We are no longer the smallest 9 mm ??

[pocketgun]

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.  

[DTM_39]

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

[alfonso2501]

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!

[PsychoSword]

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"

[Fud]

I don't care what the numbers say, there is more than 0.1" difference in size between the R9 and the micro Kahr ...



... 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.

[theirishguard]

Fudster, the R9s looks alot smaller to me also.
Tom

[Michigunner]

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.

[FireBreather01]

I don't care what the numbers say, there is more than 0.1" difference in size between the R9 and the micro Kahr ...



... 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!

[Fud]

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.

[FireBreather01]

 

BIG oops on my part! So much for my powers of observation!!!

[Aglifter]

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

[rtohio]

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

[Michigunner]

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

[Laserlips]

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.....



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

[DDGator]

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.