Maybe not. The pressure measured is the peak pressure. The ROF could have less peak pressure but sustained for the entire length of the barrel. That could theoretically result in greater velocity at less peak pressure.
True performance comparisons must be based on similar parameters—apples to apples. Obviously even two identical cartridges could perform very differently if tested in differing barrel lengths, or if tested with differing propellants.
It is certainly possible to play around with propellant pressure curves and get a performance boost—although significant boosts of this type are more likely to be seen in rifle length barrels vs. much shorter pistol barrels. However, even if that were the case, a cartridge that benefits from that type of boost is not actually outperforming another similar cartridge UNLESS the second cartridge still can’t match the performance of the boosted cartridge when it gets the benefit of being tested with the same propellant.
The article states that the ROF is a shortened version of the 9mm Win Mag and we know that the COAL of the cartridge is less than the 9mm Win Mag since it will fit in a 10mm magazine. Therefore we know it has less case capacity than the 9mm Win Mag.
Apples to apples, it will NOT outperform the 9mm Win Mag at lower pressure as the article claims. In fact, apples to apples, it will not outperform the 9mm Win Mag at identical pressures. For the ROF with its reduced case capacity to outperform the 9mm Win Mag in an apples to apples comparison it will have to operate at higher pressures.
If it is run at lower pressures as the article claims, then the more capacious parent cartridge will easily outperform it at all bullet weights in apples to apples comparisons. And, in contrast to the claim in the article, the performance deficit will be worst at the heavy bullet end of the scale as that is where the smaller case capacity becomes even more of a handicap.
but I see the question as a simpler one.
The simple question is this:
Given that a shortened version of the 9mm Win Mag has been available since 1996, what does this one provide that isn’t already available?
We know that the claims about lower pressure can’t be true without paying a performance penalty.
We know that higher performance will require higher pressure which is something of a red flag given the already high pressure levels of the parent cartridge.
We know that the claims about heavier bullets don’t make sense.
That leaves the only benefit claim that doesn’t contradict the basic principles of internal ballistics is the one stating that the cartridge is designed to use 0.357” bullets instead of 0.355” bullets.
I expect the rationale for this being a benefit is that .357" bullets might be more likely to be designed to tolerate the higher velocities better. That could be true with the heavier 9mm bullets since they are not designed for high velocities although ironically, heavier bullets tend to be less likely to fail in a given caliber. With the lighter bullets, since this cartridge generally duplicates .357SIG performance, it seems likely that there are already light 9mm bullets that should hold up to these velocities.
