Has the Ruger SR-9 Tanked?

[JP from Phoenix]

i've seen them for 460 bucks, they will probably go down to like 400 i'm guessing. IMO they seem pretty nice off of looks and feel alone, good for smaller hands. I'm gonna hold out and see if they make them in .40 and .45

 

[akanotken]

They are 399 here in the stores (without the first run knife).

I loved the feel, very slim, started thinking of taking it home. Then I dry fired it.

I'm guessing one day they'll sell used for ~300 and if so I'd likely pick one up for a glove box gun.

Or, some smith will work magic on the trigger and have a lot of business on his hands, including mine ....

I visited another gunstore and the clerk said that a lot of folks liked them till they tried the trigger ....

 

[Boarhunter]

The trigger put me off until I took the gun to the range. Going through the motions of practicing more "practical" shooting, I did not even notice the rough trigger pull. And now, after 1000 rounds through the gun, the pull has smoothed up considerably.

Now, the trigger pull will never resemble the sweet pull of my Kimber Custom Aegis or my Kimber Tac Pro, nor will the SR-9 ever be a precision bulls-eye gun, but for carry and IDPA purposes, it suits me just fine.

Boarhunter

 

[schmeky]

Now, the trigger pull will never resemble the sweet pull of my Kimber Custom Aegis or my Kimber Tac Pro

Agreed. But as long as Ruger has been making firearms and doing research into the buying habits of consumers, I would have thought the SR-9 would have a least a smooth trigger.

I feel Ruger will alienate a lot of buyers by introducing this pistol with a scratchy, gritty, trigger feel. What is the first thing a shooting "enthusiast" does when handling a firearm? Check the trigger pull.

So now, that $399.00 selling price, for some of us, will require additional cash to get the trigger right, when Ruger could have, no, should have done this from the inception.

Just my .02 cents worth.

 

[atblis]

Trigger

The trigger is what keeps me from considering one.

 

[Liko81]

+1 to above opinions that it's too early to tell and that the SR-9 is doing well for a new, newly-released design. There have been some problems reported; the most chronic is the magazine interlock, which is simply a pin block and if repeatedly impacted will deform and the gun will not fire. That sounds serious to me, especially when buying an "unsealed" weapon from under a gun counter; you simply have no way to know how many people have dry-fired the gun, and the warnings Ruger gives about this flaw are buried in the instruction manual.

Apart from that, there have been scattered reports of FTE/FTC and a few reports of trigger problems (slop, play, grit). Practically all of these can be considered refinement issues that Ruger can simply tweak given field reports of what they need to change. Every gun in existence and most other consumer products have had this phase after their introduction into the market.

 

[edwardyoung]

"The thing has been out for less than a month. It's moving, Ruger says they're getting orders, the guns have shown up coast to coast, and I'd hardly say the model has tanked.
Denis"

Glad to see you're still at it

 

[Boarhunter]

Something else to keep in mind on this issue.

The gun was released by Ruger without any pre-distribution publicity, marketing, or advertising. And the first wave of available guns were "limited edition" packages costing approximately $100 more than the regular production. All that being the case, I suggest the gun may be moving out the doors at a pretty good pace.

Boarhunter

 

[Anna's Dad]

I hope not, I bought mine about 2 weeks ago and haven't even shot it yet! I'd be bummed if it "tanked" before I even make it to the range.

 

[FR Baseball]

I'll be getting one as soon as I get the money. I didn't think the trigger was bad at all when I played with one at the gunstore. Normally I shoot 1911's so I place the pad of my finger on the trigger face, and when I tried that technique on the SR-9 the trigger sucked. However, when I placed the first joint of my trigger finger on the trigger face the trigger felt suprisingly good. Hope that makes sense.

 

[schmeky]

Ruger should have trumped the Glock in nearly every aspect. Glocks are a tough act to follow, but Ruger should have created a better pistol than a Glock, after all, Ruger has had nearly 2 decades to build a better poly-gun.

Ruger needed to give us a very good reason to buy an SR series pistol. I fear they have instead, validated why we should continue buying Glocks.

Incidentally, I love Rugers and have owned many versions of Ruger pistols and still do. I really want to see the SR-9 succeed. But installing a .50 cent trigger on a $400.00 pistol makes me want to b_tch slap the engineer (or bean counter) responsible.

 

[zamboxl]

is there a 40 s&w planned

 

[Blarelli]

SR9's are down to $350 here.

 

[DPris]

Hi Edwardy,
Good to hear from you again.
Yup, still at it. Took a few minutes off from shilling for Cimarron, S&W, and Krebs to get back to shilling for Ruger. So many guns, so little shilling time!


Zam,
Ruger won't admit to any other calibers specifically, but I'd be surprised if you don't see a .40 in the SR9. Unofficially, as in "We can't really say yes right now, but we won't say no" & so on, you should see a compact version of the 9mm SR9 on the horizon.

Denis