Miscellaneous > The Water Cooler -- General Discussions

Hypothetical about Rohrbaugh type design

<< < (2/2)

backupr9:
Fully agree….it’s “horses for courses”.  I will here reprise an earlier post of mine:

I have owned R9’s and LWS 32’s for years. Although I usually carry an extra mag, I don’t foresee a likely combat reload, specifically because those particular firearms are belly guns used at very close ranges. If the 7 rounds loaded are ineffective at that range, the proximity of the assailant makes a reload unlikely especially with the heel mounted mag release. A “New York reload” would certainly be a better option.

If the distance is greater, the likelihood of an effective shot goes WAY down making a strategic withdrawal a very valid option. When I think I may be put in a situation requiring aimed fire at 15 or more yards, I usually carry a P365 with a 12+1 mage and a 15 round spare. A good knife may be the other strong consideration for a CQB “reload”.

Wanderer:
I don't foresee a combat reload however,  if you have moved to cover at least for me at the moment I prefer the paddle release over the heal or push button magazine.   

The drawback of the push button is accidental magazine ejection and often having to change grip to perform the mag change.
For the heel release, I have probably changed my grip to do it,  although still don't have enough time in with the R9 or the Seecamp to feel comfortable with the heel release.

The R9 has a big advantage over the Seecamp in being able to fire without the magazine in place.   So one can shoot 6 shots while maintaining 1 in the chamber.   If you have achieved a cover position for the magazine change and it ends up compromised you still have the ability to fire,   but anything that would speed the reload process seems advantageous to me.   

With the paddle release being on the trigger guard which should be covered by the holster when in the pocket and since the release is perpendicular to the draw accidental mag release shouldn't be a factor.  So I don't think you lose the safety factor

ECR:

--- Quote from: backupr9 on February 20, 2024, 09:02:39 AM ---Fully agree….it’s “horses for courses”.  I will here reprise an earlier post of mine:

I have owned R9’s and LWS 32’s for years. Although I usually carry an extra mag, I don’t foresee a likely combat reload, specifically because those particular firearms are belly guns used at very close ranges. If the 7 rounds loaded are ineffective at that range, the proximity of the assailant makes a reload unlikely especially with the heel mounted mag release. A “New York reload” would certainly be a better option.

If the distance is greater, the likelihood of an effective shot goes WAY down making a strategic withdrawal a very valid option. When I think I may be put in a situation requiring aimed fire at 15 or more yards, I usually carry a P365 with a 12+1 mage and a 15 round spare. A good knife may be the other strong consideration for a CQB “reload”.

--- End quote ---

I agree here. If you are interested in an R9 sized gun with a "Traditional Mag Release", check out the Remmington version in .380. The RM380 has that style mag release. I have one and, frankly, you still have to "wiggle" your hand to operate it.
The previous mentions here of the R9 is a "Belly Gun" is 100% correct. If you need to reload within 5-10 feet as the assailant is running full steam at you, grab a knife or another gun. Frankly, you probably won't have time to reload.

ecr

Griff:
I think the closest thing to the R9 available now is the gen 4 Diamondback DB9.
It is 6 plus one capacity, about 13 oz and the smallest production 9 as far as I know.
I’ve got one and it shoots well, has good sights, and handles +p ammo.

I’ve had this idea of a near North American Arms size 22 magnum size revolver with a double action trigger bouncing around for a while…

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page