Ultimate subcompact 9mm showdown

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mayo

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
460
Rohrbaugh R9 vs Kahr PM9

For those of you who have both or shot both, which do you prefer and why? Not concerned about the price--strictly a comparison on the guns themselves. Thanks.

I'm purposely not including the Kel Tec PF9 in this discussion. Alot of people would choose this for their 9mm subcompact but only because of price--to me this isn't in the same class as the R9 or PM9 JMHO.
 
The August 2004 issue of Gun Tests has a head to head comparison of the Rohrbaugh vs. Kahr PM9. They chose the PM9. You can get a back issue and check it out. They had a few issues with the Rohrbaugh (lack of slide lock), clearing a jam being deadly slow, etc. They gave it a conditional buy rating. At ten yards the PM9 was more accurate with three different types of ammo. A friend of mine has the Rohrbaugh, I've shot it and was not overly impressed. My next gun will be a Kahr CM9.
 
In the 2004 comparison---did they factor in price at all---or was it strictly R9 vs PM9.
 
2004,that's nearly seven years ago.
I wonder how many improvements and or changes have been made to both pistols in that time frame?
I am strongly considering purchasing a PM-9 for myself at this time.
 
I have both and prefer to carry the R9. I shoot about the same with both. If I had to choose one over the other would be a close call, I will go with the R9.
BlackRose_best.jpg
Robar.jpg
 
Looks like the CM9 will soon join the conversation in this category.:evil::evil:
 
I can't speak to the PM9, but have experience with the R9 and the CW9. The Kahr is considerably easier and more pleasant to shoot, but the Rohrbaugh is a far better POCKET gun.
 
Rohrbaugh R9 vs Kahr PM9

For those of you who have both or shot both, which do you prefer and why? Not concerned about the price--strictly a comparison on the guns themselves. Thanks.

I'm purposely not including the Kel Tec PF9 in this discussion. Alot of people would choose this for their 9mm subcompact but only because of price--to me this isn't in the same class as the R9 or PM9 JMHO.
In what way is the Keltec PF9 not in the same class? If you want a CCW to shoot at the range then you are correct -- not in the same class....but i'll stand behind Keltec anyday -- I have 2 Kahr pm9s -- one is currently at the Kahr Gunsmiths for the 2nd time due to a FTF issue. I have shot 2600 rounds through my Keltec PF9 with NO FTF issues or any other problems -- its accurate, works flawlessly as a CCW, and kicks like a beast.

The few people i've let shoot it calls CDNN the next day and orders one....

If today I had to choose between a CCW -- mine and my wife's Kahr PM9 will be left in a box in our reloading closet and both of us will carry our Keltec PF9s. No doubt about it --

The ONLY way i would consider them not in the same league is on shooting pleasure -- but CCW aren't made to have fun with ...if that's the goal then get a full size gun.
 
It's pretty obvious the difference in QUALITY of the R9 and PM9 vs Kel-Tek--YOMV, but I think almost everyone can agree on that.
 
Don't mistaken luxury for quality... is Kahr more pleasant to shoot? Yea...is it a better CCW in terms of functionality? No. This Ultimate Showdown should be rephrased..."I want a Range Gun and a CCW bc I Like Shooting Small Guns."
 
[..."I want a Range Gun and a CCW bc I Like Shooting Small Guns/QUOTE]

By no means is the R9 or PM9 range guns---strictly QUALITY made 9mm in subcompact. A PF9 will work for BUG carry but there is no comparison in the craftmanship between R9/PM9 and Kel-Tec IMO.
 
The functionality of the pistols are basically the same but the quality certainly isn't. If I were looking for a sports car to drive, a Miata will function the same as a Porsche---but there is a huge difference in quality.
 
Miata is a sporty looking car...not a sports car... with that said -- we can buy whatever we wish.... I bought the Kahr PM9...two of them...and two Keltec PF9s.... my Karhs are in the closet....the Keltecs are carried by my wife and I.

When you say craftsmanship....do you mean finish? My CCW gun doesn't have to be shiny and made of gold....I want it to go bang and I want it to be reliable...I made the mistake of more $$ means more reliability.... I want to spend my money on 1911s not on a CCW gun that will more than likely never go bang...and if it does -- i've put 2,600 rounds thru my Keltec and my wife's keltec...so 5,200 in total and we have not had 1 mishap....I beleive in the gun.

Do you own a Keltec PF9?
 
Last edited:
Don't currently own a PF9--have previously. It was fine, just not as good as the PM9. Again, not debating that it won't go bang, just not as smooth a trigger etc..Both sports cars will get you where your going but the Porsche is going to be a better/smoother ride. So you don't think it's me vs you and your opinion:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=243721
 
"The August 2004 issue of Gun Tests..."

Was a joke, and it wasn't a funny one. They bungled it from start to finish.

Here is Eric Rohrbaugh's letter to Gun Tests. He lists 10 points, so it takes 3 posts to get it all.

www.rohrbaughforum.com/YaBB.cgi?board=R9S;action=display;num=1091220026

Shall I hit some of the high points? :)

"Yet, the R9S you reviewed was sent to you from the factory as a testing and evaluation piece. I should know, since I am the one who sent it to you. Subsequently, you returned the piece after your evaluation. Nowhere, at any time did you purchase the firearm. I would think, since your reputation is such that you purchase firearms, you would have had a disclaimer in the article that you did not purchase the piece and clarify your position. Since you did not purchase this piece, you were sent one magazine. "

"the pistol that was tested, by GUN TESTS, was the exact same one, Serial #R170 (see photos in the American Handgunner and the photo in GT,) that was tested approximately a month prior, by AH, and then sent to you. Ironically they seemed to have a different opinion of the function, accuracy and reliability. I might also point out that Serial #R170 was also tested by Massad Ayoob approximately one week ago at a workshop in Long Island, after you returned it to our factory. His opinion regarding the accuracy and reliability did not seem to match yours. "

"Research by actual R9 owners, (see the RohrbaughForum.com and www.TheHighRoad.org for results) has shown that HIGH QUALITY ammunition has been flawless."

"Our rifling is a 1:16 right hand twist - a standard for 9mm in the industry. Funny, this was also listed in the owner’s manual. Ironically, Roy Huntington and Mickey Fowler did not seem to have an issue, and consistently shot 2½-inch groups at 25 yards. I personally witnessed Mr. Ayoob place 6 headshots at 10 yards into a regulation IPSC target that could be covered by a silver dollar. Now this was the same gun in all tests, and Mr. Ayoob’s test was the gun that you returned. Imagine, the exact same gun fired by different hands - different results."
"Fact 9: The hammer is not flush. It resides in a recessed area at the back of the slide to prevent slam fire and cover drop-testing requirements. Ours was tested to 12 feet without incident. The trigger activates the hammer to bring it out of its chamber. "

_________

Gun Tests really fouled up their R9 review. They didn't even buy the gun. JT
 
"In what way is the Keltec PF9 not in the same class?"

You mean other than the fact it's a Kel-Tec and the R9 isn't? I have an early P-32, so I have some familiarity with the brand and the history of their gun models.

A PF9 is too big for my needs. Comparing it to my R9, the PF9 is .65" longer and .60" higher. That's well over a half an inch in both directions and it makes a difference to me when it comes to fitting in my pants pockets, and drawing from them.

The slide is also wider than an R9 and it's about an ounce heavier if that matters. But if you're happy that's all that matters.
 
Both sports cars will get you where your going but the Porsche is going to be a better/smoother ride. So you don't think it's me vs you and your opinion:

I never took it personally -- especially over a little ole CCW gun....

I hope everyone can find a CCW gun that can make them happy.... if I shoot my CCW gun enough to be bothered by the "ride" then I need to stop shooting it so much and get a range gun. We're all grown and it's ok to agree and disagree. makes it fun ....

For me -- I will never carry either of my Karh PM9 for SD....if it wasn't for the lazer show they put on and the "anniversary sentiment" -- I would have gotten rid of them...

If y'all are happy paying $1,000 for an R CCW... (but ya can't use the excuse my life is on the line and it's priceless b\c both of my $240 keltecs have performed flawlessly over 5,200 rounds.) then I'm happy. And if you do need to shoot it a lot then a CCW isn't the gun for you -- strap up like the Feds with the compact guns.

To the member who mentioned guns of Keltec's past....leave the past in the past, the future in the future, and the present where it is..... in other words they, like Taurus, aren't their guns of yesterday -- they are much improved.

My wife has a Cayenne and nothing about it is smooth...just saying
 
"The August 2004 issue of Gun Tests..."

Was a joke, and it wasn't a funny one. They bungled it from start to finish.

Really? Different testers, different results... it is plausible. Mickey Fowler & Mr. Ayoob shoot thousands and thousands of rounds of year. They are proficient shooters and probably shoot many different weapons well. :) Gun tests did not bash the Rohrbaugh, they just liked the PM9 better.:scrutiny: Too me in the article it did not seem that Gun Tests was being bias against the Rohrbaugh. They lamented the lack of a slide lock and pointed out that clearing a jam would be deadly slow.:evil: Their accuracy chart showed that for them it wasn't as accurate as the PM9. I've made quite a few gun purchase over the years based on Gun Test reviews and they have been good solid choices. CZ75b, G19, CZ75 P01, S&W Model 19, S&W Model 41. They do know what they are talking about, and unlike other rags, they are not full of BS advertisements. I don't take their reviews as the gospel. But they have done right by me.:D
 
If you can afford a Bentley then the Kahr’s have some nice pocket rockets to choose from, and the sticker shock on the Rohraugh :what: is way out of my allowance range. But then my Queen has a tight strangle hold on my allowance :cuss: so unfortunately I’m more into the Ford Fiesta price-line :( so I have a Kel Tec PF9. Once the new Ruger LC9, Sig’s new P290, and I think I read somewhere that Kahr had a new little 9mm on the horizon too, when they all start showing up, and once all the hype, any possible bug-a-boos are exterminated, and the got ah be the first to have it on the block price levels out, probably sometime in about 4 months or so, and the second-generation’s start hitting the production line and show up onto the GS tables. Then I’ll be maybe looking to up-grade if it’s warranted :rolleyes: I am one of the fortunate few though that can sometimes pocket-carry my G26 :p in like ,,,, 45% of my shorts and 20% of my pants with the right t-shirt or polo shirt, but I get some nasty sneers from the Queen because I wear these combos much too often for her liking :evil: at which times I down grade to the PF9 or dare I mention my LCP .380acp :eek: or I am forced by her Majesty to carry IWB. But it’s easer for me to get a new pair of shorts, pants, and shirt then a new Car :D
 
"Gun tests did not bash the Rohrbaugh"

We must have read different reviews. I read the one Mr. Rohrbaugh responded to. The review that was full of holes and errors. I would like to think they were just having a bad day, but how could they get so many things wrong in a couple of pages?



"They do know what they are talking about"

My father subscribed to GT for many years, so I got to read them for free when he was finished with them. Sometimes they knew what they're talking about and sometimes - like with the R9 - they were all but clueless. I used to wonder sometimes if they'd actually shot the gun they were talking about.

John
 
Forgot something...

"To the member who mentioned guns of Keltec's past....leave the past in the past, the future in the future, and the present where it is..... in other words they, like Taurus, aren't their guns of yesterday -- they are much improved. "

Thanks for supporting my point about the Kel-Tecs uneven quality over the years. They've never been as bad as some have made them out to be, but it is still telling that you say they are much improved. Are the P-32s still prone to rimlock when the mag is loaded with hollow points? The last I heard it was still a problem and that's why people are carrying FMJ. I know the mags can be modified with a spacer to function more reliably with HP ammo, but the casual owner isn't going to know about the problem.

My P-32 has been fine since it went back shortly after purchase to have the trigger axis replaced. It was one of the guns involved with the bad batch of parts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top