XR9S vs LCP - Thickness picture

Does anyone have (or can anyone take!) a picture showing the side by side thickness of the XR9-S vs a LCP (or even P3AT). I think from the dimensions the XR9-S is a little thicker, but wanted to see a side by side compro. Thanks!

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by DJ on December 10, 2011 at 9:47pm

How about a third option? Here is the S&W Bodyguard 380 which is on par with the other two. Although not an exact match, I've found the BG380 to be about the same as the P3AT (disregarding the laser, of course).

There is definitely a thickness difference. In raw numbers it isn't much, but when you are talking about pocket carry, it is a noticeable difference to me. I'm a thin build guy and while the BG380 is OK as front pocket carry for me, I doubt that I will carry the Shorty that way, because it fills my pocket in a more obvious way. With its small size and weight, the Shorty disappears in a waistband- either behind the hip or appendix carry. It doesn't, however, conceal to my expectations in the front pockets of dockers or dress pants.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BretShooter on December 10, 2011 at 11:14pm

Is that with or without a front pocket holster?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Brady on December 11, 2011 at 9:18am

DJ, I also have an XR9-S and a BG380.

IMO, the P3AT "sized" 380s are significantly easier to conceal/carry than a XR9-S.

That said they are 380s and are half as powerful as the smallest Boberg.

For those, like myself wanting the power, a better comparison would be to another 9mm like the Rohrbaugh, Keltec PF9, Sig P290, Kahr PM9.

The Boberg is smaller than the PF9, P290 and PM9 and arguably slightly larger/harder to conceal than the Rohrbaugh.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brokedoc on December 11, 2011 at 10:26am

Here ya go artx,

I would completely agree w/ DJ. I too am a slim guy and don't wear excessively baggy pants. I think the Shorty prints too much because of it's thickness. Also, even without the holster, I think the XR9-S is too thick and the grip is too long to reliably draw under stress. See my other discussion for my more detailed thoughts: First Impressions

Conan

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CWC on December 11, 2011 at 1:57pm

For any that might be unsatisfied because of the thickness or any other reason I might be interested in buying your Boberg, please pm me. I would like to have another one!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brokedoc on December 11, 2011 at 5:24pm

Funny.

We didn't say we're unsatisfied. We just would not front pocket carry the XR9-S. I have a Meco IWB on order.

CWC said:

For any that might be unsatisfied because of the thickness or any other reason I might be interested in buying your Boberg, please pm me. I would like to have another one!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DJ on December 11, 2011 at 9:19pm

John Brady:

you're right about the Boberg best being compared to the other pocket nines. I foolishly sold a perfectly functional P-11 for a not so functional P3AT (although I didn't know that at the time) because I wanted that smaller size gun. While I do like the small size for it's super concealment, I understand why many choose to carry the slightly larger pistols to get a better caliber. Whenever I'm able, I upgrade from the .380 all the way up to a .45 in the waistband.

Brokedoc/CWC:

Yep. I'm with Brokedoc on this one. "Unsatisfied" for front pocket carry doesn't mean unsatisfied all together. Although, some day when I'm holding my new XR45, the Shorty might be up for grabs. You never know.

Brokedoc said:

Funny.

We didn't say we're unsatisfied. We just would not front pocket carry the XR9-S. I have a Meco IWB on order.

CWC said:

For any that might be unsatisfied because of the thickness or any other reason I might be interested in buying your Boberg, please pm me. I would like to have another one!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DJ on December 11, 2011 at 9:58pm

BretShooter said:

Is that with or without a front pocket holster?

I always use a holster with front pocket carry, but, preferring the thinnest combination, most holsters add more thickness than I like. I just make my own. Out of duct tape. Yes, I know it's cheap, ugly, and low-class, but I like the end results. (There was a great thread on duct tape holsters on Glocktalk years ago, but I doubt its still there-- I think it was before one of the great data-loss crashes).

The first ones I made were very simple. The one I've been using for my BG380 more recently has some tapered edges to help diminish the printing even more. Unfortunately, I didn't do as good of a job on the inside with this one and I keep getting sticky residue on the slide & frame due to too many tape seams. That's when I bought a Remora to try out. The Remora is tolerable with the BG380, but still thicker than I really like. The XR9-S in the Remora is too thick for my tastes.

Now before everyone chimes in on how horrible and impractical this looks, just take a look at the thickness differences and you'll see why I like it. The Remora, which is one of the thinner holsters I've seen, adds 50-60% to the thickness of the BG.

Now compare that to the duct tape holster:

The only extra width is where I reinforced the edge to help push off. Works quite well for me. YMMV.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Brady on December 11, 2011 at 10:11pm

Well, we are new into the Boberg landscape.

The biggest design concern at this point is poor quality ammo separating under the reverse G loads.

This will either improve the quality of ammo or clarify the quality differences between available ammo choices.

As far as the BIGGEST reason for Boberg superiority... a usable and trainable super-sub-9... there are currently no better options.

As far as the quality of the XR9-S and the POWER of the XR9-S in this size package... a superior gun will be VERY difficult to design.

I for one will be KEEPING mine.

Now, let's look at the comparable choices... mostly in 6+1 capacity... NON +P...

Kahr PM9

Caliber: 9mm

Capacity: 6+1, 7+1 (magazine with grip extension)
Operation: Trigger cocking DAO; lock breech; "Browning - type" recoil lug; passive striker block; no magazine disconnect
Barrel: 3.0", polygonal rifling; 1 - 10 right-hand twist
Length O/A: 5.42"
Height: 4.0"
Slide Width: .90"
Weight: Pistol 14 ounces, Magazine 1.9 ounces
Grips: Textured polymer
Sights: Drift adjustable, white bar-dot combat sights
Finish: Black polymer frame, matte stainless steel slide
Magazines: 1 each: 6 rd flush floorplate & 7 rd extended grip

Comparison to XR9-S: longer OAL, shorter barrel giving less power on any round, more felt recoil, slightly thinner, shorter and lighter with less capacity, less power on standard loads, non-+P rated, and wider when controls are included in the measuring

SIG P290 Specifications:

Caliber: 9mm
Action Type: Double-action only
Length: 5.5 inches
Height: 3.9 inches
Width: 1.1 inches
Barrel length: 2.9 inches
Sight radius: 4.3 inches
Weight: 20.5 ounces
Magazine capacity: 6 rounds at 3.9" height
Frame material: Black polymer
Comparison to XR9-S: longer OAL, shorter barrel/less power on any round, more felt recoil, significantly wider, shorter, heavier, less capacity, less power on standard loads, non-+P rated, and wider when controls are included in the measuring

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brokedoc on December 11, 2011 at 11:54pm

John,

Good comparisons. I absolutely HATED the P290. The trigger was not smooth and the gun just didn't feel right to me.

I don't have specs but the pocket 9 market is starting to get crowded. Other newcomers in the field would be the Kimber Solo and Beretta Nano. Other popular comparably sized guns are the Rohrbaugh R9 and Ruger LC9. Mouseguns.com has an excellent chart of twelve small 9mm guns (not including the Nano yet but XR9-S is on there). Mouseguns comparison