The Rohrbaugh Forum
Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: Kim on July 30, 2004, 01:19:55 AM
-
:D I could not get on the gunsmithing area for two nights in a row. I think many of you would like to know you can have Trijicon night sights installed on your R9S. I have attached a picture showing now they look (poor picture quality). This work is done by:
Tool Tech Gun
20 Church St
Oxford, MI 48371
248-628-1811 ask for Gary
Cost $196.25
3 trijicon inssert @ $35 each
Gunsmithing $76.25
Return shipping $15
Sorry I can't figure out how to post the picture and the Help does not help.
-
E-mail me your photo, I will post it right away..We want tto see it.....
-
Thanks for posting this information, Kim. This is very good news.
Are the inserts specifically Trijicon? Did the gunsmith simply drill the appropriate holes in the sights and install the inserts? I imagine it would be pretty simple for the rear sight but not so simple to get the hole in the front sight parallel to the slide.
I'm looking forward to seeing the pictures.
-
Thanks Kim for posting this, I was sent a little better photo, thanks again.
(http://img4.imgspot.com/u/04/211/17/SlideTop.JPG)
-
BillinPittburgh
Good point, but I think *parallel* would be rather impossible. There would have to be a slight angle to avoid marring the slide top.
I imagine there are other installations where the angle was employed. It's not a perfect world we live in. :)
I, for one will go for this installation. And have the *Worlds First Perfect Pocket Pistol*. ;D
-
Hi RJ,
I think you are right, an angled hole would work, as long as the angle didn't take the bottom of the hole too close to the bottom of the inside of the slide. I haven't actually seen a Rohrbaugh yet, so I don't know how much metal is there.
Years ago, when I asked Colt about putting tritium sights on my Detective Special, I was told that it could be done with the front sight only, because there wasn't enough metal in the rear sight to drill without weakening it excessively. This, of course, is a very different situation as the rear sight on the revolver iis part of the topstrap.
The picture looks really nice.
I am a big believer in tritium sights, and if it can be done without unduly weakening the slide, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
-
Outstanding!!!
8)
-
The sights are Trijicon. Tool Tech Gunsight does all the custom work for Trijicon. The hole for the rear and front sight are parallel to the top of the slide. Very precise work, there was no room for error. Gary at Tool Tech is a master at this type of work.
-
Impressive!
Tough, very tough. Can't say that I would want to the responsibility of drilling those holes in someone else's R9 :o
Talk about holding a tight *** :D
-
"The hole for the rear and front sight are parallel to the top of the slide." Kim
If this is the case, I am glad I was mistaken.. :)
Thanks Kim
-
:) Now when I get my "second" one, I'll send my first one in for a "final addition." ;D
-
This modification looks great! What is the turnaround time for this work? Also, how would this work affect Rohrbaugh's product support?
I envy all of you that have received your R9/R9s's. I await the arrival of mine, but I believe that it is still a ways away. If anybody knows, what is the waiting period for an R9s ordered in mid-May?
-
The turn around was just under two weeks. Of course it depends on the work load at Tool Tech. I had them do a S&W 340PD and it was over a month, they were doing a lot of work for the military at that time. Rohrbaugh knows about this installation. I don't know, but they may even consider this as an option. There was no metal remove that would weaken the slide. Tool Tech would never install sights on a firearm if it would weaken any part.
-
I might add call Tool Tech 248-628-1811 ask for Gary if you are considering this work. I only sent my slide so no problems involved sending a whole pistol.
-
There is a problem with the front sight insert. It has broken twice from the recoil. I'm sending the pistol back again to
Toolteck hopefully they can fix it so as not to recur again. I will be contacting Gary on Wednesday for an opion on the problem. And will keep you informed as I learn more.
-
Thanks for letting us know and please keep us informed.
It seems that my front sights are always dimming out before my rear sights, regardless of pistol or brand of sights, but this is the first time I have heard of this occurring.
-
After posting the above, I remembered a similar thread on the NAA forum.
http://www.naaminis.com/discus/messages/2/1621.html?1091289619
Apparently, the "gutter snipe" sights offered by the NAA custom shop are not available on the .32 NAA caliber guns in part because the inserts tend to pop out under recoil and slide movement.
There have been generally no problems with the Novak tritium sights on my .380 (identical to the .32NAA except for caliber), although 1 1/2 years later, the front sight is noticably dimmer than the rear but still usable.
-
I see all is not well in the world of night sights. Thanks for the link. Talked to Karl at Rohrbaugh and he did not encourage putting the night sights in because the metal is so thin in the front. At least if need be Karl said I can send the pistol back and they will fit a new slide. After reading the above link I don't hold out much hope for the Trijicon sights to stay in one piece very long. So unless there is something Toolteck can do to make the front insert strong enough to take the recoil. I don't recomend spending the money on this.
-
I have Tritium sights on my NAA G-380, and I appreciate them. However, I have always wondered if I were not attempting to "guild a Lilly" by having them installed.
The Rohrbaugh 9mm series is, in my opinion, the ultimate pocket pistol yet made -- given the current state of the art in such things. It is in the nature of human beings to stretch the limits. However, I wonder if "glow-in-the-dark" sights are actually appropriate in a pistol which was designed to be a last-resort, up-close-and personal defensive weapon.
As with aircraft, sailboats, and ships of war, every handgun is a compromise of one kind or the other, depending on the mission and purpose. The Rohrbaughs are the lightest, smallest, most efficient, and most powerful 9mm pocket pistols ever seriously offered to the public. I simply wonder if we should not accept the Rohrbaughs for what they are -- the lightest, smallest, most efficient, and most powerful 9mm pocket pistol pistols ever seriously offered to the public.
I have a Colt 1911-type which started out its life as a standard, "Plain Jane," Government Model 1991A1. It is now one of the "loveliest lillies of the field," courtesy of Clark Custom Guns. You can do that with a 1911-type, with which the sky is the limit. With a Rohrbaugh, you are already very near to the edge of the envelope when you take the pistol out of the box.
All of the above comments are just some random thoughts as I wind down after a difficult day. No offense is intended to anyone. However, I think that I shall leave my R9s as it is, except for some personal engraving on the slide and some sterling-silver grips -- which I am told by my individualistic but gifted silversmith friend may be ready in the next week or two. (If he pulls it off, I shall attempt to post a photograph.)
RS
-
Richard_S
As I have been thinking about this problem with the sights through the day you have put into words my thoughts.
-
If there is any way possible to put night sights on the Rohrbaugh, I think it is a good idea.
Granted, it is a pocket pistol, and even a 9mm pocket pistol will have its limits as compared to a larger, more standard "primary" carry gun (sight radius, grip size, etc.).
However, the weapon you choose will not determine the threat you face, and your pocket pistol may be all you have for one reason or another. I think the reason the rohrbaugh has so much appeal in the first place is that we all realize that anything and everything we can do to maximize the capabilities of such pocket pistols is worth doing for that reason.
Right now all of the pistols you are most likely to find me with are equipped with night sights. While they don't yet have the durability I'd like, I still consider them to be a near-necessity.
-
And, there are those who feel that sights do not belong on this "belly" gun-given its intended backup role (ala a Seecamp).I wonder what the order mix has been so far (sights, no sights)and what The brothers forecast of mix is.
I have ordered them on mine, but will forego night sights until a durable solution is found.
I have a bar (rear) and dot (front) arrangement on my 1911, which works very, very well.
-
There is no answer yet but I have thought of a solution. Two slides one with night sights to carry and one to use when practicing of course this can get quite expensive and I would reather spend the money on an other gun. I'm in the position to do this as I already have a slide with the night sights installed and if the front sight insert keeps breaking I will get another slide to use when I shoot the pistol and carry it with the night sights.
-
Agree with not getting night sights until the durability problem is solved.
However, I can't imagine wanting it without sights.
Focusing on the intended role of the gun misses my point above: the gun you carry won't dictate the situation you face.
In one state-mandated concealed handgun licensing course, I was taught a method of point shooting that involved holding the gun at chest level with 2 hands. I passed the qualification, but with one of the worst-looking targets I ever shot. I had previously experimented with Bill Jordan style hip-shooting from a fast draw, and found that I missed my target about 1/3 of the time at 20 feet.
By bringing the gun up to the line of sight, I not only increased my hit probability, but also decreased the amount of time it takes to put a hit on target.
The only exception is drawing to a pectoral retention position to engage a target less than 5 feet away, and the difference in speed is then no more than 0.1 to 0.2 second.
I would also hate to have to defend a lawsuit for hitting an innocent bystander after firing without sights at a distance beyond retention distances. If you couldn't visually confirm where your bullet was going to go, then why wasn't it negligent for you to shoot?
I would be willing to bet that most of those who don't think the gun should have sights have little or no experience with unsighted shooting. There is absolutely no reason not to have the sights, even if they will not be used in all situations.