The Rohrbaugh Forum
Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: Frenchy on July 17, 2004, 10:42:54 AM
-
...spend this kind of money on a pocket pistol. :o
Now!...Before anyone gets too incensed at this statement...My question is just to get a feeling of the rationale behind your purchase.
-
When you want the very best...... ;D
-
I only carry pocket guns. I will carry it daily. I value guns that are really well made. I value guns that are small, thin, and light. I am left-handed so I value not having useless righty controls that just make it thicker. It has the build quality of an H&K PSP and is almost as easy to carry as a Kelspec.
I trust the 9mm round's stopping power and it's cheap practice ammo. 32ACP ammo is a rip off. 380ACP is better but nothing is as cheap as 9mm.
It's a jewel, high-end fit and finish. If you like the keltec concept but want something with more aesthetic appeal, i.e.,Keltec 3AT is too el cheapo looking for you.
Bottom line: IF A GUN IS MORE THAN JUST A TOOL TO YOU, otherwise get the keltec P3AT
-
I accept the logic of both of you. To me, it makes sense. Did either of you consider the Kahr PM9 instead, and if not..why not?
I am carrying the KT P-32 as of two days ago. No holster yet..just loose in front pocket (I'm a lefty too, Justin!)
-
I have a Kahr PM-9 that rides in my SUV, in a gun rug. The Kel-Tec, P- 3AT is what I carry in a holster of my design. The Roughbaugh is the next logical step in my quest to be arrned at all times. I also have a safe full of revolvers and various small pistols that I have evolved thru. But I am a holster maker, so that goes with it...they all get used to pattern holsters.
I would have more wifes too,, if the law would allo.........No, forget that!!! ::) ;) :D :o :'(
-
I would have more wifes too,, if the law would allo.........No, forget that!!!
We're both getting to old for that silliness, RJ! ::)
-
Since somebody asked, I ORDERED (don't have yet) my R9S to fill niche in my pistols that only it can fill. The next size up is my stainless PPK/S, followed closely by a 340PD. I wanted something that is smaller than either of those, yet reliable and of a caliber that stops sufficiently retards forward momentum. And I can't afford an LM-4............
-
I can't help wondering what that LM-4 is like to shoot. Anyone know? It's a small .45ACP that is hand-cycled, and if I remember correctly, it had some sort of "blow-forward" action to help tame the recoil? ???
Just so all of us are on the same page, it was originally called the Semmerling, went out of production, but was reintroduced as the "Simmerling" in a very limited production (probably made only on order) by American Derringer. I think we could buy a couple of Rohrbaughs for what the LM-4 costs.
-
I posted the following on another board when someone asked why I (and others) were excited about the R9...
Here's my evolution in thinking on various firearms, and pocket carry.
First, I prefer a full-sized kinda gun for carry in most circumstances. My favorite carry gun is an all-steel Colt Combat Commander that Marianne Carniak (local gunsmith) customized. At times when I want something a little smaller/lighter I carry a SIG P239.
I've noticed, though, that sometimes I've wanted something I can carry in a pocket. In the summer, I'm often out-and-about in just a light t-shirt and shorts. Now, some people can conceal a full-sized pistol fine in that outfit, but I cannot - I can't stand to wear an inside-the-waistband holster without something between it and my skin (like a t-shirt, or "wife-beater" shirt). So, I'm forced to wear such a shirt with an additional covering shirt. Sometimes that's a bit warm, or inconvenient. For example, if I'm lounging around at home in a t-shirt and shorts, and the family decides to take a walk around the subdivision, I really don't feel like having to change half my clothing to carry. Thus, my desire for pocket pistols for those kind of situations. I can just go to the safe, retrieve a pocket pistol, and slip it into a pocket (inside a pocket holster, of course) and go.
Here's what I've gone through, in order, with the results:
Beretta Jetfire .25 ACP - tiny, but heavy, and I've never trusted that caliber. Beats throwing rocks, though.
S&W-made Walther PPK/s .380 ACP- great pistol, reliable, but *heavy* for pocket carry. Too heavy. Did I mention HEAVY?
S&W 340PD .357 Magnum - ahhh, nice. This is one of those Scandium super-lightweight revolvers. I still have this, and it gets a LOT of pocket time. Yep, recoil is significant (I only load .38 +P's in it), but it's so darn LIGHT that it's not dragging down my pants. The only disadvantage is that being a revolver, it's a bit thick, so printing can be an issue. And, only 5 shots. Still, my current favorite pocket companion.
Kel-Tec P-3AT .380 ACP - great little pistol, reliable. Light, and very flat - perfect for pocket carry. Kinda cheaply made, though, so despite it working well I just feel like it's "cheap." .380 isn't bad, but I'd like something a bit more serious - when I carry this instead of my Commander I really feel like I've compromised a ton.
So that's where I am. I carry the 340PD most of the time when I need to pocket-carry, but settle for the P-3AT when even the 340PD is too big. What I really need is a small, light, flat pistol (like the P-3AT) that is high quality and of a serious caliber (like the 340PD).
And that's where the Rohrbaugh comes in. Here's a high-quality pistol that's only the tiniest fraction larger than the P-3AT, and it shoots full-powered 9mm rounds - and holds 6+1 of them. You bet it's pricey, but hey, this will in effect replace TWO pistols of mine (which, in combined price, are as much or more than the Rohrbaugh R9s anyway).
That's why there's so much buzz about this pistol - those of us that appreciate or require pocket carry are finding that this may save us from having to compromise.
-
The light weight of the 340PD does make for a near-perfect carry pistol, but the Crimson Trace grips on mine sometimes print through my shirt.
-
I am a firm believer in having the best tools that I can afford. I carry firearms as a tool. Also, firearms are a hobby. I rarely spend this kind of money on a fun gun. But for a tool, on which I will stake my life on, $900 seems like a bargin.
-
P.S. RJ--do you still carry your Seecamp?
-
I still have it, but now carry the KT 3AT for all the reasons it was designed for.. Light, Thin, accurate,reliable, and inexpensive. But the Rohrbaugh will replace it, for the logical reason, it being the best available.
-
It's often more expensive to not do it right the first time. I almost ordered mine a few weeks ago, but wasn't 100% sure that the P-3AT wouldn't do it for me. I've also consolidated my handguns to 9mm, .45 and .357/.38 so getting the Rohrbaugh will keep my ammo dump as is.
So... An R9S will happen sometime later this year. Right now I have a Kahr P9 for IWB carry with a FIST tuckable. The R9S might take its place for pocket and IWB or I might keep both with the Rohrbaugh dedicated for pocket carry. I tried the Kahr PM9, but it was too big for my pockets and the P9 works just as well inside the waistband, but has much better ergonomics.
In conclusion, the P-3AT is awesome, but I'd rather get the best thing possible right off the bat and probably save money in the long run.
-
I would like to thank all of you for your comments. I would be hard pressed to argue with any of them.
I have owned a pretty good variety of guns in my life, but have culled them down to those that I actually use, and that serve a specific purpose.I carry a HS2000 as a duty piece because I've found that it does exactly what I want. There are better known and more ballyhooed guns on the market, but mine serves my needs.
The Kel-Tec P-32 is my first pocket pistol. It is a back-up on the job, and a primary other wise. I have really fallen in love with this simple concept. The idea of a more powerful package in a similarly small package, is very appealing to me.
The cost is not as important to me if I can rationalize it, based on what the gun will do. from what I can see and read, this would seem to be the epitome of concealed carry art. It would also seem to be the common sense answer to most personal defense scenarios.
It will be in my future, albeit toward the end of the year.
-
Frenchy - nothing much to add to the thread, which has many very useful comments .... but I doubt I have issued a welcome yet to yourself .. or Mudboy ... just wanted to put that right!
Welcome aboard. :)
-
Thanks for the cordial welcome Chris...it's much appreciated.
-
Frenchy:
I'm tuning in late to this thread, having been up in the mountains scaring some trout for the past three days.
Welcome to the Forum.
I jumped in with my order for one of the Rohrbaughs not long after the 2000 Shot Show, where the famous prototype was unveiled. As a result, I have one of the earliest ones released to the public. I ordered it simply because I could not forego owning a pocket pistol as revolutionary, small, light, powerful, and well designed as the Rohrbaugh. I consider the price to have been a bargain.
RS
-
Richard, I wholeheartedly agree. Quality and uniqueness are worth more than a monetary price. I have one of the early H&K P7 (serial #19xxx, back when a brand new one was around $450). Looks to me like over the last 25 years the price on it hasn't gone down too much, neither has the demand. I thought high $7s was a pretty good price for a used one recently, so now I have two. You sometimes can pay a little too much, but basing a deciaion on the lowest cost can be the most expensive in the long run.
BTW, thanks to the "reserved" comments of yourself and others on the board as to the quality of the R9S, I'm now only 3 weeks into my wait for the twins (yes, I ordered 2 at the same time). Thanks, guys. They might just be a nice Christmas present.
-
And ...... yet another newcomer! Great.
Stook - welcome to you too Sir! :)
-
Did either of you consider the Kahr PM9 instead, and if not..why not?
(http://www.fototime.com/2059FDE320BBDC4/standard.jpg)
nuff said.
-
Stook:
Welcome to the Forum, and congratulations! Twins? Now that is awesome!
RS
-
Did either of you consider the Kahr PM9 instead, and if not..why not?
You'll certainly see the difference when you have both. I own both but put the PM9 away after I received and tested my R9S. I bought the PM9 for times I wanted the ability to pocket carry a 9mm. Other times I carried my P3-AT (which is also a great pistol). Now with the R9S I have a 9mm with the approximate same dimensions as the P3-AT.
My PM9 needed a trip to Mass. before it was reliable. It often failed to go fully into battery and needed a slight push to do so. I understand that was a pretty common problem. Kahr started using a stronger spring and that seemed to help the problem. The Kahr gunsmiths were great to work with and did some additional reliability work that I hadn't even asked for.
I will keep the Kahr as I may someday use it with a belt scabbard. It was not ideal for pocket carry as you will see when you compare it with the Rohrbaugh.
-
Why didn't Rohrbaugh use polygonal rifling like Kahr for better ballistics?
-
Justin ..... I'm not convinced that it would make any great difference in this barrel length ... and also can't help thinking the brothers Rohrbaugh would have considered it. Tho Kahr obviously had their own good reasons.
This barrel has a well cut rifling and I'd say does all it needs to do .. considering in particular the short ranges we would usually be considering.
What do you feel yourself would be the ''advantage factor'' ... do you feel the bullet ''takes'' polygonal better and so gets its rotational kick more reliably? Or - put the other way - what do you think might be the downside of conventional rifling.?
(http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/thr/shoot4/r9sbarrel.jpg)
-
Does anyone have a close-up photo of the magazine release? Thanks.
-
Frenchy - see if these'll help some ..... just took em ... only one view but hopefully gives some sorta impression. First - general view - then a c/u......
(http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/thr/r9s-tests-02/mag-rel-01-s.jpg)
(http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/thr/r9s-tests-02/mag-rel-02-cu-s.jpg)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just thought - I'd add a mention re ergonomics of this. If we are thinking right handed use then .......
Rotation of right wrist to 45º clockwise - or so ..... then, outer edge of left forefinger against front of mag, as left thumb pad pushes rearward on the release. Immediately upon disengagement, the mag pops out a 1/4" after which removal is easy and can me pretty slick.
Insertion of fresh mag .........align mag reasonably with mag well axis ... push rear of mag against catch to move it rearward and then insert and click home. This works well but is worth practicing. Only snag some may have initially, is letting the top round in the mag contact the front portion of mag well .. and this can make it less easy. If anything, let mag bias a tad toward a forward rake - to better help prevent top bullet ''catching'' at all.
In fact - I do find this mag release system very comfortable to use now ... it's way easier than either my Mak or CZ-52 - and i do NOT miss having a 1911 type release . no probs.
-
Thanks Chris...that's exactly what I was looking for.
Any particular reason that they went with the heel release rather than the button. I noticed Seecamp uses the heel also, while Kel-Tec and NAA use the button.
I'm personally use to the heel release with my Makarovs.
Also...Who makes the magazines for Rohrbaugh?
-
[size=13]Any particular reason that they went with the heel release rather than the button.[/size]
Most probably I think to keep the width profile totally uncluttered .... no protrusions to get in the way etc. Plus - to my mind this release is actually more reliable . The usual cross mag catch - which has to engage in a slot on the mag .. is IMO very prone to being either light on hold or - the other way - and makes for release being less than ideal .... if you will ..... more critical to get right.
Not sure re mag manufacturer ... I'm sure someone did mention .... maybe Mec-Gar ... but really am not sure. The mags tho are very well made ... a quality item .... and IIRC there had been some minor issues with them a while back .... one of the things that delayed getting stuff out earlier in the year - it had to be got right - and it was.
-
Mags are not by Mec-Gar, I did know who, and had posted it here, but the ravages of the years has taken it's toll , again..
-
Mags are made by a Long Island company: http://www.checkmateindustries.com/dynamic/p_arms.htm
Checkmate Industries
77 Mount Ave
Wyndanch, Long Island, NY 11798
I've heard of them doing hard chrome on P7s over on parkcitiestactical.com Horace Booth is the cofounder of Checkmate, but has now formed his own company Ford's Guns.
-
Thanks Justin!...I've never heard of them before.
-
Just had that confirmed Justin .. cos I had forgotten myself. Thx for digging that out.
Had a great chat with Eric not long ago - and have posted following that .... HERE (http://www.rohrbaughforum.com/YaBB.cgi?board=R9S;action=display;num=1090279860;start=0)
I must find a copy of that mag ... somewhere. Funny (sorta) there is Karl at Rohrbaugh ... didn't even see his mag until last minute, even tho a subscriber ... and not as many did, last Wednesday, or whenever it was!!
-
question #1 - can those with r9/r9s in hand tell me whether the grips are wider than the slide? how wide do they measure across (in mm)?
question #2 - can someone post a side-by-side and rear pic of r9/r9s with a pm9 (yes, i am familiar with the pic of the r9 and the pm9 cast mold, but i'd like to see it beside an actual pm9 if you have the time & the camera - thanks)?
question #3 - FJC, you said "What I really need is a small, light, flat pistol (like the P-3AT) that is of a serious caliber (like the 340PD)." I have read that the three or four best .380 JHP rounds have better stopping power than ANY bullet fired out of 2" barrel .38 Special snub-nose. Is this true? Perhaps you already own your ideal gun.
thanks for the responses
-
Bandit - welcome! :)
Can't answer all your queries - I have no PM9 to photograph I'm afraid. I'd hazard a guess (for now) that the Karh is ''fatter''. BTW --- R9 or R9s .. only the sights make them different .... otherwise identical.
Q#1 ... grip width vs slide width ...........
Slide - 0.820", grip - 0.890" ....... not much wider at all. One reason I suspect the carbon fiber grips were decided on ... to get them that thin.
Q #3 .... I know that is directed at Frank but .... hard to believe that the 380 will drastically outdo the 38 spl from 2" ... and certainly, I reckon with the R9 and 6+1 Gold Dots on board ........ it'll outdo both for sure!
-
Hi Bandit:
The PM 9 is a great pistol, jut not a true pocket pistol.
-
The grip panels are the same width as the slide at the top and widen near the bottom. I suppose to give a better grip. I had considered getting a PM9 for quite sometime. I was reluctant because of its Glockesque, i.e., brickesque shape.
With millions invested in their current products, manufacturers have chosen to cut corners by simply cutting back on barrels and grips to give their guns a smaller look and feel.
The glock 26 is the epitome of this statement. I don't know if you've ever picked one up but it's pretty ridiculous. Kahr is also to a lesser extent being a thinner and lighter platform. The back of the slide is still a brick.
-
Justin .... 10/10 for observation! I in my careless appraisal did the unthinkable .. only took one sample measurement of grips. sheesh ... wicked!
Of course ... they do indeed have slight taper ...... (re-measures to try and effect reduced loss of face! :P )
Measuring slide again BTW - 0.810" seems nearer! Should take off my puter glasses and exchange for usual ones!
Top of grips under slide ...... (note - right grip panel slightly thicker at top compared with left - that figures) ..... is indeed around the 0.810" - 0.820" mark. Base thickness swells out to around 0.910"
-
question #3 - FJC, you said "What I really need is a small, light, flat pistol (like the P-3AT) that is of a serious caliber (like the 340PD)." I have read that the three or four best .380 JHP rounds have better stopping power than ANY bullet fired out of 2" barrel .38 Special snub-nose. Is this true? Perhaps you already own your ideal gun.
I haven't seen anything that claims a .380 out of a 1.75" barrel (I think that's the barrel length on the P-3AT) can outperform a .38 +P from a 2" snub-nose. If you have a source for that info I'd love to see it.
And regardless, the argument would be the .380 vs. 9mm...
-
Base thickness swells out to around 0.910"
r9 pm9
length 5.2" 5.3"
Base
thickness .910" .9"
Seems to be getting pretty close.
FJC - I believe P3AT has a 2.75" barrel. Here is a milk jug test I am aware of:
http://ktrange.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1523&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Some non-P3AT-specific sites of interest:
http://www.powernet.net/~eich1/sp.html
http://www.internetarmory.com/handgunammo.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/ammo_by_anonymous.htm
Unaware of real-world stopping stats involving specifically a P3AT, but I'd venture to say they're at least in the same ballpark. And the 3AT is probably much easier to carry....
-
I've been an admirer of the .380 ACP for the last 40 years, starting with the Walther PPK back in Germany in the 1960s. However, when the Rohrbaugh became available in 9mm, I suddenly "got religion." I shall always have my G380 somewhere nearby, but I expect from now on to be carrying my R9s on a regular basis. Besides, just consider the wide range of ammunition available in 9mm -- all the way from the ultra-light supersonics to the heavy-hitting subsonics. (As for myself, I lean toward the latter for a defensive round.)
RS
-
question #2 - can someone post a side-by-side and rear pic of r9/r9s with a pm9 (yes, i am familiar with the pic of the r9 and the pm9 cast mold, but i'd like to see it beside an actual pm9 if you have the time & the camera - thanks)?
have read several posts claiming ownership of both guns..........................pictures? ???