The Rohrbaugh Forum

Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: xaman on August 05, 2011, 06:18:35 PM

Title: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: xaman on August 05, 2011, 06:18:35 PM

Hi all,

Forgive my ramblings, but I'm looking for some advice.  

I normally ccw a Sig p290 or a Walther PPS, AIWB.  I enjoy the fact that my primary carry is also fun at the range (good sights and reasonable recoil).  They make me want to practice more (a good thing since I'm a pretty mediocre shot at this point.)  

However, I have been needing something for more discreet carry.  Occasionally, probably less than 10 percent of the time, I have to tuck-in my shirt, or find myself in a suit.  I was reluctant to pay so much for the R9 when I only need it so infrequently, so I picked up a used NAA Guardian 380, thinking I could make that work for those times when I can't carry the larger ccw.  My guardian has the NAA "guttersnipe" sight system.

I shot it today for the first time, 75 rounds without a hitch.  However, I didn't shoot very well as far as groupings.  The sight system was a little frustrating to me honestly.  

Caveat --- I know these are mostly belly guns.

So, here's where I'm at in my thinking :).  If I get an R9, will I be able to shoot it better?  The sights will be similar I know, but the trigger has to be better than this guardian (must be 12-15 lbs, seriously).

Or will I be even more frustrated because now I have a 1200 dollar gun that I can't shoot, lol?  

But part of me thinks, if you aren't going to be able to group, and have to just point shoot, you might as well have a 9mm instead of a 380...

I doubt I'm making any sense.  And in the end, my guess is, I'll never know until I take the plunge and buy an R9.  Otherwise I'll always be wondering if it's really all it's said to be.

Anyway, if any of you have real experience with both the R9 and the Guardian 380, I'd appreciate any insights or comments.

Thanks for looking :)

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: Robar233 on August 05, 2011, 06:42:30 PM

Xaman,
 It is better to hit the target with a .22 than miss with a .45ACP! I think the R9 has an excellent trigger pull. Yes, a bit long but mine is smooth as silk. I have never tested the # but if I had to guess I would say 6lbs to 8lbs. I am sure someone will have more accurate numbers. I have felt the NAA pull and I agree with you, it is rough.
 If you need a super small pistol, I would look at the Seecamp LWS380. If you can go larger the R9 is fantastic.

 Robar233

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: Richard S on August 05, 2011, 09:55:15 PM

xaman:


First of all, welcome to the Forum.

As for the NAA Guardian 380 vs. the Rohrbaugh R9, I own them both. The G380, with "gutter snipe" sights, was my EDC pocket gun prior to the introduction of the R9 in 2004.  Here are photographic comparisons of the two for reference:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/R9G380Side-by-Side.jpg)

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/g380r9.jpg)

As can be seen, the difference in size of the two pistols is minimal. However, the weight of the G380 is a little greater than that of the R9 (even without the three Troy ounces added by those sterling silver grips I had cast for my G380). The G380 can be field stripped, cleaned, and reassembled in the dark. But the R9 is the smallest and lightest pistol yet designed for the 9mm Parabellum cartridge. The G380 is a straight-blowback design, while the R9 employs a locked-breech mechanism. Consequently, the felt recoil (at least for me) seems to be about the same for both pistols. As for accuracy, I am better with the R9 than with the G380. That, no doubt, is due to the silky-smooth trigger of the R9 -- and perhaps the short sight-radius of the G380's "gutter snipe" sights. The shortness of the "gutter snipe" sight radius can be seen in this photograph:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/g380-meltedpolishedguttersnipesights.jpg)

As a result of all of the above, the R9 has been my EDC for the past seven years, while the G380 has enjoyed honorable retirement in my gun safe.

In my opinion, the R9 is quite simply the finest pocket pistol yet designed. While the G380 is built like a little tank, the R9 is what I would describe as a functional work of art.
_____

I should add that, while the G380 received sterling silver grips, I decided that the R9 -- as a functional work of art -- deserved something a little better:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/OutofAfrica--HisHers-1.jpg)

_____

[[size=10][Last edit: Typo.][/size]

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: xaman on August 06, 2011, 12:04:14 AM

Richard and Robar,

Thanks for the responses.  Richard, your experience does help a lot, and I'm especially glad to see that you do shoot the R9 better.  I think I need to save some pennies and give it a try.

You are correct about the Guardian being built like a tank, wow.

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: backupr9 on August 07, 2011, 10:37:21 AM

"Accuracy" for any self defense pistol may be difficult to determine.  Accuracy from a rest or in slow fire is certainly nice to have, but that is not how self defense situations usually present.  IMHO you want a small, handy, totally reliable handgun that you can present and fire quickly and rapidly while still staying on a potentially moving target while loaded with adrenalin.  In this situation you cannot focus on the sights anyway....your vision will be tunneled on the target and with practice you should be able to present the front sight to that target and fire several shots rapidly at a target that will likely be from 3 to 10 yards away.   "Accuracy" will then be a different concept from range shooting and a smooth 6 to 8 pound trigger pull would serve you best, as would the larger caliber.  Go with the R9 unless you can carry a .40 or .45!

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: theirishguard on August 07, 2011, 11:56:39 AM

Eli, Welcome to the forum. I hope you enjoy your time here. I've carried a Seecamp .32acp for 27 years and a R9s since they first shipped out pistols. The deal about the R9s is it's 9mm, light, well made, pocketable and lifetime warranty. The R9s is easy to shoot with some limited practice ie: shoot a couple of mags each time, take it easy and make it a fun learning experience. Tom

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: Aglifter on August 07, 2011, 08:09:15 PM

The pup itself is accurate, but I find it difficult to shoot well - it works well at 15 yards or less, on a standard target, for me, but I can shame myself on a plate rack w. it...  

Part of me suspects that w. a F.O. front sight, and a good rear notch, it could be useful, but the Karl didn't think it should have sights at all, at first, so...

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: jaa82 on August 16, 2011, 10:50:03 AM

xaman - I'm dealing with the same delimma.  I've purchased a lot of pistols thru the years and unforetunately, I've come to regret some of the purchases.  I'm trying to do more research and get more opinions before making my next purchase.  

Regarding the G380 - Seems like guttersnipe is a must, what about dehorning or crimson trace for that matter?  If I add those three options the price of G380 (~$800) is getting closer to an R9.  

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: xaman on August 16, 2011, 11:46:59 AM

Jaa,

I have the guardian, and also just sent off the money for a new R9... I'll try to report back with a direct comparison after I've had both in hand, carried concealed, and tested on the range.

However, I can update my original thoughts concerning the Guardian.  I pocket carried it a few times in dress slacks, and man it's heavy.  I've never worried about weight when belt carrying, but it makes a big difference in the pocket.

At this point I'm hoping the R9 is thin and small enough to carry IWB in a tuck able holster without printing.  

Good luck :D

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: xaman on August 16, 2011, 11:50:20 AM

Oh yeah, forgot to mention:  the guttersnipes were what I wanted in theory, but I don't care for them in practice.  I certainly wouldnt pay $150 plus shipping to have them added to a guardian, personally.

It'd be great if you could find some to try before you buy.  I could pretty much tell before I even fired them that they were only minimally better than no sights, and worse that the factory minuscule standard sights.  

(I bought mine secondhand, so didn't lose any money on the sights.). Just Thinking out loud...

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: backupr9 on August 16, 2011, 03:24:13 PM

Quote

The pup itself is accurate, but I find it difficult to shoot well - it works well at 15 yards or less, on a standard target, for me, but I can shame myself on a plate rack w. it...  

Part of me suspects that w. a F.O. front sight, and a good rear notch, it could be useful, but the Karl didn't think it should have sights at all, at first, so...

The R9 was developed for close range self defense and is, in fact, a "belly gun."  At close range and in a hurry, front sight awareness and and smooth trigger control might be more important than lasers, fancy sights, etc.  I have a laser on my wife's S&W 642 .38 which will be fine for her in low light and at night, but in bright sunlight, it takes much longer to acquire the laser dot than I like, and have found myself using the sight in preference.  If you jerk the trigger or push the pistol in anticipation of recoil, you won't hit the target regardless of what sights you use.  The best advice I've ever been given: "Spend your money on ammo and practice with your weapon of choice."

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: yankee2500 on August 16, 2011, 11:11:16 PM

Quote

  The best advice I've ever been given: "Spend your money on ammo and practice with your weapon of choice."

++1

  All the gimmicks and gadgets in the world won't make any difference if you can't do your part.

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: Moonshine on September 05, 2011, 03:42:58 PM

OK, this thread made me wonder, so I just measured the trigger pull of my R9S using a Lyman digital trigger pull gauge.  The average of 10 trigger pulls was 7 lbs, 12.5 oz.

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: xaman on September 05, 2011, 04:57:26 PM

Do you have a guardian to compare it to?

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: Robar233 on September 05, 2011, 06:05:27 PM

Xaman,

 I had an ASP 9mm built in the early '80's. It came with yellow guttersnipe sights. I never did get the hang of them. As I have aged it became even more difficult to use them. I traded the ASP for my Robar edition and I have not looked back, much. My only regret was there were only 300 of the ASP's made and they have a following.
 That being said, I carried the ASP a handful of times. The R9 is my primary EDCW.
 I would suggest you put a bunch of rounds through your R9 and fined the ammo you both like.
 Robar233

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: xaman on September 05, 2011, 07:32:00 PM

Absolutely.  I'm definitely committed to the R9 at this point. I started this thread when I had the Guardian but no R9 yet.  Since I made the plunge for the R9, I'm definitely loving it.

Unfortunately, I sent my Guardian back to NAA because the tritium inserts in the guttersnipe sights were dead.  They are supposed to call in the next week or so with options, but when originally speaking to the gunsmith on the phone, he told me the guttersnipes were backordered for at least 6 months.  He asked if I'd be pleased with Novaks in stead.  That would be a stellar swap for me, if it pans out.  We shall see.

But in the meantime, I haven't had the chance to shoot, or even hold, both the guardian and the R9 at the same time.  The guardian went off before the R9 landed...

I think they are both fine weapons, but the R9 is in a different class in so many ways :)

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: Moonshine on September 06, 2011, 12:17:49 AM

Quote

Do you have a guardian to compare it to?

Sorry, I do not.

Title: Re: R9 compared to Guardian 380
Post by: eye_spy on September 06, 2011, 10:50:32 PM

I had a guardian and my opinion is the r9 is superior and I feel more comfortable with the caliber.

I have been a die hard 1911 guy for ...a long time. I can't imagine life without the r9.

I don't miss the guardian, or seecamp I once owned.


BUT, guns are a real personal choice.