The Rohrbaugh Forum
Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: WatchTimes on February 10, 2006, 12:31:37 AM
-
http://kel-tec.com/pf9pr.htm
Hmm
Looks like Kel Tec is jumping on the bandwagon.
I had the .380 and the quality was just so lets say cheap, I dont know if I really trust them. I will still have to take a look at this when it comes out.
-
I handled and even dry-fired it a the SHOT show today. It was the nicest quality KT I have seen - admittedly, I am a KT fan however. If you are looking for the finish level of an R9, you are probably not going to be satisfied. I liked the PF-9 quite a bit, and compare it closely to a Kahr PM9. It is thin and light, but longer and taller through the grips than both the PM9 and R9.
-
The R9 is still smaller -
R9 5.2"l, 3.7"h, .812"w - 12.8 oz
PF9 5.85"l, 4.3"h, .88"w - 12.7 oz
and, dare I say - much better engineered and constructed! And WTF do you need/want an accessory rail for on a pocket gun????????????
-
Yep - that accessory rail really got to me! ;D
I agree this gun will prove to be some competition for the R9 - but then too we are apples and oranges as well!!
The price will filter out the buyers - and daresay the new KT will fit a niche - those folks who cannot or will not pay the R9 price.
Simple ! :) I know which I prefer.
-
I don't think it will really compete with the R9. It is a bit thinner, especially through the grips, but otherwise larger.
Karl R. took one of the new R9's apart for me today, and showed me the brand new Smith & Wesson M&P finishes. The R9 is a one very fine pistol. The triggers i tried today were much, much better than the one I tried at a gunshow several months back. I now suspect that one may have had a problem.
-
The triggers i tried today were much, much better than the one I tried at a gunshow several months back. I now suspect that one may have had a problem.
The triggers were better? In what way?
-
The trigger on my R9 from about a year and a half ago is/was just fine. I hope they didn't change that.
-
The triggers were better? In what way?
The one I tried originally was too heavy for my tastes and hung before it broke. All the R9/R9s I dry-fired today were lighter and smoother, especially right before the break.
-
Hey pocketgun, thanks for the info, look out you might have to get one now that you like it.
Tom
-
Kel-Tec was careful to say lightest and flattest... not smallest.
I think the R-9 specs were clearly a production goal, since the unloaded weight is .1 oz. less than a Rohrbaugh and the slide is hundreds of an inch ... er ... "flatter."
Frankly, I think KT has had something stuck in their craw ever since the R-9 and PM-9 took away their "smallest 9mm" advertising schtick.
-
The trigger mechanism on the R9 is very simple -- I took my grip off, took the assembly apart and cleaned it, and had my wonderful original trigger again -- some lint/grit, etc had gotten into the grease.
-
The R9 trigger is indeed simple - to the point of being exquisitely so IMO.
Well, if Pocketgun tried the new and found them better - I have to wonder what ''better'' does to ''already superb''!!!!
My two are exact 7#, no problems with the break and butter smooth - hard to imagine that getting much better! I actually find poundage no prob' with triggers but I do demand smooth.
I shall hope to get my sweaty paws on a new one sometime, just to see properly the small differences.
-
I'm confused, But thats not hard to do. If the pf9 is .88"w and the r9 is .812"w How is the pf9 flatter? Dan
-
I think the portion that actually contributes to the PF9 being wider are the slide and mag releases - the slide itself may be a bit thinner than the R9, but as a whole, with controls, the PF9 is wider.
-
I sure like the trigger on my July 2005-built R9S. IMHO, as good a DAO trigger as there is in the business. The big trick is straight linkage without bends to cause torque / side loading on the pivots, and the Rohrbaugh attention to fit & finish. 8)
As for making a 9 mm pistol smaller than the R9 - I don't think I'd want to fire many rounds from one of those.
Lots of forum members have noted ergonomic issues with the R9. Their hands are just too big to get the pistol to cycle properly. I think it was Erich who found he had to trap his weak-side thumb between the grip and his strong-side thumb for reliable cycling.
-
Having handled both of them yesterday, the R9 is shorter and less tall, but the PF9 seemed thinner, the grip area of the R9 being the difference.
Hey pocketgun, thanks for the info, look out you might have to get one now that you like it.
Tom
Yeah, I was impressed with the pistols yesterday, and like what the Rohrbaughs are trying to do. ;)
-
FireBreather01, Thanks for the clarification. I don't know if I would hang my advertising on it being a flatter gun if it has protrusions that make it wider. ??? Dan
-
It’s been said before here. Competition breeds innovation! As for the PF-9, on paper I’m sure it’s got its pluses & minuses in comparison to the Rohrbaugh.
I for one would like to see comparison photos between the two!
-
The Rohrbaugh and the MK9/PM9 are all way smaller than the dimensions of the latest Kel-Crapper.
Length:
Keltec 5.85"
Kahr 5.3"
Rohrbaugh 5.2"
-
I don't care what the numbers say, there is more than 0.1" difference in size between the R9 and the micro Kahr ...
(http://www.fototime.com/AD9304C5FC54D33/standard.jpg)
... the human eye can barely see the difference in 0.1" and I can clearly see that there is a differnece in size of the two guns. Either the micro-Kahr is bigger than it says or the R9 is smaller than it says but I refuse to believe that there is only a 0.1" difference between the two ot them.
-
Fudster, the R9s looks alot smaller to me also.
Tom
-
I was not able to keep my Kahr PM9 because it just seemed too large and heavy for pocket carry, despite giving it a good long try. I always carried IWB.
The R9S, on the other hand, just slips right into the pocket and is not noticed.
-
I don't care what the numbers say, there is more than 0.1" difference in size between the R9 and the micro Kahr ...
(http://www.fototime.com/AD9304C5FC54D33/standard.jpg)
... the human eye can barely see the difference in 0.1" and I can clearly see that there is a differnece in size of the two guns. Either the micro-Kahr is bigger than it says or the R9 is smaller than it says but I refuse to believe that there is only a 0.1" difference between the two ot them.
R9 5.2"l, 3.7"h, .812"w - 12.8 oz
PF9 5.85"l, 4.3"h, .88"w - 12.7 oz
The difference in length is .65", or just over 5/8". The .1" difference is purported to be in the width. All-in-all, it's still bigger than the R9. For a semi-auto 9mm, I believe the R9 is right at the maximum for a true pocket gun. ANY larger, and it starts to defeat the purpose - you might as well have a bigger gun on your hip!
-
FireBreather01, I was comparing the R9 to a micro Kahr ...
Kahr 5.3"
Rohrbaugh 5.2"
... which is suppose to have difference in LENGTH of only 0.1" but looking at the picture comparison -- appears to be more.
-
:-[
BIG oops on my part! So much for my powers of observation!!!
-
It could be that close if you compare the distance from the barrel to the rear end of the grip -- still happier w. my pup :D
-
Are there any pictures out there of the Kel-Tec PF9? I see it was at the Shot show but cannot find it anywhere on the internet.
RTOhio
-
They are revising the Kel-Tec web site. It should be there soon, I imagine.
Here is the previous view.
http://www.kel-tec.com/old-site/pf9pr.htm
Bill
-
DDGator:
I'm not the defender of the KelTec faithful, but I do own a P11 and a P32 and they have both been quite accurate at self-defense range and 100% reliable.
If you don't think a KelTec P11 (and probably a Kahr among others) was laying on the design table when Rohrbaugh was considering potential size and function of their fine, yet to be produced 9mm, I respectfully suggest you might be mistaken.
It would have been stupid for Rohrbaugh designers to ignore the small 9mm pistols already in production when they got to the design phase for the R-9..
I don't think the Rohrbaugh folks were stupid.
Also I don't even consider the R9 as competition for the new KelTec "slim" 9mm simply because price alone would deter probably 90% of potential 9mm pistol buyers away from the Rohrbaugh.
Simply put, IMO, (covering my butt here), I don't think the majority of "regular folks" can afford to spend a grand on a cc pistol. I'm not saying most of us wouldn't LIKE to, nor am I saying the Rohrbaugh isn't worth the price of admission. I just don't think most average pistol buyers even have a $1000 buck pistol on their radar when they head out to buy some firearm to carry concealed.
IMO the Rohrbaugh has a nitch of its own in the concealed pistol market.. But then so has the H&K P7M8 in a larger 9mm pistol. Both top quality, both too expensive for average income buyers.
I've personally meandered all over the small firearm market over the past couple of decades, and at present still have a few, including 3 J-frame Smith revolvers. I have yet to find any of them that allow me more concealed carry protection than my 638 Bodyguard w/Crimson Trace Lasersights. CT is releasing a set of their excellent CT Lasergrips this month for the Sig P239, and I'm ready when they are.....
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_4765.jpg)
I'm certainly NOT knocking the Rohrbaugh, only saying things that all Rohrbaugh owners (and those who wish to own a Rohrbaugh) already know. The Rohrbaugh pistol is about as assessable a firearm to the average joe as a Porsche 911 would be to a potential vehicle buyer..
Nope, I don't think KelTec has any problem with Rohrbaugh at all. Not the same market, and the small size of the R9 simply means nothing to those firearm buyers who couldn't afford one anyway.
For the same reason I don't think the new single stack 9mm KelTec introduced at the Shot Show will siphon off any potential Rohrbaugh buyers. Not the same market.
Hey, Rohrbaugh should be completely satisifed to have cornered the market for those who can afford the best, AND for what it's worth (not much) the smallest cc 9mm pistol....
Best wishes to all the Rohrbaugh owners and others who appreciate the fine little pistol. Heck, I appreciate the pistol too.... I just can't afford it.
Thanks,
J. Pomeroy ;D
-
Laserlips,
I agree with a lot of what you say, and can live with a lot of the rest... ;)
I am serious that I think KT didn't like losing that "smallest" moniker. Now they are "flattest"? They are looking for a new "est" I guess...
I think its funny that the PF-9 beats the R-9 in one measurement by THOUSANDTHs of an inch. I don't think that is coincidental. Do I blame them for doing it? Of course not.
I don't think, from what I have been told, that Karl Rohrbaugh had any particular benchmark in mind with the R-9. He wanted to make it as small as possible to contain 9mm pressures and function reliably. After much experimentation with slide length and weight and springs -- the current R-9 proportions are what he came up with, and I tend to believe it is the ragged edge, size-wise, of what can be done.
I do have to quarrel with your price analogy. A base Porsche 911 runs about $71,000. Your average nice commuter car (say a Honda Accord LX) is about $20,000. That makes the Porsche about 3x more expensive...
A Glock 26 is a pretty good example of a "working man's gun." It runs about $500. An R-9 can be had for less than $1,000, so its something like 2x more expensive...
However, I don't think you can compare $500 more expensive to $50,000 more expensive. A $500 difference can be saved up by most people who really want to do it. To call a $950 gun unobtainable to the masses seems like a stretch.
Anyway -- my two cents. By the way, I own a couple of Kel-Tecs and I like them just fine. ;D
-
I purchased the .380 Kel-Tec model after getting the R9 ...
(http://fud-files.netfirms.com/image/private/guns/f156.jpg)
... but was less than impressed with the Kel-Tec and after a trip to the factory didn't correct the problem, I traded the gun in. Still have the R9 :)
-
[quote author=DDGator
I do have to quarrel with your price analogy. A base Porsche 911 runs about $71,000. Your average nice commuter car (say a Honda Accord LX) is about $20,000. That makes the Porsche about 3x more expensive...
A Glock 26 is a pretty good example of a "working man's gun." It runs about $500. An R-9 can be had for less than $1,000, so its something like 2x more expensive...
[/quote]
DDGator:
Thanks for your reply..
I don't think we need to quarrel about the analogy as when I was making the price comparison I was comparing the price of a new Rohrbaugh to what should be the price of KelTec's new "slim" 9mm pistol.
I've read where the price of the KelTec should be realistically be sold for around $250.00. KelTec's are generally discounted from retail price, even tho for the first few months that might not necessarily be true..
I've "heard" that Rohrbaugh's generally are NOT discounted as they are hard to get, and apparently still not produced in sufficent numbers to allow for discounts in general. I could be wrong in this, but even if they sold for $750.00 + tax they would still be three times the price of the KelTec. Can you purchase a new Rohrbaugh for $750.00? If so, then I stand corrected, and apologize.
As for the Glock 26. When the Glock 26's were first sold to the public I had yet to retire, so my "buy the flavor of the month" firearm mindset was still in effect.. In fact I bought two of the suckers. I didn't like them. They had a trigger action that I respectully suggest is an AD looking to happen for AVERAGE shooters. I think Glocks are fine for professional shooters, and LEO types (except for the guy who shot himself in the leg with a 40cal Glock while demonstrating how to be "safe with firearms" to a class of elementary school kids..)... The Glock 26 felt like a brick in my hands, was not as accurate (for me) as my Sig P239, and had a ftf problem. I sold them both. I don't consider the Glock 26 in the same "size" for easy concealed carry as I do the Rohrbaugh or the new KelTec we are discussing.
You are entirely correct in that it is easier to save $500 than an extra $50,000 (or it is here in my household), but IMO Honda Accord purchasers (yep, I had one of those too..) generally never make it by the local Porsche dealership for a test ride. Most know putting a Porsche in the garage just "ain't" (I live in Ga.) gonna happen.
Thanks again for your response.
Best Wishes,
JP. ;D
-
Reading through this string I feel compelled to ask.....
For those PM9 owners or past owners, in your opinion is the R9 trigger smother than the PM9. If it is in a couple weeks I will be in trigger heaven. The PM9 IMO is the best DA pull I have ever experienced. Smooth as silk as reviews have indicated.
Is it the same type feel through travel, different, inbetween, etc.
Thx, Fred
-
IIRC correctly from checking out the PM9, the R9 has a smoother and somewhat lighter trigger. Both are good, but I think the R9 is a nicer feeling trigger. The trigger feel was the first thing I noticed that demonstrated the overall craftsmanship present in the gun.
Perhaps a forum member owning both guns can comment more accurately than I can from my memory of the PM9 trigger.
-
The MK9 has a smoother and somewhat lighter trigger but it lacks a repeat striker capability which is found on the R9 and the R9 has a nicer feeling trigger IMO.