The battle of reliability-G17 vs. P95


PDA






Flashpoint
March 13, 2004, 02:21 PM
So everyone has heard of Glock's utter reliability, and Ruger's P series are suppose to built like tanks; so if a P95 and a G17 went head to head in a torture test who would come out ahead?

If you enjoyed reading about "The battle of reliability-G17 vs. P95" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
orangeninja
March 13, 2004, 02:34 PM
My vote would be the Ruger. I'm not talking about accuracy or form, just pure rugged nastiness when the trigger is pulled. Why?

I owned a Glock 22. Cheap ammo like S&B and WWB would cause failures to extract due to a dirty extractor. However that was very rare. The Glock's weakest area is in light hits on the primer using S&B ammo. About 1 or two out of every box. Third, I had to qualify with a Glock during a thunderstorm, it sucked and my mags started to fail shortly after. The guy next to me with a P89 was shooting his same mags until the day I quit that job, my Glock mags needed new springs though.

My Ruger was a P94, I actually got hit by a heavy armored door on an armored truck and got knocked down. I landed on top of my holstered gun as if I had been tackled. Nothing but a scratch on the polymer grips to be seen. I'm not sure if that would have been true of the Glock. The Ruger had a tendancy to not go fully into battery if you limpwristed however which at the time I had a tendancy to do. Once I figued that out it worked fine. The one thing the Ruger needed that the Glock did not was about a 2 to 500 round break in. The Glock was great out of the box but gradually got worse.

BHPshooter
March 13, 2004, 04:08 PM
An honest question, if you please: Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability? They can hiccup just like any other gun, so what's the big deal?

Please, don't be offended, I seriously want to know...

Wes

orangeninja
March 13, 2004, 04:39 PM
I believe it has to do with their marketing strategy. When Glock used to go around the country to different shows and Police Dept. they would purposely abuse their guns to show how reliable they are. One test I remember hearing about was a guy throwing a Fully loaded Glock 17 inside of a bullet resistant plexiglass container. The gun did not fire no matter how high he threw it, but when he picked it up and pulled the trigger it fired. Everyone was amazed. It is not because they are that much better, but Glock set out to PROVE their reliability. In truth, they have their lemmons to.

Preacherman
March 13, 2004, 07:38 PM
Don't forget, too, that when the Glock first came out about 20 years ago, it was competing against pistols that were truly not as reliable as they are today. The 1911's, S&W's, etc. of the day were "picky" as far as reliability went. The Glock beat all of them hands down in reliability demonstrations. One of the results has been that Glock set a new standard, which other autopistols now meet and surpass.

Dave Markowitz
March 13, 2004, 08:23 PM
Several years ago my brother did much of the photography for the Glock Annual. Part of this entailed thinking up ways to seriously abuse a Glock 17 to show it's durability and reliablity. I recall that he immersed it in a few inches of water in a pan, then stuck the whole thing in the freezer until the pistol was encased in ice. He then took it outside and threw it down against some concrete steps to break it out, with no damage.

He then had his girlfriend's dad run it over with a tractor.

Another form of abuse was to immerse it in a mud bath, then rinse it off and shoot it.

Granted, not especially scientific, but it was fun. :)

I'd bet a Ruger would do as well.

Vern Humphrey
March 13, 2004, 09:18 PM
Impressive tricks sell guns, but don't mean a lot otherwise.

I knew a guy years ago who traded M1911s. He had a trick, he'd set up a magazine to feed empty cases when you racked the slide.

Someone would want to see a gun under the glass, he'd pick up that trick magzaine, shove it in and start racking the slide. KA-CHING! And the guy'd walk out the door, convinced he had the most reliable pistol ever.

Of course, if you used that same magazine with live ammo, it wouldn't feed worth a hoot.:D

444
March 13, 2004, 09:44 PM
Anybody know the details of the US Army trials that took place in like 1910 ?

Jaegermeister
March 14, 2004, 01:15 AM
My vote goes to the Ruger for pure reliability. My personal P-95 has never failed with an ungodly variety of cheap ammo and factory reloads. Mine is accurate enough with the heavier bullets such as 124 and 147 grains, but it does not like the 115s as well.

I have personally seen Glock 17's not finish pistol qualification courses while a Ruger P-94 in .40 kept humming right along and the guy never cleaned it during the training.


Now, if you want to add reliability plus accuracy, my USP .45f takes both.
I was once a 1911 fan, but that big, beautiful USP is more accurate and holds more rounds.

Glocks are popular and are high quality weapons, but the polymer Rugers do not get the credit they deserve by gun snobs. I may get a P-97 just to have another quality .45.

orangeninja
March 14, 2004, 01:42 AM
"I knew a guy years ago who traded M1911s. He had a trick, he'd set up a magazine to feed empty cases when you racked the slide.

Someone would want to see a gun under the glass, he'd pick up that trick magzaine, shove it in and start racking the slide. KA-CHING! And the guy'd walk out the door, convinced he had the most reliable pistol ever."


Anyone who sells a life saving tool by using con tricks should be locked away like the felon he should be. Imagine for a second if makers/dealers of defribulation devices pulled a stunt like that, just when you need it, someone dies because you wanted a fast buck. Guys like that give the gun industry as a whole a black eye.:fire:

Longbow
March 14, 2004, 02:19 AM
Several years ago my brother did much of the photography for the Glock Annual. Part of this entailed thinking up ways to seriously abuse a Glock 17 to show it's durability and reliablity. I recall that he immersed it in a few inches of water in a pan, then stuck the whole thing in the freezer until the pistol was encased in ice. He then took it outside and threw it down against some concrete steps to break it out, with no damage.

He then had his girlfriend's dad run it over with a tractor.

Another form of abuse was to immerse it in a mud bath, then rinse it off and shoot it.

Granted, not especially scientific, but it was fun.

I'd bet a Ruger would do as well

Until I see a Ruger auto that can take those abuses for real, I might consider it as my primary defense pistol. But for now I'll keep trusting on my G17. :)
BTW, my G17 will feed empty cases almost 80% at a time, with no mods or tricks.:eek:

goalie
March 14, 2004, 04:01 AM
An honest question, if you please: Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability? They can hiccup just like any other gun, so what's the big deal?

Please, don't be offended, I seriously want to know...


Well, IMO it is because they have loose chamber tolorances and an unsupported (actually, less supported is more accurate) case when in battery. These things allow them to cycle very reliably. Unfortunately, there is strong evidence that the unsupported case part can be a problem with high-pressure ammo, especially the .40.

Obiwan
March 14, 2004, 12:52 PM
The Ruger will make a better hammer than the Glock

glocksman
March 14, 2004, 03:36 PM
I knew a guy years ago who traded M1911s. He had a trick, he'd set up a magazine to feed empty cases when you racked the slide.

Someone would want to see a gun under the glass, he'd pick up that trick magzaine, shove it in and start racking the slide. KA-CHING! And the guy'd walk out the door, convinced he had the most reliable pistol ever.

Heh.

My Smith 4506-1 will do that with empty cases and loaded rounds from the same magazine.

No tricks, just some solid engineering on the part of S&W. :)

Kestrel
March 14, 2004, 06:02 PM
I remember when Glock took a G17 and drilled a 3/16" hole all the way through the side of the slide and barrel and inserted a hardened steel bolt through it, with a nut on the other end. Then they welded the muzzle to the end of the slide and welded around the breach block to the ejection port.

Then they completely filled the magazine well with epoxy and sawed off the trigger guard. Then they replaced the firing pin with a 16 penny nail and removed all the springs and magazine catch. Then they glued the trigger in place with epoxy and removed the sights. Finally, they scribbled grafitti all over the slide and frame. They even re-engraved "Glock" on the slide, but misspelling it, this time. They then soaked the entire pistol in howler monkey urine overnight.

IT STILL FIRED. And with .45 acp ammo. They then tried other calibers in the G17 pistol. Everything fired. .22LR, .40, .357 magnum, .44 special. They even got it to fire a 12ga, 3" shell (but it wouldn't feed reliably out of the magazine). All this with the existing 9mm barrel that was bolted and welded to the frame.

What a gun.

:rolleyes:

Obiwan
March 14, 2004, 06:08 PM
Wow....Cool!

cratz2
March 14, 2004, 08:11 PM
Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability?

Marketing and Chuck Taylor always updating us as to how many hundreds of thousands of rounds his G17 has gone with no failures.

I can honestly say my G23, my friends G23 and my other friends G19 have never failed and they've all been shot over 2,000 roudns. My friends G23 is probably upwards of 20,000. Mostly WWB and S&B ammo.

But I also have a Taurus that has never failed, a Kahr that has never failed, several 1911s that have never failed... First time I ever shot a G30, the second round failed to feed... Never failed (for me) after that.

Between the G17 and a P95, I'd put money on the Glock... But only about $1. :D

mini14jac
March 16, 2004, 09:02 AM
I've owned both, and I certainly think it would be an interesting test.
A 15rd Glock 19 is smaller, and more suited to CCW than a P95.
But, the Glock will cost 1.5 - 2x as much.

The 9mm and .40 Glocks have slimmer grips, which smaller shooters appreciate.

I've sold/traded my Glocks: 17,19,23,26. The only one I miss is the 19.
I love the high capacity/ small size.

I recently sold my Ruger P95.
I really miss that gun! I had over 1000 trouble-free rounds through it.
I had cut down the mag realese buttons.
I had got to the point that the large grip felt natural to me.
It was very easy and fun to shoot, and very accurate.

I think, of all the guns I've sold and traded, that is the only one I would like to have back. :(

Taurus_9mm
February 21, 2010, 09:28 PM
****Old Thread Resurrection Alert**** :D

Both companies are renowned for the durability and longevity of the firearms they produce. My P95 eats any and everything I feed it without fail and experiences related to me by those I know with Glocks seem to mirror my own. IMO you really can't go wrong with either one though the Ruger does offer a price point advantage. It would probably take quite a bit of shooting to kill either one as well. A fellow moderator on the Taurus forum is a longtime police officer that has related that his Glock 19 has 225,000 rounds through it and still is ticking along, with minor maintenance over the years. :)

www.taurusarmed.net

REAPER4206969
February 21, 2010, 10:21 PM
The Ruger will make a better hammer than the Glock
Doubt it. Glock does everything better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4ffaQbqlkg

Snakum
August 23, 2011, 08:13 AM
Necro ... I know, but someone else may be searching on 9mm reliability one day.

I have been researching 9mms lately to add a pair to my 40 cal Glocks (G22s and G23s), and all the research I've done indicates the old Ruger semi-autos are darn near bullet proof. Definitely underrated.

Hangingrock
August 23, 2011, 10:37 AM
I can’t make a comparison simply because I don’t have a Ruger P95 to compare with a Glock G17. The G17 that I have has proven to be as reliable as advertised. Now if some one wants to send me a Ruger P95 free of charge I’d be willing to evaluate and test it.

Zerodefect
August 23, 2011, 12:47 PM
I own both. The G17 with proper updated mags, not old gen 1 or 2 mags, walks all over my P95.

The P95 got alot better after some ramp polishing and switching to +P ammo.

jmr40
August 23, 2011, 03:00 PM
When someone takes a Ruger or some other gun and duplicates this

http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90

Or this



http://www.tactical-life.com/online/combat-handguns/glock-17-9mm-torture-test/


We will have an answer. Not saying it cannot be done by someone else, but so far no one has done it.

Mike J
August 23, 2011, 07:05 PM
As a Ruger P-series owner I'd like to say the P95 would slam the Glock but I remembered this old thread. http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=55230&highlight=1000

They are both good guns in my opinion.

Edited to Add: JohnKSA's post in this thread gives more information- http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=324738&page=2

Hammerhead6814
August 23, 2011, 07:46 PM
Both options in this thread are irrelevant. Buy a Browning Hi-Power and never want another gun again.

GLOOB
August 24, 2011, 12:09 AM
An honest question, if you please: Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability? They can hiccup just like any other gun, so what's the big deal?

Please, don't be offended, I seriously want to know...
They keep on shooting even when they are dirty, and they are so easy to clean. That's a good combination of traits.

DenaliPark
August 24, 2011, 12:54 AM
An honest question, if you please: Why is it that Glock is hailed as the be-all end-all of reliability? They can hiccup just like any other gun, so what's the big deal?

Please, don't be offended, I seriously want to know...

Wes
Why they are is because they are! When Glock first burst onto the scene way back when, they scored their two first major police departments with the G17, St Paul PD and Miami as I recall, back then S&W revolvers ruled the police trade with auto's not really seriously considered.

That all changed with the introduction of the Glock-17 9mm pistols, before Glock, all auto's were viewed as not reliable for police duty, and largely speaking this was correct. Then came Glock with their indestructible pistols that virtually never didn't go bang when you pulled the trigger, they didn't require the attention's of gunsmiths or "reliability pkg's" to perform, quite the opposite, they worked right from the box and they never failed, they also didn't rust or corrode even after years of neglect from individual officers....

Glock almost put S&W out of business, literally, it was that close! Suddenly LEO's had a 17 shot pistol that was virtually maintence free, it always worked, it fed everything that they could stuff into it. Other gun makers were forced to compete or die, Colt would have died if not for their government contracts, S&W who had ridiculed the Glock ended up losing a lawsuit to Glock for so closely copying Glock that you could actually swap out slides from the Sigma to the Glock and they would run!

Glock changed the entire paradigm, every ultra reliable pistol available in this modern market is just that, ultra reliable because of the Glock....

That's why Glock is the be all, end all of reliability, they changed the paradigm and now rule at least 70% of the LE market alone, not to forget that they are also the favored pistol by most of Nato.

Jed Carter
August 24, 2011, 06:18 AM
I doubt if the P95 could keep up, but you can shoot a G17 untill it melts the frame and causes the pistol to fail. Just how many continous rounds that is I do not know, but I believe the Ruger would experience failures before the Glock. The Ruger with ambidexterous everything, has a lot more to fail than a G17. The Lexington Police went from Beretta 92s to the Ruger pistols due to a perceived need for a decocker. This lasted briefly and all use Glock pistols with the NY trigger now. Cost, maintenence, reliability, accuracy and capacity all determine what a department uses, with cost a major concern. Don't run over them with a tractor, or throw them in the mud. Just shoot them until they fail, my vote would be the G17 on top.

Fiv3r
August 24, 2011, 11:32 AM
I really like Rugers. I really like Glocks.
I have to say that straight out of the box, the Glock is probably going eat the Ruger's lunch in term of reliability.

I watched my friend buy a P95 from a gun shot NIB, take it to the range and curse it every other mag when it jammed. It just needed to be cleaned, honestly. However, it was a jam-o-matic that first day. It's flawless now, but it needed a cleaning and a break in.

I took a G36 NIB (one of the supposedly fickle Glocks) out of the glass case where I bought it and put 200 rounds down range. I never once had a FTF/E. No jams, no anything.

I realize that two guns of two different calibers a statistical does not make. I find Glocks boring, fairly ugly, and they ooze zero charisma. But they are simple guns, well made, and if you HAD to bet the farm on a pistol running like a champ right out of the box, you certainly could make worse choices than a Glock.

easyg
August 24, 2011, 12:51 PM
I had a Ruger P95....

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n165/allenXdog/HPIM6391.jpg

It was a nice enough pistol, especially for the low price, but overall it just wasn't as nice as my Glocks.
The trigger-pull was not as nice as the trigger-pull of the Glock.
And I really hated the magazine release design on the Ruger....too sharp and the forward push was slightly awkward.


The new Ruger SR series is a great improvement in my opinion...

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n165/allenXdog/HPIM7193.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "The battle of reliability-G17 vs. P95" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!