I bought this mostly because I like the micro sized "1911" pistols and partly because the price was right.  $299 ($319 out the door with tax included) isn't bad for a like new in the box .380.  Secondarily I wanted to see how well it compared to both my PPK/S and my Kimber Micro.   I had low expectations, but I was pleasantly surprised.

Handling

The sights are Novak style sights that are actually quite good and allow ample space between front and rear sights for good front sight acquisition.  

This was something of a surprise as a couple of the video reviews I’d seen prior to buying it indicated the front sight was too small and “disappeared” when firing the pistol.    However, as soon as I picked it up in the gun shop I understood the issue wasn’t the front sight as it’s as high as the front sight on either my Kimber Micro and higher than the front sights on my various PP and PPK/S pistols.

Instead, the issue is that the combination of the bobbed grip frame, the flat mainspring housing and the lower than usual tang and beaver tail on the grip safety result in the hand being forced almost a quarter inch lower than it is on other micro sized 1911s and changes the grip angle slightly compared to those other micro 1911, as well as a standard 1911.  

Difference in tang and beaver tail heights:



In short, for a shooter who developed a consistent grip and sight picture with a 1911, the Baby Rock will point slightly low and the front sight won’t be visible as the pistol rises into your line of sight as you draw it, when using your normal grip and head position.  

Rather than alter my grip – which works well with everything else I shoot - I elected to use a slightly more upright head position, raising the eye line slightly to bring the front sight into view.    

That solved the reported front sight issue.  However, it would benefit from some bright paint on the front sight, and an arched mainspring housing would improve the point-ability of the pistol.  Here’s hoping RIA or a third party decides to market one for it.

I suspect the comparatively low tang and beaver tail were an intentional design feature by RIA to create a bit more clearance between the slide and web of the hand.   Under recoil, if you’ve got a large hand, the clearance on the Kimber Micro is minimal.  I suspect with the greater recoil of the Baby Rock, RIA wanted to increase the clearance to prevent slide bite.  Still, an arched mainspring housing would not have interfered with that and would have improved the point-ability of the pistol.    

With the exception of the aluminum alloy mainspring housing and trigger, the pistol is all steel and weighs a pleasant 24.8 oz fully loaded.  The grips are nicely done with a rubber compound that manages the recoil well, but it would benefit from a slightly wider grip with a bit of palm swell as the grip frame itself is small.

Shooting

The Baby Rock’s controls are typical 1911, just smaller. The trigger was surprisingly good. The pull was right at 5 pounds, but was very crisp and clean, and like all 1911s the trigger reset is delightfully short allowing very rapid double taps and accurate controlled pairs.   The safety is very positive and nicely sized – larger than the Kimber Micro, and the grip safety works as advertised even with the small size of the grip and the lack of any bump on the grip safety.  Still, if it poses a problem, the time honored approach of pinning the grip safety would work fine.  

RIA missed the boat to some extent with the Baby Rock’s blow back operation rather than the delayed recoil system used on the full size 1911 and most other micro sized 1911s.  In that regard it’s not a true “1911”.   That’s unfortunate as an all steel 25 oz pistol with the Baby Rock’s slide and barrel length using a delayed recoil operation system would be awesome to shoot.    

On the other hand, with the longer slide relative to the shorter Colt Mustang, Sig P238 and Kimber Micro, along with it’s heavier weight, the Baby Rock has excellent balance and recovers very quickly under recoil, producing excellent double taps and controlled pairs despite the blow back operation.  





Reliability was excellent.  On the initial range session it digested 200 rounds of flat nose and round nose FMJ as well as three different varieties of hollow points including, Mag Tech 85 gr JHP, Hornady 90 gr XTP, and Remington 102 gr Golden Sabers.

Accuracy was ok.  It demonstrated acceptable combat accuracy and would hold the X ring on a B-27 at 10 yards in slow fire and will hold the 9 ring with double taps at 7 yards.  That’s on par with my Kimber Micro, but the slow fire accuracy isn’t quite as good as any of my PP or PPK/S pistols.  This isn’t surprising given the fixed barrel design of the PP series pistols.

Felt recoil was noticeably sharper than the delayed recoil operated Kimber despite the Kimber’s significantly lighter 16.8 oz loaded weight, but was for all practical purposes identical to the blow back operated 25.8 oz PPK/S.

One negative is that the rear of the manual safety is higher profile and sharper than I’d like.  It’s not a major issue if you keep your thumb up on the safety when shooting, but if you move your thumb down, it’ll start eating into the web of your hand.  I may decide to round the edges on this a bit to de-horn it.  

The 3.75” barrel is a plus.  It’s a full inch longer than the Kimber Micro, and a quarter inch longer than the PPK/S.  That’s important with the .380 ACP takes a significant hit in short barrels.  The 90 gr XTP in any of a half dozen or so commercial loads will meet the FBI’s 12” penetration and 1.5X expansion requirements in plain and heavy clothing ballistic gel tests, but it will only give reliable expansion in the heavy clothing test if the muzzle velocity is at least 1025-1050 fps.  In most pistols, that requires a barrel at least 3.5” in length.  

The last two rounds in the magazine were notably hard to load, and I found that an UpLULA magazine loader was worth bringing to the range.  I also found the standard 9mm-.45 ACP model worked fine.   The magazine got slightly easier to load after being left loaded for several days, but it still needs a loader if you are planning on an extended range session. In the event you elect to load it 7+1 by dropping a round in the chamber rather than stripping it out of the magazine, the external extractor will readily pop over the rim.

I found the magazine would not drop freely from the magazine well, which is a negative in a self defense handgun.  I have a couple more magazines on the way from Armscor and we’ll see if they have the same issue.

The Browning 1911 .380 magazines are slightly thicker and will not work in the Baby Rock.  It’s unfortunate that a standard magazine could not be used.   I recommend stocking up on them, just to ensure you’ll have them if Armscor goes away.

The slim profile is easy to conceal and while holster options are very limited for it, I found that my various Walther PP holsters worked perfectly with it.   In an IWB holster it feels no different than a Kimber Micro, provided you are using a good carry belt to handle the extra 8 oz of weight.

Baby Rock and Walther PPK/S:







It is however too long to carry in a pocket holster, and that’s where a Kimber Micro, Sig 238, Colt Mustang, etc. has an advantage as a back up pistol.

My primary carry pistol is a Ruger LW Commander in 9mm Para, and while it is substantially larger than the Baby Rock, the LW Commander is only 10 oz heavier.   Still, I can see some potential use for the Baby Rock rather than carrying a PPK?s at times when I need a lower profile pistol than my Commander.    The Baby Rock is a bit heavier than my Kimber Micro but shoots well and offers the ballistic advantage of the longer barrel, while also having common 1911 operation.

Ruger LW 1911, Baby Rock and Kimber Micro:



Loaded weights:

Ruger 9mm LW Commander = 34 oz
Walther PPK/S = 25.8 oz
RIA Baby Rock = 24.8 oz
Kimber Micro = 16.8 oz

Looks like a really nice little pistol. And at a good price as well. That said the only shortcoming that might steer me away from it is.....for about the same price I can get a CZ 83 WITH A DOUBLE STACK MAGAZINE. I would feel more comfortable having a few more rounds in the gun when dealing with the .380 cartridge. Likely never need it but just nice to have the added ammo.
Report back to us when you have 500 rounds through it. Thanks for a very thorough review.

It sure looks like they could have gone another .25 inch higher on the frame with the beavertail. It would have made a BIG difference in pointability and pulled the bore axis down into the hand more. Might have made it feel less snappy. I also would have liked it to be .50 to .75 inch shorter in slide and barrel. I agree with you on the palm swell grips. I have some Spegels on a Hi Power and a new SP01 Shadow that use palm swells. They just help plant the pistol into your hand.

Will be a good range toy and some will use it for carry, but it could have been better. Who knows, in a year or two, maybe they will do it.

Nice review.

I wonder how it compares to the Browning Black Label .380.

Great review, thanks for the contribution.

I handled  one recently at the gun show.  Tempted but passed. The safety was sharp, as you mentioned.  It was,IMO, overly large for a 380.  And the weight felt heavy for a back up- if I recall, that's  heavier than a loaded glock 19.

Still it seemed well made.

It's not quite that heavy.

The Glock 19 weighs 21.0 oz unloaded but 30.0 oz loaded.

And again the major difference is in the relative size and bulk.  A much better comparison is the Glock 42, which is only 14.4 oz loaded.  The Glock 42 fits the 6"x4"x1" format while the Baby Rock is a bit less than a half inch longer and higher (but with an additional half inch barrel length and 1 more round).  

Of course if I'm comparing to a Glock 42, I'll compare it to the Micro Carry which is thinner and a half inch shorter than the Glock 42 and only 2.4 oz heavier.

---

I agree though that it was much better made than I expected.  I've never been a RIA fan.

Agree that the 42 is a valid comparison.  Of course a metal frame will be heavier.

I think its a good thought ix you're  a 1911 guy, but if not, then I'm  not sure it would be my first choice.  Still, it is pretty thin, so should conceal well.

Be interesting if they could do a 9mm that size, similar to a glock 42 vs 43.  I don't  know of many 1911 style 9mm pistols that small.

Good write up.

The advertised weights has the Glock 42 being heavier than the Micro. Not that you could notice a difference. I have the Micro Raptor and love it.

Thanks for the write up.  I'm interested in the Browning .380 1911 you mentioned.  Do you have one since you had mags to try in this one?   I didn't see you do a review on it if you did.  I dig you carry gun.

Nice review and a cool little pistol.

I had a similar thought - I think it would work just fine if they used the 1911's  delayed recoil locking system.  The'y had to scale the grip ups slightly but that would be a positive change anyway.

They had a Black label Compact and a Black Label Full Size (which is still an 85% size) at the local gun shop and we tried the magazine from the full size to see if it would fit.  I liked the Browning pistols, but they were twice as expensive as the Baby Rock.  The weight of the full size was 16oz empty, which puts it within a couple ounces of the Kimber Micro.  I'm interested to see how the composite frame on the Browning holds up.  Apparently it's a composite frame built on an aluminum sub frame and using aluminum frame rails.  It should wear quite well.

I applaud the most excellent write up.  Very seriously, nice.

It highlights the idea that the RIA .380 is an awespicious answer to a non-existent question other than the desire to figure out what the Baby Rock might actually do usefully.  And then realize, nothing.

If the desire is a CCW .380, the answer is a Ruger LCP .380 at half the weight and half the size.  And it points low, too.

If the desire is an intermediate size pistol, the answer is a Glock 19 at the same size and weight, incrementally more or less.

In between and really useful are the Shield 7 round 9mm, Glock 43 9mm, and Ruger LC9s 9mm (by far the best).  

Once the Glock 43 was born, the Glock 42 is likewise an answer to nothing.

I enjoyed the RIA story.  Thank you.

Thanks for the review, I had not heard of it.

Cool pistol, but I'm disappointed that it's straight blowback.

I agree for the most part.  But there are two niche markets where it fits.

Mini pistols are not practical but they are fun.

I actually showed up at the shop because I'd gotten a call that they had an Erma Luger in .32 ACP.  It's basically an 85% P.08 Luger, they were well made, but they didn't make very many of them - as in this was the first one I've ever seen in the flesh.  Unfortunately, it had already been snapped up by another Luger collector sight unseen, so all I got to do was look - and make a secondary offer if the guy backs out.

The 85% 1911s fall into the same category - mini versions of the full size 1911, in both .22 LR and .380 ACP.

This type of pistol has very little to do with practicality, and mostly exists for the purpose of "fun".  

With a $300 ish price point, it's cheap enough to justify buying one just for fun and at half the price of the Browning, it's about twice as easy to justify the purchase.


There is some appeal for a 1911 fan who wants to stay with 1911 controls.

As noted it's larger and 50% heavier than the Kimber Micro I often carry as a back up in a pocket holster, and it's not that much lighter than the LW Commander I carry as my primary self defense handgun, but it compares well to a PP or PPK/S with less accuracy, but better reliability as it is not at all ammo finicky.

Isn't the Browning's .380 1911 a delayed recoil system like a full sized gun?  I would think this might be of some use to shooters that struggle with recoil.  I'm not sure if the lower weight makes it overly snappy though.  I keep searching for handguns for my family to shoot other than a .22.   I don't know what to say.  Even my son doesn't want to shoot my G26.   They all do  fine with a .22 but asking them to step up in recoil has been a pretty difficult thing to achieve.  At least my son is shooting a M-1 Carbine and could use that for HD if he needed to.  And he's shot the AR and didn't complain too bad.  Other than it was heavier than the Carbine.  

Anyways.....  I like the idea of a very soft recoiling gun in caliber larger than .22.   A model 10 might be good with some lighter loads.  They have shot a similar set up.  My friend had a Security Six with some light loads and they had fun with that.   But they were pretty soft loads.  Handloads.    I think a full sized 9mm 1911 might work too.  But it might be on the big and heavy side for them.

Yes, the Browning 1911 .380 has a delayed recoil operating system just like the full sized 1911.  The opted for a lightweight polymer frame.

I think the recoil would be pretty close to the recoil of the Kimber Micro, which is a lot less "sharp" than the Baby Rock or PP and PPK/S despite the lighter weight.   Total recoil will be the same, but the delayed locking system spreads it over a longer time interval and it feels softer.

In that regard Browning and RIA both missed the mark somewhat, as RIA used blow back operation and Browning used a lighter frame.  An all steel, delayed recoil locked mini 1911 in .380 would be great fun to shoot and ideal for recoil sensitive shooters.

----

I have noted that a PP or PPK/S in .32 ACP is very enjoyable to shoot, due to the lighter recoil.  It's much more friendly for new shooters than the same pistols in .380 ACP and it's a good choice for new shooters who need a step up from .22 LR.

FEG made PP and PPK/S clones in 9mm Mak, .380 ACP and .32 ACP.  The  FEG AP7S and APK7s are steel framed PP and PPK/S clones in 7.65 Browning (.32 ACP). They slightly heavier than their Walther cousins and even more pleasant to shoot.   They can still be found in excellent condition for $300-$350. The Interarms imported versions are better finished than the TGI imported version but they all shoot well.  

As you've noted, .38 Special is pleasant to shoot in a K frame revolver, especially with lighter target loads around 600-700 fps and that would make a good next step.  I have a 4" Model 15 (a Model 10 with adjustable target sights, hammer and trigger) that is one of my favorite revolvers to shoot.  I also have a 6" Model 19 that is similarly very mild with .38 special target loads, but it's probably a bit heavy for a young shooter.

The Ruger Speed/Service/Security Sixes are great guns and are very similar to the L frame S&Ws in strength but closer to the K frame in weight.  

You've also got the option of the heavier L frame revolvers like the 686 which can still be shot with .38 Special, but the weight is over 40 oz with a 4" barrel so it's a bit heavy to hold for a young shooter.

Yeah, I have a 6" Model 19.  It was definitely too much gun for my wife.  Even though it's got a pretty nice trigger, she struggled with being able to pull it in DA.  I think just the heft and front heaviness of hte gun aided to that.  I didn't have my son try it yet though.  But yeah, when I shoot PMC 130 grain FMJ's it's a super fun gun to shoot.  Very little recoil.  And freaking accurate.  

I thought about the PPK, but figured it would recoil too much.  But I forgot about .32.  It would be better than a .22.

Small update on the magazine issues - hard to load and won't drop free.

I received two blued Armscor magazines from Advanced Tactical.  These are not factory replacement magazines but are made to Armscor specifications.   They use a different floor plate that butts up against the bottom of magazine well, they have different witness holes and a different follower.

But they are much easier to load and they drop free from the magazine well.  

Initial results look good, but unfortunately, it will be the end of the week before I'll be able to shoot them enough to meaningfully assess reliability.

I got the new magazines out to the range to shoot this weekend and the results were mixed.

Of the two blued magazines from ATI's website, one of them was flawless, while the other failed to feed the last round about half the time.

So..the good news is that one of them would work fine for the primary mag, while the original magazine (that does not drop free on it's own) will make an ok second magazine.