Good to hear; I'd assumed the bullet pull-out issues would only get worse as bullet weight went up (more recoil, and more bullet momentum to yank it out the case).
That gun is supposedly rated past Rowland or some crazy nonsense --not that you'd want to actually shoot that!
It's pretty much the laziest comment someone can make as a form of dismissal.
That line is also one of my personal peeves. Modern American consumers expect every new product to immediately solve every issue of the past, as well as so many in the present, that to deny its
immediate superiority-in-every-way to the predecessor, you'd have to be an idiot. All this just to
consider it as an "unproven alternative." Just yuck.
"What price would you put on your life or your loved one's? You can't put a price on your life or your loved one's. Always, never, forget that" --Paraphrasing Sterling Archer
I take less issue with this laziness, since it's more intended to diffuse arguments with cheapskates who tend to resent guns more expensive than they are personally willing to shell out. The former is meant to start fights by denigrating an otherwise-functional alternative under discussion.
The 9mm models are just under/just over a grand. Smaller is more expensive, here. As far as cost/benefit, the gun is well-past the point of inflection where you get less for less money
(it's got a smaller side-profile than a Rohrbaugh, but is heavier/fatter and doesn't cost 2000$ like those, if you can find them, or require frequent spring changes)
TCB
