A while back I took advantage of some good pricing and Silencerco's rebate, and I bought a Maxim 9 from kellybachand. I haven't actually received it yet, since it's still in ATF jail.

More recently, Kelly's necro-post about the SAR 9 caught my attention. It looked like a cool gun at a great price, though with questionable reliability. But what the hell, I'm up for a challenge!

Kelly ordered a SAR 9 for me, and today I went to pick it up. Kelly has two of the SAR 9 pistols himself, neither of which had seen range time yet, so we decided to take them all out together. And what the hell, why not give the Maxim 9 its first conjugal visit at the same time.





I brought my cleaning supplies to the range, and I cleaned both the SAR 9 and the Maxim 9 before we did any shooting. I didn't want any manufacturing grease to be the culprit if there were failures. I gave both guns my typical treatment, which includes field-stripping, EEZOX on Q-tips for the frame, rails, chamber and slide, and EEZOX with bore snake through the barrel.

I started with the SAR 9. After reading some reviews and watching the Military Arms Channel (MAC) video, I knew that this pistol might not run 100%. I brought some 115-grain reloads, some 147-grain reloads, some Federal 115-grain aluminum-cased ammo, and some Federal 147-grain HST.

And sure enough, the problems started right off the bat, with four failures to eject (FTEs) in the first mag of 10 rounds. Things got slightly better as I shot more, but I was still getting consistent FTEs, and occasionally a light strike. All of the cartridges with light strikes fired when I put them in for a second try.









Seeing a pattern yet?

At one point I took out the barrel and rubbed some EEZOX on the outside of it; I hadn't done this when I cleaned. This made the gun run better, but it didn't stop the failures.

After shooting a few mags of my 115-grain reloads, Kelly handed me 10 rounds of Armscor factory ammo. The first five out of the ten failed to eject.

I also shot a bunch of my 147-grain reloads, and in general they were worse than the 115-grain reloads.

I shot a total of 641 rounds through the SAR 9:

115-grain reloads: 259 rounds, about 1-2 FTEs per mag
147-grain reloads: 272 rounds, about 2 FTEs per mag
Armscor factory 9mm: 10 rounds, five FTEs.
Federal factory aluminum-cased 9mm: 100 rounds. Worked the best of all ammo tried, with only one light strike and no FTEs.
Federal factory 147-grain HST: 0 rounds. I didn't see the point of using the expensive stuff just yet.

Near the end of the session, Kelly noted that the SAR manual gives lubricating instructions that show oil being applied . . . well, pretty near everywhere! I took the gun apart again, and we dropped lube (not the EEZOX, but actual lube) liberally onto the inside of the slide and all over the barrel. This seemed to make yet another significant improvement, and the gun ran better after that though it wasn't completely cured.

I should also note that I had two failures of the trigger to reset early in the day, which I think was because of friction inside the gun.

Reliability issues aside for the moment, I *really* like this pistol. It feels great in my hands, it points nicely, and I shoot well with it. I really enjoyed shooting it today.

I should also note that I overloaded the 15-round mags with 17 rounds a number of times, and I didn't notice that it made a difference.

As for Kelly's two pistols, he put about 50 rounds through each with no FTEs or similar malfunctions. He did have some failures of the trigger to reset in one of them.

Bottom line: Obviously this pistol has major reliability issues. However, the more I shot it, better it did . . . and the more I lubed it, the better it did. By the end of the day, it was fairly regularly firing full magazines without a malfunction, which was a big accomplishment. And did I mention that I really, REALLY like shooting it? I'm cautiously optimistic that more shooting and more lube will get it through the break-in period, and it can become a good range partner.

Next up was the Maxim 9! I put some 115-grain reloads in it, and fired the first shot:



DAMMIT!

I ended up putting 61 rounds through the Maxim 9. After that first FTE, it functioned perfectly. I tried it without my earpro, of course; with 115-grain ammo, it was tolerable but loud, louder than I would like. With 147-grain ammo (subsonic of course), it was very comfortable to shoot without earpro. This was in the full-length configuration; I didn't try removing any of the baffles.

So . . . why only 61 rounds, you ask? Well, it's because I was in the middle of my fifth mag, shooting, when suddenly the front sight went flying through the air and landed on the ground behind me. What in the HELL....

We retrieved the sight, which has the same design as a Glock sight, with the mini screw coming up from the bottom. There was obviously a piece missing, so I shook the gun, muzzle-down, until the screw head fell out of the muzzle. Jeebus.





So yeah . . . two thumbs up for the Maxim 9, except for the front sight issue which I'm sure will be solved. I'm guessing that maybe someone over-tightened the screw, and weakened the head, but who knows. I've emailed Silencerco and asked them to send me a new sight and screw.

Reliability-wise, this was a rough day. But it was still a damn good day at the range . . . thanks, Kelly!

i need to up my game holy shit lmao

So Jelly. Cant wait for my Maxim!

MadPick, interesting stuff.

Observation on the front sight failure - part of my career is in analyzing (and correcting) bolted joint failures, and I'm 90% certain that front sight screw broke because it was too loose, rather than too tight. Repetitive movement/slip of a bolted connection can result in failures like that.

To correct it, I install Glock style front sights with plenty of green Loctite 680 on the sight base, which prevents future movement by filling the gaps. I like to use blue #243 on the screw. If you don't have either one, you can use one of the red loctite grades, but consider it a permanent installation.

So you didn't read the owners manual before testing a new gun? C'mon, Steve!
I'm looking at the SAR 9 and it looks like Glock and H&k had a baby.

That front sight...smh.

Good writeup. I've had frustrating days at the range like that.


I'm done being a beta tester for guns ... just too frustrating and costly and annoying. Give me something that's tried and true, been around for a decade or several, been adopted by a military or police force, and I'm good to go.

Like Steve noted, I brought my two SAR9 pistols out, and put first rounds through them. Since mine were 100% reliable, I have to first say, there is a very real possibility of consistent operator error on the part of Steve... Ok, maybe that's not fair to Steve, but I pretty much had to .

I put 10% as many rounds through each of mine, about 60 rounds each, but without any FTEs like Steve had. They all went bang and they all ejected fine. On one or two occasions a trigger got hung up and didn't kick out to reset. This is obviously a failure, though of a different nature, and moving the trigger a little made it pop out.

I only shot factory ammo through mine, that could be a factor, but it's not clear since Steve had issues with factory ammo in his. I will say that I had pre-lubed mine rather thoroughly, missing just one spot the manual notes (inside of the slide above the barrel), so it's possible that extra lube made both of mine more reliable. Side note: in the same time Steve put 600+ rounds through his gun, I put just 300 rounds of 9mm down range. I think Steve was on a mission to sling some lead today.

One other odd note, I dry fired one of mine a few hundred times and the trigger became noticeably smoother on pull and reset. It may even have lightened up. My second SAR9 has a rather gritty trigger, this is the one that failed to reset at some point. I plan to dry fire this one a bit more to see if its trigger similarly smooths out.

I'd second Steve's opinion that these pistols are fun shooters. I was joking with Steve that these might be both the cheapest pistols and most ergonomic pistols I own. I swapped the side panels and back straps to small size and the pistol fits my hands almost perfectly.

All the pistols shot accurately and were point of aim, point of impact from about 10 feet to 40 feet where we tested them. These are inexpensive pistols and we noticed a few things that confirmed that like I had a front sight with a less than perfect paint job on one of mine, and the trigger grittiness. All that being said, I think the price was right on these ones and the $ to fun ratio is in the right ballpark.

As for all the bad luck Steve had, it's like what they say about fishing "a bad day fishing is better than a good day at work". We didn't have a bad day at the range, but even with some bad luck, broken stuff, and reliability issues, it was way better than a good day at work!

.

Thank you for the excellent report Steve. Your SAR-9 experience is reminiscent of my first outing with my Sig P365. Hopefully you will end up as happy with it as I have with my P365. I wouldn't trade the P365 for anything now that I have a fully functional and reliable model.

I had a SAR 9mm CZ clone and it ran flawlessly, but clearly was a different mechanical design.

I thought about a Maxim 9; it is a novel thought.
I will see what happens when my Rugged Obsidian 9 gets released and I try it on a few 9mm platforms. I think that will be good enough for me.

I have bought several guns that I assumed were dialed in and stable prior to purchasing, but needed some spring changes or other minor alterations. And with a little fiddling, generally my guns are now all reasonably stable (because if they weren't I would fix or ditch them). And I find that all my guns run better with lots of Hoppe's #9 oil...

Saved for sig use.

If you don't mind supporting the Turks, the SAR B6P (9x19mm CZ 75 clones; also somehow tied to EAA which are nearly identical, maybe imported by EAA, not sure) are totally GOOD TO GO. Have several, and hands down the best sub $300 9mm poly hammer gun on the market.

As for lubes, pour a couple ounces of Mobil 1 snythetic motor oil on the guts and rails and it'll run like budda....

Haha . . . well, the reality is that I do more talking than shooting at the range lately, so today was an anomaly.



Interesting, thank you.

I didn't notice that the front sight was loose on the gun, but then again I didn't take a hard look at it, so who knows.

I have blue Loctite and I normally use that on the screw for Glock front sights, but I never thought to use Loctite on the sight itself.

I was going to suggest limp wristing may be the culprit here, but since Kelly was there, I'm sure he would have told Steve to get a grip.

Once I took a look at that Maxim, wuff. No want. Too ugry.

Made me LOL.

The worn area on the nut in your picture indicates the sight was moving after the nut was in place, but it may not have been enough movement to notice. It doesn't take much.

You can try just the blue Loctite on the sight base, but it won't work as well. The green #680 I recommend and use myself cures in up to .015" air gap (the blue will not), so it'll fill in between the sight boss and slide to prevent movement. It also does a better job of bonding the sight in place.

Jealous of that Maxim 9 btw. I want one, just too many other things in line first. Cool pistol.