Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

2,303 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
No, I dont own the DB9 and there are no pictures as I did not have a camera (and no my cell phone, also known as an electronic leash does not have a camera). What this is, is a non-Glock persons initial impressions on the Diamondback DB9. And I will state up front, I know its not a Glock, and this is not exactly a comparision to them, but one cannot help but compare certain features, its parentage, at least visually is similar but perhaps not as blatant, as any number of 1911 siblings are to the original Colt. It would not be fair to compare it exactly of course and I do not. Simply point out similarities.

A friend bought one several weeks ago and when my new Guntest issue arrived this week I decided to see how my own impressions might match up, so before reading the issue I asked my friend to bring it to the range Saturday. I ran the better part of two boxes of mixed ammuntion through it, a variety of hollowpoints, and fmj loads from about 6 manufacturers.

My first impression upon looking was it looked very similar to a Glock, in fact my friend bought it because he said it was the pistol he wished Glock would make, I did not ask him if it has fulfillied his expectations as I wanted to form my own. The slide is the familiar blocky shape, and the overall visual impression is Glock, almost. It is very similar to a Glock, but, with some improvements, at least in my opinion. Two of the things which make me not like Glocks is the grip design, which feels blocky in my hand, and the trigger mounted safety feature. Well, the DB9 does not have the trigger safety, and the grip does not feel as blocky to me, nor is the grip angle that same glock grip angle, or at least it does not feel it to me. It seems much more vertical and feels more comfortable in my hand. So, I already liked it upon first grip than I did the Glocks I have shot, which have been numerous in different calibers. Obviously those who love Glocks may not think these are improvements, and I understand this completely, each person has their own likes, these are simply mine.

Over all shooting impressions were favorable, did not have a single failure to feed even in mixed loaded magazines.
Accuracy were about what I have experienced in other very small 9MMs, which is to say accurate enough for its intended purpose, very close range self defense. The majority of groups were in the 3+ inch range at 10 yards, someone more familiar might close them up more. But I was very satisfied with it. The sights were very adequate for its purpose, and fast to use.

One thing I will note, after reading the issue today, is that Guntests marked it down because of the excessively long and sharp trigger. But, honestly I can;t do that. My favorite small pistol the P3AT has a fairly long trigger stroke, and the end and sides of the first one I bought, my wife has one also, were sharp and caused blisters on my trigger finger. I solved this with a few minutes work with a small exacto knife and some small needle files. No harm no foul, sometimes even the best manufacturing molding processes leave flashing or sharp edges, I worked in an injection moding company long enough to know this. In a case like this with such a simple fix I can hardly mark it down much, its not a major malfunction.

Overall I would be very satisfied with it, moreso than I would be with any true Glock I have shot. Overall build quality as it relates to materials, and long term reliablity will be something that only time will tell. Will it be similar to Glocks famous reliablity, who knows, again time will tell. But in the short term, I would not feel poorly armed with it as a CCW pistol. But would run several hundred rounds through it like any CCW handgun before I trust it implicitly.
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.