Ruger American pistol!?

[Old Dog]

this American is an evolutionary step beyond the SR9.

Yes, but hardly an evolutionary step beyond every other quality plastic pistol already out there ... simply resembles a cheaper PPQ/VP-9/320/M&P etc.

Denis, you're not working for Ruger now, are you? But, I got admit, it's the flippin' name the company chose that grates on me ...

(I'm still annoyed with Ruger for naming a rifle "American Rifle" -- just kinda presumptuous -- for me, at least, the "American Rifle" is a Winchester Model 70, and the "American Pistol" is the Colt 1911.)

 

[DPris]

Not working for Ruger now, or ever, just trying to give some context & clarification on this new model.

Did not say it was a revolutionary groundbreaking design.
It IS a step forward in Ruger's centerfire pistol line.

If you don't think it has anything to offer, don't spend your money on it.
Makes no difference to me, just make an informed choice.

I personally think it's an interesting entry in Ruger's pistol evolution.

The first P Series were robust, but budget guns.
The P345 was a slimmer & trimmer step, but still without features preferred by most professionals.
The SR9 family was a new departure, but still not really pro-grade.
The American is what I'd call Ruger's first "serious" attempt at a professional duty pistol.

They may not be leading the pack, but they are finally appearing to be "keeping up with the Joneses".
Denis

 

[Old Dog]

Hey, I'm not doggin' you, Denis, it's simply that I have been issued the M&P for a few years now, and am finally warming up to it (especially since the triggers and accuracy have become much improved); off-duty, I favor SIGs, and have recently jumped on the 320 bandwagon (sweet trigger, amazing accuracy, superb ergonomics). Likewise, I'm digging H&K's VP-9 a bit (pity this company doesn't offer factory night-sights). As far as Walthers go, I've no experience, but some credible people I know say its newer pistols are GTG as well.

I simply think Ruger is missing the boat trying to compete with some pretty good existing products when it should be working on improving its own offerings. Also, the fact that Ruger is known for using cast and MIM (to lower costs) on such a widespread basis isn't going to help them sell product to those who don't worry about the price point.

 

[danez71]

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

That's my feeling with all of the pistol gripped rifles.

It's great that those that want them have fifty-eleven slightly different flavors to choose from.

But it sucks that practically no new semi auto rifles have been developed with traditional stocks for about, what?, 10-15 yrs?

 

[qotsarock]

They seem a little heavy, but I'm sure they are sturdy.

 

[BearBrimstone]

I don't like the look, but I also don't dislike it. I will probably try to shoot one sometime soon and may end up with one depending upon how that goes.

 

[DPris]

Dog,
If you prefer the M&P, stick with your M&P.

For many years, people pushed Ruger to build a 1911.
In a world where there was a bucket full of 1911 makers, domestic & foreign.
When Ruger did, theirs wasn't anything groundbreaking, or anything "better" than what most other makers were putting out, but those are still selling for the company.

My American sample's on the way, so have not handled it yet.
I have looked all over YouTube (not as THE definitive answer, but for initial research on what others are saying) & found a T&E that was quite abusive. The pistol did well.

The features are sound, the pistol has what I call a pro-grade set-up as far as I can see so far, it is a step forward for Ruger, and time will tell us more than non-hands-on Internet gun forum chatter on a gun not even really in circulation yet.

Just put it in perspective.

It's kinda like the photography world, where you have "consumer" grade & "professional" grade.
$90 consumer grade point & shoot pocket cameras offer convenience & a "good enough" picture for a major market share among those who want to save vacation memories & post Facebook stuff. And not spend much money.

If you want better resolution, more features, a longer life, and more capability for a better end-quality result, you squeeze your wallet hard & buy professional grade cameras at ten times the price.

While the price analogy doesn't apply as directly to the SR9 & the American, the rest does.

Materials-wise, with a plastic frame Ruger loses no points where that's what the market is buying.

Cast-wise, today a non-issue since Ruger's done quite well with their cast parts for several decades, they're hardly alone in using castings, and I don't even know if the American has any yet.
If it does, and the pistol was designed with military acceptance criteria in mind, I wouldn't worry about cast parts.

MIMs? EVERBODY's using MIMs.

And I'd say this pistol is a clear indication that Ruger IS improving its offerings.

It may sell, it may tank.
We'll see.

If you don't want one, don't buy one.
Denis

 

[ColoradoShooter77]

For the same money, I'd rather have the XD Mod2 full size. It doesn't look hideous for one thing.

 

[Geldarr]

Ruger American pistol

I held the 9mm model at Palmetto State Armory in Columbia, SC yesterday.

Some quick impressions:

*It felt nice in the hand (had the medium backstrap installed), sat low, and felt solid.
*It looked better in person. The metal finish was very even and nice. It looks much less wonky that it does in pictures. I think the triangle shape behind the mag release throws off the look in pictures.
*It was fairly light, and felt very similar to holding a full size pistol with an aluminum frame. No grip flex when you squeezed it.
*The sight picture is very clear and sharp. Three dot configuration (could be a plus or minus, depending on what you prefer).
*The magazine release button was a little odd feeling, but I'm sure one could get used to it.
*Trigger was fine by me. I don't own any other striker fired pistols, so I can't compare, but I was expecting worse (from what some have mentioned online).

Both the 9mm and .45acp were priced at $539. Price should drop a bit in a few months when it's not the "latest/greatest." I'm very tempted to pick one up eventually, especially if I can get a compact grip-frame down the road a-la-Sig 320/250.

 

[Panzerschwein]

I'm really liking this new Ruger AmeraPistol.

It's real game changer IMHO, and far better than the GLAWK.

 

[PabloJ]

I haven't seen a post on this yet but here are pics of Ruger's new polymer handgun. I am a big Ruger fan, especially their SR line of autoloaders. This gun however, os extremely ugly to me. I hope it shoots well and feels good in the hand. Personally, I would take an SR9E.


http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...riker-fired-ruger-american-pistol-9mm-45-acp/

It is copy of Taurus PT24/7 utilizing SIG Sauer slide take down lever. The Taurus uses Glock-type slide take down system. What you have in them pics is American Glockurus.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Ok, so what do we have?

1) a short recoil operated pistol based on the SIG/Sauer action. 50 year old tech. Lots of 'em made.
2) 17 shots of 9x19. Cartridge goes back to 1902 and 17 autos go back 50 years. Lots of 'em made.
3) polymer frame. Tech goes back 50 years. Lots of 'em made.

So what is the great leap forward?

Deaf

 

[MAKster]

It is copy of Taurus PT24/7 utilizing SIG Sauer slide take down lever. The Taurus uses Glock-type slide take down system. What you have in them pics is American Glockurus.

The Taurus 24/7 is DA/SA. So they don't seem to be related at all.

 

[USAF_Vet]

I'm really liking this new Ruger AmeraPistol.

It's real game changer IMHO, and far better than the GLAWK.

What does this gun do that a dozen other guns don't? How is this a game changer? What do you see that I don't?

It's not a horrible pistol by look and feel, but I don't see what is new or different about this pistol.

I'm not a Glock fan, but to say a gun that was released a few days ago is far better than anything else is a huge leap of faith with zero facts supporting the claim. I'd rather buy a Glock over the Ruger American. Tried, true, proven, and cheaper. My money would be better spent elsewhere, leaving both the Ruger and the Glock for the next buyers.

 

[Slater]

The bargain-priced (sub-$400) Turkish guns seem to be gaining a following and their quality is by all accounts pretty good. Not sure how Ruger would compete with those.

 

[Delford]

Kentucky Gun did a review on YouTube. The owner liked its out of the box performance. Since my first ever pistol is the P345, which was affordable and problem free, I'm interested in the $433 KG price and I like the.45 version but would like it compact. I'm a Canon DSLR guy so give me the right tool for a good price and I'll shoot like crazy whether with a T2i or a P345. It's pretty clear that RoninPA and other posters and the KG video are right that Ruger built it Made in USA for the military trials. It's another option that will fit many people's hands at a reasonable price point.

 

[mgmorden]

Hickok45 posted on Facebook that he has one in hand and has been firing it. He hadn't filmed the video for it yet but he did mention that he hadn't run across any major negatives so far.

 

[mgmorden]

I got a chance to handle one of these at a gunshow today. Marked price was $439. Felt solid - didn't feel uncomfortable to me but that was just holding it a bit.

I will say that for a poly gun it was HEAVY. Probably heavier than I would have liked TBH. Overall though not bad. I may end up with one eventually.

 

[RON in PA]

I'll reboot this thread because I picked up a 9mm RAP this past week at a LGS for $450 and put 350 rounds of assorted ammo thru it. No malfunctions of any kind shooting aluminum case, steel case and brass case ammo, all ball. Novack sights are very visible to my ancient eyes. The gun did shoot a bit low, even with the front sight dot placed over target. Shot at 7 yards only, I don't think as accurate as my PPQ, VP9 or 320.

I left the medium back-strap on. The ergonomics are fine, the gun is a soft shooter and gets back on target quickly. None of the thumb problems reported by MAC in his video.

Trigger pull was a bit heavy compared to a PPQ or VP9, but perhaps a good idea for a service type weapon. No creep or grittiness. Reset a bit long. Not as good as a SIG 320.

IMHO the pistol to make a direct comparison to is the SIG 320 because of the frame-removable chassis system. Ruger has gone the interchangeable back-strap route while SIG has gone the interchangeable frame route. The Ruger chassis seems to give the impression of better manufacture, the parts look more refined than the SIG which is primarily of stamped construction. The Ruger is probably of MIM and/or cast construction. As to whether or not one is actually superior to the other is debatable.