experience with rohrbaugh?


texas bulldog
March 21, 2007, 12:29 PM
hey there...

for my next gun purchase, i am looking for something that can be my daily CCW. considering my typical attire in a mostly hot climate, my thought is that if i'm going to carry it habitually, it probably needs to fit in a pocket. this leaves me looking mostly at so-called pocket autos and j-frame smiths.

while i love revolvers, i have to admit that i shoot much more accurately with autos [at least comparing full-size versions of each]. at the same time, i'm not all that comfortable with .380 as a personal defense caliber. so looking around the net, i've come across the rohrbaugh. 9mm i could be alright with, but i'm not crazy about going with a manufacturer with such a short track record.

can anyone out there give me a firsthand [or secondhand, i suppose] account of this gun's reliability, handling, etc. obviously, reliability is probably the foremost requirement, but other info is welcome too.

if the rohrbaugh is not a viable choice, then i will probably just go with a j-frame. at least i can feel comfortable with the simplicty of operation and the confidence it will go BOOM! every time i ask it to.

thanks in advance for any feedback you can give...

If you enjoyed reading about "experience with rohrbaugh?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
March 21, 2007, 12:35 PM

The main forum for detailed information is http://rohrbaughforum.com Plenty of useful information there.

Here is a recent link on Glocktalk.com.


texas bulldog
March 21, 2007, 01:17 PM
thanks michigunner.

it seems like the expectations they have for a $1000 gun are ridiculously low. replacing mag springs and recoil springs every few hundred rounds seems beyond excessive to me.

looks like i need to either reconsider the .380 offerings from kel-tec, kahr, walther and others or just get my hands on the smallest reliable .357 i can find. and given my anti-.380 bias, it'll almost certainly be the latter.

and it'll be a heck of a lot cheaper!

March 21, 2007, 01:38 PM
The PM-9 from Kahr is a 9mm x 19 and not a 380 by the way and easily pocketable with looser pants.

Good luck - I alternated between a J and a PM-9 depending on pocket fit.

March 21, 2007, 03:49 PM
I have both PM9 and J Frame 642 for CCW. I just ordered a set of Crimson Trace Laser grips for the 642. See how that works out. Feedback has been good from the 642 club members.

I am also going to purchase a MP 340 new for 2007 which is less expensive than the 360PD and contains no scandium, SS and Titanium only. Lighter than a 642 heavier than the 360s in a .357.

If you want a diminutive and small auto I would also look at North American Arms NAA .32 manufactured by Kahr and built in collaboration with COR BON. Packs a wallop for its size. Downside, special ammo. Buy a few hundred rounds.


The 32NAA is a new cartridge/firearm 'system' designed and developed by the partnership of North American Arms and Cor-Bon Ammunition.

In essence, the cartridge is based on a 380 case, which is necked-down to hold a smaller 32 bullet. The benefit is a remarkable gain in ballistic performance.

According to industry expert Ed Sanow, the 32NAA:

Produces more velocity, more energy and more stopping power than any conventional jacketed lead hollow point (JHP) 32 ACP, 380 ACP or 380 ACP (+P) with 15% less recoil (Power Factor) than the (+P),

Penetrates 8.3" of Gelatin after passing through four (4) layers of denim, expanding to a .55" mushroom with a retained weight of 100%,

Has a Fuller Index of 62% One-Shot Stops, compared to (for example) the 380 ACP Federal 90gr. Hydra-Shok (53%).

Here's mine.


March 21, 2007, 07:38 PM
A good many aspects of the R9, including some problems are contained in my R9 FAQ ... see link in my sig line.

It's a thorobred gun and has not been without a few problems - but if we allow for high cost ''loaded'' guns also having problems sometimes, it helps put things in perspective.

As a pocket 9mm I believe it is right up there despite cost - but the new .380 version could well be the better choice because when things get this small with a less than pure mouse cal - it is hard to make it all work very easily.

March 21, 2007, 07:52 PM
get a smith 642 or 442 with crimson trace grips, a safariland comp 1 speed loader,1000 rounds of practice ammo and a couple hundred speer 135 gold dots add a desantis nemisis pocket holster and your set BTW you'll have enough left over to take SO out to dinner:)

March 21, 2007, 09:49 PM
I love the P9 Kahr. You have to look at how thin they are, you'll love it. They are easy to hide.

March 22, 2007, 01:47 AM
replacing mag springs and recoil springs every few hundred rounds seems beyond excessive to me.

If you'll notice in that thread, I refused to accept it as well, but you meant:

replacing mag springs and recoil springs every one hundred rounds seems beyond excessive to me.

March 22, 2007, 09:04 AM
Chris made a good point about other guns.

I didn't like having to break-in my PM9 with 200 rounds, and the Kimber with 400 rounds.

My brand new Beretta 92FS 9mm Inox could not fire three straight shots without jamming during CCW class. It was quite a sight.

March 23, 2007, 08:19 AM
I notice that some important improvements are being made to enhance the R9S reliability.

Please note the two posts about conversations with Rohrbaugh.



March 23, 2007, 09:59 AM
For the price of the Rohrbaugh, I would buy a NNA min-revolver, a KelTeck P3AT, AND a KelTec PF9 or Kahr P9. I would still have a fat wad of money left over.

March 23, 2007, 03:53 PM
When I was researching a similar choice of pocket gun, there were some significant factors to keep in mind.

1. The 38spl and 357 loose a LOT of ballistics in the tiny barrel pocket models, (the 38spl in a snub is generally is in the same ballpark as the 32acp and 380 in terms of stopping power.) I do not have any reliable data on the 357 out of a snub. Some rounds retain ballisitics well even when the barrels are short, 357sig and 40s&w are among the better performers for short barrels.

2. Given diminished ballistics, repeat shots are a foregone conlcusion with a pocket gun. Therefore, recoil recovery speed and reload speed are significant factors to consider for a pocket gun. This made me eliminate the 38 and 357 from my consideration.

My final choices were a NAA 32acp for true pocket carry and an AMT Backup in 40s&w or 357sig for larger pocket carry. I chose steel guns because they seem more durable and more controlable in smaller packages. I bellieve the 32 to be the equal of the 380 and the 38 in pocket size guns, and the 40s&w and the 357sig to be superior to the 357mag IN A POCKET SIZE GUN. Bigger guns is a whole other story.

I mostly carry the AMT Backup in 40s&w now days and it is what I qualified with for my CCW. There are situations where I will carry the 32, but I am aware of the diminished ballistics and make appropriate tactical adjustments. Although the AMT Backup will fit in most of my pockets, it is heavy for pocket carry and there is a significant bulge (probably about the same size bulge as a pocket revolver though.) I carry it in a belt pouch a lot. If I must be more discreet, I carry the 32 or use the slower to draw but almost invisible belly band carry for the AMT in a Thunderwear position.

Just my 2 cents

Roll Tide

If you enjoyed reading about "experience with rohrbaugh?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!