REAPER4206969
Member
O'rly? Thanks for keeping that little bit of info secret...
Anyone Else Prefer the Ruger SR9 to the S&W M&P?
- Thread starter mordechaianiliewicz
- Start date
- Status
I prefer the SR9, largely for design decisions like the partially cocked striker vs fully cocked, and the well executed not-optional thumb safety.
the M&P has much nicer slide serrations, but the SR9 feels better in my hand, and definitely feels more solid and high quality.
haven't shot the M&P, and I have little handgun experience to weight any feedback I might have anyway.
the M&P has much nicer slide serrations, but the SR9 feels better in my hand, and definitely feels more solid and high quality.
haven't shot the M&P, and I have little handgun experience to weight any feedback I might have anyway.
Full Metal Jacket
member
it's been all over that secret place called the internet...
the new 45 m&p striker is stainless:
for the 9mm/40cal: old design #4 on the left & the new design #4 on the right:
REAPER4206969
Member
Great post.
Full Metal Jacket
member
thank you, my friend
Autolycus
Member
I prefer the M&P myself. But I prefer Glock first and foremost.
Glockensig
Member
M&P.... Ruger doesn't make a 357sig. I liked the old P series though...
I believe this is actually striker #5 for the M&P. They have had to redesign it 4 times already. Hopefully this one is the winner. I was going to buy one but I decided to wait to see what happens with them. As with any new gun, there's probably going to be some teething issues. SR9 and M&P are no exceptions.
Oh, and I understand the new strikers are also MIM, just a different design. The previous changes were very slight compared to the latest one.
Oh, and I understand the new strikers are also MIM, just a different design. The previous changes were very slight compared to the latest one.
gglass
Member
M&P All the Way!
REAPER4206969
Member
Just called. Amazing service! I said I need a new striker, he said name and address?
Less then 45 seconds! Here is the line you need to call: 1-800-331-0852 Extension-2904
Sapper771
Member
I would take the M&P over the SR9 every time. The SR9s that I have seen and handled were junk IMO. Most M&Ps that I have been in contact with have been of good quality.
easyg
Member
I've handled and shot the M&P but I have never handled a SR9.
So maybe you can tell me what exactly gave you the impression that the SR9 is "junk"?
Thanks,
Easy
I prefer the SR9c to all of those. I went on a mission to find a 9mm carry piece a few months ago and rented all of the guns, shot them all, including the XD, and ended up liking the SR9c the most. I went based on feel of the gun and how easily I shot it. I have no question as to the quality of Ruger products, I own several other guns from them and their quality and CS has been outstanding.
schmeky
Member
I've owned 2 M&P's, never owned an SR-9, but I've handled a few.
Ruger has succeeded in creating a trigger mechanism that is combination of a wood rasp and 80 grit sandpaper, with perhaps a sprinkling of crushed granite thrown in. Obviously I'm exaggerating (probably not a whole lot), but the SR-9's I checked out had the worst triggers in recent memory.
I love Ruger's, my first pistol was a Ruger (still have it after 30+ years), but their center-fire semi-autos lag behind the industry and I see no improvement in sight (I've owned several Ruger semi-autos too).
I would pay a premium for an M&P before I would buy a discounted SR-9.
Ruger has succeeded in creating a trigger mechanism that is combination of a wood rasp and 80 grit sandpaper, with perhaps a sprinkling of crushed granite thrown in. Obviously I'm exaggerating (probably not a whole lot), but the SR-9's I checked out had the worst triggers in recent memory.
I love Ruger's, my first pistol was a Ruger (still have it after 30+ years), but their center-fire semi-autos lag behind the industry and I see no improvement in sight (I've owned several Ruger semi-autos too).
I would pay a premium for an M&P before I would buy a discounted SR-9.
REAPER4206969
Member
Word is the SR9c has a new trigger system.
Once again, link ANY evidence that Walther had any part in the design of the M&P. The moderators have made it clear to me that I am only allowed to imply what the lack of a link from you says about your character and credibility.
Also, if you persist on spreading unfounded misinformation on THR, I've been told to report you to the moderators rather than continue to hound you. So please persist with your baseless claims.
MachIVshooter
Member
S&W, like Kel-Tec, is one of the best in the industry for CS. Your experience is about the norm with S&W.
REAPER4206969
Member
Yep.
RobMoore
Member
Reasons I like the M&P over the Ruger (in no particular order), on their own merits, saying nothing about the company, their reputation, customer service, or LEO agencies or competitors using them.
#1 The slide release is bigger
#2 The Magazine well is easier to hit. The ruger's backstrap comes down a bit further.
#3 The cut of the underside of the trigger guard for the M&P fits my middle finger better. The ruger's is too narrow. Not having a relief cut would be better than one too small.
#4 The M&P trigger fills up more of the trigger guard than the Ruger
#5 The slide serrations are bigger and easier to grasp on the M&P
#1 The slide release is bigger
#2 The Magazine well is easier to hit. The ruger's backstrap comes down a bit further.
#3 The cut of the underside of the trigger guard for the M&P fits my middle finger better. The ruger's is too narrow. Not having a relief cut would be better than one too small.
#4 The M&P trigger fills up more of the trigger guard than the Ruger
#5 The slide serrations are bigger and easier to grasp on the M&P
Runningman
Member
I actually like the feel of the SR9. But as it stands right now M&P.
I feel Ruger needs to work on a number of issues on the SR9. For starters my S&W M&P is in a 357 Sig. Ruger seems to want to totally ignore the 357 Sig market.
My second biggest complaint it the trigger of the SR9. While the out of the box trigger on the M&P is nothing to brag about at all. The two SR9 I've fired had extremely miserable triggers. Last time I felt a trigger like that it was on a very cheap Remington Viper 22, a coworker bought in the 90s. I mean are they hacking trigger parts out scrap cars with a hammer and chisel or what? It is amazing Ruger could make triggers that bad.
Opinions are not unfounded misinformation. If they were, all your "opinions" about Glock's would be similar baseless claims. I can't give you a link but it seems that SW got its polymer act together after the advent of the SW99 - clearly a Walther/SW joint venture. Do you have a proof otherwise?
Last edited:
Fishman777
Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2007
- Messages
- 520
No.
The SR9 is a pretty nice gun, but I prefer the M&P.
I prefer Ruger DA revolvers over Smiths, but not Ruger autoloaders over the M&P.
The SR9 is similiar to the M&P, but the M&P is the better gun by a considerable margin, in my eyes.
The SR9 is a pretty nice gun, but I prefer the M&P.
I prefer Ruger DA revolvers over Smiths, but not Ruger autoloaders over the M&P.
The SR9 is similiar to the M&P, but the M&P is the better gun by a considerable margin, in my eyes.
Your baseless "opinions" which fly in the face of contrary evidence, are the very definition of unfounded misinformation.
I can, and do, have opinions about the lackluster ergonomic decisions made by Glock. These are subjective points.
That the M&P design team consisted of M&P Project Lead Engineer Joe Bergeron and Project Engineers Brett Curry, Sean O’Clair and Gary Zukowski is that pinprick in your fantasy world called a fact.
You are entitled to your opinions, as spectacularly silly as they have proven to be. You are not entitled to make up your own facts.
Sapper771
Member
Easy,
The triggers were overly stiff, around 8-10 pounds. The reset definitely could have been shorter. The backstrap was odd to me due to the middle portion being higher than the rest of the backstrap. The overall quality felt cheap to me. Like I said, IMO. I haven't got to shoot one yet, so my opinions of the SR9 are based on just handling and not overall performance. Just based on handling characteristics, I would still choose the M&P over the SR9. I haven't had a very good track record with the past Ruger P series pistols either.
The triggers were overly stiff, around 8-10 pounds. The reset definitely could have been shorter. The backstrap was odd to me due to the middle portion being higher than the rest of the backstrap. The overall quality felt cheap to me. Like I said, IMO. I haven't got to shoot one yet, so my opinions of the SR9 are based on just handling and not overall performance. Just based on handling characteristics, I would still choose the M&P over the SR9. I haven't had a very good track record with the past Ruger P series pistols either.
Still no evidence they did not get some help or guidence from say Walther or other Europeans. The only fact I can come up with is SW made an OK polymer gun in the M&P after they produced the SW99 and Walther was "in the building". You might be right but in my opinion I don't think so but if you want a fully US influenced polymer pistol perhaps you should stick with the Sigma (minus all the Glock influence) or the Ruger.
They (SW) did of course add lots of lawyer safety features onto the M&P which is clearly an American way of doing things but other than that the M&P looks and acts like the "old" country.
- Status