Rohrbaugh sold

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JohnBT

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
13,233
Location
Richmond, Virginia
The folks who have spoken to Mr. Rohrbaugh have confirmed the sale to big green.

I am on my phone or I,d post the links to the rohrbaugh forum threads.
 
I called Rohrbaugh several times in the past month as I want to buy the r380 pistol but I never could get in touch with them. I went on the forum and they said it was sold but did not mention the company. If it is Remington, I hope they do a better job than they did with their R51.
 
Well present owners will now have a collectable firearm . You know the new owner will not have the quality (no matter what they claim) as the limited production of the originals.
 
LOL! Maybe the Mods shouldn't have been so quick to lock down snooperman's thread!

I remember meeting the owners of Rohrbaugh at SHOT show '07 and my impression was that this was always a nest egg for them. Nothing wrong with that.

Remmy should figure out a recoil spring setup that lasts longer than 200 rounds. The R9 might draw more interest, price point be damned.
 
Have you actually shot an R9 200 times? It's a handful. I shot mine 101 times soon after I bought it in 2007 and got that foolishness out of my system.

You won't go broke buying springs for an R9.

And I suspect that the stated 200-round limit on the springs is very, very conservative.

John
 
I've never put more than 50 rounds through my R9 in a session.

My opinion right now is that the quality of the R9 will stay the same. From what I understand the machinery that has been used to create the R9s up to this point has been relocated to a Remington location and the Rohrbaughs help set up the equipment at the new location and are doing knowledge transfer to Remington employees. I think the Rohrbaughs are going to be making R9 pistols while the Remington employees watch and learn.

At some point production may be totally transferred to Remington staff and maybe quality will take a hit then - I don't know, but I don't see a reason the fist batch of pistols out of the new location wouldn't be high quality
 
No, I have not shot an R9 200 times, but I own a Seecamp and I know all about the discomfort of shooting guns this size. If one actually practices with what they carry, they will cross 200 rounds in short order. Even if you are only shooting 50 rounds at a time, you are going to need to keep buying springs on a ridiculously regular basis.

If a Seecamp spring can last significantly longer than 200 rounds, the R9's spring design is lacking. There's simply no justifying a spring with such a short lifespan.
 
I didn't know Seecamp ever made a 9mm.

I just looked at the Seecamp site. I see .25, .32 and .380, but no 9mm.

If a person can't afford some inexpensive springs a few times a year, how will they afford ammo? The price of the gun and the springs didn't stop Rohrbaugh from selling every R9 they could make for about 10 years.
 
I agree that the life span of the springs is short in the Rohrbaugh pistols , but that has not affected the sales of these guns. When Wiley Clapp , a well known writer in American Handgunner asked Mr. Rohrbaugh about his prices, he remarked, "I sell every one I make". That is the bottom line.. People will buy these guns because they are beautifully made even though they may have an issue that would kill the sale of another gun. Regardless, I am going to buy an R380 as soon as I can find one or have one made. My 2 cents, Snoop.
 
That said, 3 years ago I would not buy one but after shooting one that belong to a friend here at my farm range , I have changed my opinion. There really isn't a pocket pistol that size with that kind of quality being made.
 
I started working out regularly to increase the strength in my hands and forearms. I don't feel that the R9 has punishing recoil that makes my hands sore. My muscles do start to ache but it is from using those muscles to control recoil of the gun and try to keep it on target / get it back on target.

I've said before that the gun is "easier" to shoot one-handed, but that is because my wrist and arm rises with the recoil. More pleasant to shoot but it takes longer to get back on target.

There are examples of people who have run their recoil springs 500 and 600 rounds with no problems, but anyway the recommendation is 200 rounds so it is what it is.

The folks at Wolff have made the best spring that can be made for a gun like this. The only other thing Rohrbaugh could do is limit ammo weight - like Kimber and Diamondback do. I'm sure if they limited bullet weights to 105gr - 115gr standard pressure they could tweak the recoil spring assembly to work specifically with that recoil impulse and those springs would last longer than 200 rounds.

Even if they zeroed in on 124gr or 147gr weights - they could tailor a spring assembly with some specificity and that would increase spring life. As it is they have springs that function from 105gr to 147gr cycling a tiny lightweight slide for the 35,001 psi Luger cartridge and the springs have a short life.

It costs me 20 bucks for range time.

I'm probably using 3 bucks in gas driving to and from the range.

A $5.00 recoil spring for this specialty pistol is part of the deal. I knew that before I purchased the gun. For some people that is a deal-breaker and that's fine - everyone determines for themselves what meets their needs and what constitutes value and what doesn't.
 
I didn't know Seecamp ever made a 9mm.

I just looked at the Seecamp site. I see .25, .32 and .380, but no 9mm.

If a person can't afford some inexpensive springs a few times a year, how will they afford ammo? The price of the gun and the springs didn't stop Rohrbaugh from selling every R9 they could make for about 10 years.
Click to expand...

Considering we're talking about an even SMALLER pistol in a marginally smaller cartridge, the direct comparison for the same cartridge isn't necessary. The concept of a micro pistol firing a service cartridge and the design concerns brought about is the topic at hand (and yes, the .380 was indeed a service caliber). You questioned me about shooting an R9 200 times as if it was inconceivable. I answered with a relevant comparison; the hand-battering Seecamp. Small centerfire pistols hurt to shoot, no matter if it's a .32ACP or a 9mm. I get it. You still need to practice with the gun if you intend to be able to use it effectively.

When you're a tiny shop selling a unique offering, "selling every one we make" isn't difficult to achieve. Since you offer the tiniest 9mm, you have the demand but you don't have the huge production capacity to flood the marketplace. In fact, "selling every one we make" can be misinterpreted and it might actually be indicative of failing to meet demand.

Nobody manufactures a firearm that needs to have the recoil spring replaced every 200 rounds. Nobody except for Rohrbaugh. There is no justification whatsoever for having a recoil spring design/spec that is recommended for replacement after only 200 rounds. The only justification is that they didn't feel like putting in the R&D, or partnering with someone else to come up with a better solution. Hell, Boberg said they could solve the spring problem, but they are not interested in helping their competitor.

Everyone wants a tiny 9mm; the expense of the pistol and the springs isn't much of a problem. On the other hand, having a recoil spring that needs to be replaced every 200 rounds and then re-tested for reliability is something that needs to be looked at. I know a few people that bought and sold their R9s precisely for that reason. They wanted the smallest 9mm, but they weren't enthralled with the constant spring swaps and reliability testing. If you resolve the concerns of the market, you increase your market, plain and simple.

The spring can and should be improved. If Remington is smart, they'll look into a dual-captive system or something along the lines of the Seecamp spring, with a smaller, heavier poundage spring inside of a longer, larger diameter one.
 
The spring assembly on the Rohrbaugh incorporates a dual spring. We're talking about replacing the outer spring.

In TOG's picture you can see the inner recoil spring / plunger / assembly to the left of the outer recoild spring:

attachment.php


http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/11/eric-nelson/gun-review-rohrbaugh-r9s-stealth/
 

Attachments

  • R9 parts.jpg
    R9 parts.jpg
    53.1 KB · Views: 695
Last edited:
There is lots of room to improve the design for the R9.

Even the way the spring assembly sits beneath the barrel. There is a slight notch where the barrel transitions from round barrel to square barrel hood and the plunger for the recoil spring hangs on that. Many times I've reassembled my R9 and have had the spring rod sticking out of the front of my pistol by about a 1/4"

I notice my CM9 doesn't have that, the area is sloped so the spring snugs up to right where it is supposed to be.

For the R9, I just tap on the rod a little bit to get the spring assembly to jump over the notch and get where it is supposed to be but it could be improved.

The screw holes for the grip could be improved, like using a T-nut or a cage nut instead of drilling the aluminum frame.

Retaining the trigger bar could be improved, it is now dependent on having the right grip panel firmly screwed in.

It's not a perfect gun and some might argue that for $1,100 it damn well should be, but IMO it is still the best combination of light weight and small footprint for a pocket sized 9mm.
 
Have you actually shot an R9 200 times? It's a handful. I shot mine 101 times soon after I bought it in 2007 and got that foolishness out of my system.

You won't go broke buying springs for an R9.

And I suspect that the stated 200-round limit on the springs is very, very conservative.
Click to expand...

I hate to be that guy, but...yeah. Boberg. Just sayin'

In any case, I would not hold much hope for the R9 maintaining any standard of quality, most especially if the facilities are moved or if anything at all is changed. The R51 fiasco pretty much demonstrated the company is incapable of setting up a new firearms project at this time. Everything from materials, manufacturing, tooling, quality control and inspection, labor oversight, distribution, and customer support has been an utter debacle. The only thing that was done mostly right was the engineering, which was mostly subverted by manufacturing cost-cutting measures.

"Owner's, don't let your babies grow up to be Remingtons"

TCB
 
boricua9mm said:
If a Seecamp spring can last significantly longer than 200 rounds, the R9's spring design is lacking. There's simply no justifying a spring with such a short lifespan.
Click to expand...

It may not be the SPRING DESIGN that's the problem, but different design objectives that affect the space available for springs. All gun designs involve compromises that affect size, capacity, durability, and function -- and the results of those compromises seem more critical and obvious in the very small guns.

While the art of making steel is changing and advancing, it still hasn't changed so much that metallurgists can, today, squeeze a lot more "metal power" into the smaller spaces available in some of these gun designs. With some of these smaller guns (or larger capacity magazines) springs have apparently come to be considered a renewable resource by gun designers, and for most of us, that's a good trade off: shorter spring life (perhaps because of smaller springs) might allow a 10%-20% smaller weapon or a 15% mag greater capacity. Buyers seem to like that approach, and those guns sell well.

Rohrbaugh may feel that it's better to err on the side of reliable function than economy when stating a spring life for customers. If I had an R9 I'd be using and older spring for range work and lower-count or relatively new one for carry, understanding that the range gun may have some functional problems from time to time, when it doesn't matter.
 
Last edited:
Sure, they could have designed the slide to be larger and heavier and then they would have had more room for a larger spring that would last longer. But then it wouldn't be the tiny 9mm they set out to build.

"I hate to be that guy, but...yeah. Boberg. Just sayin' "

Uh, just saying what? The Boberg 9mm is 4 ounces heavier at 17.4 and about the same size as an R9. That's getting heavy for a pocket pistol. Heck, my S&W 442 is lighter than that by 1.5 ounces. Doesn't one of the Boberg models even come with a rail? I wouldn't have purchased a Boberg even if they'd been available in 2007 when I bought my used Rohrbaugh.

Fwiw, my R9 with the original black carbon fiber grips only weighs 12.8 ounces.
 
I looked over and examined a Boberg at a gun show recently and it is a very complicated gun. Most gun designers today try to make a pistol that is simpler with less parts , but not Mr. Arne Boberg. He is wants to design the most complicated system to push a round in the chamber. Based on the complaints that I have read, he has not been too successful as more of his guns are returned for reliability issues. Compare that to the simple and few moving parts of the Rohrbaugh design. There is no contest, Rohrbaugh is the superior designed pocket pistol.
 
The way I see it, 200 rds is a reliabiltiy test. Replace the spring and I have to start over. Spring needs replacing at 200 rounds? Well then it defeats the purpose of having the gun in the first place. For me anyway. As always YMMV.
 
Arnes gun excels at eeeking out the most velocity in the shortest length handgun.

The Boberg XR9-S is the shortest of all the micro-nines at just 5.1" It is tall for a pocket pistol and it is heavy for a pocket pistol. Part of the height is the extra round that the XR9-S holds.

Rohrbaugh R9
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 2.9 in
Length: 5.2 in
Height: 3.7 in
Slide Width: .82 in
Width at thickest part of pistol: .95 in
Weight: 13.5 oz, magazine 1.6 oz
Capacity: 6+1 Rounds

Boberg XR9-S (Shorty)
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel: 3.35 in
Length: 5.1 in
Height: 4.2 in
Width: .96 in
Weight: 17.5 oz
Capacity: 7+1 Rounds

The XR9-S is ammo-sensitive in a different way than other micro-nines. Because it loads the chamber by pulling cartridges out of the magazine rather than pushing cartridges out of the magazine, cartridges that don't have a sufficiently strong crimp can come apart.

The gun also has a requirement that non-metallic anti-seize be used on the unlock-block. That is a little bit of a special requirement as most guns just require a "quality lubricant", and most anti-seize products have metal dust in them like zink, or copper.

The Glocks ship with copper anti-seize in them, and I've slathered the stuff on my 17L and it's worked just fine with the stuff - but that's a Glock and a big ol Glock at that.

The XR9-S, like the Kahr MK9 is a very small, very heavy pistol. So it fills a niche for people who want a very small pistol but don't pocket carry so weight is not that big of a deal for them.
 
Lucky Derby, you are misinformed. One does not have to fire 200 rounds through a pistol every time a spring is replaced to test for reliability. That is true for the Rohrbaugh and many other guns as well.
 
COunt Zero, You missed the point. It is obvious what Boberg is trying to accomplish with his design. What is not obvious to some is that the design is too complicated and unreliable. In my opinion he does not fill this "niche" very well.
 
Lucky Derby writes:

The way I see it, 200 rds is a reliability test. Replace the spring and I have to start over. Spring needs replacing at 200 rounds?
Click to expand...

That had occurred to me, too, the first time I read about the spring-replacement interval recommendation.

So many here (and elsewhere) say that one should fire 200 trouble-free rounds through any new gun, or any gun that has been worked on, before carrying it. I wondered at the time if a spring replacement was considered "work"..
 
Another question I have (sorry I brought up the Boberg; touchy ;)) is how Remington is paying for all these sales. This isn't exactly the 'boom times' for them as a corporation, so I find it extremely weird they'd be acquiring new companies --of any size-- while they are having trouble getting their own affairs in order, and pruning brands/products left and right. I kind of wonder if they're just burning operating capital at this point to speed up the bankruptcy filings, or something.

TCB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
rohrbaugh released
Replies
0
Views
575
arinvolvo
A
D
  • Locked
  • Poll
Rohrbaugh R9s: Why or why not?
Replies
16
Views
617
Bobo
B
K
  • Locked
Rohrbaugh
Replies
21
Views
2K
Alan Fud
A
J
  • Locked
Rohrbaugh next week???
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Jeff OTMG
J
D
  • Locked
Rohrbaugh Firearms
Replies
16
Views
2K
Jeff OTMG
J
Back
Top