Boberg XR9 (SHOT 2008)

I like it!

Of course you may not see the need to jump through California's stupid drop test hoops in order to sell your gun here. I hope you do though.

So when is the 10MM version coming out?

Seems overly/needlessly complex to me.

GUNTECH: I hate to sound naive, but what kind of pistol is that you pictured there?

GUNTECH: I hate to sound naive, but what kind of pistol is that you pictured there?

Click to expand...

It is a 9mm semi-automatic pocket-sized pistol with a rotating barrel locked breech. The barrel is 4.2" long. For more info visit http://BobergEngineering.com

Of course you may not see the need to jump through California's stupid drop test hoops in order to sell your gun here. I hope you do though.

So when is the 10MM version coming out?

Click to expand...

The gun has a passive firing pin safety to prevent discharge when dropped. It also has two other safeties, but it does not have a manual safety - does that DQ it for CA? I heard Rohrbaugh could sell there, and they have no manual safety.

10mm is a great cartridge - I have always wanted a pistol chambered for it. Imagine a hunting pistol you can slide in your pocket...

I first have to offer 9mm, then .40 S&W, then .45 Auto - in order of market demand.

I think you need a chamber loaded indicator and a magazine safety as of Jan 06 and then there is that micro-stamping BS. As of Jan 1 2010 all semi-auto pistols must be able to micro stamp a case. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AB_1471

Any rough idea as to MSRP yet, ABBOBERG?

I have to say this. I like it. A lot. One, it's different... and in this world of Modified Browning Actions, this is refreshing. The longer barrel in a small package? Like a mini handheld bullpup. I like that too.

Send me one for testing, I'll review it for Concealed Carry Magazine.

One possible application for this that I see is the use of rimmed cartridges (and longer barrells), for example a pistol in .22 mag. .357 mag or .44 mag. The grip should be slightly smaller front to back than otherwise due to the angle of the cartridges inside, and the barrell is longer by the length of the cartridge (considerable in these long COL chamberings which favor longer barrells in the first place).

tsh77769

Man, I want one. I wonder what the MSRP will be.

I think you need a chamber loaded indicator and a magazine safety as of Jan 06 and then there is that micro-stamping BS. As of Jan 1 2010 all semi-auto pistols must be able to micro stamp a case.

Click to expand...

Warren:

These are very good points. Right now the XR9 has a chamber-viewing window, so you can actually see the cartridge base. I am assuming that "magazine safety" means that the gun cannot be fired without the magazine. If this is the case, the Boberg XR9 will fail that test; however, the XR9 cannot be loaded without the magazine, unless you are willing to field strip the gun and place a round into the barrel separately, then re-assemble. In other words, the gun can be used for survival without the magazine. I have not studied the micro-stamping requirements yet. If I have to, I wil buy a laser engraver to save on the cost of only having a single-source supplier.

MSRP for the Boberg XR9 will be announced on the website. With the Rohrbaugh R9S being at $1199, and they appear to have a sustainable business, I am guessing the Boberg might be more unless a very clever way is found to keep the part cost down. The goal is to make the gun as affordable as possible but still allowing a sustainable business.

One possible application for this that I see is the use of rimmed cartridges (and longer barrells), for example a pistol in .22 mag. .357 mag or .44 mag. The grip should be slightly smaller front to back than otherwise due to the angle of the cartridges inside, and the barrell is longer by the length of the cartridge (considerable in these long COL chamberings which favor longer barrells in the first place).

Click to expand...

In order to feed rimfire ammunition, there would have to be tighter tolerances in the breech area and the "Tong" area. I'm not saying it can't be done - it just hasn't been tried. I agree that there is a barrel-length opportunity here with rimfire, especially when comparing to "woodsman"-style pistols, where the Boberg mechanism would give you 2-1/2" to 3" of extra barrel for the same-sized gun. Ironically, .17 HMR was the first chambering when the design started five years ago.

As far as rimmed cartridges are concerned, .32 Auto was the second chambering in an early prototype. The cartridge fed extremely well with no rimlock issues whatsoever. It think it is because the cartridge gets "ripped" out of the magazine with the force of the slide recoil. The rims just don't seem to get in the way. I laid out a .44 Mag configuration and carved it out of wood. It kind of looks like a cross between the Automag and a Desert Eagle, except it is about 3" shorter than the Desert Eagle for the same barrel length.

Several things:

Most of the bulk that causes a carry pistol to be uncomfortable is the length of the *grip*, not the *barrel length*. The grip here is the same.

Secondly, on your website it appears to be the same size as a PF9. What am I getting, again?

Thirdly, one of the primary reasons for a longer barrel is increased sight radius. Your gun does not help here either.

Lastly, 28% more energy (not performance, as this pistol is not easier to make hits with nor does it conceal better than a PF9) does not turn this gun into a wonder-weapon, and seems to be the sole reason for the funny feeding cycle and $$$$ price.

I think I would drive hard at the subcompact and fold 100% of the profits from the present model into the subcompact pictured above, because the extra machinations that give you that extra 1.25" of barrel actually matter there - a Browning action in a pistol that short wouldn't even have a barrel!

Build that subcompact, and you will have a 10 million dollar business.

Very interesting. Probably out of my price range for awhile though, but good luck in the market.

About the only thing I would change is make the light rail lower profile to improve the overall lines of the gun. Ruger's SR9 seems to have done well with this and it looks like you have enough space to move it up, judging from the cross section.

I like it! I like the sub-Compact version above too.

Most of the bulk that causes a carry pistol to be uncomfortable is the length of the *grip*, not the *barrel length*. The grip here is the same

Click to expand...

.

Like you said yourself, it is not the length of the gun that is the issue - so why chop it down to a compact?

the funny feeding cycle

Click to expand...

I would guess that those on the receiving end of the Maxim, Fowler and Browning machine guns did not find the feeding cycles "funny". I could only venture to guess that any BG on the receiving end of the XR9 feeding cycle would also find little humor.

Lastly, 28% more energy (not performance, as this pistol is not easier to make hits with nor does it conceal better than a PF9) does not turn this gun into a wonder-weapon,

Click to expand...

23% more energy is all you need to bridge this gun to full-sized guns. Getting 28% is just a bonus. Full-sized guns seem to be the most popular weapons out there. There must be some reason consumers are buying full-sized guns over pocket guns. Sight radius can't be the only reason. Why wouldn't someone prefer a full "Government style" in a "Commander" length (or shorter)?

Don't get me wrong - I appreciate all your opinions. I just want to offer the option of having a pocket-sized gun that duplicates the performance of a fulll-sized gun. If I were to tell you that several shooters have produced 1/3 the group size of the XR9 versus the PF9 (which I own), then someone is going to say that these pocket guns are "gut shooters" anyway - you don't need the accuracy. If all you want is something that goes "boom", the PF9 fills that niche very nicely.

BTW - I have not ruled out the compact version of the XR9 - I think there would be a demand for a gun that is 4.9" long with a 3.2" barrel.

About the only thing I would change is make the light rail lower profile to improve the overall lines of the gun. Ruger's SR9 seems to have done well with this and it looks like you have enough space to move it up, judging from the cross section.

Click to expand...

You are correct - this would clean up the lines a bit. In fact, the original design has this configuration; but then I started thinking about how nice it would be to house a laser sight in that area, and all I would have to do is lower that rail a bit.....

I would guess that those on the receiving end of the Maxim, Fowler and Browning machine guns did not find the feeding cycles "funny". I could only venture to guess that any BG on the receiving end of the XR9 feeding cycle would also find little humor.

Click to expand...

I am sorry, I meant no disrespect. I was just referring to its complexity.

There must be some reason consumers are buying full-sized guns over pocket guns. Sight radius can't be the only reason.

Click to expand...

I would say that the two reasons for going to a fullsize weapon are easier controllability (longer grip, heavier), better reliability (tiny 1911's are problematic, as are the smaller Keltecs), higher capacity, longer sight radius, and more power from the longer barrel. I don't know where the first three are, but I would wager that more power is pretty far down the list.

If I were to tell you that several shooters have produced 1/3 the group size of the XR9 versus the PF9 (which I own)

Click to expand...

...then I would say your gun probably fits better than the PF9 and has a better trigger. Your gun's price puts it past the range of a Springfield EMP, so it dern well better shoot better than a Keltec with its terrible DAO trigger.

I hope that you do some reliability tests versus the other pistols. I think that the Browning feed design runs into problems when you shrink it, and that your feed mechanism might solve those. If the reliability stacks up better than competitors, you should emphasize that in your marketing.

Don't get me wrong, I love the design and think people would buy it. I also think (as you do) that there is a strong market for this solution-in-search-of-a-problem gun. Usually that's not the case (see: Metalstorm).

It's neat to see someone with a product that doesn't cry "me-too."

And if you decide to produce it in a shocking array of various shades of neon polymer, you could always market it as the "Bobek"!



I keed! I keed!

I also think (as you do) that there is a strong market for this solution-in-search-of-a-problem gun.

Click to expand...

How many times have you read on a gun board something to the effect of: Magmaker's magazines are junk. Are there any magazines that my gun will work with?

Once the XR9's tongs have pulled a cartridge out of the magazine the magazine is no longer a factor in whether-or-not that cartridge will feed. With the XR9 the timing of how the magazine lips release the cartridge is no longer a factor, nor is the precise angle of the follower or whether-or-not the follower has a dimple or any of the other things that can be wrong with a magazine. It is enough that the tongs be able to reach the cartridge and hold it tight enough to pull it out.

Also, once the cartridge has been elevated by the lifter it is almost a straight shot to the chamber. The shape of the bullet can't cause feeding problems.

It seems to me that the XR9 is an effort to solve a very important problem that is found in many guns, i.e., unreliable feeding.

It seems to me that the XR9 is an effort to solve a very important problem that is found in many guns, i.e., unreliable feeding.

Click to expand...

I agree. However, Boberg's marketing seems to be focusing on the power that the longer barrel allows, and it should be focusing on the reliability as you suggest. And there are already reliable compact autoloader pistols out there that won't cost $1800.

Efforts to date at using a Maxim machinegun style feeding cycle in a pistol have been unreliable. For the price he's asking, I'd better get Glock reliability, 1911 ergonomics, and full-size power (in that order).

1. I think it's great that someone is revisiting an answer that we have all taken as a given- the conventional feed mechanism is the way to go for a small autopistol. It may well prove that this is another evolutionary dead end- but it may not. Great ideas are great ideas because they depart from conventional thinking.

2. As to this being needlessly complex, perhaps. If it works no better than a conventional feed system, you're adding a lot of complexity to achieve a small increase in barrel length. This assumes that it does not work better, in practice, than a conventional feed system. I think this has the potential to work quite a bit better than your standard feed system...but since you're adding complexity, it could also work quite a bit worse. The only way to know for sure is to build it and see how it works.

Besides, if sheer simplicty was the final answer, we'd all be arguing "what size rock for pocket carry?"

3. I don't get the accessory rail hate. It adds, at most, a few grams to the nose of the gun, no size, costs very little, and allows you to put a laser or light there (if they ever make lights small enough) if you want to, and also allows you do just leave it alone if you don't.

4. "The added barrel doesn't increase sight radius." No. Making the gun bigger increases sight radius. That's the opposite of what he's trying to do. Making the barrel longer does increase velocity, though, and when you're talking "pocket pistol", you want every last FPS you can get.

One thing that does give me pause...how do you clear jams? What happens if the round-puller-thingy grabs a round, pulls it halfway out of the mag, and loses its grip? What's the malfunction drill?

Mike

After watching the animation a couple of doxen times, I finally figured out that this is a locked breech design. Frankly, it looked like a non-fixed barrel blowback pistol. However, the locking mechanism does not look all that strong. It appears to rely on two minor lugs, and locks up an a rotating or slight camming principle. My concerns are for accuracy and long term reliability.

I would like to see at least a 3,000 round torture test first.

You know, cars are a lot more complex than horses but they seem to have caught on with most people.

Even if the whole concept falls flat on its face, I think it's great that people are thinking outside the box and are innovating. Like all things, the price will also come down as the design is refined and becomes easier to produce. I'll be watching for this to launch soon!

What does this gun do after the last round fired? It does not have a way of holding the bolt open so I would imagine that you stand a chance of pulling the trigger on an empty chamber as well as needing to charge the pistol for another magazine change, unless you do a mag drop with one in the chamber.