ABBOBERG
Member
Are you implying that Rohrbaugh is NOT using any MIM parts in their guns?
If they did, this could greatly reduce the selling price!
If they did, this could greatly reduce the selling price!
Rohrbaugh R-9s DELIVERED!
- Thread starter Blackhawk
- Start date
- Status
Lightsped
Member
That R9 looks like a cool little gun. Without going back through and reading all the pages of this thread, I'd like to find out where I can get a R9 and how much they are going for?
To my knowledge, they are not using any MIM parts. I've looked them all over without detecting any indication of them, and I've asked the Rohrbaughs in times past.
As for as using MIM parts providing any greater economy, that's a false assumption. The upfront tooling costs are substantial, even though the per part cost is nominal. It's like saying an injected plastic part costs $1 compared to its metal counterpart that costs $3 without regard to the $100,000 mold cost to make the plastic part and has to be replaced after 50,000 parts! (The mold cost alone would be $2 per part.)
Here's the dilemma: A LOT of the value of the gun is in the handworking. It's NOT a mass production gun, it's more of a custom gun built to Rohrbaugh's specifications by them (kinda like Rolls Royce of old). If volume goes up to the level that justifies MIM parts (strictly from a cost standpoint), then either one of two things will happen (1) lower QC standards, or (2) employing lesser skilled personnel to get the guns out the door because skilled workers are scarce and it takes a long time to train them. The constant example of that is Kel Tec, and Kahr has again proven the principle as have Colt, S&W, and others. Kel Tec mass produces guns, and it relies on its customers to do the final QC. I'm happy with that and don't hesitate for a minute in buying any KT product. However, I wouldn't be happy giving my wife one for protection or setting out on a "save-the-world" mission with a KT just because of the niggling doubts....
I've owned the Colt pocket nine and lets just say I will not be looking to Colt to make a quality "pocket 9mm". 
I happen to agree with Blackhawk that a gun like this could have been made long ago,,,,, all we had to do was,,,,, ask John Moses Browning.
I happen to agree with Blackhawk that a gun like this could have been made long ago,,,,, all we had to do was,,,,, ask John Moses Browning.
Jeff OTMG
Member
Don't look to Ruger to have made a competing design as it is not possible in their political environment.
There are no plastic, MIM, or cast parts in a Rohrbaugh. The only stampings are in the magazine. Every part, even the trigger, hammer, and hammer strut is machined from a forged billet.
I have been to the range three times with mine already and it is a sweet shooter. I hope to be done by next weekend.
There are no plastic, MIM, or cast parts in a Rohrbaugh. The only stampings are in the magazine. Every part, even the trigger, hammer, and hammer strut is machined from a forged billet.
I have been to the range three times with mine already and it is a sweet shooter. I hope to be done by next weekend.
It's been too long to remember a Kahr trigger except that the one I tried was unremarkable. I pay a lot more attention to triggers now.
By my relatively crude measurement with a digital scale that measures in 1/10 pound increments, my R9's trigger breaks at about 7# measured at the finger pressure point on the trigger. Jeff will probably put it on an accurate trigger scale though.
By my relatively crude measurement with a digital scale that measures in 1/10 pound increments, my R9's trigger breaks at about 7# measured at the finger pressure point on the trigger. Jeff will probably put it on an accurate trigger scale though.
My point about CAD systems was that 30 years ago, CAD existed, but the software was probably $20,000, and you needed a $100, 000 computer to run it.
(Ballpark numbers.)
Now, a small firm like KelTec can buy quality CAD software for $500 and run it on a $500 computer.
It puts more technology in more hands.
Klegren or Rohrbaugh can innovate, and try things they want to try.
The big company, with the expensive computer system, and the big government contract didn't have quite as much freedom.
They most likely had a spec sheet for the aircraft engine, that left little room for them to try their ideas.
In the "old days" only big companies could afford CAD systems.
Of course, there were always "draftsmen" using pecil and paper, but the process of modifying a design, or changing a design took days or weeks, compared to the few minutes it takes now.
The technology is cheaper now, enabling more people to try their hand at bringing a product to market.
The more people that you have trying something, the higher probability that someone is going to be successful.
How old is the anodized aluminum technology in the Rohrbaugh?
I'm asking, because I know that aluminum guns have been out for years, but how long has the current technology been available?
(The '70s maybe?)
Smith and Wesson came out with a "ground breaking" aluminum 5 shot revolver in what.....? the '50s?
We've got to remember that the companies that did come out with small, light autos, for the most part, put unreliable guns on the market.
This generated bad press, so the market was limited to people who were willing to spend money to get the guns to work.
(Early Walther .380s, TPH .22 are two that come to mind, but there are others.)
Many of these guns were also not very accurate, and painful to shoot as well.
I think with KelTec, Kahr, Rohrbaugh and others, we are seeing companies build on the successes of the ones that came before them, while avoiding the failures.
Quite possibly, these guns couldn't have been built until someone came up with the dual-recoil spring assembly. I know Seecamp has some of the recoil patents, but I'm not sure who else.
Could one of the "giants" have come out with this gun 20 years ago?
Probably.
Two things really came together at the same time to drive the current wave of carry guns we have now:
1. The AWB- no guns with more than 10 rounds on board.
2. Multiple states started passing "Right to Carry" laws.
We just happen to be at the "sweet spot" of concealed handgun manufacturing right now.
(Kind of like being alive when cap-n-ball technology replaced flintlock, or cartridges replaced the powder horn.)
Whatever the reasons, I'm glad these guns are here now.
If one of you guys get a chance, I'd love to see side-by-side photos of the R9 next to a PM9.
(Ballpark numbers.)
Now, a small firm like KelTec can buy quality CAD software for $500 and run it on a $500 computer.
It puts more technology in more hands.
Klegren or Rohrbaugh can innovate, and try things they want to try.
The big company, with the expensive computer system, and the big government contract didn't have quite as much freedom.
They most likely had a spec sheet for the aircraft engine, that left little room for them to try their ideas.
In the "old days" only big companies could afford CAD systems.
Of course, there were always "draftsmen" using pecil and paper, but the process of modifying a design, or changing a design took days or weeks, compared to the few minutes it takes now.
The technology is cheaper now, enabling more people to try their hand at bringing a product to market.
The more people that you have trying something, the higher probability that someone is going to be successful.
How old is the anodized aluminum technology in the Rohrbaugh?
I'm asking, because I know that aluminum guns have been out for years, but how long has the current technology been available?
(The '70s maybe?)
Smith and Wesson came out with a "ground breaking" aluminum 5 shot revolver in what.....? the '50s?
We've got to remember that the companies that did come out with small, light autos, for the most part, put unreliable guns on the market.
This generated bad press, so the market was limited to people who were willing to spend money to get the guns to work.
(Early Walther .380s, TPH .22 are two that come to mind, but there are others.)
Many of these guns were also not very accurate, and painful to shoot as well.
I think with KelTec, Kahr, Rohrbaugh and others, we are seeing companies build on the successes of the ones that came before them, while avoiding the failures.
Quite possibly, these guns couldn't have been built until someone came up with the dual-recoil spring assembly. I know Seecamp has some of the recoil patents, but I'm not sure who else.
Could one of the "giants" have come out with this gun 20 years ago?
Probably.
Two things really came together at the same time to drive the current wave of carry guns we have now:
1. The AWB- no guns with more than 10 rounds on board.
2. Multiple states started passing "Right to Carry" laws.
We just happen to be at the "sweet spot" of concealed handgun manufacturing right now.
(Kind of like being alive when cap-n-ball technology replaced flintlock, or cartridges replaced the powder horn.)
Whatever the reasons, I'm glad these guns are here now.
If one of you guys get a chance, I'd love to see side-by-side photos of the R9 next to a PM9.
I was pleasantly surprised when I received both a phone call and email from Eric Rohrbaugh a couple of weeks ago to tell me that they would indeed be making an all stainless steel version of the R9 sometime next year (They DO listen to input from potential customers). I'm on the list for one of them. I think that should eliminate any concerns over using +P or +P+ ammo that anyone might have. I'm really impressed that they're using 17-4 stainless rather than the more common 4xx series.
I wonder if the Rohrbaughs have gotten one of these guns into the hands of one of the gun rag testers. As skeptical as I am regarding their reviews, a positive report would surely do wonders for sales.
Looking forward to some range reports from Blackhawk and Jeff OTMG.
I wonder if the Rohrbaughs have gotten one of these guns into the hands of one of the gun rag testers. As skeptical as I am regarding their reviews, a positive report would surely do wonders for sales.
Looking forward to some range reports from Blackhawk and Jeff OTMG.
I've figured out 2 independent ways to make field stripping easy enough for anybody (especially with #2) to do WITHOUT the need for a slide lock:
1. Relocate the accessory pin access holes in the slide toward the rear so that the slide only has to move back just half the diameter of the pin to line up. It will provide exactly the retention advantages of the present arrangement, and if there's a downside, I don't see it. My wife can't, but everybody else I've tried this on can easily move and hold the slide into that position merely by holding the pistol in their left hand by the back of the gun with the thumb underneath the grip and the fingers around the top of the slide. Simply squeezing the left hand easily moves the slide back far enough leaving the right hand free to manipulate the 1/8" punch type removal tool.
2. Make a plastic or non-marring accessory that hooks into the front of the trigger guard with "cams" to contact the front of the slide on each side above the recoil guide hole and below the muzzle and that curves around the top of the slide to terminate with a finger hole at about the middle or front of the ejection port. By holding the gun with the left hand more-or-less as described in #1, the owner's trigger finger goes into the finger hole, and when the hand in contracted, the slide moves back to align the accessory pin holes. That won't mar the finish and will allow easy removal of the pin.
The accessory of #2 could be of much lighter construction if #1 is implemented. With the #2 accessory by itself, there's NO need to make any changes to the pistol itself to accomplish the objective of enabling any owner to field strip the gun. Since one accessory is already needed (the punch type tool to push the pin out), another one provided by Rohrbaugh or an independent supplier isn't any big deal.
1. Relocate the accessory pin access holes in the slide toward the rear so that the slide only has to move back just half the diameter of the pin to line up. It will provide exactly the retention advantages of the present arrangement, and if there's a downside, I don't see it. My wife can't, but everybody else I've tried this on can easily move and hold the slide into that position merely by holding the pistol in their left hand by the back of the gun with the thumb underneath the grip and the fingers around the top of the slide. Simply squeezing the left hand easily moves the slide back far enough leaving the right hand free to manipulate the 1/8" punch type removal tool.
2. Make a plastic or non-marring accessory that hooks into the front of the trigger guard with "cams" to contact the front of the slide on each side above the recoil guide hole and below the muzzle and that curves around the top of the slide to terminate with a finger hole at about the middle or front of the ejection port. By holding the gun with the left hand more-or-less as described in #1, the owner's trigger finger goes into the finger hole, and when the hand in contracted, the slide moves back to align the accessory pin holes. That won't mar the finish and will allow easy removal of the pin.
The accessory of #2 could be of much lighter construction if #1 is implemented. With the #2 accessory by itself, there's NO need to make any changes to the pistol itself to accomplish the objective of enabling any owner to field strip the gun. Since one accessory is already needed (the punch type tool to push the pin out), another one provided by Rohrbaugh or an independent supplier isn't any big deal.
tiberius
Member
Blackhawk,
Have you fired it yet? If so, do tell. I saw on the .380 thread that you were carrying it so I assume that you have and I know lots of us are interested.
Thanks
Have you fired it yet? If so, do tell. I saw on the .380 thread that you were carrying it so I assume that you have and I know lots of us are interested.
Thanks
No, I haven't, and believe it or not, I'm dithering about it!
The gun I would like to own the most is the only existing .45 ACP Luger toggle top. There were only 2 made by Georg Luger, and the other one was destroyed in testing by the Army. If I got my hands on it, would I shoot it? Its value as a collector's item would plummet!
If I got by hands on any historical firearm, would I fire it? Not if I wanted to preserve its je ne sais quois that makes it historically valuable.
Should I ever get such an opportunity, I've always hoped that I'd have enough restraint to avoid corrupting a value I don't understand by doing what comes naturally.
My R9-s is the very first one deliverd to a customer. Since then, it's unfired. It was fired before that at the factory, going through 2-3 magazines without any malfunctions, but it hasn't been fired since the historic event of being the first one delivered to a customer.
I have absolutely no qualms about carrying it and it working should the need arise. After dry firing and hand cycling plus a LOT of inspection, I have absolutely no doubts that it will work perfectly.
So, is this a museum piece or collector's item I have, or is it a gun to shove several thousand rounds through in an attempt to "prove" it?
Jeff's been to the range 3-4 times with his, the second one to be delivered, and he's wringing it out for an article he's writing (not to mention having a lot of fun).
I've even been thinking of keeping it in my safe deposit box at the bank. There might as well be something in there I think is worth having....
(BTW, I've already made plans to get a few more of them....)
The gun I would like to own the most is the only existing .45 ACP Luger toggle top. There were only 2 made by Georg Luger, and the other one was destroyed in testing by the Army. If I got my hands on it, would I shoot it? Its value as a collector's item would plummet!
If I got by hands on any historical firearm, would I fire it? Not if I wanted to preserve its je ne sais quois that makes it historically valuable.
Should I ever get such an opportunity, I've always hoped that I'd have enough restraint to avoid corrupting a value I don't understand by doing what comes naturally.
My R9-s is the very first one deliverd to a customer. Since then, it's unfired. It was fired before that at the factory, going through 2-3 magazines without any malfunctions, but it hasn't been fired since the historic event of being the first one delivered to a customer.
I have absolutely no qualms about carrying it and it working should the need arise. After dry firing and hand cycling plus a LOT of inspection, I have absolutely no doubts that it will work perfectly.
So, is this a museum piece or collector's item I have, or is it a gun to shove several thousand rounds through in an attempt to "prove" it?
Jeff's been to the range 3-4 times with his, the second one to be delivered, and he's wringing it out for an article he's writing (not to mention having a lot of fun).
I've even been thinking of keeping it in my safe deposit box at the bank. There might as well be something in there I think is worth having....
(BTW, I've already made plans to get a few more of them....)
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
Hats off to the brothers ... and, this has been a most interesting thread to follow.
I look forward to report data from Jeff eventually.
I look forward to report data from Jeff eventually.
Done it before. Carried a S&W revolver in combat tours in Vietnam for 2 years and never fired it.
It's not a matter of faith in my fellow man, it's a matter of faith in myself to assess mechanical devices, especially guns, etc. I've never been surprised by one of my guns going off or by one not going off.
Besides, what does firing a gun prove about the next time you need it to shoot? Just because a lightbulb worked when you switched it off doesn't mean that it will work when you switch it back on, does it?
Seriously, if this thing does get relegated to being a "museum piece in waiting," I obviously won't be carrying it. Right now, I'm carrying it to get a feel for how R9s carry more than as the sole means of survival in the asphalt jungle outside my door. Everybody, especially me, really enjoyed the show-and-tell today where they got to handle it, etc.
I don't have the demeanor of being a potential victim either. I've been carrying going back more than 40 years, and I've never been in any situation where a CCW could have justifiably come into play. I avoid crowds and events like Mardi Gras where trouble is likely to be, but if it finds me, I'll just do what's necessary.
If I decide to keep this one virginal, when my next Rohrbaughs show up, I'll take out all my pent up desire to fire this one on them. I'm not Karnak, but I predict that there are plenty more Rohrbaughs in my future....
Speaking of the future, what does the future hold for Rohrbaugh? I'm specifically wondering what their next model might be like (I'm predicting the company will be successful). I think the R9 looks terrific as a pocket gun, and I wouldn't want to change it. For me, however, I'd be more interested in something similar but with a 3.0" barrel and a grip long enough to accomodate one more round. Maybe that would also add enough mass to the slide to high allow higher pressure ammo. Oh yeah, and dovetailed sights (again, I wouldn't change the R9/R9s at all).
Last edited:
NJ3
Member
I know a stainless framed one was mentioned in this thread as the next model, that should hold up to +P and +P+ ammo. The weight of an all stainless model would be less desirable for pocket carry though.
No telling, pinepig2, but they've hit a resonant chord with their R9 so they'll still be innundated trying to fill the orders for a long time to come. I've wanted a small gun just like this for much longer than I can remember, and apparently it hits MANY other people as being "just right" as well.
I'd much rather Rohrbaugh stick with what they know and can EASILY handle with the personnel they have to facilitate slowly adding staff at a rate they can train them to maintain the exceptionally high quality and workmanship that's evident on mine.
Over expansion or too rapid expansion has killed or crippled way too many companies that started out producing great products. Kahr is an example. They started out with a great design, but by the time they figured out the trigger needed fixing with the "Elite Trigger," they had several models, and that required adding a bunch of staff. Unfortunately, the new staff wasn't quite "with the program" on quality or customer service. Kahr's reputation has taken such a beating that it may never overcome it. Same way with some other big name manufacturers.
If Rohrbaugh quality ever slips or they ever make compromises on parts or processes or turn control over to some money grubbing "experts", they'll take a hit on their reputation. Then the ghosts of their ancestors will rise up and make their lives miserable for dragging the family name, honor, and fortune into ridicule. I don't see that happening. They're much too smart and focused. I've known them for a year and a half, and they're not greedy with delusions of grandeur that they're going to corner the firearms market. What they do, they do very well, and they and their products will enjoy similar accolades to those bestowed on Browning, Colt, Luger, Maxim, Henry, and other notables in firearms history. And that's my prophecy about the Rohrbaughs and their company.
I'd much rather Rohrbaugh stick with what they know and can EASILY handle with the personnel they have to facilitate slowly adding staff at a rate they can train them to maintain the exceptionally high quality and workmanship that's evident on mine.
Over expansion or too rapid expansion has killed or crippled way too many companies that started out producing great products. Kahr is an example. They started out with a great design, but by the time they figured out the trigger needed fixing with the "Elite Trigger," they had several models, and that required adding a bunch of staff. Unfortunately, the new staff wasn't quite "with the program" on quality or customer service. Kahr's reputation has taken such a beating that it may never overcome it. Same way with some other big name manufacturers.
If Rohrbaugh quality ever slips or they ever make compromises on parts or processes or turn control over to some money grubbing "experts", they'll take a hit on their reputation. Then the ghosts of their ancestors will rise up and make their lives miserable for dragging the family name, honor, and fortune into ridicule. I don't see that happening. They're much too smart and focused. I've known them for a year and a half, and they're not greedy with delusions of grandeur that they're going to corner the firearms market. What they do, they do very well, and they and their products will enjoy similar accolades to those bestowed on Browning, Colt, Luger, Maxim, Henry, and other notables in firearms history. And that's my prophecy about the Rohrbaughs and their company.
Good post, Blackhawk. The LAST thing I'd want to see are any changes to the company that would affect the quality of the final product. When I first learned of this gun, I thought "ahh, a higher quality alternative to Kahr." If Kahr caused their QC issues by releasing too many different models early on, then I will be content with just one from Rohrbaugh.
WonderNine
member
Nah, you're thinking of Kimber.
What's on my wish list, a pocket 45!!!
The difference in weight between a Colt Pony and a Stainless Mustang, it is a big change. The aluminum frame cuts a lot of weight off the gun. Anodzing is just a surface treatment, heat treating makes metal stronger.
As being a CNC machinist, just permently laid off from Bosch, , this gun can be massed produced, on CNC equipment, we had 1000 CNC operators at Bosch, making fuel injectors, but it takes time to train people, millions of dollars for equipment, tooling, training etc...
People think you can start production quickly, but that takes time and lots of money.
I just wish that more manufacturers would produce what the people want. Amen
The difference in weight between a Colt Pony and a Stainless Mustang, it is a big change. The aluminum frame cuts a lot of weight off the gun. Anodzing is just a surface treatment, heat treating makes metal stronger.
As being a CNC machinist, just permently laid off from Bosch,
, this gun can be massed produced, on CNC equipment, we had 1000 CNC operators at Bosch, making fuel injectors, but it takes time to train people, millions of dollars for equipment, tooling, training etc... People think you can start production quickly, but that takes time and lots of money.
I just wish that more manufacturers would produce what the people want. Amen
Black Snowman
Member
No, it's a real gun. There's no room for the extra bulk, weight, and room for potential failures in a gun like this, especially in this size.
If they do develop a new model, I hope they can do it after making back the money they've already laid out. It's very difficult starting a new business and there's still a lot of things that could go wrong for them. I know I'd like to see a particular new gun from them . . . well, actually I'd like to develop it and make money off it myself but I don't know if I can pull it off or if I'm willing to take the risk to do it.
We'll see in both cases
I wish them the best and it sounds like they've make a great product that deserves to succeed.- Status