R9S or KahrPM9

[DDGator]

Searcher -- you hit on another aspect of buying a Rohrbaugh -- try getting Gaston Glock on the phone... or his brother!  

Second strike capability is routinely considered to be an added benefit by knowledgeable trainers -- a second strike takes a fraction of a second and can be done without the need for second hand or taking the gun off target.

[TCat]

Second strike capability is routinely considered to be an added benefit by knowledgeable trainers -- a second strike takes a fraction of a second and can be done without the need for second hand or taking the gun off target.

Not nearly as much as success on the FIRST strike is.  With quality ammunition and a good gun, second strikes are simply not needed.  40 years ago, perhaps; ammunition quality was much lower then.  But now?  
Besides, look at the reported failures for both guns (PM9 and R9); neither has a history of not setting off the primer.  Feeds or ejection failures are the primary problems with almost any guns.  Worrying about second strikes with these pups is a lot like being concerned that your race car's CD player may skip during the Indianopolis 500.

[Fud]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I wouldn't want to trust my life to a "better than 50% chance" of a round firing. If it doesn't go boom the first time, then you should perform the  tap, rack and bang drill.

JD

That's the whole point. If you are physicallyed engaged in combat with someone, you are lucky to be able to keep ONE hand on the gun. Your attacker is unlikely to give you the opportunity to perform the  tap, rack and bang drill. With a R9, you still have a better than 50% chance of firing the round. With Glocks, Kahrs, etc., you have a 0% chance because pulling the trigger will do nothing.

[Fud]

Worrying about second strikes with these pups is a lot like being concerned that your race car's CD player may skip during the Indianopolis 500.

According to statistics, a majority of us will never need to employ a weapon for the purpose of self defense. Yet, we still carry. As DDGator pointed out, second strike capability is considered an added benefit and it only  takes a fraction of a second and can be done without the need for second hand or taking the gun off target.

[TCat]

As DDGator pointed out, second strike capability is considered an added benefit

My point is that it isn't considered an added benefit any longer.  It was decades ago.  Nowadays if you need second strike capability, you most likely have a defective gun and shoulda been carrying something else.  Contemporary ammo and guns simply do not fail that way.

Take Incursion.  In his tests with Jax, he had an ejection failure with Jax's gun and five extraction failures plus one ejection failure with his gun.  And Jax had the magazine pop out regularly.

But not one failure to fire.  Not one.

And later in the same thread, Ben S. tells us of his similar experiences.

How would second strike capability be relevant in these cases?  We can see your strong loyalty to that position, but can you make any case for it beyond, "It's nice to have"?  Heck, a switch-blade bayonette would probably be statistically more valuable.

[DDGator]

First, let me state that I was -- as I said -- parotting the views of other knowledgeable folks.  I am not a firearms trainer, nor do I play one on TV.

I have no strong loyalty to the position at all.  If you want to characterize it as merely "a nice thing to have" that is fine with me.  Its clearly not essential, or Glocks and Kahrs would be completely out of step.

Repeat strike capability would not have mattered a whit in the failures you describe.

I don't have enough DA semi-auto experience to judge the statistical importance of second strike capability.  I know it has been important to me in revolvers with reduced power mainsprings--but that is not self defense.  I defer to others for the statistics.

[Incursion]

I agree; failure to fires are rare unless the ammo is bad.  

[searcher]

I am in the process of purchasing sbrenner's R-9S. Can I dry fire this gun.

[9mil.mouse]

Yes, you can dry fire it, although I am using snap caps when doing so. The trigger can be pulled repeatedly, no need to rack the slide each time. Dry firing is a good way to get used to the trigger, which feels different from many other autos, but similar to a double action revolver..

[searcher]

Thanks 9mil.mouse.

[9mil.mouse]

Sure thing, Searcher. I think you're going to really like your new pocket pistol. I sure like my own Rohrbaugh. When I spoke to Eric he didn't think that dry-firing it without a snap cap would do any harm, but members of this forum recommended that I use a snap cap, and I thought about it, and since I had some, I'm using them. Wouldn't want to hurt my nice little pistol you know!  

[dmobrien2001]

As the poster above, I have a PM9. I bought it last July when I ordered my R9S. My intention was to be armed with a pocket carry piece right away, and practicing/getting used to pocket carry while my R9S was being made. The PM9 has proved itself beautifully.

My R9S arrived today. I have to get to the range to "break" it (me) in.  Then I have to wait for one of those fine HedleyHolsters.com pocket holsters to arrive before I can carry it.  (My PM9 already has one.)

Then I have to decide what to do with my PM9 self defense system (Kahr, Hedley pocket holster, Mr. Softy IWB holster, 3 6-rounder mags, K&D double mag carrier) when I finally migrate to the R9S (the ultimate pocket pistol).  Sell the PM9 "system" and recoup some of my investment toward the R9S? -OR- Keep it as an alternative, get it dirty, work doors in the Florida sand pistol?  I just haven't decided.

[Wayne]

dmobrien2001,

Having both the PM9 and the R9 next to each other, I was wondering what your thoughts are with respect to contrasting the two guns as far as design, features, etc.

It would also be interesting to get your opinion on range performance, when you get to that point.