Ruger American pistol!?

Amazing how U-Tube, and Internet "experts" proclamations have replaced actual handling, and firing of the gun. One video out of multiples found an issue, and, of course, the usual response is to believe it over all of the rest. Sad commentary about a supposedly educated group.

The NRA video mentions that the sample shown was the "Pro" Model. The safety, mag disconnect, and loaded chamber indicator are supposedly available on the standard version. That same video also mentions the new Modular Handgun System Trials, and Police bids.

It would appear that Ruger is transitioning it's lines to reflect the American name.

Face it, despite the drive-by drivel of some, Ruger wants part of the Police market, and to be positioned to enter the mythical new Handgun Trials that the military keeps teasing the manufacturers with. In a day of budget constraints, and shrinking force levels, the military needs a new handgun like we need another President like Obama. There are many more important systems that need upgrades. Maybe fixing the bolt deterioration of the M4 carbine using M855A1 ammo?

Instead of frothing at the mouth about a gun that most of us have never held in our hands, let's try to actually get our hands on one, shoot it, and make a (gasp) informed decision.

I was able to lay hands on both 9mm and .45 versions of the pistol today. Some thoughts...

Ergonomically, it's a little weird. The triangular magazine release button feels odd, and the backstrap checkering is a little unpleasant. The transition in shape at the top of the backstrap is very abrupt, so a high grip is hard to maintain, and I can understand why MAC's shooters were getting chewed up by the frame. In my size XL hands, the bigger .45 felt much better than the 9mm, but it still didn't feel great. It might have been more about the balance than the shape. They got the takedown right though - no pulling the trigger, just flip the takedown lever and off comes the slide.

The trigger is so-so. None of the M&P's weird flexing, not as mushy as a Glock, but nowhere close to what H&K or Walther have achieved. It's a striker-fired trigger; it isn't going to be great. The reset on these two pistols wasn't as long as in MAC's example, so I wonder if theirs had more problems than just the weak striker spring (or if that was related to the long reset they found.)

Aesthetically, it's a mess. It's a hopeless jumble of clashing and conflicting lines and curves. Not many polymer pistols are ever going to be considered great works of art, but this thing is wretched in its appearance. Give me the clean, functional lines of a Glock over this any day.

But the proof will be in the shooting, and I haven't shot one yet. Nor am I likely to any time soon; I generally prefer hammer-fired guns and between my G17 and VP9 I'm pretty well set on striker-fired guns. Street price on these is going to be less than most of their major competitors, which will help sell some guns, and Ruger likes to play up the Made in America angle, which will help sell some more. But not to me. At least in the gun store, I can't find any compelling reason to choose this over a Glock or HK; Springfield and S&W might have to worry a little bit.

I got to handle one today at the LGS. It's actually quite comfortable, but didn't get to fire it. I can see where it might bite the thumb knuckle, though.

Trigger reset was long, almost full stroke length. Trigger wasn't the greatest, long, not as smooth as other guns in it's class, but the break was fairly consistent when dry firing. It might be one of those guns that feels better when actually shooting it.

It's a full size gun. Not quite as big as the older P series guns, but it's big. Not as heavy as it would appear, but it's not a light weight.

But at $509 sticker price... no thanks. Not when the S&W M&P was $60 cheaper (and still overpriced).

I'm not trampling anyone to be the first in line to get one. Too many other, better (IMO), options available.

Deleted: My initial thread search missed that the MAC review had been linked.

But in short, I don't see this pistol having a place in my collection, and definitely not for social work if it can't be used for several hundred rounds in a class.

It doesn't do it for me. But it'll sell to a lot of guys.

JTQ said:

Glock sells bunches of G17's at the same price and size.

Click to expand...

If I buy another plastic framed pistol it's going to be Russian-designed Strike One. At least it has different barrel locking mechanism. I'm sick and tired of seeing same design with different manufacturer name on it. If I want copy of something else I will just buy inexpensive Turkish pistol. Why pay $500 when you can get same thing for $350?

I'm sick and tired of seeing same design with different manufacturer name on it.

Click to expand...

Agree. The net effect of the parade of next-big-things that's been going by for years has really cut my excitability for new products. Only so many "Glock killers" can by before all we can do is yawn.

I think it's great that each company has taken a go at the striker fired polymer pistol design. That gives us more choices.

I handled one today at my LGS. Nice gun but I wouldn't trade my SR9 or SR45 for one. I really not sure I would consider it an improvement over the SR series, maybe it isn't intended to be.

I think it's great that each company has taken a go at the striker fired polymer pistol design. That gives us more choices.

Click to expand...

whereas I think it gives us less and less options. esp. if your not fond of that type of gun, for whatever reason.

I think it's great that each company has taken a go at the striker fired polymer pistol design. That gives us more choices.

Click to expand...

Sure, variety and competition are great. Nonetheless, we as consumers only have so many "oohs" and "ahhs" to give for the also-rans.

I don't see these guns filling any void in the market...What does it do that any other polymer-framed semi-auto would do just as well? I'll be interested to see how they do, both commercially and in LE. As for it being designed possibly for the Army XM9 trials, Ruger has been pretty clear that they aren't participating in those. And even if they did, my understanding was that manual safeties were still a requirement. Although I could easily be wrong, so please correct me if I am!

Personally, overall the Ruger American doesn't look too exciting to me. Ergonomically it doesn't look seem to be a revelation. It is heavier than I would like, and it is too angular and thick for me to consider as a carry gun, albeit that is just my personal preference of course...
I find it quite aesthetically disappointing, to say the least, and I think Glocks are pretty! I really hope I don't offend anyone who likes how the American looks, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I can't help but look at it and wonder what the designers were thinking. When I look at the Ruger American, my country is just not the first thing that comes to mind. "Is that what Ruger thinks an American gun embodies?" I wonder. It is American in that it is made in America, by Americans for Americans, but if that is the only criteria that merits that name, all of their models could be called the same thing. Maybe I'm overthinking this? I have nothing against Ruger by any means; I was a huge fan of the P series and the SP101, and I always enjoy seeing new things from them! But this model isn't impressing me so far. I'll reserve my final judgement for whenever I get to shoot it, naturally.
-Love from Ray

tarosean said:

whereas I think it gives us less and less options. esp. if your not fond of that type of gun, for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

I'd agree if Ruger was getting rid of a lot of its lineup to just offer this. But Ruger also makes DAO pistols like the LCP and LC9, 1911s, and revolvers. How is also offering this reducing the amount of choice in the market?

The American, as of right now, is not planned to replace any of the SR9 family.

It is not intended to be a "budget" pistol.
The SR9 was & is & will remain a budget entry, in terms of configuration & design.

The American is Ruger's attempt to build a truly pro-grade service pistol, which the SR9-ish pistols are not.
As such, so far it appears to be well ahead of the SR9 in that regard.

Ruger is undecided about bothering with military trials.

It's a wait & see on how well the pistol does in the marketplace.
Denis

tarosean said:

whereas I think it gives us less and less options. esp. if your not fond of that type of gun, for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree. Is there even an all metal, hammer fired semi-auto pistol in Ruger's current offerings other than their 1911?

Even after handling the gun, I wasn't impressed. And as it offers nothing new, it's just not my cuppa tea.

USAF_Vet said:

I tend to agree. Is there even an all metal, hammer fired semi-auto pistol in Ruger's current offerings other than their 1911?

Even after handling the gun, I wasn't impressed. And as it offers nothing new, it's just not my cuppa tea.

Click to expand...

But was there an all-metal, hammer-fired auto in their lineup besides the 1911 before the release of the American?

Mitlov said:

But was there an all-metal, hammer-fired auto in their lineup besides the 1911 before the release of the American?

Click to expand...

No. There wasn't an all metal hammer fired semi auto, and there should have been. Ruger already had a full seized striker fired poly, so I guess I simply don't see the point of offering another one, even if it's supposed to be higher quality at a higher price point than their current offering.

Some people, myself included, still want all metal hammer fired semi auto pistols. I'm okay with buying used P-series Rugers, or used 2nd and 3rd gen S&Ws. I just see the market flooded with... yawn... more plastic guns.

I want a 4" barrel compact grip SR like Springfield makes of the XD.

Also the LCR 3" needs to come in 22 and 357.

USAF_Vet said:

No. There wasn't an all metal hammer fired semi auto, and there should have been. Ruger already had a full seized striker fired poly, so I guess I simply don't see the point of offering another one, even if it's supposed to be higher quality at a higher price point than their current offering.

Some people, myself included, still want all metal hammer fired semi auto pistols. I'm okay with buying used P-series Rugers, or used 2nd and 3rd gen S&Ws. I just see the market flooded with... yawn... more plastic guns.

Click to expand...

I thought those people were known as 1911 owners? ;-)

not if you shoot 9mm.

USAF_Vet said:

not if you shoot 9mm.

Click to expand...

If only someone would have invented such a device! Its Power would be Hi indeed!

Nothing wrong with a 9mm 1911 either.

Mitlov said:

If only someone would have invented such a device! Its Power would be Hi indeed!

Click to expand...

Ha! That made me laugh. Nice one.

Frankly, a hammer-fired 9mm would be a step backward for Ruger, not a step forward.
They're trying to compete with the M&P on this one, not the 1911.
They've already got a 1911 & this American is an evolutionary step beyond the SR9.
Denis