Am I shooting the same gun?

[robertd]

I bought a R9s several months ago, used with s# Rxxx. I've shot it a couple of hundred rounds using mostly Gold Dot 115s and various 115 gn. hard ball mixxed in. I went a good while before I had a couple of failures to fire that fired on the followup pull. Recently I've had a couple of failures to feed. No big deal. I intend to try some Silver Tips if I ever find any. I've cleaned and lubed after each session a thing I don't always do with other guns. New recoil spring as dirrected at 100 round intervals. I bought the gun as a pocket, daily carry gun. I didn't buy it for a range gun for 25 yds. I like it and reccommend it. But to me it is not a pleasure to shoot. It kicks more than any other 9 I own. I'm not a wuss and recoil is to be expected. I can consistently put all rounds into center mass at 7 yds but I'm not going to grab it when I go to the range for punching holes at greater distances. It's a pain to break down and reassemble. It's pinched my hands in enumerable ways. That comes with a small package, strong springs, and old hands. A Glock or Beretta are pleasures to shoot. They are easy to tear down and put back together. I'm not going to throw it away. I plan on making it my daily carry piece. But if I'm the only one having these issues. I want to know. I read that a guy pushes the pin through the slide hole with a tooth pick. I use a brass drift pin and a screw driver handle for a hammer. A new pin proved to be easier but still requires persuasion. The channel locks work. The 2 in 1 tool was a waste of money. I'm not down on the gun. I admire the beauty and workmanship. I just hope there's someone else out there that will fess up the he too has had these growing pains. Otherwise, what may be wrong?

[Richard S]

robertd:

For myself, I'm not quite sure how to respond to your post  other than to say that my experience has not been the same as yours, except that we both admire the beauty and workmanship of the R9 and recommend it for its intended use -- a pocket pistol for daily carry.  True, it took a little practice for me to become proficient in the break down and reassembly process. However, I personally find the Hedley Tool (the "2-in-1") to be very helpful in the procedure. For instance, using it precisely to hold the slide mechanism open at the exact spot, I can easily remove the retaining pin -- even using a toothpick (although I usually employ a brass punch from Brownells for that purpose).

Being designed to be the smallest and lightest pistol chambered for the 9mm Parabellum cartridge, the R9 is a technological marvel. I remember thinking to myself when I first disassembled my own R9 (No. 132) -- "This beauty surely isn't my old 1911."

I wish you all the best in coming to complete terms with a pistol which you obviously already hold in high esteem.  

[theirishguard]

the hard ball ammo may be causing your problems.  Tom

[robertd]

I installed a new recoil spring last night. I went to the range and put up a 6" Shoot-N-See and made all within the 9 ring glow at 7 yards with 7 Gold Dots and 6 PMC 115 ball. I sent another 6 mags of ball down range with my P7M8. All in all a good outing.

The piece of plastic from an old tooth brush holds the slide perfectly, my hands are sufficient to remove the spring assembly, the channel locks safely allow the replacement of the spring and replacing the new pin is simple enough with hand pressure with a final tap on the drift pin.

[ACP]

I identify with Robert and have had issues in the past as I look to the leaders in this forum to guide me. It seems to me that overcoming shortcomings with R9 is commonplace.

Sigs and Glocks are simple as pie to assemble and disassemble. 1911, though a little more complicated, is still fairly easy. However, with the R9 you have a potent cartridge in a very small package with corresponding issues. However, given its extraordinary engineering and workmanship, I have always come back to the R9.

I absolutely cannot imagine doing this, nor absorbing the expense, with a gun that lacks the panache of the R9.

[robertd]

Thanks ACP, that's what I needed along with a successful range session. Tom Watson's opinion is one I respect. I know he faces a challenge with every day and, to my knowledge, has never made a public point of it. I've seen scads of guys announce their purchase from competitors and have seen nought but a congrat from Tom. A great asset. I want to shoot Gold Dots only but Fiocchi or PMC at $22/c fit my budget better than $100/c. Maybe I'm using them as a measuring stick saying that if it will work with a few of these it'll surely do well with the good stuff.

I am not demeaning the Rohrbaugh. I bought mine from a Beretta guru from Utah. It had been seldom shot if ever. If the truth be known I think I stole it for $850.00. That included next day shipping to Arkansas and a Raven Tac. Prod. pocket holster. I got the sweet-heart in New York to send me a few springs and a new takedown pin. For only $54.00 she sold me a complete recoil spring assembly with a few grip screws that remain unopened. I planed on its being a life-time investment.

The beauty and workmanship that Richard confirms remind me of L.C. Smiths, Win Mod 12s, Belgian Browning A5s, S&W stuff from before MIM, and Berettas from when they didn't have bill boards.

I read the June edition of "Guns" today. It says that most of today's .380 mouse guns are borderline for safe carry. His opinion is that .38 snub guns with +P ammo are more comfortable to shoot but are not really pocket guns. I think that the R9 is the closest thing to perfection out there for what I think it's meant to be used. That said it's only "more nearly perfect".

[ACP]

Concur with your thoughts as to Tom Watson. And yes, you did steal the R9 at the price you paid.

The .380 is better than no gun at all and I carry a vintage PPK (+P HP) in that caliber. The greatest challenge to us all, right now, is finding .380 and 9MM ammunition.

[tracker]

Thanks for mentioning the June edition of "Guns", robertd. The free
digital version is very handy to reference the .380 article, for example.

[robertd]

I liked the article but was concerned that Rohrbaugh's .380 is conspicuous by its absence. Unless Rohrbaugh was not at the Shot Show, it makes me wonder why its entry is not mentioned. I know it could not have anything to do with advertizing dollars. Naw

[BytorJr]

Where is this Guns digital copy?

Also, to be fair, I think the J-frame is a good deal more pocketable than most people give it credit for.  Cargo pants, casual khakis, etc, they work pretty well.  

Dress pants, well, I'd have to say the R9 would work better; but I think dress pants warrant IWB carry in reality.  Most nice tropical wool weight pants print like crazy; be it a gun, knife, car keys, gum, etc.  

Just my 0.02.  

Oh...and Tom's a great guy.  Truly a special person.

[ACP]

If you enter "Guns Magazine" on your search engine you will be able to click on the .380 article from the cover of the magazine. Thus, a virtual article.

I agree about the absence of the Rohrbaugh .380 in this article. The R9 (or K380) is the cadillac of the pocket gun and I am guessing that its cost and low advertising revenue going toward publications are reasons you do not read very much about Rohrbaugh.

I was a member of the forum 4 years ago and was attracted back here after having read a favorable article for the Stealth only recently.