Different angles of the new Ruger KP345

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Boats

member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
3,705
Location
Oregon
KP345PR-Lt.-Angle.jpg


KP345PR-Rt.jpg


It looks pretty flat to me.
 
Thanks for sharing the pics!

Reduced grip size for smaller hands or better concealment? Still, it looks like Ruger continues its trend of slimming down the once bulky P-85 design but the real question is the technical refinements that followed with each successive model.

One thing is that the magazine release is a departure from the original P-85 design. It's no longer ambidextrious and it appears that Ruger has forsaken that feature in favor of slimming down the firearm. It certainly is more othordox than its predecessor.

Since the extractor remains on the right side of the slide, I take it that the thingy atop the slide is a "loaded chamber indicator" that was inspired by lawsuits. I wonder if it's held in place by the rear sight? There's no discernable pins on the slide (except for the one that secures the extractor). It also appears to have a detachable back strap (perhaps various types for different hands?).

One good thing is the front sight. Note how the base of the front sight is as wide as the front sight itself. That's good. It provides more surface area for the sight pusher to push against when the sight is changed. I had a Sig sight "snap" off on me once (while using a Sig sight pusher) and I had to hammer the base out the old fashion way.
 
The light rail looks nicely integrated.

If only they'd make one with a frame mounted, down for fire safety, I might give a crap.
 
There's not too much I can say I don't like about it. But, that safety is the cheapest looking thing I have seen, especially from the side view. I assume this is a SA/DA?
 
I'm sure it's an SA/DA like most other Ruger autoloading pistols, except the DAO models.

I want a .45 ACP for concealed carry and have been thinking about a G36. I might consider this one instead.
 
Nice looking gun. I tried to buy one then my dealer reminded me with Ruger's track recordm, these will be on the shelves in 2006. I will stick with my 1911 SA Mil Spec.
 
Lobotmy Boy,

I would consider this P345 also. One thing about Ruger I really like is that you get alot for your money. Most all their guns are accurate and built to go thru WWIII and IV both. Out of all my handguns, I don't have a .45acp. I am waiting on the rumored Springfield XD-45's and would look at this Ruger also.
 
I have always liked Rugers. I've owned more Rugers than all other brands put together and have never once had a problem with them. My brother just bought a 10/22 that needed some magazine tweaking out of the box to shoot cheap ammo, but that's the worst I've experienced.

If Springfield came out with an XD in .45 ACP, I'd give that some serious consideration. The XD is a nice gun and a good value.
 
If the XD-45 is only going to be in GAP, I am going to give this one a long look as my first polymer purchase in a long while.
 
I've never been a fan of Ruger centerfire pistols (thought I've recommended them on many occasions) but the grip on this one looks like it might almost feel like a semi-ergonomic gun rather than a brick.

Now, maybe something with a 6+1 capacity, about a 3.5" barrel and a smooth 6# DAO trigger and no funky safety would be a very worthy carry piece.

Speaking of Ruger triggers, I rarely look at new Rugers... how are the triggers lately? Still unrealistically heavy or are they better now days?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top