Taurus G3 vs Ruger Security 9

The votes for the Ruger are from mail ballots.

As I mentioned I have a Security 9 and I saw a used G3C at a LGS for $240. I was very tempted, but it is basically the same size as my S9. They are the same height, the G3C is a little wider and the S9 a little longer. Felt like it was the same gun with shorter barrel and less capacity.

I didn’t realize the G3C was so close in size to the G3.

If the gun is intended for social work, Taurus is completely off the table and Ruger is marginal at best. There's a reason you won't find either gun in the holster of a reputable trainer.

psyopspec said:

If the gun is intended for social work, Taurus is completely off the table and Ruger is marginal at best. There's a reason you won't find either gun in the holster of a reputable trainer.

Click to expand...

I can't care less about what a "reputable" trainer has in his holster. Probably he is the same kind of person that continues to pull the trigger on an empty Glock before re-holstering, without any reputable reason.
I have the Taurus G3 as well as some top notch pistols and I don't see the Taurus going to fail on what it is designed to do. Nor the Ruger.

5-SHOTS said:

I can't care less about what a "reputable" trainer has in his holster.

Click to expand...

As is your wont. And I don't care that you don't care, for whatever that's worth.

5-SHOTS said:

Probably he is the same kind of person that continues to pull the trigger on an empty Glock before re-holstering, without any reputable reason.

Click to expand...

That's random behavior indeed, and not what most reasonable shooters would expect from someone worthwhile. Who did you see teaching that way?

5-SHOTS said:

I have the Taurus G3 as well as some top notch pistols and I don't see the Taurus going to fail on what it is designed to do. Nor the Ruger.

Click to expand...

Indeed. I don't think anyone here is saying that the companies are incapable of making some guns that function. But they are budget guns for budget prices, with budget reliability. One way around that though is to not train (with anyone reputable or otherwise). Keep the round count low and the chance of failure follows. But that's hardly worth the while IMO. If yours varies that's all good.

psyopspec said:

As is your wont. And I don't care that you don't care, for whatever that's worth.



That's random behavior indeed, and not what most reasonable shooters would expect from someone worthwhile. Who did you see teaching that way?



Indeed. I don't think anyone here is saying that the companies are incapable of making some guns that function. But they are budget guns for budget prices, with budget reliability. One way around that though is to not train (with anyone reputable or otherwise). Keep the round count low and the chance of failure follows. But that's hardly worth the while IMO. If yours varies that's all good.

Click to expand...

Budget Reliability? I'm thinking you mean as far as running it through a torture test. Something like MAC does to certain semi's? That I have not seen done by any of the Youtube gun testing gurus (MAC, TFBTV, Sootch00, etc). It would make for an interesting video that I would definitely watch.

Apart from that, both have them have fired every time I've pulled the trigger. I would say that I am at around 500 bullets through both of them with not issues.

Now, when it comes to reloading, I will say that the Taurus G3 has a shorter COAL than the Ruger. The Ruger will accept bullets with larger OGIVE's and the Taurus will not. But I've only come across one particular bullet where this was an issue. In Taurus' defense, that same bullet would not function in an M&P. Comparing it to other bullets from different makers, The bullet was a little fat.

psyopspec said:

As is your wont. And I don't care that you don't care, for whatever that's worth.



That's random behavior indeed, and not what most reasonable shooters would expect from someone worthwhile. Who did you see teaching that way?



Indeed. I don't think anyone here is saying that the companies are incapable of making some guns that function. But they are budget guns for budget prices, with budget reliability. One way around that though is to not train (with anyone reputable or otherwise). Keep the round count low and the chance of failure follows. But that's hardly worth the while IMO. If yours varies that's all good.

Click to expand...

I agree. Taurus is the Harbor Freight of firearms. There is a certainly a market for such but it is in people's best interest to know what they are buying and if it will most likely suit their needs or not. I would not be surprised if the "average" Taurus firearm is fired less than a couple hundred rounds in it's lifetime and though they are generally reasonably reliable they are not longer term top tier reliable or durable but again that is OK if that suits a users more modest needs for their intended use.

I shot 200 NATO spec rounds in my Taurus G3 on its first range trip. No failures of any kind and good accuracy for the price. I can agree it is probably not made to shoot tens thousands rounds without some failures but I can say it is a pretty good designed pistol and for the price it is well built.
As I said I already have what are supposed to be 9mm top tier pistols to put thousands rounds on them and I felt no guilty to add a Taurus in my little collection because I'm not a snob when talking about firearms as I respect and fear them all for what they are capable to do.

Crazy Horse said:

Budget Reliability? I'm thinking you mean as far as running it through a torture test. Something like MAC does to certain semi's? That I have not seen done by any of the Youtube gun testing gurus (MAC, TFBTV, Sootch00, etc). It would make for an interesting video that I would definitely watch.

Apart from that, both have them have fired every time I've pulled the trigger. I would say that I am at around 500 bullets through both of them with not issues.

Now, when it comes to reloading, I will say that the Taurus G3 has a shorter COAL than the Ruger. The Ruger will accept bullets with larger OGIVE's and the Taurus will not. But I've only come across one particular bullet where this was an issue. In Taurus' defense, that same bullet would not function in an M&P. Comparing it to other bullets from different makers, The bullet was a little fat.

Click to expand...

I'm not necessarily talking about a torture test, although it doesn't hurt to know if a gun could hold up to abuse at the far end of the bell curve if that should happen.

I'm mostly referring to high round counts. I prefer to buy pistols that I can own, shoot, and carry for several years into round counts of tens of thousands. Assuming it's a gun I own for defensive purposes, 500 rounds is a minimal break in for me (and I prefer 1k, with at least 200 of those being the preferred carry round).

My [gun] has been fine for [XXX] rounds isn't in contention with what I'm saying, at all. I'm not arguing that your Ruger or Taurus can't function, or even function well. Heck, my Ruger LCP has been fine. I've had failures with Glocks, Berrettas, and Colts, had a SIG P-series that was a lemon out of the box, and broken an extractor on an HK. Unless Odin himself cast your gun in the forges of Asgard, it was made by humans and it will fail eventually. I'm not saying X brand fails and Y brand doesn't. I'm saying that high round count shooters tend to gravitate toward high round count pistols (often that can also stand up to more abuse, to your point). Taurus and Ruger tend not to be those pistols (my LCP sees maybe 50-100 rounds per year). And that's perfectly okay.

5-SHOTS said:

I shot 200 NATO spec rounds in my Taurus G3 on its first range trip. No failures of any kind and good accuracy for the price. I can agree it is probably not made to shoot tens thousands rounds without some failures but I can say it is a pretty good designed pistol and for the price it is well built.
As I said I already have what are supposed to be 9mm top tier pistols to put thousands rounds on them and I felt no guilty to add a Taurus in my little collection because I'm not a snob when talking about firearms as I respect and fear them all for what they are capable to do.

Click to expand...

None of what you've said is in contention in any way with what I've said -- see my other reply above. Glad you've had a good experience, hope it stays that way.

I purchased the Taurus Millennium G2 PT111 four years ago from Whittaker Guns for 184.99 + 12.99 S&H

I thought the gun was a good deal for under $200.00

I look at the the G3 and the G3C going for $330.00 + now and I don't think that's a good deal.

For just a little bit more there are much better guns out there from manufacturers such as Ruger, Canik and SAR.

My only Taurus is a revolver and the chambers are undersized, require reaming in order to load certain brands of factory ammunition. Ironically enough, the rifled barrel is okay. How hard is it to use a correct drill bit? It's a little comical. But nothing is broken and it was cheap.