The Rohrbaugh Forum

Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: guncats on June 27, 2013, 11:08:22 PM

Title: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on June 27, 2013, 11:08:22 PM
Starting a new thread to post the progress of my "R9 2000rd test".

-- the R9 was bought used. Farmingdale production, rather early serial, R3XX.
-- Showed signs of being carried (dings in the frame), but the internal was pretty clean when I took it apart so I suspect it wasn't shot much.
-- Did not come with a spare spring. Supposedly the recoil spring in it was new (zero rounds).


text colors: round count #'s will be in blue, cleaning/maintenance will be in green, and failures will be in red

*6/1/2013, initial test fire (20r total)
S&B 115gr FMJ
-- one misfire, fired after pulling trigger again. 3 more misfires after that, it turned out there was a piece of brass shaving in the firing pin hole.
-- Four failed-to-extra/fail-to-eject after that.
-- S&B 115gr is not the right ammo for this R9

Cleaned the gun and coated the barrel and underside of slide with GunJuice. (strip the metal surface of any grease/oil, heat on a 60W bulb and apply gunJuice when metal part is hot. Repeat the heating/coating four times). After that, apply Tetra grease to the metal surface while it is still warm. Let cool, wipe off any grease off the surface.  


6/2/2013 (36rd)
*American Eagle 115gr FMJ
-- 12 shots fired, 100%
-- the recoil is a sharp slap.
-- 11rd into 2x3" at 25ft, all 12 into 3x4".

*Federal 115gr FMJ (at this point the hand started to want to shake from the "115gr slap")
-- 12 shots  fired, 4 failed-to-extract/eject

*Americal Eagle 124gr FMJ
-- 12rd fired, one failed to extract, two failed-to-feed.
-- 8x8" rapid fire, 25ft (could not help myself, the hands wanted to shake pretty badly).

6/4/2013 (69rd)
*AmericanEagle 147gr FMJ flat-nose
-- 33rd total, one failed to feed  (probably due to holding the gun "shock-absorbing" style)
-- 12rd slow fire went into 3x4" at 25ft.
-- Kicks pretty hard, but no slap. Primer shows firing pin drag mark.

*Speer Lawman 124gr FMJ
-- 24rd total, 100%.
-- 12rd of slow fire went into 3x3" at 25ft, with 11 within 2x2".

*Speer lawman 115gr FMJ
-- 12rd total, 100%
-- sharp slap.
-- 12 into 6x6" at 25ft (shaky hands...?)

6/6/2013 (44rd)
*S&B 124gr FMJ
-- 19rd total, two failed-to-extract
-- primers are flat, over-pressured? this is standard target ammo!

*PMC 124gr FMJ
-- 25rd total, 100%
-- Huge fireball!

*****174rd fired, by me, at this point.
Disassembled the R9, cleaned off the metal surface, coated with Tetra gun grease then wipe clean.
Replaced recoil spring. The old spring (old style) was 1/2" shorter than the new spring (new style).*****

6/28/2013 (10rd)
*Remington 124gr FMJ
-- 10rd total. 2 failed to feed, always the 2nd round in the mag. The nose was caught by the chamber opening, no way to push it in and no way to extract the round (since there is no slide hold-open and I only have two hands), very difficult to clear this kind of malfunction. .
-- not the right ammo for this R9

6/30/2013 (54rd)
* Magtech 124gr FMJ
-- 18rd total, 100%
-- 6"x6" at 25ft

hand started to shake involuntarily after that, the harder I hold the gun the more shaky it gets. I though 124gr stuff doesn't cause that problem.

*PMC 115gr FMJ
-- 36rd total, 4 failed-to-extract, usually the 3rd or 4th shot.


7-9-2013 
* PMC124gr FMJ
-- ( 50rd) total, semi-rapid fire. 100%.

7-15-2013 24rd
PMC 124gr FMJ, 24 rd total. One failed-to-extract/eject (last round of the mag, empty back into the chamber)

7-19-2013 18rd
-- 18rd total, semi-rapid fire. 1 failed to fully extract.  Big fireball.

7-23-2013 18rd
--PMC124gr FMJ, 18rd total, 100%. Overall 6” at 25’. Looks like the size of fireball is lot-dependent.

7/30/2013 19rd

--PMC 124gr, 19rd, 100%
8/6/2013 19rd
--PMC 19rd, 100%. Recoil is very manageable.
8-18-2013 12rd
-- 12rd, 100%. PMC 124gr FMJ. very manageable recoil.

***** 222rd since last spring change. 8 malfunctions in these 222rd.
---Replaced recoil spring, cleaned and lubed internal with TW25 B
*****

8-23-2013
-- 50rd PMC 124gr. 100%. very manageable recoil.

8-27
-- 58rd Lawman 124gr. One failed to fully eject (empty case caught by the slide/ejection-port).  Middle of the 3rd mag.

approaching max post length. continue in post below....




Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Douglas on June 29, 2013, 10:52:21 AM
Very cool!

I'll be watching this space. Thanks guncats.  8)
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on August 24, 2013, 10:14:08 PM
9-7-2013
-- 19rd PMC 124gr FMJ, 100%

9-22-2013
-- 38rd PMC124gr FMJ, 100%

10-2-2013
-- 25rd PMC 124gr FMJ, 100%

10-19-2013
-- 38rd Lawman 124gr FMJ, 100%, very manageable recoil.

10-20-2013
-- 12rd Lawman 124gr FMJ, 100%

**** 240rd since last spring change. 1 malfunction (a failed-to-fully-eject, easy to detect & clear) in these 240rds.
***  Replaced recoil spring, cleaned and lubed with TW 25B


10-28-2013
-- 50rd PMC 124gr FMJ, 100%

11-17-2013
-- 50rd PMC 124gr FMJ, 100%

Dec 2013
-- 50rd Lawman 124gr FMJ, 100%.

Jan 2014
-- 43rd PMC 124gr FMJ, 100%

3-9-2014
-- 18rd PMC 124gr FMJ, 100%

****211rd since last spring change, no malfunctions. I assume this thing is fully "broken in" by now.

March/April 2014 (several range sessions)
-- 50rd Lawman 124gr FMJ, 100%

4-19-2014
-- 6rd Speer Gold Dot 124gr JHP, using newer (stiffer mag spring) mag, strong hand only (one-handed), , with arm fully extended, aimed slow fire. 100%. 15ft group 4", mostly horizontal spread (the DAO trigger is harder to shoot one-handed than I thought). Center of group is 2" high and 2" to the right.
-- 6rd Speer Gold Dot 124gr JHP, using original/older (softer mag spring) mag, weak hand only (one-handed), , with arm fully extended, aimed slow fire. 100%. 15ft group 6" (most in 4" with one opening up the group  to 6"; Center of group is about the same as the strong-hand-only group).
** two-handed groups at this distance, using Lawman 124gr FMJ, is usually around 1.5" **

4-22-2014
-- 6rd Speer Gold Dot 115gr JHP, using newer mag, strong hand only, with arm fully extened, aimed slow fire. 100%. 15ft group 3", center of group is point of aim.
-- 6rd Speer Gold Dot 115gr JHP, using older mag, weak hand only. with arm fully extened, aimed slow fire. 100%. 15ft group 3", center of group 2" above point of aim.
* the 115gr gold dot recoils a lot more sharply, it "rocks" upward a lot more than the 124gr. Fatigue set in quickly, I almost didn't finish the mag when shooting with weak hand.  I guess one mag-ful per hand might be the limit for this load, for me, before any involuntary "limp wristing" starts to happen.

4-302017
* took the little gun out of the safe and ran a few speed drills today, using Speer Lawman 124gr FMJ.
-- Out of 30 rounds, got one fail-to-fully-eject (empty case pushed back into the chamber, middle of the mag) and one no-bang (the extracted round doesn't show primer strike mark, it was possibly a failure to fully into battery; this was in the middle of the mag. ).
-- after checking the round count record here, I realized that this spring is way passed the 200rd replacement point, it was already pushing the 300rd mark even before today. Somehow I forgot to replace the spring at some point... :-[
-- anyway, with this recoil spring, the first 285rd were malfunction-free; then it went downhill really fast, 2 problems out of 30rds.
**Lesson learned: Do change the spring before the 200rd mark, or the gun WILL malfunction at some point....

***Cleaned the gun and installed new recoil spring.***

 5-26-2017
-- 14rd of Speer 124gr FMJ to "burn-in" the new recoil spring. two-handed hold, rapid fire; 100%
-- 14rd of Federal HydraShok 124gr JHP; "one in chamber, 6 in mag", one-handed slow fire
      strong-hand-only, using the newer mag (stiffer mag spring): 7/7, no problem, 25ft group about 4"
      weak-hand-only, using an older mag (noticeably softer mag spring): #3 &4 failed to feed, jammed nose-up; might have something to do with the softer mag spring.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: backupr9 on August 24, 2013, 10:53:49 PM
Good range report Guncats!...thanks.  Should note that some here feel FMJ ammo is OK for range work but is not the optimal round for this pistol which functions more predictably with JHP and, interestingly, with variability from one pistol to another in their preference for Gold Dots (124 or 147), Federal premium, or Golden Saber (among others).  115gr ammo seems to be a rare preference for the R9 and IMHO is not the best ammo for self defence, nor for this pistol in terms of reliability.  I use 124gr Lawman for practice and have had 100% reliability in my R9's and both pistols eat Gold Dot 124 and 147gr ammo without issue, which is what I carry daily.

I've not found any PMC 9mm recently, but have been impressed with its function (in JHP) in the notoriously finicky Seecamp .32 pistol.

Keep on shootin' and keep on posting!
John
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: feedramp on January 11, 2014, 10:05:10 AM
Nice range report, and will assists in my search for the most reliable ammo for the Rohrbaugh,  I have yet to purchase. 

Still debating of which model to order ....  :-\

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: C0untZer0 on February 02, 2014, 09:41:36 PM
It seems like the round count is from the last spring change.

How many rounds have you fired through it in total?
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on February 09, 2014, 09:27:05 PM
174 + 222 + 240 + 193 = 829 rd so far.

Looks like it is now functioning 100% with PMC and Lawman 124gr FMJ.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on February 23, 2014, 05:42:59 PM
What do you find with the recommended silver tip 115 gr?

Mine will not run it properly for some reason.

Thanks for the awesome documentary. Very helpful.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: backupr9 on February 23, 2014, 08:47:32 PM
Josh, see my response to your previous post about reliability...I suspect your firing pin retainer is out of spec and loose...when it moves to the side it will cause friction on the slide during recoil, impede the function and prevent full extraction. 
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on February 24, 2014, 11:38:56 AM
I sent you a reply post on that heading backupr9.

Thanks for the help. You may be on to something.

I would still I would like to see guncats run some of the recommended ammo (silvertips and american eagle 115 gr) to see if he has similar results as myself and apparently others with 115 gr ammo.

I am seeing several guys prefer the 124 gr due to reliability issues with 115 gr.

Of course we all know kimber solo only recommends the heavier bullet... Did they run into similar issues with 115 gr?

If this is the case would the brothers Rohrbaugh be wise to recomend the 124 gr rather than shake SOME people's confidence and the rep of this excellent firearm (that I'm still trying after $300 worth of ammo experimentation to get to fire dependably)?

"I want to love my Rohrbaugh... But" is where I am at. I did buy my piece USED, so perhaps if their are issues with the gun mechanically that would be why. It's just such a trip trying to figure out the puzzle.

This forum is definately helping me track down the issue.

Thanks for your help : )

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: bobsmith on March 03, 2014, 03:05:56 PM
Mine didn't like 124gr.  Or anything else I could find in town.  I was told by the factory rep it was designed for 115 grain and to stick with that. 

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 04, 2014, 11:07:09 AM
I know. She told me the same thing Bob. I would try it. Look at guncats results with specific ammo. Some good. Some bad.

This forum is full of guys with good experience with some ammo and bad with others.

I am (as stated elsewhere) having much improved results with the GD 124 compared to ST 115 and suspect you may also well enjoy similar results. Try it. Maybe you will like it. Kinda like green eggs and ham ya know.

Anyway I think if you did try a box and it works well you could sell your gun more confidently and with no pressure on your conscience (who needs that?) if you don't like the inconvenience of buying GD 124 online.

BTW you can pick it up for a fair price pretty effortlessly on lucky gunner sir.

I KNOW you could probably get back what you've got in her if it's shoots GD 124 well since there is no such thing as a NY R9 in production anymore.

I have a feeling if I'm right you will end up keeping the r9 and becoming and enthusiast like others on this post. I wish I bought mine new :)

Hope this helps ya sir.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: bobsmith on March 04, 2014, 12:14:01 PM
How many rounds have you shot since your last failure on the 124gr Gold Dot?   I need to see more than slight improvement in reliability and honestly it sounds like you do as well.  I have a new pistol and a claim filed within a week of my purchase date. 

To me it sounds like you got screwed by the person who sold you the pistol.  I've seen many of these for sale and I'm guessing the solution a lot of people resort to is passing the buck when it doesn't work. I'll watch for Gold Dot 124 though and if I see a box before they are up again I'll give it a try.

My advice to anyone purchasing a used R9 is a reliability test at the range. 

My advice to anyone purchasing a new R9 is to wait until they have a viable operation and start to honor warranty claims.  As of today, for whatever the undisclosed reason, they are not operational.     

 
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 04, 2014, 01:24:24 PM
Yeah I agree. I need to see more thAn a small improvement as well.

You asked how many rounds fired since last FTE with 124 GD. it's been approx 25-27 rounds.

Please note that I did make that shot one handed AFTER shooting about 35 consecutive rounds. My hands were buzzing : ) I was really so happy with the results from the 124 GD that I decided to push the envelope.

As for further testing I am now deoing that by simply firing one clip at a time with gold dot 124 and only firing a max of 2 clips per day and putting at least 2 hours between clips. Extreme? Weird? Idk. Shoot little carry a lot and trust my life to it is the goal. Now that being said I would probably pick up my G21 or sig 226 or G22 (or all 3) if I was heading out into an apacolypse battle front (I plan to be GONE when that takes place : ), but for the streets of Indy if I can get 100-200 (not sure yet, please give advise) of consecutive reliability out of it I am good to go.

I would not have even dreamed that was possible 1 month ago. Now with proper grip, Prefered rounds (at least for my R9) and letting my hands rest and barrel cool I am HOPEFUL.

ONLY HOPEFUL AT THIS POINT. More to this story as the box of 124 GD gets lighter and my Carpul tunnel increases lol.

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 05, 2014, 10:54:02 AM
6 clips down the pipe with no FTE / FTF

ONLY 2 FTE out of the last 80 rounds here too.

124 gr GD is where it's at for my R9

Why does the factory not recommend 124? Is it hard on the little gun?

If not I would like to see them open up their recommendations to 124. Any insight?



Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on March 05, 2014, 12:18:25 PM

In my recollection the factory has wisely not taken an official position on any ammo except no +P. Other than that restriction it is up to the owner as to what suits him and his R9 best. Several owners have had anecdotal conversations about ammo with Karl and Maria but it was their opinion and preference at the time to be helpful and offer suggestions. Use whatever works for you. My distributor, Tom Watson, now deceased, steered me to the Gold Dots from day one and I evolved into the GD 124 gr. and HST 124 gr. as an alternative carry ammo. It is doubtful that you will ever hear a specific ammo recommendation from Rohrbaugh.   
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 05, 2014, 02:57:52 PM
According to bob (not bamboobob) the definatiley recommended 115 gr ONLY.

As I spoke with Maria I was informed that silvertip or gold dot 115 for carry or American Eagle 115 Gr for range.

I am seeing that those who are ammo sensitive go heavy or go home frustrated. I am seeing 124 works more than 115 on this forum (but I'm a newb so I may be wrong).

If I am correct and some can fire 115 gr ok and everyone can fire 124 gr ok (provided there is not a problem with the gun) then why do we want people trying to love their R9's and potentially walking away in disgust (see bob's remarks).

That being said I am a newb with about 250 or so rounds through my R9 and with my numb hands typing this I am wishing I didn't have to test it out as much.

If some can't shoot the 124 gr because they jam like mine does on 115 I would be surprised.

Just forum discussion. Please don't take it that I think I know it all : )

Feedback requested fellas.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on March 05, 2014, 03:10:09 PM
 Apparently, I did not state it clearly. Karl also once told me several years ago that he preferred WST 115 gr. but it was never a written policy or recommendation such as Seecamp or Kimber, for example.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: bobsmith on March 05, 2014, 03:17:22 PM
I got this from Rohrbaugh 01/18/2014:

FTF? failure to feed or failure to fire?  Following are some suggestions that have helped others with them
same type of problems.



 



First we will address ammo... We recommend Winchester
Silvertips 115 Gr. STHP and Speer Gold Dot 115 Gr. HP for carry and Federal
American Eagle 115 Gr. FMJ for plinking 124 Gr. may also be used for defense
and plinking.



 



You should be able to put through any standard ammo.  Although 147 can be standard it will beat up
the gun with extended use is not recommended. Remington, Corbon and Hornady
seem to have hard primers and don’t always function in our guns.  Keep in mind that this is a custom gun and
some guns don’t like certain ammo.  As an
important note remember never to use any +P or reloads only standard ammo.



 



The recoil for some after a while can cause fatigue in their
hand which can cause a limp wrist which, in turn will cause problems with
extraction, feeding and cycling. The second is with extended use if the gun is
not cleaned it can malfunction because our pistols have very tight tolerances
and a dirt buildup will cause issues.  We
suggest cleaning the gun after every 50 rounds.
We use 50 but you will need to be the judge especially if the ammo is
dirty.  The third is again with extended
use the metals will heat up and they can expand and can cause it to
malfunction.



 



Another tip for a smooth outing at the range is the speed at
which you’re pulling the trigger.  With
our gun the speed of the hammer is control by how fast your trigger pull is… So
when pulled at an even fast cadence it will increase the inertia therefore
increases a more positive ignition.  We
advise that when you go to the range to initially pull and shoot the gun as if
your life depended on it emptying the magazine.




 



We have found that when people follow the suggestions above
it helps them to have a successful outing.
Please give us a call if your problems persist.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: bobsmith on March 05, 2014, 03:22:43 PM
When i talked to them on the phone they pushed American Eagle 115gr as it was "made by Federal".  I got some of both in 115 grain.  I recall the focusing being on 115 grain mostly.  All my other 9mm are on 124 diets so I ran out and got a number of different 115 grains to try based on this.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 05, 2014, 04:12:05 PM
Unfortunately so did I. I ended up running accross a bunch of WST 115 AND 115 American Eagle right after talking to Maria so I stocked up. Whoops. Well it's Glock fodder now I guess.

Anybody want some WST? Lol.

This is what Maria had been pushing right up to the point the factory began "The Move"

So I ask all you pros out there who successfully run 115 grain (which a lot of us obviously can't) can you run 124 GD's with equal success?

If so, they need to start recommending 124 instead of 115 IMHO : )

Let's see what y'all have to say 
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on March 05, 2014, 04:14:04 PM
I didn't receive that memo. Also, Federal HST 124 gr. was not mentioned in your document. It only became available to the public in the last year or so and has received wide praise with some gun tests with it on this forum.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on March 05, 2014, 04:56:09 PM
To further confuse the issue here is a post from Chris, "R9SCARRY", from the distant past. I think the key word in this discussion is "suggested" and "recommended." There are different ammo options for different owners and a lot of it is personal preference. Chris is very experienced and knowledgeable but was speaking for himself.

http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/rohrbaugh/basefile/ammo.htm
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: bobsmith on March 05, 2014, 05:06:47 PM
I didn't receive that memo. Also, Federal HST 124 gr. was not mentioned in your document. It only became available to the public in the last year or so and has received wide praise with some gun tests with it on this forum.

It was an email I got from them.  It wasn't signed by anyone so I don't know who sent it to me. 
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Douglas on March 05, 2014, 08:42:29 PM
By now I've got about a thousand rounds through my R9S: 115g. 124g. and mostly 147g, without a hiccup.

147g is what I carry.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on March 05, 2014, 08:54:35 PM

Yea, Douglas! Great news. What is the approximate s/n on your R9?
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 06, 2014, 02:42:27 PM
So I ask all you pros out there who successfully run 115 grain (which a lot of us obviously can't) can you run 124 GD's with equal success?

Any responders?
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Douglas on March 06, 2014, 08:06:09 PM

Yea, Douglas! Great news. What is the approximate s/n on your R9?



R1819
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 11, 2014, 04:57:52 PM
Weather's nice guncats. Got any ammo for further testing sir? I'm eager to see your results man : )

Also, would ya consider firing some 115 GD or WST? I would like to see your results.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on March 11, 2014, 10:46:49 PM
I mainly shoot indoors so weather condition is not an issue, I actually like snowy days, get to keep all 15 lanes to myself  ;)

Haven't tried any premium ammo yet.

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: JoshA on March 11, 2014, 11:01:53 PM
Very well sir.

I will look forward to your future posts. Looks like she's running like a sewing machine now.

Take care.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: C0untZer0 on March 19, 2014, 06:03:29 AM
Before I purchased my R9 I poured through posts to get an idea of what kind of ammo the R9 liked and didn't like.  My biggest fear was that the R9 wouldn't cycle the 147gr rounds.  I didn't want a 9mm that could only shoot 115gr standard pressure bullets.

My conclusion from my own research reading posts here, was that the 124gr Gold Dot was the round that worked in most R9s.  It was the most trouble-free cartridge.  So I sized up the 124gr std pressure Gold Dot to make a decision on whether or not I could live with that as a SD round if it turned out that the 124gr Gold Dot was the only round my R9 would shoot.

I came to the conclusion that the 124gr Gold Dot is an adequate self defense round and I purchased an R9.

Now it just so happens that my R9 also shoots the Winchester Ranger "T" Series without any problems and I like that round better than the 124gr Gold Dot for SD
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on April 19, 2014, 09:35:34 PM
updated test log with Gold dot 124gr JHP results (one-handed, both strong and weak hand).

Strange thing is I felt the gun cycles more "solidly" with one-handed hold, the recoil came straight back, instead of the "rocking" motion when using two-handed hold.

I now have enough confidence in this little gun, this will probably be the end of the test.... I know it is not even at half-way point of the original 2000rd goal, but considering the Farmingdale R9's will soon become "collector items"...... :P
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on April 22, 2014, 11:03:26 PM
updated log with Gold Dot 115gr JHP results.
The 115gr recoil is a bit sharper than 124gr, not really a straight back kick, instead it has more of an upward rocking feel to it. Hurts the wrists....
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on April 30, 2017, 09:13:51 PM
4-302017
* took the little gun out of safe and ran a few speed drills today, using Speer Lawman 124gr FMJ. Out of 30 rounds, got one fail-to-fully-eject (empty case pushed back into the chamber, middle of the mag) and one no-bang (the extracted round doesn't show primer strike mark, it was possibly a failure to fully into battery; this was in the middle of the mag. ).
  I got home and checked the gun over and everything looked ok, except that the recoil spring felt rather soft. And I don't remember the round counts on this spring. so I came up there to check the round count records ( which is the primary reason of why I started this thread, I can access the info by a simple google search, anywhere; sharing the experience is just the by product ;)). Sure enough, this spring was way pass the 200rd replacement point, it was already pushing the 300rd mark even before today.
-- with this recoil spring, the first 285rd were malfunction-free.

**Lesson learned: Do change spring before the 200rd mark, or the gun WILL[/ malfunction....

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Douglas on May 04, 2017, 08:54:43 PM
Just checking in. Thanks for the update!  8)
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on May 28, 2017, 10:26:09 PM
5-26-2017
fired 14rd of Speer 124gr FMJ to "burn-in" the new recoil spring. each drill with one round in the chamber, 6 in the mag, two-handed hold, rapid fire; 100%

then tested 14rds of Federal HydraShok 124gr JHP, again "one in chamber, 6 in mag", slow fire
-- strong hand, using the newer mag (stiffer mag spring): 7/7, no problem, 25ft group about 4"
-- weak hand, using an older mag (noticeably softer mag spring): #3 &4 failed to feed, jammed nose-up; might have something to do with the softer mag spring.

(I wanted the hydrashok to work, since Sportsmansguide have them for $12 per box of 20..... oh well, will stick with the GoldDot 124gr for now)

https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/federal-premium-hydra-shok-9mm-luger-hsjhp-124-grain-20-rounds?a=706752
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: backupr9 on May 30, 2017, 09:03:27 AM
Guncat, could the weaker mag spring have been an issue, or the could the weak hand have been the culprit...just a little limp wrist action?
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on May 30, 2017, 10:59:30 PM
probably both. But I suspect the mag spring has more to do with it. Maybe I will burn the remaining 6rd of Hydrashok next time, using the new mag and shoot it weak handed.

and this brings up an interesting point..... how often do we need to replace mag springs? how soft is too soft?
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: backupr9 on June 03, 2017, 06:45:30 PM
There were discussions a few years back about the need to replace recoil springs because they were rapidly pressure loaded, but that mag springs, even left with a loaded magazine, would not require frequent replacement.  I've heard arguments pro and con.  Eric, or MRC or any one of our other experts need to weigh in on this one.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on June 03, 2017, 07:09:57 PM
Springs wear out from use: compression and expansion, not from being left compressed in a magazine. As previously mentioned the same principle applies to recoil springs. However, I have not heard of any recommendations on "rounds fired" criteria with the magazine springs. I have heard of loaded 1911s brought home from the war that had remained unfired for 70 years and fired flawlessly.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: MRC on June 03, 2017, 07:54:45 PM
tracker is absolutely correct about springs.  I just never shoot a pistol enough anymore to worry about mag springs.  I do routinely replace recoil and mag springs on Auto Mags I pickup, but those guns are 40+ years old.

That said, the guys at our club that shoot the steel matches will routinely shoot a 1000+ rounds over a weekend and these are held monthly when the weather is warm. They replace mag springs a lot as they are very competitive and a jam will take them out of contention.

The slide speed on a R9 is very high so a good mag spring is required.  I really do not know of many people who shoot their R9 a lot as they are really not made for that type of shooting.

Let's face it, one of the steel shooters could very well wear a R9 out in a weekend.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on June 04, 2017, 01:20:47 AM
...

Let's face it, one of the steel shooters could very well wear a R9 out in a weekend.

I'd rather say "the R9 could very well wear a steel shooter out in one match". ;) , his shots will be all over the place toward the end .....very different kind of recoils.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: MRC on June 04, 2017, 07:15:13 AM
...

Let's face it, one of the steel shooters could very well wear a R9 out in a weekend.

I'd rather say "the R9 could very well wear a steel shooter out in one match". ;) , his shots will be all over the place toward the end .....very different kind of recoils.

That could happen also.   :)

But believe me, those guys are marathoners.  A 1000+ rounds of fairly hot 40 S&W can take a toll also.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: ECR on June 12, 2017, 12:50:08 PM
Hello everyone. . . . . I'm back from my little "Vacation" on my ole' BMW Scooter.

So, I see we have mention of the magazine springs for our R9 Series Pistols. Well, here is how things went at our shop:

Initially, the mag springs were ten coil jobs. They would begin to give us weak pressure against the rounds in the magazine within a relatively short time, depending on use. Karl went to a 13 coil spring and, while that worked, I felt it was too difficult to load the magazine and I also felt it was not necessary for it to be that stiff. I experimented by cutting one coil off of the 13 coil magazine spring and did a test fire of around 500 or so rounds, all of which were trouble free. I felt confident with this spring at 12 coils and it had the added benefit of being a little bit easier to load the ammunition into the magazine. As a number of you have correctly suggested, a weak mag spring will cause different malfunctions in a semi-automatic pistol. I feel if you are having any troubles with "stove-piping" and such, remove the base plate on your mag and count how many coils you have. If it's a 10 coil spring, then you have the 1st. Gen. spring and you should update that to the 12 coil spring. If you have a 13 coil, you have a 2nd. Gen. spring. Those work well, but are tougher to load. If you have a 12 coil spring, you have the 3rd. Gen. spring, which was to become the "Standard Magazine Spring" for the R9 Pistol. We had the least amount of jamming issues using the 3rd. Gen. 12 coil spring!

Below are the R9 magazine springs from Left to Right: 

Gen. 1 ~ 10 coils

Gen. 2 ~ 13 coils

Gen. 3 ~ 12 coils
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on June 17, 2017, 02:40:35 PM
Interesting on the S&B. It is the ammo tested and recommended by CZ, they are BOTH made in the Czech Republic. HOWEVER S&B is VERY hot ammo even in the non +P.

S&B is made for the Czech military and was designed to also work well in their Sub Guns so it will be a 'bit' warm.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on June 17, 2017, 04:16:42 PM
S&B primers tend to be hard also, and I wouldn't consider that ammo to be fired or carried in the R9.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Boatswainmate on June 30, 2017, 03:28:24 PM
A need to hear from others as to an opinion on how firing 147 gr. trough the R9. Been using Lawmsn 124, Federal and Eagle 115 and 124 gr however failure to extract, eject, stove pipe on occasion recently occurred after new Lawman 147 was first used. Problem with racking first and chambering a round too. For over a year no problem until 2 weeks ago. Possible remedy Inserted new Wolf guide rod spring to start. But question mag springs tension for next tryout. Federal 115 shot by gunsmith and no incidences in rapid fire feed. Racking also no problem for him that test fire? He suggested maybe I was limp wristed preventing feed via rapid fire. Never had a problem for a year racking or firing?? His test was conducted after a new guide rod spring was inserted and alternated between new mags and used mags with used and non used springs. This week I am trying my Lawman 124 gr versus 147 gr my thinking 147 gram too hot a load? Is this possible? Welcome and appreciated are thoughts and comments if problem still exists after new guide rod spring, used unused mags and lowered ammo from 147 grain to 124 or even 115. Thanks
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Boatswainmate on June 30, 2017, 03:52:19 PM
Any comments on a changed out guide rod spring and number of coils and the cut end of a worn spring  versus the two new Wolf springs each side of the old worn spring. Very interested to learn why the worn spring end was cut. Less coils too? The worn one is an original first spring changed out after 300 rounds before jamming occurred. Welcome are comments.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on June 30, 2017, 09:05:18 PM
the old style recoil spring has cut end, the new style have flat-ends.

Lawman 147gr is a pretty stout load, I have never used it in the R9, but when shot in my SDP the recoil difference between 147gr and 124gr Lawman is quite a obvious. It is probably too hot for the R9, and compressed your recoil spring prematurely...

Maybe a fresh recoil spring will bring back the reliability?

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on June 30, 2017, 09:10:24 PM
Why mess with the 147 gr when it has been well documented over years on this forum that the 124 gr and the 115 gr are the ammo choices that function best in the R9?
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on June 30, 2017, 09:21:43 PM
Why mess with the 147 gr when it has been well documented over years on this forum that the 124 gr and the 115 gr are the ammo choices that function best in the R9?




115gr Winchester JHP. Others MAY work but I KNOW this is a reliable load.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 01, 2017, 09:19:17 PM
Early on Eric recommended 115 gr Winchester Silver Tips; then this forum evolved into Speer Gold Dot---115gr or 124 gr. Most recently in the past year or two some of us moved to the Federal HST 124 gr, which I prefer. The most important thing is to carry that which works in a flawless fashion.   
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 02, 2017, 02:35:57 PM
Early on Eric recommended 115 gr Winchester Silver Tips; then this forum evolved into Speer Gold Dot---115gr or 124 gr. Most recently in the past year or two some of us moved to the Federal HST 124 gr, which I prefer. The most important thing is to carry that which works in a flawless fashion.



I'll stick with Eric's recommendation. EVERY WEEK there isa 'NEW WONDER ONE STOP SHOT' anon coming out by EVERYONE.  Silvertips have been doing the job, and work flawlessly in all 6 of my 9R's, since the 1980's.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: mannylinda on July 02, 2017, 09:32:22 PM
I have found a good ammo search engine for Silvertips and all kinds of ammo.
www.gunbot.net
They pretty much search the web with a lot of different filters that can narrow the search and the price.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: MikeInTexas on July 03, 2017, 11:28:33 AM
I have found a good ammo search engine for Silvertips and all kinds of ammo.
www.gunbot.net
They pretty much search the web with a lot of different filters that can narrow the search and the price.

Good find, did not know about that one. 

Thanks,


Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: backupr9 on July 05, 2017, 12:26:25 PM
Excellent!  New to me as well.  Thanks.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 05, 2017, 04:40:39 PM
Federal has a new HST 9mm available: it is the 150 gr micro for short barreled semi-autos. I think that I will try it in my Glock 43 and Shield but not the R9.
http://www.luckygunner.com/9mm-150-grain-hst-jhp-federal-premium-20-rounds#geltest
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on July 05, 2017, 08:52:35 PM
Hello everyone. . . . . I'm back from my little "Vacation" on my ole' BMW Scooter.

So, I see we have mention of the magazine springs for our R9 Series Pistols. Well, here is how things went at our shop:

Initially, the mag springs were ten coil jobs. They would begin to give us weak pressure against the rounds in the magazine within a relatively short time, depending on use. Karl went to a 13 coil spring and, while that worked, I felt it was too difficult to load the magazine and I also felt it was not necessary for it to be that stiff. I experimented by cutting one coil off of the 13 coil magazine spring and did a test fire of around 500 or so rounds, all of which were trouble free. I felt confident with this spring at 12 coils and it had the added benefit of being a little bit easier to load the ammunition into the magazine. As a number of you have correctly suggested, a weak mag spring will cause different malfunctions in a semi-automatic pistol. I feel if you are having any troubles with "stove-piping" and such, remove the base plate on your mag and count how many coils you have. If it's a 10 coil spring, then you have the 1st. Gen. spring and you should update that to the 12 coil spring. If you have a 13 coil, you have a 2nd. Gen. spring. Those work well, but are tougher to load. If you have a 12 coil spring, you have the 3rd. Gen. spring, which was to become the "Standard Magazine Spring" for the R9 Pistol. We had the least amount of jamming issues using the 3rd. Gen. 12 coil spring!

Below are the R9 magazine springs from Left to Right: 

Gen. 1 ~ 10 coils

Gen. 2 ~ 13 coils

Gen. 3 ~ 12 coils

Thanks for the great info Eric.

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on July 05, 2017, 10:34:51 PM
an update on the mag spring replacement (got some replacement springs from Eric...thanks you so much Eric!):

The springs  out of my older silver mags are the 10-coil version. When compared to a new/fresh 10-coil mag spring, the old springs are about 10mm shorter, so they did compress a little from use.

the hammer spring: the old one measures 42mm in length, new/fresh one is 44mm.

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: ECR on July 06, 2017, 04:20:33 PM
You are quite welcome Cats. Glad I can help here somehow.   ;)

Regards,

Eric R.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: guncats on July 08, 2017, 08:47:35 PM
update on the Fed 124gr hydra-shok retesting after mag spring replacement:
-- 7 shots loaded (one in chamber, 6 in mag)
-- used an older silver mag, with fresh 10-coil springs installed.
-- weak-hand only, slow aimed fire
==> shot #3 failed to feed, mouth of bullet caught at the bottom edge of feed-ramp. I stopped at that point.

Looks like this little R9 doesn't like the 124gr hydra.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: Douglas on July 09, 2017, 06:10:21 PM
Thanks GC! Still watching.  8)
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 09, 2017, 07:37:50 PM
GREAT info guncats. Thanks much.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: ECR on July 12, 2017, 07:26:20 AM
update on the Fed 124gr hydra-shok retesting after mag spring replacement:
-- 7 shots loaded (one in chamber, 6 in mag)
-- used an older silver mag, with fresh 10-coil springs installed.
-- weak-hand only, slow aimed fire
==> shot #3 failed to feed, mouth of bullet caught at the bottom edge of feed-ramp. I stopped at that point.

Looks like this little R9 doesn't like the 124gr hydra.

The early 10 coil magazine springs were too weak to push the rounds up quickly enough, which did cause some jamming issues, hence the move to the 12 coil springs, which pretty much eliminated that issue, so your findings here using a 10 coil mag spring are no surprise Cats. Nice R&D thread though. . . . Keep up the good fun work!  Ha haa . . . . .

ecr
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 25, 2017, 02:42:32 PM
update on the Fed 124gr hydra-shok retesting after mag spring replacement:
-- 7 shots loaded (one in chamber, 6 in mag)
-- used an older silver mag, with fresh 10-coil springs installed.
-- weak-hand only, slow aimed fire
==> shot #3 failed to feed, mouth of bullet caught at the bottom edge of feed-ramp. I stopped at that point.

Looks like this little R9 doesn't like the 124gr hydra.




Hi,



Where did you find replacement mag springs? I am going CRAZY Googling them. Thanks

kevinqjhps
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 25, 2017, 02:56:01 PM
The R9 magazine maker was Check-Mate in West Babylon, NY. You might give them a call at 631 491-1777 and inquire about the springs. Wolff was probably the source for the mag springs.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: ECR on July 25, 2017, 06:46:40 PM
 Yes, Walter Wolff made those springs for the magazines.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 25, 2017, 07:06:46 PM
Wolff still stocks R9 recoil springs and trigger sear/bar springs.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 26, 2017, 11:45:42 AM
Wolff no longer stocks the springs BUT it overtime you call ask about them and they will start making them.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 26, 2017, 11:47:11 AM
The R9 magazine maker was Check-Mate in West Babylon, NY. You might give them a call at 631 491-1777 and inquire about the springs. Wolff was probably the source for the mag springs.




Thank you Tracker. I will give him a call.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 26, 2017, 12:09:07 PM
Well I talked to Checkmate. No good :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ They have NO individual parts available. They do have 100 mag bodies that they are having followers and springs made for. He said you must pre-order them NOW if you want mags. After those 100 are gone there will be no more.  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 26, 2017, 12:23:06 PM
What did Alex at Stevens say about your defective magazine? I read that they will replace bad mags but won't sell new ones.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 26, 2017, 04:17:05 PM
What did Alex at Stevens say about your defective magazine? I read that they will replace bad mags but won't sell new ones.



I spoke with Williams. They do have msg springs BUT they are not for sale. You must send both the gun and magazine to get the spring replaced..I lost a Walther PPK/S  once that way and said never again. I have extra mags so I can get by.   
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 26, 2017, 05:06:14 PM
I wouldn't do it, either. They should just replace the magazine if you sent it to them as not functioning properly.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: ECR on July 26, 2017, 11:40:12 PM
 Agreed
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: kevinqjhps on July 27, 2017, 03:14:32 PM
I have sold over 400 guns on G-broker. When shipping in a small box I would NOT list the addressee as " Williams Gun Sight" or similar. I ALWAYS Shipped with something like "Williams G.S.. Company"


More with UPS or Fed Ex, but even with USPS  things in small boxes with gun addresses seem to get 'side tracked' more often.

kevinqjhps

Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: MikeInTexas on July 27, 2017, 11:29:08 PM
I have sole over 400 guns on G-broker. When shipping in a small box I would NOT list the addressee as " Williams Gun Sight" or similar. I ALWAYS Shipped with something like "Williams G.S.. Company"


More with UPS or Fed Ex, but even with USPS  things in small boxes with gun addresses seem to get 'side tracked' more often.

kevinqjhps

My local UPS store will not accept anything firearm related, at all.  Even optics are on their list of stuff they will not handle.  Had to take my EOTech sight to USPS for them to ship back.

However I have shipped 'car parts', 'radio equipment' and 'machine tool parts' from that location without too much trouble :)



.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: tracker on July 28, 2017, 12:00:47 AM
That is a change in policy from UPS; they used to ship overnight without a problem.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: MRC on July 28, 2017, 07:30:13 AM
I have sole over 400 guns on G-broker. When shipping in a small box I would NOT list the addressee as " Williams Gun Sight" or similar. I ALWAYS Shipped with something like "Williams G.S.. Company"


More with UPS or Fed Ex, but even with USPS  things in small boxes with gun addresses seem to get 'side tracked' more often.

kevinqjhps

My local UPS store will not accept anything firearm related, at all.  Even optics are on their list of stuff they will not handle.  Had to take my EOTech sight to USPS for them to ship back.

However I have shipped 'car parts', 'radio equipment' and 'machine tool parts' from that location without too much trouble :)



.

UPS proper takes firearms.  The UPS Store is a private run enterprise and can't meet the protocol that UPS requires.

I recently shipped a rifle insured for $8000.  The Clerk at UPS put a piece of red tape on the box and I asked what that was for.  She said that reminds me to take it to my Supervisor's office so she can move it on in the system.
Title: Re: To be updated: the R9 2000 round test thread
Post by: MikeInTexas on July 28, 2017, 10:12:06 AM
Yeah I know. I've used the hub to ship firearms all over the US, but it's a 45 minute drive to get to it.

However the leftists at my local store are a weird bunch and I have to use a bit of deception if I want to ship from them. 

Problem is they are cheap and convenient so I've learned my lesson about telling them what is actually in the box.


.