The Rohrbaugh Forum
Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: R9SCarry on September 20, 2004, 06:17:27 PM
-
OK guys .. many apolagies for the wait .... particularly to Dan who I know was thirsting for results from the Rangers he sent me. I did tho need to run some things by Eric and Karl before ''going live'' with the URL ... and seeing as those guys work all hours, it took a while.!!
Anyways - had a chat with both today and after an addition on my conclusions page .. was ready to go. That is all uploaded as is the updated R9 ammo data page, so ... do go peek when you have time.
[size=18]R9 ammo test #3[/size] (http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/thr/r9s-tests-03/)[/url]
[size=18]R9 ammo data page[/size] (http://www.acbsystems.com/boards/data/R9-ammo-data.htm)[/url]
All comments and queries welcome. I will say again that for expansion tests I must try something better than wet pack. Water would be preferable if I had the necessary large tank - and even better would be gel .. but cost and logistical problems there.
-
Very nice job. Much thanks.
-
I think you did a wonderful job with your testing and it is very helpful in determining appropriate carry ammo for the R9.
Thanks!!
-
I think the destabilization is a little disconcerting given that this pistol cost $950.
-
Superficially I would once have agreed about the destabilization .. but having learned the reason for the freebore being generous and why - and adding in close range useage factors ... I think it is something I can accept - personally.
As far as cost goes ... the gun is a hibrid high tolerance piece IMO which has had to have design concessions made in order to achieve the goal of such a small piece in a major cal .... I doubt it could be any other way .. plus remember too .. the choice of ammo not only aids the reliability factor but also all but rules out frequent or significant bullet instability probs.
I can live with that myself .. but appreciate not everyone agrees.
Again .. only my own 2c!
-
Fantastic job, Chris. Really spectacular. Thank you so much.
As for Incursion's comment: All critisims of this gun seem to come down to price... I have heard it all. "Oh yeah, well a cost that costs $1,000 should have X or shouldn't have X!" This is a high quality gun produced with expensive materials (no plastic, no cast or MIM parts -- instead stainless steel, aircraft aluminum, carbon fiber and Wolff springs) in a low volume factory with a lot of hand fitting.
Furthermore, there was ton of R&D that went into this gun. I can't recall if we have discussed this before, but Karl and Eric spent a lot of time and money working with Wolff and others to design the shortest possible slide/spring combination to permit reliable function. Much was trial and error, until they found the smallest combination that would contain 9mm pressures and function properly. The freebore issue is, I am sure, related to that. This is a design which absolutely pushes the envelope of gun design and the laws of physics! The reason its not .25 inches shorter is because its not possible -- can't reasonably be done.
Accept the R-9 for what it is. A sports car. A thoroughbred. A semi-custom handgun that pushes the limits of what is possible in a 9mm pocketgun.
Its not a target pistol, a race gun, a compact or even a sub-compact. It can only do what it can do. R9SCarry's results--I think--prove that it can do a lot. If bullet stability is your ultimate goal, a Glock 19 should do well for you. Or better yet, a Glock 34. Just don't expect them to fit in your pocket.
-
Dang Chris......nice photos and layout as usual. Do you work for a magazine or have graphics or photography background?
-
Thx Duane.
I would mention one more thing .. and this is relevant to something I discussed with Karl. He told me how with his Seecamp - bought in 1980 ... he might put a coupla mags of ammo thru every - what .. 3 months. Clean up and put it back in his attache case, or wherever it lived. This meant he ''proved'' it .. he also swapped mags ... relaxing one and refilling the other.
I have come to think we should treat the R9 similarly. Sure ... initially we break a new gun in .. we need to practice and explore the boundaries of functionality ... be proficient. IMO this can be done over the first 100 rounds. If then we make a wise choice on carry ammo ... and periodically check for cleanliness and function .. then I think we need to let this pup become what it is meant to be. A close quarters, emminently concealable, pocket 9mm. NOT a regular range plinker! Would we take our Ferrari onto rough roads willingly, and beat it up? :D
Having put over 300 rounds now thru my first R9 ... I am actually loathe to do much more, despite having a new recoil spring ass'y. About all I would like to do now is swap the pin for the correct spec uprated version.
When I get #2 .. over next month I rather hope .. this will become the constant-use carry .. whether BUG or primary . I shall not worry so much about aesthetic degredation ... then I can keep my #1 for posterity .. well, loaded and ready buy the desk here maybe! :)
-
[size=13] Do you work for a magazine or have graphics or photography background?[/size]
Haha ... you posted while i was writing Jim!
No - no magazine work but - most of my work is web design oriented (generally very ''gizzmo-free - don't use many bells and whistles!) .. plus data conversion and that sorta stuff. Despite my primary qual' being Engineering (systems) ... I started freelance photography long ago - as an extension of a hobby. I had my own darkroom for years and processed all film and prints ... mostly B/W work.
I guess that helps even now with dig work . Camera useage etc is not something you forget .. plus all the image manip work I have to do with web things means I can tweak pics usually, enough to make em do what I want!
So - expert? No, not really ...... but enough experience I guess to sorta mostly know what I am doing! :) (some of the time ;D)
-
I agree with Chris. I have shot a couple hundred rounds to verify function, test my carry ammo (Gold Dots), and get comfortable with the gun. Having done that, I plan to shoot it occasionally (at least quarterly) -- probably just the 13 rounds I carry in the gun and spare mag. That does three things: 1) verifies continuing function, 2) keeps me familiar with the gun, and 3) rotates my carry ammo. I will clean after each session, but that is pretty much my standard procedure with all my guns.
-
I can accept the tradeoffs if I can get the gun to work reliably in my hands. I think Eric is starting to see me as a thorn in his side. His tone when I told him about the broken barrel pin wasn't what I expected.
-
I spoke with Eric last week about this same topic. I have over 600 totally bobble free rounds through mine. Changed to new pin and grip screws. Tested new pin with 12 more rounds...now my plinking days with R9s are over...now it is my carry gun but will only be test fired periodically...carry 124 gr gold dots.
-
Incursion....sorry you continue to have problems..I would send gun back again.....I cant imagine Eric won't or can't fix it.....I only know I have not had ANY misfire, bobbles, fte, or anything but bang in over 600 rounds of gold dot and pmc.
-
Yeah, if I had 600 rounds through mine without any hiccups, I'd be carrying it too! I envy you!
-
Incursion ... I really am distressed you have had problems ... seems very much a rarity. I trust tho in the long run all can be sorted out for you. Murphy always seems to get into the frame at times!
One small point re the test stuff .. I have been told of and found one or two links which were wrong .. happens!! I think I have sorted this now but do please tell me if something dson't go where it should!
And .. off topic ... but sure as heck hope we'll hear from fly soon.
-
Superficially I would once have agreed about the destabilization .. but having learned the reason for the freebore being generous and why - and adding in close range useage factors ... I think it is something I can accept - personally.
What is this about the freebore? I did a search on 'freebore' but it only points to this thread. Please enlighten me. :)
-
Frank ... With a round chambered, there always has to be some gap ahead of bullet ... if it were already engaged in the rifling then pressures would spike dangerously.
In rifles this ''jump'' gap is small .. possibly in order of 0.025" .. it is something reloaders try to get right . just enough - not too much - but certainly not too little or none. This is why OAL of cartridge is very critical with rifle reloading... for safety and optimum performance.
In handguns it is less critical by comparison but required for same reasons. A revo doesn't need one ... it has a cylinder throat and gap already and so looses peak pressure safely. In auto's it is more critical and necessary. Karl elected with the R9 barrel design to give a large freebore of 0.025" in order to bring the peak pressure level down to a safe region before rifling is engaged - thus spare the whole mechanism from possibly destructive effects of severe pressure spike - safeguarding too I'd say the chamber walls too.
It is this generous freebore which now seems likely to at times permit slightly uneven engagement of rifling as the bullet jumps the gap and then ''bites'' rifling.
Don't know whether this helps any.
-
Thanks. I familiar with what freebore is, but hadn't seen anything on it being different in the R9 than in other pistols.
-
Sorry Frank .. musta sounded like I was trying to teach Grammaw to suck eggs! Just ran thru the whole deal from habit! ::) :)
-
R9SCarry
Thanks for the lesson, some know, some don't..
I have wished for years now, that God had put a little gauge, like a Fuel Gauge, on everyone's forehead. So you could look and see if that person had a "Full" tank, or was running on "Empty".... :D
-
RJ ... haha .. you too eh? Yes indeed - how many times did I wish for that lil' gauge ..... sometimes I assume it shows full when it doesn't but more often, I assume empty or part full and plow on ranting away and prosthelitizing ... in all innocense! ;D
Hey .. BTW .... LOVE the new avatar ... very cool Sir! I think we should all post self pics .. put faces to each other! :P
-
R9SCARRY,
Just wanted to add my thanks for your great work. Insightful, interesting, and well presented! A lot of work to put together - much appreciated.
We'll have to wait for a while before we try to get you to test even more ;). I, for one, will be happy to send a bunch of ammo for any future testing...
-
Thank you Brian .. well, perhaps by time I get #2 R9 I'll be ready to put some more ammo thru ... break it in!! :D It is rather time consuming but it is also rewarding in as much as we all benefit .. even tho in the theater of testing I am no pro'!! :P
I think we have covered most ammo brands that matter for now - broken the back of it perhaps. But daresay down the line we'll have a few more yet.
-
Excellent Chris... as we have come to expect from you. You sent a very high standard for yourself - and have once again accomplished it WELL. Thanks! ;D
I know that was a LOT of work. Now, I'm just hoping you didn't Read all those papers, just shot them. ::) A most perfect use for printed news in most cases!
Now, how can we do some useful ammo testing with TV news?
Again, thanks!
-
Chris:
Your ammunition tests and reports are truly extraordinary pieces of work! Thank you!
RS
-
I really appreciated reading this test. Thank you for all your trouble.
OK, so I have to ask this question and maybe it is an empirical one and not answerable without actual tests. But this whole idea of bullet instability makes me wonder what effects that will have on the degree to which the bullet will penetrate and do damage. A big reason for going with this gun is that is shoots 9mm rounds instead of a .380 or similar caliber from small guns. But will the instability make the bullet more comparable to a stable but smaller caliber bullet in its effect? That is, will an unstable 9mm round penetrate and do damage similar to a .380 round that is stable? Or will that be offset by a larger wound channnel when the bullet is moving off its axis as it moves forward...or what? Thanks in advance for thoughts!
-
mjt - welcome to the forum .. :)
Re your points ... IMO - broadly speaking - the occasional round which can occuir with a slight deviation from axis as it leaves the gun, is within the short distances envisaged in a combat situation ... still going to do damage - plenty I'd say.
My thinking is .... the sort of tumble which I would anticipate - (when it occurs) - would be in region perhaps of some 5º as an absolute max ... thus, I consider that on impact the HP will still probably try and expand ... if of suitable design .. like Gold Dot - but marginally asymmetrically. Once expansion has initiated, the bullet ''off axis'' element will almost certainly IMO produce a significant yaw .. and thence rapid tumble effect.
Clothing density will, as ever, affect performance but I do think that penetration will be more than adequate and the damage quotient considerable .. possibly even more at a shallower depth than a ''straight and true'' bullet impact.
This really is why I do not treat the possibility of an occasional tumble effect with any great degree of concern ... consider maybe the old days with a 38spl wad cutter ... it delivered an affective hit and probably quickly gained some tumble too - if meeting varying tissue/bone densities .. and yet - results were probably considered well adequate.
So - 6+1 - of the right ammo will for me be just fine ... even if one of those were to yaw a bit. Our aggressor will I am sure not be aware of any great reduction in wounding potential!
-
And if it some how twists totally sideways. I guess it will just hit with a big KER....THUMPP. ;D
Actually, just kidding, I agree with Chris above.
-
R9SCarry,
Thank you for those thoughts. Did you observe any differences in penetration depths across the bullets that showed sooting vs. not or were they pretty much the same? I guess that might be one way to measure the degree to which it makes much difference.
-
mjt ... All I can say - as a generality really .... is that when doing penetration tests, bullets that showed some tumble and unequal expansion where pretty much ''down there in the pack'' along with symmetrical ones. So do not think it prejudices penetration all that much ... JMHO.
-
R9SCarry, thanks for the work, excellent. Needless to say, I'm extremely disappointed in the Ranger 147 in the R9. Expansion was very strange, indeed. Looks like GD 124 is the prefered ammo, and here I'm sitting on a 500 round case of the Ranger :) My Kahr seems to like it I guess that is where I'll use it. Again, nice work, thanks!