Tropical Z
Member
Which do you think would last the longest in a brutal winner takes all torture test?
Raw toughness over the long haul-Glock 21 vs Ruger P97..
- Thread starter Tropical Z
- Start date
- Status
10-Ring
Member
Just from all the torture tests I've seen involving Glocks, I'd vote Glock on this one.
Mark IV Series 80
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 207
I would say, that as shipped, with no replacement parts allowed, the Ruger would win.
Big Mike
Member
Ruger,
That being said as the G21 I owned was not 100% reliable. Mike
That being said as the G21 I owned was not 100% reliable. Mike
9x45
Member
Any of you Ruger owner's shot more than 80,000 rounds thru your gun?
No, I didn't think so.
But that's nothing for a Glock 21 owner.... I only speak for myself based on actual competitive experience.
Firestar, what? you shoud know that even when a frame rail breaks off, the gun doesn't quit running! I doubt you have seen them break, not only that, I know you have never seen them break, why? well because Glock owners don't even noticeteh broken part until they clean their guns. The Glock doesn't stop running from a broken frame rail.... Even in one in twenty-five thousand guns. Thats more than all the Ruger autos ever MADE!
Edited by moderator.
Does that make Glock sights the same joke as a Ruger Boat Anchor?
No, I didn't think so.
But that's nothing for a Glock 21 owner.... I only speak for myself based on actual competitive experience.
Firestar, what? you shoud know that even when a frame rail breaks off, the gun doesn't quit running! I doubt you have seen them break, not only that, I know you have never seen them break, why? well because Glock owners don't even noticeteh broken part until they clean their guns. The Glock doesn't stop running from a broken frame rail.... Even in one in twenty-five thousand guns. Thats more than all the Ruger autos ever MADE!
Edited by moderator.
Does that make Glock sights the same joke as a Ruger Boat Anchor?
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark IV Series 80
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 207
Originally posted by 9x45:
In the five years, 1993-1997, Ruger produced more than 1 Million semi-auto pistols:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firearms Production by Type and Manufacturer, 1997
Source: The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms' Annual Firearms Manufacturing and Export Report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pistol Production
Manufacturer_____Location_____1993_____1994_____1995 _____1996_____1997
Sturm, Ruger___Prescott, AZ__280,305___299,647___197,489___134,791___174,627
Your statement is not correct.
In the five years, 1993-1997, Ruger produced more than 1 Million semi-auto pistols:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firearms Production by Type and Manufacturer, 1997
Source: The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms' Annual Firearms Manufacturing and Export Report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pistol Production
Manufacturer_____Location_____1993_____1994_____1995 _____1996_____1997
Sturm, Ruger___Prescott, AZ__280,305___299,647___197,489___134,791___174,627
triggertime
Member
Provided that the slide stop lever doesn't back out or the magazine release fails, the Ruger P97 would win.
People need to remember to remove all the packing grease before shooting a brand new Ruger pistol. If they don't, they'll eventually have trigger problems requiring a trip back to the factory.
People need to remember to remove all the packing grease before shooting a brand new Ruger pistol. If they don't, they'll eventually have trigger problems requiring a trip back to the factory.
Mylhouse
Member
9x45,
Mark IV beat me to it, but I was agreeing with your post until you started posting ridiculous and false information about the number of Ruger pistols made. From that point on, your argument lost credibility.
Mark IV beat me to it, but I was agreeing with your post until you started posting ridiculous and false information about the number of Ruger pistols made. From that point on, your argument lost credibility.
You lost me right from the beginning. While it would be highly unusal for someone to shoot 80,000 rounds out of a privately owned handgun, it is not out of the question. Saying that you did that with no parts breakage or wear on the parts to the point of not working is more than I am willing to believe without seeing it myself. I have a lot of ammo through one of my handguns, not 80k but 20-30k. But I am not going to tell you that I didn't need ejectors, extractors, and springs to get there.
9x45 wrote,
"But that's nothing for a Glock 21 owner.... I only speak for myself based on actual competitive experience.
Firestar, what? you shoud know that even when a frame rail breaks off, the gun doesn't quit running! I doubt you have seen them break, not only that, I know you have never seen them break, why? well because Glock owners don't even noticeteh broken part until they clean their guns. The Glock doesn't stop running from a broken frame rail.... Even in one in twenty-five thousand guns. Thats more than all the Ruger autos ever MADE!
Firestar, you are not telling the truth! You are 'RugeRing' It's the same as lying, like your comment about Glock plastic sights, of course they are plastic, so what"
____________________________________________________
I forgot that Glocks are indestructable and they never jam.
I have seen Glocks jam and break parts and I have seen Ruger autos jam and break parts. I have seen more Glocks fail than Rugers so that is why I think Ruger are more durable.
I have seen two different Glocks with the frame rails (tabs) broken. In one gun it never effected reliability but in the other one it may have caused serveral jams. We can't tell for sure because the owner didn't know when it broke and had problems with it for a while.
I doubt you have ever SEEN 80,000 rounds of ammo let alone fired 80,000 rounds of ammo. Go to bed little one.
"But that's nothing for a Glock 21 owner.... I only speak for myself based on actual competitive experience.
Firestar, what? you shoud know that even when a frame rail breaks off, the gun doesn't quit running! I doubt you have seen them break, not only that, I know you have never seen them break, why? well because Glock owners don't even noticeteh broken part until they clean their guns. The Glock doesn't stop running from a broken frame rail.... Even in one in twenty-five thousand guns. Thats more than all the Ruger autos ever MADE!
Firestar, you are not telling the truth! You are 'RugeRing' It's the same as lying, like your comment about Glock plastic sights, of course they are plastic, so what"
____________________________________________________
I forgot that Glocks are indestructable and they never jam.
I have seen Glocks jam and break parts and I have seen Ruger autos jam and break parts. I have seen more Glocks fail than Rugers so that is why I think Ruger are more durable.I have seen two different Glocks with the frame rails (tabs) broken. In one gun it never effected reliability but in the other one it may have caused serveral jams. We can't tell for sure because the owner didn't know when it broke and had problems with it for a while.
I doubt you have ever SEEN 80,000 rounds of ammo let alone fired 80,000 rounds of ammo. Go to bed little one.
Beorn
Member
You know, I am going through a similar dilema myself. You see, I want a .45 for the CDP division of IDPA. I will eventually get some 1911 style something-or-other, but I wanted something different first. Something less expensive that I could either trade in, sell off, or barter up.
The guns I started looking at were the Ruger P90 and P97, the Glock 21 (I already have, and am very pleased with, a 17), or an EAA Witness. All were relatively inexspensive and seemed to be popular enough. I wasn't certain I could afford a G21, so I was looking into the Rugers.
Nobody has ever said anything bad about either gun to me. They have their plusses and minuses to be sure; all guns do. If they made the perfect gun, we'd only buy that one and be satisfied (as many on THR have paraphrased from time to time).
I think they are both fine weapons. If the magazine ban sunsets next year, then the G21 might be more fun for the "pray and spray" clientelle. Some people don't like either because of the ergonomics for some hands. Others think they both just look ugly. I don't personally care what they look like. I'm concerned with what they shoot like.
This was supposed to be a simple question, eh Tropical Z?
I've seen 80,000 rounds of ammunition, but I sure as heck haven't fired that much. Come to think of it, I've only fired about 500 rounds since December! Man! I gotta get cracking! That's 2000 rounds per year... Aw man! I gotta shoot for another 25 or so years to eclipse the 80K mark. I'll be 57 or so years old by then. I feel old already!
Now, is that all with the same gun? Because I can't really be certain how much I've shot with each type... And then there are the guns I don't own anymore; one's that belong to my Dad...
Do rifles and shotguns count?
Yep, Tropical... this could have been a simple question alright.
The guns I started looking at were the Ruger P90 and P97, the Glock 21 (I already have, and am very pleased with, a 17), or an EAA Witness. All were relatively inexspensive and seemed to be popular enough. I wasn't certain I could afford a G21, so I was looking into the Rugers.
Nobody has ever said anything bad about either gun to me. They have their plusses and minuses to be sure; all guns do. If they made the perfect gun, we'd only buy that one and be satisfied (as many on THR have paraphrased from time to time).
I think they are both fine weapons. If the magazine ban sunsets next year, then the G21 might be more fun for the "pray and spray" clientelle. Some people don't like either because of the ergonomics for some hands. Others think they both just look ugly. I don't personally care what they look like. I'm concerned with what they shoot like.
This was supposed to be a simple question, eh Tropical Z?
I've seen 80,000 rounds of ammunition, but I sure as heck haven't fired that much. Come to think of it, I've only fired about 500 rounds since December! Man! I gotta get cracking! That's 2000 rounds per year... Aw man! I gotta shoot for another 25 or so years to eclipse the 80K mark. I'll be 57 or so years old by then. I feel old already!
Now, is that all with the same gun? Because I can't really be certain how much I've shot with each type... And then there are the guns I don't own anymore; one's that belong to my Dad...
Do rifles and shotguns count?
Yep, Tropical... this could have been a simple question alright.
Tropical Z
Member
WOW!
Island Beretta
Member
This is not even close:
The Ruger P97.
The Ruger P97.
cslinger
Member
I have owned a Glock 30 and a P97
I sold the Glock and still have the P97.
Both are built like tanks, both had about the same frequency of errors and both had their weak points.
The Rugers weak point seems to be it's extractor, although I have yet to have a problem. The Glock seemed to have a fragile trigger, never did have a problem though.
Now I don't think I can even fathom 80,000 rounds but in my limited experience they are both spectacular firearms. The Ruger was more accurate but I think I would give the edge in durability to the Glock, since at least the G17 has proven it will go through hell and back. I have read somewhere that Ruger also did a similar torture test with the newer P series guns and they did very well but I don't remember where I read this and cannot verify.
So it seems to me that they are both spectacular guns. I have never had a slide stop issue with my Ruger P97 and I only get the occasional shell ejected straight back at me. I think the Ruger is a better gun for the money. I don't think the Glock gives the same value for the dollar.
For what it's worth my Ruger has loosend up a bit and isn't finished as well on the inside surfaces as the Glock but it's stainless finish still looks as good as the day I bought it. When I sold the Glock it was showing some holster wear. The Tennifer finish may or may not be more resistent to the elements but I cannot say either way.
So I think I would give the Glock a very very slight edge in durability but only because of the torture tests that have been done on the G17. My Ruger just keeps on chucking lead and even has a good trigger to boot, no kidding, really.
BTW, the only reason I sold the Glock is because I just don't like the trigger system. Too light. I prefer true DA/SA guns. I also didn't like the take down routine.
You won't go wrong either way. Both are tough as nails.
I have a buddy with a P95 that we have decided will feed rocks if we sprinkled the right amount of gun powder in. His gun is a torture test gun. He rarely cleans it and had the captive recoil spring come apart at some point and the thing still never malfunctioned. The only malfunctions he has had were with a really cheap aftermarket, abused, magazine. He has many thousands through this gun. 80K no but probably around 5,000-6,000 rounds.
Chris
I sold the Glock and still have the P97.
Both are built like tanks, both had about the same frequency of errors and both had their weak points.
The Rugers weak point seems to be it's extractor, although I have yet to have a problem. The Glock seemed to have a fragile trigger, never did have a problem though.
Now I don't think I can even fathom 80,000 rounds but in my limited experience they are both spectacular firearms. The Ruger was more accurate but I think I would give the edge in durability to the Glock, since at least the G17 has proven it will go through hell and back. I have read somewhere that Ruger also did a similar torture test with the newer P series guns and they did very well but I don't remember where I read this and cannot verify.
So it seems to me that they are both spectacular guns. I have never had a slide stop issue with my Ruger P97 and I only get the occasional shell ejected straight back at me. I think the Ruger is a better gun for the money. I don't think the Glock gives the same value for the dollar.
For what it's worth my Ruger has loosend up a bit and isn't finished as well on the inside surfaces as the Glock but it's stainless finish still looks as good as the day I bought it. When I sold the Glock it was showing some holster wear. The Tennifer finish may or may not be more resistent to the elements but I cannot say either way.
So I think I would give the Glock a very very slight edge in durability but only because of the torture tests that have been done on the G17. My Ruger just keeps on chucking lead and even has a good trigger to boot, no kidding, really.
BTW, the only reason I sold the Glock is because I just don't like the trigger system. Too light. I prefer true DA/SA guns. I also didn't like the take down routine.
You won't go wrong either way. Both are tough as nails.
I have a buddy with a P95 that we have decided will feed rocks if we sprinkled the right amount of gun powder in. His gun is a torture test gun. He rarely cleans it and had the captive recoil spring come apart at some point and the thing still never malfunctioned. The only malfunctions he has had were with a really cheap aftermarket, abused, magazine. He has many thousands through this gun. 80K no but probably around 5,000-6,000 rounds.
Chris
G. Glock
Member
Through 15 years of Glocking, I've never had trouble with rails or plastic sights. I don't know of anybody in real life who has either. It's interesting that this always comes up on the bulletin boards as some hugh Glock negative.
For the life of me I don't see what the big deal is about polymer sights; after all, the whole frame is made of the stuff. duh.
For the life of me I don't see what the big deal is about polymer sights; after all, the whole frame is made of the stuff. duh.
cslinger
Member
For the record, I never had problems with my sights or rails either, but I have actually seen somebody who has had a front sight break off. It could happen to anybody though, just as likely to happen to my Walther P99.
Chris
I think people get really hung up on a firearms perceived toughness and like cars people become very very brand loyal so anytime something goes wrong with the other brand people tend to blow it out of proportion. Any good quality handgun made today should do you just fine.
I am a SIG kind of guy but SIGs have cracked frames in the past.
Glocks have had their frame rail problems recently.
Ruger has had the slide stop issue.
S&W had the SIGMA
HK has brittle firing pins
Kimber has apparently affronted all that is good and natural with MIM parts and the series II safety.
Colt has made crap for years.
Springfield 1911 magazines suck
and the list goes on.
The point is all of these are excellent firearms manufacturers who make extremely good quality products, that "gasp" have mechanical problems from time to time. Chances are if you are a gun nut and buy enough guns you might even come across a lemon but I think chances are better that you will get a very good product from any of the above and other manufacturers.
Buy either the Glock or Ruger with confidence. One plus with the Ruger, though, you won't be tempted to buy those super high priced pre ban full capacity magazines.
Chris
I think people get really hung up on a firearms perceived toughness and like cars people become very very brand loyal so anytime something goes wrong with the other brand people tend to blow it out of proportion. Any good quality handgun made today should do you just fine.
I am a SIG kind of guy but SIGs have cracked frames in the past.
Glocks have had their frame rail problems recently.
Ruger has had the slide stop issue.
S&W had the SIGMA
HK has brittle firing pins
Kimber has apparently affronted all that is good and natural with MIM parts and the series II safety.
Colt has made crap for years.
Springfield 1911 magazines suck
and the list goes on.
The point is all of these are excellent firearms manufacturers who make extremely good quality products, that "gasp" have mechanical problems from time to time. Chances are if you are a gun nut and buy enough guns you might even come across a lemon but I think chances are better that you will get a very good product from any of the above and other manufacturers.
Buy either the Glock or Ruger with confidence. One plus with the Ruger, though, you won't be tempted to buy those super high priced pre ban full capacity magazines.
Rob96
Member
Have read here there of Ruger P-90's going over 100,000 rounds at rental ranges, and you know the upkeep they get. Other rental ranges report that other makers require trips back to the manufacturer for repair before the Rugers.
one-shot-one
Member
own a g26 and a p95dc.if grabbing a pistol from the safe for immediate defense it would be the p95. i carry the g21 because it is more concelable.
Minute_Of_Torso
Member
Gotta say I'd have to go with the Glock because of all the torture tests that have been performed in the past.
I own both and IMHO they're both great tools, take care of either one and it'll last many, many years.
As for the 80K rounds . . . hmmm. The last time I was shooting my Glock on the moon (when I was a Space Ranger, you know), I put over 200,000 rounds through my Glock 21 in just under an hour and it functioned perfectly even after getting hit with a Vulcan death ray.
Sorry for the satire, but I still am amazed at the "Glocks are indestructible and defy all the known laws of materials science and physics" crowd. I personally love the fit, feel, and function of a Glock but I'm realistic enough to know that any human-designed piece of machinery will eventually fail. NOTHING is indestructible.
I own both and IMHO they're both great tools, take care of either one and it'll last many, many years.
As for the 80K rounds . . . hmmm. The last time I was shooting my Glock on the moon (when I was a Space Ranger, you know), I put over 200,000 rounds through my Glock 21 in just under an hour and it functioned perfectly even after getting hit with a Vulcan death ray.
Sorry for the satire, but I still am amazed at the "Glocks are indestructible and defy all the known laws of materials science and physics" crowd. I personally love the fit, feel, and function of a Glock but I'm realistic enough to know that any human-designed piece of machinery will eventually fail. NOTHING is indestructible.
- Status
