>>Chris...
I'm surprised you weren't more excited about the idea of helping to develop a registry (?) for the R9 to include on your FAQ site **sniff**...lol...! I know the R-Boys are busy critters but if they like the idea they may be willing to contribute the data as a service to their customers and for collectors use. In reality I shouldn't think it would be THAT much work for them in that they have only sold ~ 200 R9s to date...easier to start up now then down the road, and a public registry could save them work down the road in that they could simply reference the site to inquiring individuals. Anyway, it was just a thought. I might pursue it on my own down the road...and if I get anywhere I'll let you know. Perhaps such a resource would be better set up here at the Rohrbaugh forums...?...
OK...on to my next suggestion for your FAQ site... How about a thread addressing good and bad magazines for the R9...? It could start with the comments/questions you raised in regards to bullet seating looking at the minimum diameter across the feed lips of the mags as an indicator of a mag which may or may not function smoothly. Some of the older mags had widths in the neighborhood of .308" - .312". The newer ones all seem to be .320". When I asked Eric about this he noted the mags are made with a gap tolerence of +/- .005" from .320"...mags outside of this are considered "bad" mags.
Your original comments about the mags can be found under Rohrbaugh Products & Accessories / R9 & R9s Pistols / R9 Price Increase and Grip Material Change...page #3...Reply #35 on 14 October '04 @
http://www.rohrbaughforum.com/YaBB.cgi?board=R9S;action=display;num=1097036345;start=30#30 .
So...whacathink...?...TW<<
