing, and remains firmly covered and protected during carry. The LCP trigger pull is longer, but still should be kept in a holster. The 642 trigger pull is heavier and the least likely of this bunch to be inadvertantly pulled by clothing or objects or whatever. I still holster it, but have a little more flexibility in my carry options with it. That heavy 642 trigger and small sights does not make it easy to be accurate. Nor do the practically non-existant LCP sights make that gun easy to be accurate with either. But I have no doubt that all 4 of these guns are accurate enough, reliable enough, powerful enough, and carry enough ammo as long as the shooter has practised. Hopefully they will continue to only get a workout at the range Wanna kill these ads? We can help!