Why no love for the SR9?


PDA






marb4
September 21, 2012, 10:00 AM
Whenever I see discussions surrounding which full size 9mm is "best", which to buy, etc I always see the usual contenders - Glock, Sig, HK, etc. Rarely if ever do I see the Ruger SR9 included in the list. A few weeks ago I picked up a lightly used one on a whim and must say that I am thoroughly impressed with this handgun. Its very comfortable, points naturally, has fully adjustable sights, fit and finish are excellent, has been 100% reliable through 500 rounds, simple to tear down and clean, high capacity (17 rounds), has an excellent trigger (at least mine does), is American made, and is backed by Ruger CS. And oh yeah, it priced significantly less than other pistols on this "list". I'm just curious why it doesn't get more "love and attention" when it comes to discussing service sized 9mm's. Mine is quickly becoming one of my favorites.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why no love for the SR9?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Sam1911
September 21, 2012, 10:20 AM
Not sure, really. I only see them show up at competitions every once in a while, and never in the hands of anyone who's skills would give me a good sense of the gun's comparative merits.

Don't they all come with a magazine disconnect "safety?" If so, that would probably have something to do with it. (IDPA doesn't let you remove that if the gun comes with it, and very very few shooters want them.)

Bozwell
September 21, 2012, 10:46 AM
I don't think there's really anything wrong with them. They feel great in the hand, seem to be reliable guns and Ruger has great CS. I hated the trigger in the one I shot, but I hear the SR9c's are better in that regard, and I typically do a trigger job/have one done anyways on handguns, so that's probably a resolvable issue.

mgmorden
September 21, 2012, 11:00 AM
I think they're a great value personally, but for me they put in more lawyer features than I'd like. For me to REALLY embrace the gun I'd want the following:

1. Remove the manual safety - or at least make it both with and without.
2. Remove the magazine disconnect - its just a plain annoying feature.
3. Remove the shark-fin LCI and just use a witness hole instead. Ruger already does this on the LCP, so they're not completely opposed to the idea.
4. Make a version with a barrel between 5" and 5.25".

I realize that particularly on #2 and #3 those can be done yourself, but as Sam stated removing the mag disconnect isn't allowed for IDPA (though it is in USPSA which is my game of choice), but I don't think disabling the LCI is legal in either sport - unless it comes from the factory that way.

I still may get one eventually (like I said for most people they're a great value), but if they did all of the above I'm about 84.2% sure that I'd pick up one of these over my M&P to start shooting competition with.

TarDevil
September 21, 2012, 11:04 AM
I dearly love my SR9c.
Why, to answer your question? It has a thumb safety (don't use it if you don't want to). It has a mag disconnect safety (easy to remove). It has a loaded chamber indicator that IS large but doesn't get in the way or is even visible when shooting the gun.

But it has EVERYTHING else any gun enthusiast would ask for: reliable, accurate, some of the best customer service in the world.

At a price point below the rest.

Fiv3r
September 21, 2012, 11:11 AM
The SR9 was my first handgun. I really liked the way it felt, but I got a good amount of the dreaded barrel peening that was supposedly "normal wear and tear", and I hadn't even shot it that much.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still a Ruger guy. I love my revolvers, my Mk iii, my P-89, and LCP. However, that left a sour taste in my mouth.

As chunky as it is, I prefer a Glock these days. Certainly not "perfection", but it works for me.

The smiling swordsman
September 21, 2012, 11:14 AM
I have only shot one SR9 and I loves the look and the feel of the gun but hated the trigger.

TarDevil
September 21, 2012, 11:34 AM
I have only shot one SR9 and I loves the look and the feel of the gun but hated the trigger.
...something Ruger long ago corrected.

M2 Carbine
September 21, 2012, 11:52 AM
I liked my first SR9C so well I bought a second one. Then I bought a third SR40C.

The smiling swordsman
September 21, 2012, 12:20 PM
...something Ruger long ago corrected.

If that's the case then I might look into them again. Like I said I loved the feel and the look.

marb4
September 21, 2012, 12:39 PM
I had heard that the trigger on the SR9 was pretty abysmal but the one on the used SR9 I bought was very crisp and smooth. Feels nearly identical to the triggers on my G19 and G26. And yes, the trigger and all components are completely stock.

MarshallDodge
September 21, 2012, 12:47 PM
Probably because for a little more money you could pick up a Springfield XD, S&W M&P, and of course a Glock.

Not saying that there is anything wrong with the Ruger but the amount of aftermarket support for the above mentioned models is far greater.

M2 Carbine
September 21, 2012, 12:47 PM
I heard the early SR9 triggers were bad but that Ruger corrected the problem and is now like the SR9C.
The SR9C trigger is what finally sold me on the gun.

RBid
September 21, 2012, 01:12 PM
Newer SR9s do have the improved trigger, as found on the SR9c.

TarDevil
September 21, 2012, 01:16 PM
Probably because for a little more money you could pick up a Springfield XD, S&W M&P, and of course a Glock.

Not saying that there is anything wrong with the Ruger but the amount of aftermarket support for the above mentioned models is far greater.

I would assume this is exactly what prompted the OP. I guess it depends on how much after market support one needs, but I get all the aftermarket support I need for my SR9c. So why spend more for above listed?

dom1104
September 21, 2012, 02:09 PM
Because Glocks, M&Ps, and XDs are better, easier options to do what people do with guns.

Mikey Idaho
September 21, 2012, 02:22 PM
I've thought about his topic before as my brother in law has a SR9 and it's a perfectly capable gun. Though compared to my M&P9 and Glock 21 the fit and finish and "solid" feeling isn't quite the same. Also if you look at high level competition and LE/military use it is essentially completely absent as far as I know which probably is the reason the aftermarket for the SR isn't nearly as vast as for it's higher level competitors.

Sent from my Verizon Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 2

atblis
September 21, 2012, 02:37 PM
But it has EVERYTHING else any gun enthusiast would ask for: reliable, accurate, some of the best customer service in the world.

At a price point below the rest.
Not low enough IMO. If they were sub $300, they'd get my attention. I'd probably snag one just to try.

JTQ
September 21, 2012, 02:38 PM
Sam1911 wrote,
(IDPA doesn't let you remove that if the gun comes with it, and very very few shooters want them.)
I'm not a competitor, but didn't that rule get changed within the past year or so? It seems like I may have even read it here on this forum or maybe a Hi-Power focused forum.

Sam1911
September 21, 2012, 02:44 PM
Ahhh, you're right! I do believe that changed back in March. Too me a minute to jar that fuzzy memory loose. :)

HOOfan_1
September 21, 2012, 02:47 PM
The SR9 was my first handgun. I really liked the way it felt, but I got a good amount of the dreaded barrel peening.

How long ago was this?

Gato MontÚs
September 21, 2012, 03:20 PM
dom1104 wrote,
Because Glocks, M&Ps, and XDs are better, easier options to do what people do with guns.

Go on...

atblis wrote,
Not low enough IMO. If they were sub $300, they'd get my attention. I'd probably snag one just to try.

LOL! I'm sure if the SR was priced bellow a Sigma we'd all have at least one. Unless of course you were saying that the Rugers quality was so low that it SHOULD be priced lower than a Sigma, all without trying one first funny enough.

I too cast off the Rugers, then I shot one, now I'm a fan. The SR9c I rented felt better in my hand, shot more comfortably and produced better accuracy for me than my G19 ever did. If you have an XD, Glock or M&P and it's working out for you, awesome, but don't for a minute think the Ruger is a lesser gun.

atblis
September 21, 2012, 03:39 PM
LOL! I'm sure if the SR was priced bellow a Sigma we'd all have at least one. Unless of course you were saying that the Rugers quality was so low that it SHOULD be priced lower than a Sigma, all without trying one first funny enough.
Interesting you bring up the Sigma. I'd put the SR9 and Sigma in the same market segment. They have a similar look to them.

HOOfan_1
September 21, 2012, 04:11 PM
Interesting you bring up the Sigma. I'd put the SR9 and Sigma in the same market segment. They have a similar look to them.

If that is so, then the HI-Point and Walther PPQ look similar :rolleyes:

Fiv3r
September 21, 2012, 04:22 PM
How long ago was this?
It was around the first generation back in late 2008 or early 2009, I believe. It was enough to get me to trade the gun off. I would give the gun another chance if I fell into one. However, when I was compact 9mm shopping, even the grip comfort and price point of the SR9c could not steer me away from the G26.

The peening barrel, while I'm sure is a non-issue, just didn't give me confidence in the pistol.

wbwanzer
September 21, 2012, 04:28 PM
I've got lotsa love for my recently purchased SR9c. :D

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m145/wbwanzer/SR9c001.jpg

atblis
September 21, 2012, 04:47 PM
If that is so, then the HI-Point and Walther PPQ look similar
You don't think they look similar? Interestingly enough, the main knock against the Sigma was the trigger pull. Other than that, they're actually decent guns. S&W couldn't sell them until they lowered the price to <$300.

http://www.impactguns.com/data/default/images/catalog/535/ruger_sr9.jpg

http://www.rc-trucks.org/Smith-and-Wesson-Sigma-SW40VE-Pistol-Review-2.jpg

Fremmer
September 21, 2012, 05:55 PM
i think its probably because consumers just dont identify ruger wih striker fired guns. thats a marketing issue i suppose.

Blue .45
September 21, 2012, 06:19 PM
I haven't seen any sales figures for the SR9, but most of the comments I've read about them are positive. The one I handled shot well. The grip angle and the bore axis reminded me a little of my CZ75.

As far as them looking like a Sigma, most plastic pistols look alike to me. In fact, didn't Glock sue S&W for patent infringement after they introduced the Sigma?

scandmx5
September 21, 2012, 06:22 PM
I've owned 2 SR40's and 1 SR9....1 of the 40's had to go back...other than that they were great guns the only thing I hated was the narrow sights, too small for my astigmatism on the rears. I wasn't a fan of the huge extended mag releases, every time I slightly bumped something, they popped out.

needmorecowbell
September 21, 2012, 09:17 PM
Although I just sold my SR9c yesterday and bought a CZ P01 to replace (have a 75b full-size and wanted a compact too that shared same mags), the SR series are fantastic pistols. For a plastic, striker fired gun you can't beat it with a $400 price tag. It's just as good as glock, xd, m&p etc... I think some people just can't like them though because of all the lawyer gadgets. Mags are too pricey too.

burk
September 21, 2012, 10:15 PM
My take on them and I sell lots of them is that with Ruger not pursuing a lot of Military and Police business they don't have quite the same cache. But in my mind they are certainly competitive with the Glock, M & P, and XD. To me they each have pluses and minuses:

M & P: Pluses, great ergonomics and probably the best low cost .45 platform. Minuses, trigger is the worse of the bunch and I would not carry w/o safety. Full size 9mm has too short a lock up.

XD: Pluses, Best trigger of the bunch, grip safety is a great alternative, that your not likely to forget to engage like a reg. safety. Extra weight tames recoil in .40 better than the others. Minuses, weird sizing, largest footprint, sub-compacts are bigger than the other guys compacts. Made in Croatia

Glock: Pluses, simplicity in tear down, reliability especially in 9mm, tons of aftermarket support. Minuses, .45 is blocky and as a platform they don't tend to fit everyone

Ruger: Pluses, reliable The compact with the extended and concealment mag is the best concealment/range gun package of the group. Minuses, metal slide has some sharp edges, not near as much aftermarket support in holsters, etc.

TimboKhan
September 21, 2012, 10:31 PM
I loved mine, and am thinking about a sr9c for a carry pistol.

JRWhit
September 22, 2012, 08:13 AM
When I was at the range with an unconvinced friend. He quickly changed his mind as he noticed I was able to out group him and his 6in revolver consistently. You might think that I was just a better shot,but when he took over the gun his groups were better too. Sure the revolver was capable of better accuracy in the right hands,but the ergonomics of the SR9c just make it easier to hit with. The SR9c for a compact is pretty accurate. My friend had the same passive attitude about them until he saw the results. Now he's determined to add one to the list.

CMAS, I'm not saying it's more accurate than a 6in revolver, It's just easier to shoot for the average person, resulting in better groups.

KenW.
September 22, 2012, 08:39 AM
XD: Pluses, Best trigger of the bunch, grip safety is a great alternative, that your not likely to forget to engage like a reg. safety. Extra weight tames recoil in .40 better than the others. Minuses, weird sizing, largest footprint, sub-compacts are bigger than the other guys compacts. Made in Croatia

So the XD takes a ding because it is manufactured overseas? I do wish they were to move production for the US to the US, much like FN has. The importer/marketer, Springfield Armory has some of the best customer service around. If they were poorly made so many of us wouldn't be carrying them regardless of where thet are made.

I agree that the XD subcompact is more comparable to other brand's compact versions. The XDS though, could be the "new subcompact" XD. To me a subcompact should be a pocket pistol, which the XD subcompact is not.

I'm a big fan of Ruger's revolvers, but have been turned off on thier autos since the P-89 was released. Than's not to say the SR series is not good; I just do not have one.

HOOfan_1
September 22, 2012, 09:14 AM
You don't think they look similar?

They look somewhat similar...but so do many other guns. How does that speak to the quality of the gun though?

Not to mention as you said, the SD is pretty much a quality gun, with a poor trigger. The Ruger has a good trigger. Just as good as my Glock 19 and just as good as or better than the M&Ps I have handled. The Ruger's trigger is MUCH better than the SD's

kokapelli
September 22, 2012, 10:01 AM
Add me to the SR9 fan club. Love mine.

Southside830
September 22, 2012, 10:51 AM
Ruger as a whole are solid firearms IMO there's just too many choices in the autoloader market and Ruger doesn't stand out in any way and honestly theres better autoloaders in the same genre.

PedalBiker
September 22, 2012, 11:13 AM
My knock on Ruger - they have two vastly different safety styles - the P-95 and P-345 go UP to fire, the newer SR series go down.

I also don't like magazine disconnects.

I like the nice, large loaded chamber indicator on the SR series and I like the safety (aside from point #1).

I'd like to see a single stack SR-45 with a 4" barrel.

zenshootist
September 22, 2012, 12:31 PM
My wife has an SR9 and loves it. Ghost trigger is a cheap upgrade and makes it a smoother shooter. We did have some trouble with the striker but Ruger sent us a mailing label and had it back to us in a week at no charge. Agree about the lawyer comments but the customer service makes up for any other shortfalls.

kokapelli
September 22, 2012, 02:02 PM
What's the big deal about the safety? If you don't like it, don't use it and the magazine disconnect takes about thirty seconds to remove.

JR47
September 22, 2012, 02:28 PM
Ruger as a whole are solid firearms IMO there's just too many choices in the autoloader market and Ruger doesn't stand out in any way and honestly theres better autoloaders in the same genre.

This is the type of senseless comments that you get when there really isn't anything but "I don't like it" behind it.

I own both an SR9 and an SR9C. They were bought in the past 18 months, so benefited from the improved trigger. Well over 1k through both of them without fault. That includes standard pressure rounds, +P and +P+ rounds, together.

Even the Perfect one :barf:, Glock, had problems as new guns. Plastic sights, Ka-Booms in .40 S&W, and firing pin issues in the Model 21. Not to mention having to re-engineer the magazines to drop free. Yet, you hear no mention of that.

I have no problem with the XD's origin. I just don't think that it feels as good in my hands as the SR series pistols.

The remark about safety movement is also reaching. How many buyers of the SR pistols will have another, older, Ruger pistol that they might mistake for an SR series? Really? The safety is small enough to ignore if you don't like it.

I've been carrying my SR9c for months, and have NEVER had the magazine release activate during even strenuous physical labor.:)

The guns are solid, dependable, and easy to operate. They are priced below many competitors offerings. Is it really a reach to see why they are selling so well?

TarDevil
September 22, 2012, 02:41 PM
honestly theres better autoloaders in the same genre.
Replace "honestly" with "in my opinion" and you have an accurate statement.

mgmorden
September 22, 2012, 03:05 PM
What's the big deal about the safety? If you don't like it, don't use it and the magazine disconnect takes about thirty seconds to remove.

Safeties have a habit of getting clicked on when you don't intend them to. Its not as simple as "just don't use it". Basically, you have to treat safeties much like a loaded gun. When you need the gun to fire, all safeties are always on until deactivated. Its better to just not have one and KNOW the gun is ready to fire.

As to the magazine disconnect - realize that shooting sports have become VERY popular over the last decade and continue to grow. As already stated, despite how easy it might be , you can't legally deactivate the mag disconnect in IDPA. Certain things need to come right from the factory else various rules prevent you from changing them.

PedalBiker
September 22, 2012, 03:54 PM
I have a P345 and an SR9c. Maybe I'll just have to make a choice and get rid of one of them.

JTQ
September 22, 2012, 04:01 PM
mgmorden wrote,
As already stated, despite how easy it might be , you can't legally deactivate the mag disconnect in IDPA. Certain things need to come right from the factory else various rules prevent you from changing them.
I believe that has changed.
JTQ wrote,
I'm not a competitor, but didn't that rule get changed within the past year or so? It seems like I may have even read it here on this forum or maybe a Hi-Power focused forum.
Sam1911 wrote,
Ahhh, you're right! I do believe that changed back in March. Too me a minute to jar that fuzzy memory loose.

atblis
September 22, 2012, 06:09 PM
They look somewhat similar...but so do many other guns. How does that speak to the quality of the gun though?
The thread is titled "Why no love for the SR9?", and not "Is the SR9 a quality pistol?". You cannot disregard opinions. People buy guns based on opinions. Appearance is important. I suspect you'll find a good many people consider the SR9 cheesy looking. I do.

In a case full of Glocks, XDs, M&Ps, H&Ks, CZs, SIGs, Berettas, Walthers, etc. etc. the SR9 has to distinguish itself. Does it? Does looking like a Sigma hurt? Don't know. The few SR9s I've fondled had horrid feeling triggers. That killed any chance of my buying one new out of the case.

Now consider the somewhat recently released PPQ. It's sexy looking, and the trigger feels great. Plenty of love for the PPQ. No stupid lawyer crap either. Simple and elegant.

The guns are solid, dependable, and easy to operate. They are priced below many competitors offerings. Is it really a reach to see why they are selling so well?
Are they selling well? I've yet to see one on the range.

Feanor
September 22, 2012, 10:38 PM
Whenever I see discussions surrounding which full size 9mm is "best", which to buy, etc I always see the usual contenders - Glock, Sig, HK, etc. Rarely if ever do I see the Ruger SR9 included in the list. A few weeks ago I picked up a lightly used one on a whim and must say that I am thoroughly impressed with this handgun. Its very comfortable, points naturally, has fully adjustable sights, fit and finish are excellent, has been 100% reliable through 500 rounds, simple to tear down and clean, high capacity (17 rounds), has an excellent trigger (at least mine does), is American made, and is backed by Ruger CS. And oh yeah, it priced significantly less than other pistols on this "list". I'm just curious why it doesn't get more "love and attention" when it comes to discussing service sized 9mm's. Mine is quickly becoming one of my favorites.
The fact is, Ruger is not a well respected name in professional circles, period! They never earn(none at all last I heard)any significant contracts with LEA, and DoD only bought a handful of them to give to the Afghani defense forces because they were literally given to them by Ruger at firesale prices, likely so Ruger could say that they had a genuine DoD contract, and swell the chests of their customer base with false pride.

But don't let that stop you, by the time they lock down this thread, all of the expert gunslingers will have you convinced that Ruger is so good that the only way S&W, Sig, Glock, H&K ect.. trounce them in purchase trials, is because they cheat, and undersell poor Ruger's pricepoint, which of course is a laugher as Ruger pistols are as cheaply fabricated as they come, which is exactly why they are never chosen by any serious LEA.

ColdDayInHell
September 23, 2012, 12:21 AM
What?!?!? My SR9c is my favorite handgun along with my Gen4 G19. My SR9c trigger is the best trigger I have ever felt that I bought in MA, which requires a heavy trigger. The SR9 is a solid gun and the internals mimic the Glock, which I can't believe they didn't get sued over. The Glock patent must have expired because besides the mag disconnect (which I took out), the guns are identical inside. I love how the SR9c can take a SR9 full size magazine, just with the grip sleeve to cover the gap. It's like two guns in one!

ColdDayInHell
September 23, 2012, 12:26 AM
I get a lot of people drooling over my polishing job on my Rugers, specifically my SR9c. It looks incredible and way better than the matte finish it came with. It looked gritty and the polishing only took about 3 hrs total.

http://i49.tinypic.com/e7mm1l.jpg

meanmrmustard
September 23, 2012, 06:31 AM
They kinda have a crap trigger, huge front sight (and I mean HUGE) and overall it's a bit heavy for a polymer framed wonder nine.

Kiln
September 23, 2012, 06:45 AM
Google search SR9 and "light strikes" to see why I don't want one. Almost all of the people that posted claimed round counts under 1000 rounds. To me, light strikes are a big deal, especially in a SA striker fired gun.

Pops 1
September 23, 2012, 10:18 AM
We have two SR9c's his and hers, love em and no problems at all.

kokapelli
September 23, 2012, 10:27 AM
Google search SR9 and "light strikes" to see why I don't want one. Almost all of the people that posted claimed round counts under 1000 rounds. To me, light strikes are a big deal, especially in a SA striker fired gun.
Mine has well over 1000 rounds and has never failed to fire or jam and I love the trigger.

Kiln
September 23, 2012, 10:39 AM
I'm just saying that is why I don't own one. Hope you don't have any issues but that model is known for them. There are ALOT of forum posts from many different users complaining of light strikes with the SR9.

HOOfan_1
September 23, 2012, 12:22 PM
Google search SR9 and "light strikes" to see why I don't want one. Almost all of the people that posted claimed round counts under 1000 rounds. To me, light strikes are a big deal, especially in a SA striker fired gun.

Google Glock Gen 4, failure to eject.....google, S&W M&P rust, google SIG rust

You can google any gun and find some people who have had a problem with it.

How does it have a bad trigger? The trigger is just as good or better than my Gen 3 Glock 19.

I MUCH prefer the look of the SR9 to the PPQ. I think the PPQ is quite ugly. I really want a PPQ because I hear how great they are, but they are also $550-$600. I have seen a SR9 on the range...I have never seen a PPQ or P99 on the range.

Heck if this thread is about opinion, then it is completely misguided. You can do a forum search and find plenty of threads with people suggesting the SR pistols and plenty of people who actually own it saying how much they love it. MY OPINION, is that some people just love to hate on Ruger, with absolutely no foundation in truth.

Checkman
September 23, 2012, 12:32 PM
You're right. There are always going to be people who just love to hate on everything. People who hate Remington, Winchester, Walther, Glock, Beretta, Colt, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, so on and so forth.

VoodooSan
September 23, 2012, 09:51 PM
I like the SR9. I think Ruger makes a durable firearm usually. There are some who don't like Ruger for whatever reason and that's fine. I'm not one for gun A is better than gun B debate. There are gun brands I don't like, some I think are ok, and some I love.

As for the SR9 I like it. Don't own one but held and shot one. I'm not a fan of the loaded chamber indicator but the feel of the gun is great.

The SR9c has caught my eye too. I would seriously look at one if I didn't already have a compact for daily carry.

kayak-man
September 23, 2012, 11:33 PM
I was sure people were tired of me repeating this by now, but....

I have an SR9. I find it to be a better trigger than my Glock, and I like the sights. Its an accurate gun, I'm the one that makes it look bad. I have over 4,000 rounds through it, with one malfunction of the gun (I've had my handloads malfunction, but when there's just not enough powder in the case, that's hardly the guns fault.).

In the guns defense, it was I have no idea how many rounds I put through that gun without cleaning it when it malfunctioned... just that it was probably a fairly high number, I have no idea when the gun had been oiled last, and it was stage 5 or 6 of an IDPA match that received what felt like several inches of rain. The sand/GSR/water mixture in the gun eventually gummed it enough that I had a stovepipe.... and that was it. I cleared it, and the gun just kept running after that.

Before that IDPA match, I'd put the gun through a lot. I shot about a hundred rounds through it once a week for almost a year, and took a couple handgun classes, including one with a round count around 2k.

To answer the OPs question... I guess I don't know why people don't like the SR9....

Chris "the Kayak-Man" Johnson

meanmrmustard
September 24, 2012, 06:40 AM
I love the trigger.
Really? You like a gritty trigger that stacks more than a Pringles can?

bannockburn
September 24, 2012, 06:51 AM
At the time it came out I thought it was decent design but I already had plenty of full size high capacity 9mms. Make it a little bit smaller for CCW and I might be interested. Well they did and I tried one and was sold on the SR9c.

kokapelli
September 24, 2012, 08:32 AM
Really? You like a gritty trigger that stacks more than a Pringles can?
My SR9 does not have a gritty trigger and yes I like it just as it is.

Kiln
September 25, 2012, 08:21 PM
HOOfan: I have a Ruger MK3 and love the P95 if that makes me hate all Rugers then so be it. I just pointed out a known issue with them, if you don't think light strikes are a big deal then all power to you.

TarDevil
September 25, 2012, 08:37 PM
Really? You like a gritty trigger that stacks more than a Pringles can?
My SR9c trigger comes nowhere close to your description.

JEB
September 25, 2012, 09:23 PM
Really? You like a gritty trigger that stacks more than a Pringles can?

the trigger on my (wife's) sr9c is nowhere near what you describe. in fact, it is one of, if not the best striker fired trigger i have ever felt.

HOOfan_1
September 25, 2012, 10:24 PM
HOOfan: I have a Ruger MK3 and love the P95 if that makes me hate all Rugers then so be it. I just pointed out a known issue with them, if you don't think light strikes are a big deal then all power to you.

I don't think a few people talking about it on a message board are a big deal.

Just like I didn't think people on message boards complaining about the newest Glock 19s having ejection problems were a big deal when I bought mine last year. I haven't had a single problem with mine through 1400 rounds.

In the age of the internet, you can always dig up some trash about anything. I bet I could even find a dissatisfied Purdey or H&H customer. I've seen FAR more praise of the SR9 than I have seen people complain about problems.

I will buy one with confidence and if I get a lemon, I am confident Ruger will make it right.

atblis
September 25, 2012, 10:39 PM
the trigger on my (wife's) sr9c is nowhere near what you describe. in fact, it is one of, if not the best striker fired trigger i have ever felt.
I believe Ruger revised the trigger. It was truly sucky initially.

meanmrmustard
September 25, 2012, 11:06 PM
the trigger on my (wife's) sr9c is nowhere near what you describe. in fact, it is one of, if not the best striker fired trigger i have ever felt.
The pistol I've experienced was an older model. Trigger was horrible. Maybe this has been revised or reengineered, but to start it was not anything to write home about.

Still and all, they're heavy to me as well.

kokapelli
September 25, 2012, 11:12 PM
The pistol I've experienced was an older model. Trigger was horrible. Maybe this has been revised or reengineered, but to start it was not anything to write home about.

Still and all, they're heavy to me as well.
When the SR9 first came out there were all kinds of warnings that dry firing would cause the trigger to get gritty unless the magazine disconnect was removed.

My SR9 was an early model and since I had read the warnings, the first thing I did when I got mine was to remove the magazine disconnect and my trigger has been excellent from the get go.

Feanor
September 25, 2012, 11:36 PM
When the SR9 first came out there were all kinds of warnings that dry firing would cause the trigger to get gritty unless the magazine disconnect was removed.


No, not gritty, it would simply break! This was/is because the Ruger company relied upon the most primitive and chincy of magazine disconnects in all of history. The firing pin would literally slam into a piece pot steel. The P345 was/is legendary for breaking in exactly this fashion, many purchased them new from dealers shelves that had been dry-fired by other customers, and thus went home with the unsuspecting fella already broken.

justice06rr
September 25, 2012, 11:41 PM
I have looked and handled a SR9/SR9c/SR40/SR40c quite a few times and here are the reasons why they might not get as much "love" as other pistols in its class:

1. Mag Disconnect - most, if not all of them have it from the factory. Sure its an easy fix, but personally I do not like to mess with my guns. I'm not a gunsmith nor do I have the desire to change that aspect of the pistol.

2. Small thumb safety - this can be minor or major issue, but it can be hard to activate and deactivate during a quick draw. It can be left off if needed of course, but compared to M&P's, Sig's, H&K's those have better and larger external safeties.

3. Trigger - You either love or hate the trigger. From my dry-fire experience side-by-side, the Compact versions have a slightly better trigger feel than the full size counterparts.


I have almost bought an SR9c before, but did not due to some of these factors. It is still a fine pistol nevertheless, but a few more $$ and you can get a M&P9 or XD9. I do like the stainless silver slide option and the pistol is very slim, which feels slimmer than an M&P.

7even6ix2wo
September 26, 2012, 12:19 AM
I've had an SR9 for about 2 years now, probably put about 1000+ round through it and have never had any real problems. Yes, the trigger does have some roughness at first, but the more i've shot it the better it's gotten. Ghost inc. also make a replacement trigger connector for a reasonable price. Haven't got around to getting one yet though.

David White
September 26, 2012, 01:13 AM
I don't own the SR9. I bought the SR40 and it has been dead on solid.
I did remove the Mag Disconnect though.
Trigger is as good as any Glock, Smith or Beretta that I own.
I also love the "tiny" safety.
Can't beat the price either.
Sweet gun all around!

Ehtereon11B
September 26, 2012, 02:34 AM
I have a Ruger SR9c. Great little gun for a primary carry and it is my go to gun for summer weather or in any situation where I can't conceal one of my bigger firearms. I only have 2 issues with it but they are minor, namely because I went far and out of my way to get this gun out of my ex's hands when we broke up (because it was technically hers)

1: The giant I AM LOADED!! indicator. I have always contemplated filing down the bar that pushes against the casing so it won't come up as high when loaded but never get around to it.
2: Mine is older so I am not sure if this was fixed in later models but my slide stop is not a slide release. The last round holds the slide open after firing but I can't pop a magazine in, slide my thumb over the release to keep firing. I have to pull the slide back manually. Again I am not sure if they fixed this in later models.

meanmrmustard
September 26, 2012, 07:03 AM
When the SR9 first came out there were all kinds of warnings that dry firing would cause the trigger to get gritty unless the magazine disconnect was removed.

My SR9 was an early model and since I had read the warnings, the first thing I did when I got mine was to remove the magazine disconnect and my trigger has been excellent from the get go.
That gun is gone. It is not missed. It's sale funded a Glock.

mhuxtable
September 26, 2012, 09:18 PM
My first and only 9mm is the SR9. I rented the Glock 17, Springfield XDM and SR9 and shot lots of rounds thru each. The SR9 won out and I couldn't be happier.

kokapelli
September 26, 2012, 09:50 PM
That gun is gone. It is not missed. It's sale funded a Glock.
That's fine, I like Glocks too but they just don't feel as good in my hand.

meanmrmustard
September 26, 2012, 10:26 PM
That's fine, I like Glocks too but they just don't feel as good in my hand.
I'll give you that...unless we are talking G19. Feels oh so good...

I wish I had a 9mm that handled like my SR22. Wishful thinking. But, the SR series is great in the hand, but, I've seen better.

JR47
September 27, 2012, 05:23 AM
But, the SR series is great in the hand, but, I've seen better.

That puts it ahead of the Glock in my hands. To me, somebody made a plastic brick, then put a plastic 2x4 on it for a handle.

Owning BOTH an SR9 and an SR9c, and an XDm to compare side by side, I like the Ruger better. Fact is, even for that "little more $$" I haven't found anything "better".

Weight? SR9 is 26.4 oz., Glock 17 is 22.4 oz. SR9c is 23.4 oz. and Glock Model 19 is 20.99 oz. These are empty weights.

None of the guns are particularly heavy. You aren't comparing them to a 1911A1. :)

Kiln
September 27, 2012, 05:43 AM
JR47: I prefer the XDM but honestly after holding an M&P in a shop I've always wanted to fire one. They just feel like an extremely comfortable gun.

meanmrmustard
September 27, 2012, 06:26 AM
That puts it ahead of the Glock in my hands. To me, somebody made a plastic brick, then put a plastic 2x4 on it for a handle.

Owning BOTH an SR9 and an SR9c, and an XDm to compare side by side, I like the Ruger better. Fact is, even for that "little more $$" I haven't found anything "better".

Weight? SR9 is 26.4 oz., Glock 17 is 22.4 oz. SR9c is 23.4 oz. and Glock Model 19 is 20.99 oz. These are empty weights.

None of the guns are particularly heavy. You aren't comparing them to a 1911A1. :)
You're talking a 1/4 lb of extra heft over a fullsized Glock or nearly 1/2lb over a compact Glock. That is QUITE substantial in a carry pistol, or an extended shooting session.

How could a Glock be a plastic brick with a plastic 2x4 for a handle? You do realize the slide is steel, right? I wasn't, with that statement, saying Glock had a better grip, but good for me. I was more referring to the SR series vs say an XD or M&P (which, to me, the M&P would win that comp).


Kiln: M&Ps are awesome. After shooting an M&P .45 Fullsize over a year ago, it was the softest shooting gun in that caliber I've had the pleasure of pulling the trigger on.

Jeff H
September 27, 2012, 09:03 AM
Soooo many posts on this thread from people who have never owned one. Amazing. :banghead:

I've had a SR9 for about 4 years now and I can honestly say that I have no complaints. Thousands of rounds down the pipe and it still goes bang every time and is plenty accurate. I have the 2nd gen trigger (right after the original recall) and after about 500 rounds it wore in very nicely and feels good and breaks clean.

I don't compete primarily because I don't have time (weekends are spent as the kids chauffeur) but I do bring it to the club steel matches as often as I can get the time and I always score pretty respectably.

The most important thing for me in a typical 9mm pistol is reliability. It had better go bang every time whether it is a gun game or a SD shooting; if I pull the trigger and it doesn't work every time, I'm getting rid of it. So far, the SR9 has never let me down.

mhuxtable
September 27, 2012, 09:14 AM
Every longstanding manufacturer makes great guns....I don't get the Glock hate or the Springfield hate. I chose to buy a Ruger because it works best for ME, but a Sig, Glock, etc make work better for someone else. Nothing wrong with that. Different strokes.

mavracer
September 27, 2012, 12:41 PM
You're talking a 1/4 lb of extra heft over a fullsized Glock or nearly 1/2lb over a compact Glock. That is QUITE substantial in a carry pistol, or an extended shooting session.
Those figures are not entirely accurate Ruger chooses to weigh they're guns with a magazine Glock's weight is without a mag. throw a mag in them and it's much closer.

TarDevil
September 27, 2012, 12:54 PM
The weight of the SR9c was another selling point for me. It is the perfect balance between light enough for carry and heavy enough for accurate, rapid follow up shots. It's easier on my arthritic hand, allowing me to practice frequently and without discomfort.

biohazurd
September 27, 2012, 03:37 PM
I owned one for a time. Just didnt fit my hands good. Traded it for an sr9c. Which suprisingly is more comfortable to shoot. Good reliable handgun though.

meanmrmustard
September 27, 2012, 08:03 PM
Those figures are not entirely accurate Ruger chooses to weigh they're guns with a magazine Glock's weight is without a mag. throw a mag in them and it's much closer.
Once again; as per Rugers sight, the full size SR9 weighs in at 26.5 oz...sans magazine. That is, once again, 1/4 lb more than the Glock 17. That is substantial.

David White
September 27, 2012, 08:10 PM
Once again; as per Rugers sight, the full size SR9 weighs in at 26.5 oz...sans magazine. That is, once again, 1/4 lb more than the Glock 17. That is substantial.

Don't forget adding ammo to a mag. I have the SR40 and depending on the ammo I chose, there is a bit of difference in the weight.
The SR40 is heavier than the 9mm but not too heavy to carry on a day to day basis.

meanmrmustard
September 27, 2012, 08:28 PM
Don't forget adding ammo to a mag. I have the SR40 and depending on the ammo I chose, there is a bit of difference in the weight.
The SR40 is heavier than the 9mm but not too heavy to carry on a day to day basis.
Unloaded.

David White
September 27, 2012, 09:48 PM
Unloaded.

Rodger that sir!

KZinOKC
September 27, 2012, 10:17 PM
The SR9 was my first handgun, but I shot a P95, and a Beretta 92 before holding the SR9 and deciding this was the one. It fills my hand just right, very accurate, great trigger, great trigger reset too. I removed the mag disconnect in 2 minutes. I like the small safety and the loaded chamber indicator does not bother me.

I have over 600 rounds of various brands through it, and not one failure of any type. I have found mine to be reliable and plan to carry it when my permit comes in. If I find it to be too large for CCW, then I'm going to buy the SR9c in its place.

Yes I like it that much.

mavracer
September 27, 2012, 10:39 PM
Once again; as per Rugers sight, the full size SR9 weighs in at 26.5 oz...sans magazine.
The Ruger "site" does not specify "sans magazine". But if you look at the 10 round model it's 1/4 oz lighter, be kinda hard to do that if they weigh them "sans magazine"

checkmyswag
September 28, 2012, 12:11 AM
Because people like to hate on Ruger for various reasons.

VAPOPO
September 28, 2012, 12:31 AM
I've had my SR9c for about 4 months now and have well over 1000 rounds through it, no issues ever and it is way more accurate than a gun this size needs to be. I carry a SIG 229 DAK for a duty gun and it is a nice piece, I normally carry a custom Springer Loaded Stainless during jacket weather but the SR9C just melts into my belt line and conceals so well in shorts and a T-Shirt that I find myself reaching for it more and more. In short I love the gun and for the price will probably buy another just in case.

JR47
September 28, 2012, 11:56 AM
You're talking a 1/4 lb of extra heft over a fullsized Glock or nearly 1/2lb over a compact Glock. That is QUITE substantial in a carry pistol, or an extended shooting session.

Did you take "New Math" in school? While the SR9 is 4 0z. heavier, the SR9c is 2.41 ounces heavier than it's counterpart.

I always thought that 8 ounces was a half-pound. Even IF it were that heavy, it would be like a 1911A1, and I routinely carry one CCW, and shoot several hundreds of rounds in practice. Physical fitness goes a LONG way towards easing such problems.

Glocks, in my hand, always balance like a 2x4 with a handle. Your opinion may be different, but that isn't anything BUT our opinions, sir.

The S&W M&P is a nice gun, but I don't find it any easier to shoot than the Ruger.

David White
September 28, 2012, 12:25 PM
Because people like to hate on Ruger for various reasons.

Don't k ow why. I love my p95 and SR40!

Ehtereon11B
September 28, 2012, 11:39 PM
I guess weight is not a big selling point for my carry pistols. When your duty gun is 41oz loaded, everything else seems really light by comparison. Even my .380 backup is 18oz which is considered "heavy" by modern standards. So a 28.8oz SR9c loaded weight isn't all that much.

JR47
September 29, 2012, 09:31 AM
You're talking a 1/4 lb of extra heft over a fullsized Glock or nearly 1/2lb over a compact Glock. That is QUITE substantial in a carry pistol, or an extended shooting session.

I guess weight is not a big selling point for my carry pistols. When your duty gun is 41oz loaded, everything else seems really light by comparison. Even my .380 backup is 18oz which is considered "heavy" by modern standards. So a 28.8oz SR9c loaded weight isn't all that much.

Exactly. I have no idea where the idea that every CCW gun must be a fly-weight, other than Internet Commandos.

The idea that shooting several hundreds of rounds through an SR9c will tire you out is pretty funny, actually. WE, my wife and I, routinely work our way through over 500 rounds of center-fire, usually 9x19 and .45 ACP, and 500 rounds of rim-fire when we shoot. My wife has RA in her hands, but can shoot hundreds of .45 ACP from her 5" Model 625-3 revolver without discomfort. The 9x19 is shot through a bunch of duty size platforms, like the Taurus PT92, the Beretta M9, the Ruger SR9, the S&W Model 39-2, a Star Super B, a Star BM, and others. NONE of these are fly-weights, most having high capacities.

I also shoot a 3" Model 625-3, a Stainless Series 80 Government Model, a Stainless Springfield Defender, and an assortment of other 1911A1 platforms.

The rim-fires are shot through an assortment of Browning, Ruger, and High Standard pistols. None of them polymer guns, save a single Ruger 22/45, 5.5" bull-barrel.

Perhaps 1000 rounds, minimum, doesn't suggest an extended range event to some, but we try to do this bi-weekly, simply because of cost. Fixed incomes, and all that.

alienbogey
September 30, 2012, 01:03 AM
I had an early model that I bought after I handled it in a gun shop and loved the ergonomics—it fits my hands really well and points naturally for me. I brought it home, pulled the (stupid) mag disconnect, and realized that the trigger sucked.

I dry fired it tons to try to work it in, bought the Ghost trigger kit when it came out, and while it marginally improved it the trigger still sucked. It might have gotten close to a Glock's, but since in my opinion Glock triggers suck that was not a good thing.

It was also mediocre at best in terms of accuracy, which may have been partly due to disliking/fighting the trigger.

I own 7 other Rugers and love them, and I was really excited about the SR-9's feature set and look and feel, but I sold it because of the trigger and indifferent accuracy.

helitack32f1
October 1, 2012, 12:42 AM
Google search SR9 and "light strikes" to see why I don't want one. Almost all of the people that posted claimed round counts under 1000 rounds. To me, light strikes are a big deal, especially in a SA striker fired gun.
I just Googled various other manufacturers models with the phrase "light strikes" and all had either the same number of responses or vastly more than the SR9. Guns I included were Glock G17, Xd9, P226. So I guess we should all avoid these guns in the future.

TarDevil
October 1, 2012, 01:01 AM
I just Googled various other manufacturers models with the phrase "light strikes" and all had either the same number of responses or vastly more than the SR9. Guns I included were Glock G17, Xd9, P226. So I guess we should all avoid these guns in the future.
+1
Amazing that so many people on these forums don't realize the rest of us can access the internet and actually know how to do Google searches.

atblis
October 1, 2012, 08:46 AM
I just Googled various other manufacturers models with the phrase "light strikes" and all had either the same number of responses or vastly more than the SR9. Guns I included were Glock G17, Xd9, P226. So I guess we should all avoid these guns in the future.
You need to do something to compensate for the number of guns out there. The Glock 17 has been on the market for 28 years. I suspect there is an order of magnitude more Glock 17s out there than SR9s.

Don't you guys find it interesting that we're still arguing about whether anybody has managed to make a better polymer framed pistol than one that was put on the market 28 years ago? The Glock is still the benchmark. Pretty amazing really.

helitack32f1
October 1, 2012, 10:28 AM
You need to do something to compensate for the number of guns out there. The Glock 17 has been on the market for 28 years. I suspect there is an order of magnitude more Glock 17s out there than SR9s.

Don't you guys find it interesting that we're still arguing about whether anybody has managed to make a better polymer framed pistol than one that was put on the market 28 years ago? The Glock is still the benchmark. Pretty amazing really.
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to point this out. I was trying to point out that there is no veracity whatsoever to using google results as a means of determining whether you should buy a gun or not. Incidentally, the results for XD9 were far higher than Glock 17. I suspect there are at least twice as many Glocks in the world than xd9's. Do I believe there are way more light primer strikes for XD's than Glock's? Heck no, and you certainly cannot tell from Google results alone unless you of course read all those results.
And yes, I too believe the Glock is the best. Yet I would love to try the SR9.

Kiln
October 1, 2012, 11:24 AM
My whole point is, I avoid a new model until the bugs get worked out. A quick search can give you a pretty good idea of what kind of issues you can expect.

For instance if I'd ran a simple Google search before I bought my P22, I could have saved myself one hell of a headache.

mavracer
October 1, 2012, 12:05 PM
Don't you guys find it interesting that we're still arguing about whether anybody has managed to make a better polymer framed pistol than one that was put on the market 28 years ago? The Glock is still the benchmark. Pretty amazing really.
I find this statement real ironic.
Don't you guys find it interesting that we're still arguing about whether anybody has managed to make a better combat pistol than one that was put on the market 100 years ago? The 1911 is still the benchmark. Pretty amazing really.

atblis
October 1, 2012, 01:53 PM
I am failing to see the irony.

kokapelli
October 1, 2012, 01:59 PM
I find this statement real ironic.
Don't you guys find it interesting that we're still arguing about whether anybody has managed to make a better combat pistol than one that was put on the market 100 years ago? The 1911 is still the benchmark. Pretty amazing really.
I don't agree with that. Although I don't own any Glocks, I find it hard to believe that a 1911 is superior combat pistol compared to a Glock and a few others as well.

atblis
October 1, 2012, 02:01 PM
I think we need a 1911/Glock version of Godwin's law.

TarDevil
October 1, 2012, 02:43 PM
My whole point is, I avoid a new model until the bugs get worked out. A quick search can give you a pretty good idea of what kind of issues you can expect.

For instance if I'd ran a simple Google search before I bought my P22, I could have saved myself one hell of a headache.

It was just such a search that led me to try out the SR9c (among others). I have not had any headaches... not one hiccup... aside from bad ammo.

JR47
October 1, 2012, 02:58 PM
The Ruger "site" does not specify "sans magazine". But if you look at the 10 round model it's 1/4 oz lighter, be kinda hard to do that if they weigh them "sans magazine"

And what is different in the 10 round magazine, over the 17 round mag? They block the magazine capacity via that plastic piece, which would weigh more than 1/4 oz. I do believe that this means that the 10 round mag is actually heavier, empty, than the 17, for the SR9.

There is more than performance to explain when comparing the Glock to anything else. The guns are cheaper, and are very close the the old revolvers, endearing them to Police Administrations nationally. Of course, the idea that a safety is problematical, while holsters are critical to the Glock, makes little sense.

You take your choice. Obviously, there are a LOT of people liking guns that were introduced in October, 2007. I would be curious just how many Glocks there are, after 28 years, that weren't LEO related. The SR9 has been on the market for just at 5 years. I wonder what, again, the penetration of the non-LEO market was like 5 years after it's introduction?

Bozwell
October 1, 2012, 04:45 PM
Of course, the idea that a safety is problematical, while holsters are critical to the Glock, makes little sense.

Surely you aren't suggesting that holsters are any less critical for a firearm carried condition 1.

mavracer
October 1, 2012, 05:20 PM
And what is different in the 10 round magazine, over the 17 round mag? They block the magazine capacity via that plastic piece, which would weigh more than 1/4 oz. I do believe that this means that the 10 round mag is actually heavier, empty, than the 17, for the SR9.
Seriously the bottom third of a 10 round mag is plastic aand has no spring it is 1/4 oz lighter than a 17 round mag. Which also means Ruger like most other manufactures lists empty weight with a magazine in place. Unlike Glock who list empty weight without a mag that way their fanboys can claim that a G17 weighs 1/4 pound less than a SR9, when in reality if you add the weight of a empty G17 mag in there's only one oz difference.

splattergun
October 1, 2012, 11:49 PM
Ruger rarely makes the top of any "best of" list except for customer service. They are usually not the most accurate, usually not considered the prettiest, nor the best fit and finish. What Ruger excels at is a reasonably priced, reliable, accurate, and strong firearm with best in class service.

I like my Rugers. When I buy Ruger, it is to keep.

stevereno1
October 2, 2012, 03:35 AM
I don't know why there's not more love for Ruger. They're surely putting the overtime in their R&D department and are dedicated to Gun rights.

checkmyswag
October 2, 2012, 04:14 PM
I think most of the responses in this thread show there is plenty of love for the SR9.

kokapelli
October 2, 2012, 07:28 PM
I think most of the responses in this thread show there is plenty of love for the SR9.
Exactly! And most of the knocks are from none owners.

atblis
October 2, 2012, 07:28 PM
I suspect if you took a survey of the posters in the thread, you'd find a few vocal advocates, a few vocal detractors, and the rest somewhat neutral often offering suggestions on how to improve the pistol.

meanmrmustard
October 2, 2012, 08:19 PM
Exactly! And most of the knocks are from none owners.
Bologna. That's a fanboy statement. I've owned several Rugers in different guises, and the main detractor for me with the SR9 was weight and trigger, simple as that. Those two things matter to me, and neither two of those were something I'd overlook.

Yes, 8oz is half a pound to whomever didn't get the gist of "ball parking" but since absolutes are king here, 6oz is still a lot in a handgun. The website list that as unloaded weight, whether its with a bare mag or not means nothing. Glocks are lighter with a better trigger TO ME than the SR series.

meanmrmustard
October 2, 2012, 08:23 PM
Did you take "New Math" in school? While the SR9 is 4 0z. heavier, the SR9c is 2.41 ounces heavier than it's counterpart.

I always thought that 8 ounces was a half-pound. Even IF it were that heavy, it would be like a 1911A1, and I routinely carry one CCW, and shoot several hundreds of rounds in practice. Physical fitness goes a LONG way towards easing such problems.

Glocks, in my hand, always balance like a 2x4 with a handle. Your opinion may be different, but that isn't anything BUT our opinions, sir.

The S&W M&P is a nice gun, but I don't find it any easier to shoot than the Ruger.
You're correct, but its a 6oz difference. I was being generous to the SR9, which is as close to 1/2 lb heavier than the G17. It's an unloaded weight, whether or not with an empty mag means little. It's more than I want in a polymer framed handgun.

We can arm wrestle when you're ready.

HOOfan_1
October 2, 2012, 08:54 PM
and the main detractor for me with the SR9 was weight and trigger, simple as that. . Glocks are lighter with a better trigger TO ME than the SR series.

You stated in another thread though that you own a S&W Sigma...you couldn't possibly think the Sigma has a better trigger than the current SR9s. Sigma also weighs 24 ounces...which is 2 oz. more than the Glock, and it holds less ammo.

TarDevil
October 2, 2012, 09:40 PM
Bologna. That's a fanboy statement. I've owned several Rugers in different guises, and the main detractor for me with the SR9 was weight and trigger, simple as that. Those two things matter to me, and neither two of those were something I'd overlook.

Yes, 8oz is half a pound to whomever didn't get the gist of "ball parking" but since absolutes are king here, 6oz is still a lot in a handgun. The website list that as unloaded weight, whether its with a bare mag or not means nothing. Glocks are lighter with a better trigger TO ME than the SR series.

Yeah, probably is a "fan boy" statement. But only a "basher boy" would keep harping about a trigger that was replaced ages ago.

mavracer
October 2, 2012, 09:41 PM
You're correct, but its a 6oz difference. I was being generous to the SR9, which is as close to 1/2 lb heavier than the G17. It's an unloaded weight, whether or not with an empty mag means little. It's more than I want in a polymer framed handgun.
A Glock 17 weighs 25 oz with an empty mag in place
We can arm wrestle when you're ready.
If you have a problem pulling an extra 1.5oz out of you holster the arm wrestling will be as big of joke as your reasoning.:neener:

meanmrmustard
October 2, 2012, 10:48 PM
You stated in another thread though that you own a S&W Sigma...you couldn't possibly think the Sigma has a better trigger than the current SR9s. Sigma also weighs 24 ounces...which is 2 oz. more than the Glock, and it holds less ammo.
Cheap begets turning the other cheek. Plus, I prefer Smiths customer service. But, that's another discussion entirely.

meanmrmustard
October 2, 2012, 10:49 PM
Yeah, probably is a "fan boy" statement. But only a "basher boy" would keep harping about a trigger that was replaced ages ago.
Harping? You're fishing. If R&D was as good as stated by another member, that trigger would never had made it out. They're fixed, true. But, that ship has set sail for me.

meanmrmustard
October 2, 2012, 10:53 PM
A Glock 17 weighs 25 oz with an empty mag in place

If you have a problem pulling an extra 1.5oz out of you holster the arm wrestling will be as big of joke as your reasoning.:neener:
Pulling? No, carrying.

If the poor excuse for humor exhibited is as weak, then I've won without trying.

Bozwell
October 2, 2012, 10:54 PM
a trigger that was replaced ages ago.

I don't think the differences in weight are as great as you're letting on mustard.

In a vain effort to get this thread back on track before it's locked... I suspect one challenge Ruger really faces here is overcoming that initial impression a lot of people (including myself) got of this gun due to the really poor triggers they had early on. The other challenge is the wide array of quality pistols they compete with in roughly the same price range.

meanmrmustard
October 2, 2012, 11:03 PM
I don't think the differences in weight are as great as you're letting mustard.

Maybe not to you, but to me it is. As for guns in its range; if I want a heavily built range gun, there's better than the SR9. Carry? Many better, many as cheap if not cheaper.

I'll leave it be, so you guys can keep on with it. These are the reasons I've no love for the SR9. Take them, leave them. Doesn't matter, because they're important to me.

Bozwell
October 2, 2012, 11:12 PM
I'm pretty sure this major "weight" issue is in your head. Weigh your food sometime, the change in your pocket, or even the fluctuations in your body weight on a daily basis, then come tell me you can notice 2 oz's or whatever the delta is. Frankly, I don't buy it, unless you just have a really lousy carry rig.

I can't really think of many cheaper carry guns than a SR9c. If $400 is your budget, I can't really see it being a bad choice. Glock, M&P, CZ, XDm compacts are all going to cost around $100 or more. I have no problem enjoying myself with a compact at the range.

The SR9 series is not my personal choice for a firearm, but the reasons you're listing for hating it are pretty silly.

mavracer
October 3, 2012, 12:27 PM
I'm pretty sure this major "weight" issue is in your head.
Ditto!!
It's funny that 4oz is a half pound and makes just a huge difference, But a 3oz magazine matters not. I guess if you carry a gun without a mag.
http://www.theandygriffithshow.net/images/Barney-Fife_bw.jpg
Mr Mustard do you carry 115gr 9mms cause I'm thinking 124s would probably make the gun too heavy to carry?

Jaymo
October 3, 2012, 08:49 PM
I'm still stumped by all the Block fanboys who think a Block factory trigger is good.

Walt Sherrill
October 3, 2012, 08:56 PM
4 oz. is a QUARTER of a pound, not half a pound...

Unless you're wearing duty gear (which is heavy in it's own right), the weight of any gun seems to get heavier as the day wears on... and an extra 5-6 ounces becomes noticeable. That said, as noted, nobody complains about the weight of a fully-loaded magazine, and a spare that might be carried.

atblis
October 3, 2012, 08:57 PM
Have you never felt the first SR9 triggers? Gave the Sigma a run for the money.

mboe794
October 3, 2012, 09:18 PM
I have no complaints about the trigger on my SR9. Earlier models however, the ones without the trigger blade saftey and having the round mag release button instead of the new D shape, I cannot speak for. But it sounds like they were not very good. Ruger redesigned some parts of the trigger and the newer ones are quite nice.

exavid
October 4, 2012, 12:11 AM
A couple of years ago I bought an SR9, the first plastic pistol I've owned. I didn't like the trigger at first but loved the way the gun handled and fit my hand. I installed a Rocket trigger bar, it took an hour or so since it needed to be hand honed for best fit. That made the difference the pistol's rough trigger was gone and the new bar made for a clean and smooth trigger. I later traded the gun for an LC9 which I use as one of my main carry guns. Before the SR9 trade in I bought an SR40c which filled the need that my 9mm served but with a good bit more oomph. I really like the .40. I though the compact would be rough to handle but found out that it's perfectly comfortable and controllable even with the short 10 round magazine and the flat floorplate. I do think the SR series from Ruger are fine guns at a bargain price. There were some early issues with the SR but those have been taken care of. If you're looking for a full sized 9mm or .40 it's hard to beat. The compact models are great too!

Ryan in the House
October 5, 2012, 05:10 AM
I'm quite happy that I stumbled across this thread. I've been away from THR since 2005, and I've returned because I think I'm ready to make my first handgun purchase. I came here looking for advice, hoping to find some information on the SR9c, which I consider to be a leading candidate for my first handgun purchase. It's reassuring to know that the Ruger receives a lot of sincere praise from this forum!

I'm wondering if you "third generation" SR9 and SR9c owners will be able to address an issue with the Ruger that some people on the Internet are reporting--it involves the SR9 or SR9c failing to eject spent cartridges. Is there any truth to this? Some people have claimed that a quick polishing of the feed ramp will solve the problem, and some say that the problem is with the extractor. I've also heard that the ammunition has been at fault. Has anyone experienced any feed or ejection problems with the SR9 or SR9c? Should this make me reconsider the SR9c as a first-time handgun? Keep in mind that I'm a new buyer and shooter. While I'm confident that I can learn to field strip the handgun, I may be bewildered if the solution for a failing extractor is too complicated for a rookie. Sending it back to Ruger--well, that's a nice option, but I wouldn't want that to become the routine protocol for every problem that I might encounter. Do you believe a simpler handgun--maybe a fixed-barrel model like a Bersa Thunder 380 or CZ-83--would be a better choice? I like a more compact gun, although I prefer my handgun to have more heft than an LCP or mini Kel-Tec. It'll be a range gun, primarily, but I do want to keep the door open for concealed carry in the future.

TarDevil
October 5, 2012, 07:39 AM
Personally, this is one issue about the SR9 I've never heard. In over 1,000 rounds I (my daughter, actually) experienced a stovepipe... but her wrists were limp as a wet noodle. A lot of autos will give you cycling issues without a firm grip. Some won't.

Also as with a lot of guns, your choice of firearm may be fussy with specific ammo types. Mine isn't fond of mil spec stuff (hard primers were the problem...when they did go "boom, cycling never was an issue). It has reliably digested and spit out every other fodder it was fed.

Walt Sherrill
October 5, 2012, 08:20 AM
Has anyone experienced any feed or ejection problems with the SR9 or SR9c? Should this make me reconsider the SR9c as a first-time handgun? Keep in mind that I'm a new buyer and shooter. While I'm confident that I can learn to field strip the handgun, I may be bewildered if the solution for a failing extractor is too complicated for a rookie. Sending it back to Ruger--well, that's a nice option, but I wouldn't want that to become the routine protocol for every problem that I might encounter.

Extraction problems are almost always either due to limp wristing, a weak/failed extractor, or bad ammo -- the last being more rare. If you're a newbie, and aren't sure whether you can do some repair yourself, you shouldn't hesitate to send a gun back to the manufacturer.

I bought an earlier used SR9, and had the trigger upgraded with the Ghost trigger bar. New models since my purchase have much improved triggers. The gun is reliable, accurate, and in all ways a good handgun. The older gun with the enhanced trigger is quite nice (crisp); the newer guns seem just about as good.

Do you believe a simpler handgun--maybe a fixed-barrel model like a Bersa Thunder 380 or CZ-83--would be a better choice?

Just because the gun is smaller or uses a smaller caliber doesn't mean it's simpler or easier to shoot well.

And, better in what way? If the gun isn't going to be used for concealed carry -- one of the main justifications for a smaller size -- then go for a bigger gun. A slightly larger, heavier gun will be more pleasant to shoot. Larger models also typically have larger grips, which improves comfort while firing.

The two .380 guns you mention are fine weapons, but .380 ammo is typically more expensive than 9mm (which is what the SR9 or SR9C shoots), and generally a less powerful/effective round. Most of the smaller .380s are not as pleasant guns to shoot as most 9mms. There are exceptions.

If this is your first handgun purchase, expect some problems -- regardless of the gun maker -- as handguns are different than long guns and require different techniques. Some range time will sort it all out. Shoot a lot. And, if you can find someone locally who comes well-recommended, get some personal instruction -- it'll save you time and MONEY over the longer term.

Ryan in the House
October 5, 2012, 02:15 PM
Just because the gun is smaller or uses a smaller caliber doesn't mean it's simpler or easier to shoot well.

And, better in what way? If the gun isn't going to be used for concealed carry -- one of the main justifications for a smaller size -- then go for a bigger gun. A slightly larger, heavier gun will be more pleasant to shoot. Larger models also typically have larger grips, which improves comfort while firing.

The two .380 guns you mention are fine weapons, but .380 ammo is typically more expensive than 9mm (which is what the SR9 or SR9C shoots), and generally a less powerful/effective round. Most of the smaller .380s are not as pleasant guns to shoot as most 9mms. There are exceptions.

If this is your first handgun purchase, expect some problems -- regardless of the gun maker -- as handguns are different than long guns and require different techniques. Some range time will sort it all out. Shoot a lot. And, if you can find someone locally who comes well-recommended, get some personal instruction -- it'll save you time and MONEY over the longer term.

Thanks for your response. "Better," of course, is a subjective term; I'd never press you or anyone else to tell me what gun is the "best" on the market because I'd be swallowed up by the amount of information that is returned to me. Rather, I wanted to know whether the SR9c is ideal for a new shooter. And judging by the language of your post, there is nothing that disqualifies the SR9c from being a fine choice for a new shooter like myself. That's good! And thanks for clarifying the ejection problem. I do understand that not every gun leaves the factory in perfect working order, and some specimens turn out to be prone to failure. One "problem gun" out of a thousand doesn't reflect the quality of the gun design, but if enough people report the same problem, then I have an obligation to myself as a new buyer to take notice. :) I'm prepared to deal with some issues here and there. My question is, How does one return a defective handgun to the manufacturer? Is it as simple as mailing it via UPS, or do I need to send it though an FFL? Forgive me if this is a silly question!

Your advice about the cost of .380 ACP is well-noted, and I had taken it into consideration. I have experience firing the Bersa Thunder 380, and for what it's worth, the gun really feels great in my hand--hammer-bite was nonexistent and recoil was very manageable. So, if I like the feel and comfort of one gun over another, I don't think I'll let the round type drive me away in most circumstances. As you said, smaller guns have a tendency to be less comfortable to shoot because there is less material to grip. Good point. The CZ-83 has a thick grip, so I'm sure I'd find it very comfortable. The Bersa felt nice, too, and I don't need to probe the SR9c too much in that area because it does come with grip extensions for the magazines. I would be concerned about the LCP or mini Kel-Tecs, and while I'd like to stay within the compact region--I'm hoping to keep the door open as a tool for personal defense or concealed carry further down the road--I don't want to buy something too small to handle. Of course, I'll figure that out before I make the purchase. Thanks for sharing your wisdom, Walt! I welcome any more words of advice.

carbonyl
October 5, 2012, 02:54 PM
Harping? You're fishing. If R&D was as good as stated by another member, that trigger would never had made it out. They're fixed, true. But, that ship has set sail for me.

That's the spirit. NEVER forget, Never forgive. Once a mistake's been made there's no second chances. They should have been shutdown.:rolleyes:

TarDevil
October 5, 2012, 03:16 PM
That's the spirit. NEVER forget, Never forgive. Once a mistake's been made there's no second chances. They should have been shutdown.:rolleyes:

Exactly. Witness the issues experienced with Gen 4 Glocks. As any good gun mfr should, Glock addressed those issues.

But that's Glock, and their "ship" doesn't sail so quickly.

Shipwreck
October 5, 2012, 03:31 PM
I've shot the SR9 a couple of times. I just didn't really care for the gun. Its not a bad gun - just not for me.

rbernie
October 5, 2012, 03:45 PM
I've shot 'em a bunch (10K plus rounds, likely) and own more than a few. In their current form, they're my favorite striker fired pistol.

Walt Sherrill
October 5, 2012, 05:00 PM
Thanks for your response. "Better," of course, is a subjective term; I'd never press you or anyone else to tell me what gun is the "best" on the market because I'd be swallowed up by the amount of information that is returned to me. Rather, I wanted to know whether the SR9c is ideal for a new shooter. And judging by the language of your post, there is nothing that disqualifies the SR9c from being a fine choice for a new shooter like myself. That's good! And thanks for clarifying the ejection problem. I do understand that not every gun leaves the factory in perfect working order, and some specimens turn out to be prone to failure. One "problem gun" out of a thousand doesn't reflect the quality of the gun design, but if enough people report the same problem, then I have an obligation to myself as a new buyer to take notice. I'm prepared to deal with some issues here and there. My question is, How does one return a defective handgun to the manufacturer? Is it as simple as mailing it via UPS, or do I need to send it though an FFL? Forgive me if this is a silly question!

I added the underlining, above.

A non-FFL can't use the US mails to ship handguns, and there must be an FFL on both ends of the transaction. Many gun makers will send you a UPS or FedEx shipping label so that the gun maker pays the freight. Some don't.

As an individual, you can ship directly to an FFL or gunmaker through FedEx or UPS. It's expensive because the shippers require you touse their premium AIR service. (I wanted to ship a SIG to Gray Guns in Washington State from NC earlier this year, and the one-way charge would have been $100. I decided to not get the work done, as it wasn't a repair.)

If you buy your weapon from a local dealer, you can ask the dealer to ship it back for you. Your dealer can use the US Mails much less expensively than shipping via FedEx or UPS. Even after a long time has passed, and the dealer asks you to pay a transfer fee, it'll still cost less.

As to your other questions:

Offhand, I'd say that no "compact" gun is ideal for a new shooter -- but that doesn't mean I'm advocating crew-served handguns. You'd probably shoot a Beretta 92 better than a compact Glock, for example.

Within reason, a bigger and heavier gun works better, because small guns seem to amplify problems in technique for new shooters, such that mastering the basics takes longer.

If you MUST have a compact, the Bersa you mentioned, the CZ-83, or the SR9c are all fine weapons.

I WOULD let the cost of ammo figure in the decision -- as proficiency comes with a lot of practice. But cost isn't the only concern: with .380 ammo just finding .380 can be problematic locally -- and premium (hollow-point) self-defense ammo is very hard to find, even on the internet. There's a lot fewer options for .380s, and they all cost more.

I've had several small .380 pistols (3PAT and LCP) and a 9mm Makarov CZ-82 (virtually identical to the CZ-83.) Finding ammo locally can be a real challenge.

Mike J
October 5, 2012, 07:06 PM
I have not had a problem with the one Ruger handgun (of course it is an old P series gun & I have only had it for 12 years)I own but they do have a reputation for good customer service. If you do have a problem with a new gun when you contact them ask for a shipping label. I have seen many people post that Ruger sent them shipping labels so that they could send in a new gun with problems. Besides the worst that can happen is they say no.

Jaymo
October 5, 2012, 07:21 PM
I've been looking at getting a Block 19. My buddy has a 23 that he had a master armorer do a trigger job on. The trigger is really sweet, for a Glock.
I was trying out pistols today; Glock 19, S&W M&P9, Springfield XD9, Ruger SR9 and the S&W Sigma (whatever it's called now).
The XD had the best trigger of them all, and feels great in my hand.
The M&P had a good trigger and feels the best in my hand.
The SR9 had a good trigger, though a little gritty, and felt great in my hand.
The Glock19 had the worst trigger, not a surprise, which felt like every Glock factory trigger I've ever tried. The Glock also didn't feel great in my hand. The stupid finger grooves don't fit my fingers.

The XD factory trigger feels better than my buddy's Glock trigger after he had the trigger job.

I'm going to buy an SR9 or and XD9.
I like the low bore centerline of the Ruger. Other than that, it's a toss up between it and the XD.
There's no way I'd pay Glock's prices for a new gun. The SR9 costs the same, new, as the Popo trade in Glocks. $399.00
The XD is $439.00
The M&P is $489.00.
They're all very reliable pistols, but I'm not crazy about the design of the M&P trigger. If the thin strip of plastic at the front of the trigger safety pivot pin hole cracks, you have an unusable gun. That's the ONLY thing I don't like about the Smith.

Ryan in the House
October 5, 2012, 07:23 PM
Once again, Walt, that's very sound advice, and I thank you for being patient with me. Numerous people have told me that .380 ACP is a very impractical round for new shooters. So, I began considering the Ruger SR9c because it offered the advantages of the 9x19 Parabellum casing within a smaller body. The SR9c accommodates a grip extension on the 17-round magazine--I live in Maryland, where we're allowed to have up to 20 rounds in our magazines--so it's possible that I can reap some of the benefits of a full-frame gun with that configuration. My position is that it'd be nice to have versatility at my fingertips.

I hate to distract from the purpose of this thread--I'll gladly move this topic elsewhere if you'd prefer--but while we're here, would you suggest any other handguns in 9x19 Parabellum for a first-time shooter? One that perhaps comes in a compact or smaller frame, like the SR9c or Glock 19? I don't anticipate that I'll want to spend anything above $600, but I'm open to your recommendations.

Besides the worst that can happen is they say no.

I certainly hope Ruger wouldn't deny a warranty claim if the failure came from their end. :eek: I've heard that Ruger has exceptional customer service, though, and I'm confident that they would address any type of factory defect. I'm not an expert, but it'd seem to me that a gun manufacturer would need to maintain some sort of reputation for quality in order to stay in business. I don't imagine that anyone would buy a defense handgun that cannot be trusted to shoot when it's needed to, and judging by the number of people at this forum who trust the SR9c as a carry pistol, it must have some degree of reliability in construction or it'd never pass inspection as a carry weapon.

Walt Sherrill
October 5, 2012, 07:48 PM
Why not start a new topic -- "What reasonably-priced 9mm semi-auto would be good for a new shooter?" -- and leave this one to the SR9.

Personally, I think the SR9 does everything the Glock 19 does, and does it better. The one thing the Glock does better than the SR9, is that it functions with far fewer parts. (I think there are almost as many parts in the SR9 trigger/striker assembly as in the entire Glock handgun.)

Please understand: I like Glocks -- I have a Glock 35 and 38, and have had two 17s, and a 34. All of them were/are good guns.

mavracer
October 5, 2012, 07:52 PM
Ruger CS is great. I've only had to deal with them twice out of over 30 Rugers one a used Super Blackhawk that broke the transfer bar. Called them they asked for serial # took my info and it was in my mail box 3 days later the other was a Sheriff's vaquero that shot low. Called they sent a call tag less than 2 weeks it's back with a taller front sight. I just bought my SR9 I love it.

carbonyl
October 5, 2012, 08:13 PM
I certainly hope Ruger wouldn't deny a warranty claim if the failure came from their end. :eek: I've heard that Ruger has exceptional customer service, though, and I'm confident that they would address any type of factory defect. I'm not an expert, but it'd seem to me that a gun manufacturer would need to maintain some sort of reputation for quality in order to stay in business. I don't imagine that anyone would buy a defense handgun that cannot be trusted to shoot when it's needed to, and judging by the number of people at this forum who trust the SR9c as a carry pistol, it must have some degree of reliability in construction or it'd never pass inspection as a carry weapon.


I have a P95 and SR9c. Both have been flawless with over 3000 rounds apiece. The first time I took the SR9c apart I was having a problem getting the striker cover far enough into the slide to engage the plunger. I found a small piece of the cover in the slide. Once removed the cover slid into place. With the 95 I had a small nick on the edge of the feed ramp. Neither caused any problems with the function of the guns but when I mentioned them to Ruger CS they mailed me a new striker cover for the SR9c (now I have two) and a shipping label for the 95 (they replaced barrel). There was no cost to me for either of these non-issues and both were resolved in less than two weeks. If their customer service is your concern then put your mind at ease, they will do what it takes to make you a satisfied customer. :D

Mike J
October 5, 2012, 08:22 PM
Quote:
Besides the worst that can happen is they say no.
I certainly hope Ruger wouldn't deny a warranty claim if the failure came from their end. I've heard that Ruger has exceptional customer service, though, and I'm confident that they would address any type of factory defect. I'm not an expert, but it'd seem to me that a gun manufacturer would need to maintain some sort of reputation for quality in order to stay in business. I don't imagine that anyone would buy a defense handgun that cannot be trusted to shoot when it's needed to, and judging by the number of people at this forum who trust the SR9c as a carry pistol, it must have some degree of reliability in construction or it'd never pass inspection as a carry weapon.

I was not meaning they would not repair the weapon. I was just saying you should call them & ask for a shipping label. Most people I have seen post about this said like mavracer has posted they will send you a shipping label so it doesn't cost you anything to send a new gun to them if you ask them to.

Ryan in the House
October 5, 2012, 09:17 PM
I opened up a new thread to discuss alternatives, and I invite everyone to check it out and share your knowledge:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=8441511

Sorry for setting this thread off-track! Maybe one day I'll be able to return here and share my own experiences with the SR9c.

DAdams
October 5, 2012, 11:13 PM
Well due to the length and duration of this thread you have piqued my interest in this handgun. Maybe I'm actually missing something.

David White
October 6, 2012, 12:00 AM
Thanks for your response. "Better," of course, is a subjective term; I'd never press you or anyone else to tell me what gun is the "best" on the market because I'd be swallowed up by the amount of information that is returned to me. Rather, I wanted to know whether the SR9c is ideal for a new shooter. And judging by the language of your post, there is nothing that disqualifies the SR9c from being a fine choice for a new shooter like myself. That's good! And thanks for clarifying the ejection problem. I do understand that not every gun leaves the factory in perfect working order, and some specimens turn out to be prone to failure. One "problem gun" out of a thousand doesn't reflect the quality of the gun design, but if enough people report the same problem, then I have an obligation to myself as a new buyer to take notice. :) I'm prepared to deal with some issues here and there. My question is, How does one return a defective handgun to the manufacturer? Is it as simple as mailing it via UPS, or do I need to send it though an FFL? Forgive me if this is a silly question!

Your advice about the cost of .380 ACP is well-noted, and I had taken it into consideration. I have experience firing the Bersa Thunder 380, and for what it's worth, the gun really feels great in my hand--hammer-bite was nonexistent and recoil was very manageable. So, if I like the feel and comfort of one gun over another, I don't think I'll let the round type drive me away in most circumstances. As you said, smaller guns have a tendency to be less comfortable to shoot because there is less material to grip. Good point. The CZ-83 has a thick grip, so I'm sure I'd find it very comfortable. The Bersa felt nice, too, and I don't need to probe the SR9c too much in that area because it does come with grip extensions for the magazines. I would be concerned about the LCP or mini Kel-Tecs, and while I'd like to stay within the compact region--I'm hoping to keep the door open as a tool for personal defense or concealed carry further down the road--I don't want to buy something too small to handle. Of course, I'll figure that out before I make the purchase. Thanks for sharing your wisdom, Walt! I welcome any more words of advice.

Way to high jack a thread!

172964

Jaymo
October 9, 2012, 09:20 PM
I just can't decide between the stainless slide and the black nitrided slide.

kokapelli
October 9, 2012, 09:30 PM
I think solid color guns look much better than two tone. I wish they had the black oxide when I purchased mine.

helitack32f1
October 9, 2012, 09:43 PM
I have to agree with kokapelli. For some reason they look much better to me in black. Or even the green one with black slide. It just looks like a higher quality gun IMO.

marine 97-03
October 11, 2012, 08:10 AM
I've been thinking about one for a while

carbonyl
October 12, 2012, 04:49 AM
Well due to the length and duration of this thread you have piqued my interest in this handgun. Maybe I'm actually missing something.

Yeah "THE BOAT". But seriously, mines been a sweet, reliable, accurate and flawless shooter for many thousands of rounds. When I can purchase a dependable firearm that fits my needs made by American workers at an American based company that's the one I'll get, and did. ;)

Jaymo
October 13, 2012, 06:32 PM
I've been leaning toward the black on black, because it looks better to my eyes than a two tone.
Now, I just have to come up with the $399.00.

rbernie
October 13, 2012, 08:11 PM
I got the 9mm in black and the 40S&W in stainless, so I could tell them apart. :)

exavid
October 13, 2012, 08:34 PM
The posting that claimed you have to ship a pistol FFL to FFL is totally incorrect. You can ship your owned pistol to the manufacturer and have it come back directly to you after repairs if those repairs don't change the serial number. I've done it a couple of times in the recent past, once on a Taurus and once on an LCP. No problem at all. The manufacturer can't ship a replacement gun back to you, that would need an FFL transfer.

The Bersa Thunder was mentioned a while back. Personally I don't like blow back designs with centerfire pistols. Locked breech seems to me to be a better me design with less recoil, lighter recoil springs making it easier to rack and ligher overall weight since the slide can be lighter. In the case of .22s the blowback makes more sense, the slide and recoil spring doesn't have to be as heavy because of the smaller power of the .22, the pistol can be made more cheaply due to having less moving parts.

labhound
October 13, 2012, 08:50 PM
rbernie do you notice much difference in the recoil between the SR9 and the SR40?

rbernie
October 13, 2012, 09:19 PM
rbernie do you notice much difference in the recoil between the SR9 and the SR40?Sure, some - but it's certainly not objectionable for me at all. I wouldn't pick one over the other based upon recoil alone.

exavid
October 13, 2012, 10:05 PM
There definitely is a difference in recoil between the SR9 and the SR40c. That being said I don't mind firing a couple boxes of ammo at a range session with my SR40c.

IllinoisGun
October 15, 2012, 02:29 PM
Because there are much better guns on the market than the Ruger autoloaders for the money.

helitack32f1
October 15, 2012, 03:05 PM
Because there are much better guns on the market than the Ruger autoloaders for the money.
Considering you can find new Ruger SR9 guns for right around $400, I would be curious to know what other quality, better guns that could be had for that price.

kokapelli
October 15, 2012, 04:11 PM
Because there are much better guns on the market than the Ruger autoloaders for the money.
Please name some.

Jaymo
October 15, 2012, 09:54 PM
My guess is that the "better gun" would be a Glock. I won't bash Glock, but they're not the be all end all of autoloaders. They're not even the best on the market. Yes, they're simple and reliable. But they have had their problems, just like everyone else.
They also don't fit everyone's hands. Like mine.
My Glockho friend was disappointed when I told him I'll be getting an SR9 instead of a G19.
I explained to him that the finger grooves don't fit my hand, and the mag release button bites into my left hand. Bad things to have occur.
He opined that I could get a Gen2.
I don't like the Glock enough to pay more for a used Gen2 G19 than for a bew SR9.
In fact, I like the XD better than the Glock.
The lower bore centerline is one of my reasons for getting the SR9 instead of the XD.
Plus, it feels at least as good in my hand as the XD.

Where I live, a new SR9 goes for $399, new XD goes for $439, New G19 goes for over $500, and used G19 (when you can find one) goes for $450+.

I can get used G23s for $389, all day long. Trouble is, I have no use for a .40.
I have both ends of the spectrum covered with 9mm and .45ACP.

So, the SR9 is the choice for me. It fits my hand, which is terribly important in a defensive handgun.
It appears to be reliable.
The trigger feels better to me, than a stock Glock.
It's better looking than a Glock.
It's made in the US by an American company. Less important, but it is nice.
Ruger has great CS.
I like Rugers, though the SR9 and SR1911 are the first centerfire autopistols from Ruger that I like. The P series didn't fit my hand very well and felt muzzle heavy.

I see no reason for a lack of love for the SR9.
Heck, if you have the SR9 with the old trigger, Ruger will replace it free of charge.
Not bad.

helitack32f1
October 15, 2012, 11:00 PM
My guess is that the "better gun" would be a Glock. I won't bash Glock, but they're not the be all end all of autoloaders. They're not even the best on the market. Yes, they're simple and reliable. But they have had their problems, just like everyone else.
They also don't fit everyone's hands. Like mine.
My Glockho friend was disappointed when I told him I'll be getting an SR9 instead of a G19.
I explained to him that the finger grooves don't fit my hand, and the mag release button bites into my left hand. Bad things to have occur.
He opined that I could get a Gen2.
I don't like the Glock enough to pay more for a used Gen2 G19 than for a bew SR9.
In fact, I like the XD better than the Glock.
The lower bore centerline is one of my reasons for getting the SR9 instead of the XD.
Plus, it feels at least as good in my hand as the XD.

Where I live, a new SR9 goes for $399, new XD goes for $439, New G19 goes for over $500, and used G19 (when you can find one) goes for $450+.

I can get used G23s for $389, all day long. Trouble is, I have no use for a .40.
I have both ends of the spectrum covered with 9mm and .45ACP.

So, the SR9 is the choice for me. It fits my hand, which is terribly important in a defensive handgun.
It appears to be reliable.
The trigger feels better to me, than a stock Glock.
It's better looking than a Glock.
It's made in the US by an American company. Less important, but it is nice.
Ruger has great CS.
I like Rugers, though the SR9 and SR1911 are the first centerfire autopistols from Ruger that I like. The P series didn't fit my hand very well and felt muzzle heavy.

I see no reason for a lack of love for the SR9.
Heck, if you have the SR9 with the old trigger, Ruger will replace it free of charge.
Not bad.
I think you missed the point. He said "Much better guns on the market for the money". you pointed out yourself that the Glock 19 is $100 more than the Ruger. My point is I don't think there IS a gun as good as the Ruger for the same price. I am mostly a Glock person but love the SR9, just haven't bought one yet.

Apparently I need to move to where you live! The only way I get an SR 9 for $400 is used!

exavid
October 16, 2012, 12:20 AM
SR9s are going for $419 at the LGS here.

TarDevil
October 16, 2012, 02:46 AM
$399 NIB at several LGSs here.

carbonyl
October 16, 2012, 08:28 PM
They are 400 in my neck of the woods.
http://kamessports.com/index.php?page=ads
http://www.finfeatherfuroutfitters.com/

TimeIsRunninOut
October 17, 2012, 02:15 AM
430 in AZ. I got the all black sr9c and am happy I did. As for the shipping question, check the legal section for a sticky on shipping firearms.

Jaymo
October 18, 2012, 01:07 AM
I was surprised to find the SR9 for 399.

RBid
October 18, 2012, 07:01 AM
I recently transitioned into the gun business. What I've been running into is that most buyers are not educated about or familiar with the SR9/SR9c/SR40/SR40c. Everybody comes in knowing Glock, and a few know about S&W and Springfield Armory-- so that's where they start looking. I find that most who hold the SR(x)/c tend to love how they feel in hand. I keep Snap Caps on hand, so I like to throw one in, and let people check out the trigger. It's hard to dry fire one of these and fail to recognize the lack of take up, and crisp break-- I generally put it next to any other pistol they look at, and let them compare back to back.

When people handle them, they frequently buy them.

All of this is to say that I believe that the lack of love is because people just don't know any better-- even 'gun guys' don't always know that the trigger on these is now fantastic, since Ruger dramatically improved it.

Jaymo
October 26, 2012, 08:40 PM
I got it today. I got the SR9 with the black slide. I just can't decide if I like it better with the flat or arched side of the backstrap. My wife likes it flat.
The trigger sure is better after a drop of Break Free LP.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why no love for the SR9?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!