Is R380 less finicky than R9?

[r9newbie]

The R9s is picky about ammo and there have been numerous reports of bullet tumble due to the what sounds like spacing before the lands/grooves in order to deal with the pressures of the 9mm in this size of gun.  Hope I'm not getting that wrong, but that's what I gather from the forums.

So... wondering if the R380, given the same size gun, same high quality, would be less picky about ammo, shoot "better," with less tumbling, etc.  If the R9 is on the edge with the 9mm, I'm wondering if the less powerful .380 behaves better.  Any actual experience here, not just guesses?  Seems that the lower pressures might place less of a demand on the gun.

I LOVE my r9s, which has only 12 rounds through it before the range closed... waiting for it to open again.  But now that I'm carrying it for occasional primary carry, I'd like to know I'm not pushing the limits of the design too much... reliability and consistent performance is a must.

I might be happier with a 100% reliable .380 than a 95% reliable R9.

So - anyone got any experience with both R9 and R380 in terms of performance and reliability?

Don't get me wrong... I love my R9 and what I say above about reliability is an illustration of a point, not based on rigorous amounts of actual data.

[theirishguard]

both guns are 100% using good high quality JHP ammo, the .380 has less recoil. Just keep shooting your R9, use good ammo and take it slow and easy learning as you go. just shoot, study and enjoy without waiting for a bad experience. also shoot about 2-3 mags each time not going for a round count record.   having said all that, if you want a .380 send me a PM as I have some in stock  Tom

[Richard S]

I second Tom's comments.

[tracker]

.380 ammunition availability is presently a problem.

[r9newbie]

Thanks for the replies.  I should clarify -- I guess it's not so much about reliability, as I expect my current R9s is 100% reliable with proper ammo, maintenance and usage.

More specifically:

Compared to the R9s, is the R380 a more conservative design meaning would it tend to be less demanding of proper maintenance / ammo / etc... would spring replacement not be as much of an issue, etc...

[Richard S]

I carried pocket pistols chambered for .380 ACP (9mm Kurz) over the years since the 1960s (Walther PPK, Colt Mustang, NAA Guardian) and never felt particularly "undergunned." However, when Rohrbaugh unveiled the prototype R9 at SHOT 2002, I knew that I had finally found the pocket pistol for which I had been waiting -- one chambered for 9mm Parabellum.  

It stands to reason that a pistol chambered for .380 ACP will be subjected to lower stresses when fired than will a pistol of comparable size, weight, and materials chambered for 9mm Parabellum. It is therefore no surprise why those who have fired the Rorbaugh .380, with its locked-breech mechanism, describe it as having extremely light felt recoil.

As for the need for proper maintenance of the two Rohrbaugh pistols, I suppose that the .380 ACP might be slightly less demanding than the 9mm. However, each of the two models is built to the same tight specifications. Each Rohrbaugh pistol is manufactured by CNC machining, not by assembling a collection of interchangeable stamped parts with the loose and forgiving tolerances of a Kalishnikov AK-47.

One interesting comparison of the .380 ACP and 9mm Parabellum cartridges for self-defense purposes was compiled by Dick Metcalf, Technical Editor of Shooting Times and can be found at the following link:

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/l/aast9mmv380a.htm

[Brenden]

 My 9mm pups have been 100% with the proper feeding..

I do not have any experience with the .380 pup,and I do not see that it too would not be a good feeder with the proper fodder..

As far as having a .380 at 100% vs a 9mm at 95%,please give your pup a chance without worrying about what "may"be..

As far as that "tumble" that is mentioned,I have no problem with that (also is mentioned in the seecamps)as it just makes a larger hole!!

r9newbie,good luck with the pup!!

[Chief-USN]

 According to Maria at Rohrbaugh, The only differance between the R9 and 380 is a spacer that was added allowing for the use of a smaller cartridge. Thus you have a gun that was built to handle the loads of a 9mm running a smaller load (380) meaning it is never stressed as much. 380 ammo is a problem as far as finding though in many areas

Chief

[P7Enigma]

According to Maria at Rohrbaugh, The only differance between the R9 and 380 is a spacer that was added allowing for the use of a smaller cartridge. Thus you have a gun that was built to handle the loads of a 9mm running a smaller load (380) meaning it is never stressed as much. 380 ammo is a problem as far as finding though in many areas

Chief

Hmmm...am I smelling a possible caliber conversion kit here? Swap mag and barrel and VOILA! new gun!

[r9newbie]

> Hmmm...am I smelling a possible caliber conversion kit here? Swap mag and barrel and VOILA! new gun!

I don't think it's that simple.  I asked Maria if it was relatively simple to adapt the r9s to .380 and I think she indicated it wasn't quite that simple... don't recall the specifics but I believe that was the end result.

[tracker]

I wouldn't try to go there.

[DTM_39]

There are lots of little differences.  Would not be easy to convert.  Dan

[Chief-USN]

Definately would be a tough way to go, as Rhorbauhs are machined from solid pieces, what Maria is calling a "spacer" may be that they just did not machine as much out, leaving the chamber smaller, not actually inserting a "spacer". She was useing the example as a way to explain why the 380 was the same price as the 9. She used the statement that it was the same gun just with a spacer in it for the smaller round.

 Seems it would be easier to buy  one to go. Hmm wonder if one can just buy an upper reciever like my Ar's.......
Whooops gotta stop thinking like that !  Trying to hold off on gun buys till R45......

  Chief