taddster21
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 10
Hey, what are your opinions on a Ruger P95 9mm for a inexpensive handgun? Thanks in advance.
Ruger P95 9mm
- Thread starter taddster21
- Start date
- Status
Flyincedar
Member
Ruger makes a good product. I used to have a P95. They are pretty blocky, and not my personal favorite, but it is a well made, and as far as my personal one, a reliable handgun
DougW
Member
I also used to have a P95. Wonderful and reliable. I would not heitate to buy another.
Probably the hottest selling 9 in the shop....relatively cheap (around 339), totally reliable, high capacity, sturdy (don't know why they made it that big), and of course, Ruger's totally wonderful warranty service. We average two a week going out the door and have not had one back for repairs yet.
The Lone Haranguer
Member
I can only offer an opinion as I haven't shot one, but this is a "good value for the money" handgun, at the low end of first quality handguns - not as nice as, e.g., a Glock or Sig, but a far cry from a Hi-Point. (Not that HP's are necessarily that bad, but they are purposely made to meet a low price point.)
Excellent value, I think its not blocky at all. Very reliable, accurate, durable. I have been shooting the P95s for over 12 years and the new modifications they made in the last 5 or so have been great. Very good lines, the softest shooting 9mm I have ever encountered and the warranty dept. is second to none. If you were to buy one you would be well armed my friend. I'm getting another as soon as I get some cash together...whenever the heck that is! 
I agree with easy...what are you waiting for...go get one and see for yourself.
I agree with easy...what are you waiting for...go get one and see for yourself.1border4manu
Member
I had a Ruger P95DC, loved it. But someone decided they needed it more than me. I now have a XDm 9mm.
I bought mine because I didn't realize how much I needed one until I walked by the case and saw the $229 price tag on it. Used, from the largest gun store within 75 miles. The price told me that this was the pistol I needed to own for carry on the days where the gun wasn't allowed to go with me to the place I was going to be. In other words, it was my "carry gun" for the days when the law forces me to leave it locked in the car to be stolen.
I bought it and here's everything I think about it, good and bad.
I'll do the negatives first:
Whoever designed the finish on the grip needs his head checked. It's slicker than a wet bar of soap. For a while I was using the Hogue hand-all universal grip sleeve, but I don't care for the bulky finger grooves in that sleeve, so I removed it after about 1,200 rounds. (point being-- I have it a fair shake, it wasn't a 5-minute idea) I will either go with some kind of 3M style grip tape or maybe a thin bicycle tire inner tube. But something simply has to improve that "slicker 'n snot on a doorknob" plastic grip. IMO, it's easily the worst trait of this pistol.
Next up is the sights... I find them quite small and I would love to have something better for slow, aimed shooting. But this is merely a footnote, not any kind of deal breaker. The sights work, they just aren't great. Here I could probably add aesthetics-- it's an ugly duck, this pistol. Not a big deal for a working gun that serves a role. But if beauty is in the eye of the beholder, you'd have to be a near-sighted one-eyed guy with contacts, tri-focals and a monocle to find this pistol attractive because on almost any terms you'd judge it, it's ugly.
I love to shoot small groups with slow, aimed fire. I realize that many people don't enjoy this kind of shooting and many people don't bother to work this sort of thing in to their "constant training regiment" and that's okay, that's what makes us all different. This pistol is difficult to shoot small groups with... because of the shorter sight radius, the poor sights and the average trigger. Once again, for the money and the role it fits for me, not at all a deal breaker. But it's still a point I have to make.
On the positive side, I don't know many guns that deliver this kind of durability, reliability and simplicity for this low amount of money. The pistols runs and never puts up a fuss. When I first bought it, I tried it with some factory defense ammo and some jacketed handloads. When those went down without a hitch, I force-fed it 300 rounds of 125gr cast lead round nose handloads. It never faltered and it ate all of them.
It's bulky and not at all the best choice for concealed carry, but it will work when that is asked of it. It costs so little that if it ends up stolen from my car, I'd lose less sleep than if I lost my EDC. With Mec-Gar 17-round flush fitting magazines, it's a whole lot of pistol in a mid-size space for really low dollars.
Depending on your needs, it's damn near a must-buy.
I bought it and here's everything I think about it, good and bad.
I'll do the negatives first:
Whoever designed the finish on the grip needs his head checked. It's slicker than a wet bar of soap. For a while I was using the Hogue hand-all universal grip sleeve, but I don't care for the bulky finger grooves in that sleeve, so I removed it after about 1,200 rounds. (point being-- I have it a fair shake, it wasn't a 5-minute idea) I will either go with some kind of 3M style grip tape or maybe a thin bicycle tire inner tube. But something simply has to improve that "slicker 'n snot on a doorknob" plastic grip. IMO, it's easily the worst trait of this pistol.
Next up is the sights... I find them quite small and I would love to have something better for slow, aimed shooting. But this is merely a footnote, not any kind of deal breaker. The sights work, they just aren't great. Here I could probably add aesthetics-- it's an ugly duck, this pistol. Not a big deal for a working gun that serves a role. But if beauty is in the eye of the beholder, you'd have to be a near-sighted one-eyed guy with contacts, tri-focals and a monocle to find this pistol attractive because on almost any terms you'd judge it, it's ugly.
I love to shoot small groups with slow, aimed fire. I realize that many people don't enjoy this kind of shooting and many people don't bother to work this sort of thing in to their "constant training regiment" and that's okay, that's what makes us all different. This pistol is difficult to shoot small groups with... because of the shorter sight radius, the poor sights and the average trigger. Once again, for the money and the role it fits for me, not at all a deal breaker. But it's still a point I have to make.
On the positive side, I don't know many guns that deliver this kind of durability, reliability and simplicity for this low amount of money. The pistols runs and never puts up a fuss. When I first bought it, I tried it with some factory defense ammo and some jacketed handloads. When those went down without a hitch, I force-fed it 300 rounds of 125gr cast lead round nose handloads. It never faltered and it ate all of them.
It's bulky and not at all the best choice for concealed carry, but it will work when that is asked of it. It costs so little that if it ends up stolen from my car, I'd lose less sleep than if I lost my EDC. With Mec-Gar 17-round flush fitting magazines, it's a whole lot of pistol in a mid-size space for really low dollars.
Depending on your needs, it's damn near a must-buy.
I wonder if you have the older model P95 which was somewhat slick when wet. The newer design is slightly stippled and allows for better purchase, IMO.
Hmm...I have found the sights to work quite well.
Ok, we get it, you don't like the looks of the gun. I have my glasses on and I think it looks great, 'nuff said.
Its regimen, no "t" needed here.
Many people, including myself, greatly enjoy slow aimed fire; it is at the core of being able to fire rapidly and accurately. Also, I am able to shoot 1 inch groups off-hand at 21 feet (7 yards) with little effort.
Shorter sight radius? Compared to what? Compared to a Glock 19 its virtually the same. Compared to a mouse gun, its great. Compared to an AR its not as good. I find this an odd complaint unless you are shooting rifles and this is your first handgun.
Lastly, I agree with your final assessment...lol...but you might have scared away the OP...naw, its too good of a deal!!
Good critique of my post. In my defense, I offer this!
1) Mine is likely older... it's a crime bill era pistol that came with the ugly 10-rd factory mags. I believe the serial number dates it to 1994. So if the newer ones have better work on the grip-- it's for a darn good reason!
2) Looks are subjective in everything, I suppose... but there are some things that most folks can agree on no matter how subjective looks obviously are. If you polled every gun enthusiast across the board about the looks of a Ruger P95, I think the results would lean my way. But that doesn't make your opinion invalid.
3) regimen/regiment -- actually did a quick google on that because it didn't look correct to me either when I wrote it. After the quick web search, I was no closer to an answer. In the end, I figured out why it didn't look right: I spent too much time looking at my P95D yesterday and my eyesight is still fouled up!
4) Shorter sight radius compared to the paper punchers I typically shoot when I'm shooting at paper for groups. I shoot a long slide 1911, a 6-inch L-frame, a 7.5" Blackhawk, so these midsize and smaller pistols just aren't my cup of tea when it comes to slow, aimed fire. Obviously, you and your P95 would outshoot me if we went up against each other. But I do pretty well with some of the handguns that I have, know and love. And I can easily, easily outshoot my P95D with my carry gun, and my carry gun is even smaller. There could be a dozen reasons for that... but the bottom line seems to be (for me) that I don't shoot my P95D nearly as well as I wish I could. And that's after the aforementioned 1,200 rounds, so I should hope by this time I was familiar enough with it to be able shoot small groups.
So I'm blaming the pistol, and you can't stop me!
(even if we both know that it's not likely to be the pistols fault)
1) Mine is likely older... it's a crime bill era pistol that came with the ugly 10-rd factory mags. I believe the serial number dates it to 1994. So if the newer ones have better work on the grip-- it's for a darn good reason!
2) Looks are subjective in everything, I suppose... but there are some things that most folks can agree on no matter how subjective looks obviously are. If you polled every gun enthusiast across the board about the looks of a Ruger P95, I think the results would lean my way. But that doesn't make your opinion invalid.
3) regimen/regiment -- actually did a quick google on that because it didn't look correct to me either when I wrote it. After the quick web search, I was no closer to an answer. In the end, I figured out why it didn't look right: I spent too much time looking at my P95D yesterday and my eyesight is still fouled up!
4) Shorter sight radius compared to the paper punchers I typically shoot when I'm shooting at paper for groups. I shoot a long slide 1911, a 6-inch L-frame, a 7.5" Blackhawk, so these midsize and smaller pistols just aren't my cup of tea when it comes to slow, aimed fire. Obviously, you and your P95 would outshoot me if we went up against each other. But I do pretty well with some of the handguns that I have, know and love. And I can easily, easily outshoot my P95D with my carry gun, and my carry gun is even smaller. There could be a dozen reasons for that... but the bottom line seems to be (for me) that I don't shoot my P95D nearly as well as I wish I could. And that's after the aforementioned 1,200 rounds, so I should hope by this time I was familiar enough with it to be able shoot small groups.
So I'm blaming the pistol, and you can't stop me!
(even if we both know that it's not likely to be the pistols fault)jimk0512
Member
The Ruger P95 is a reliable inexpensive handgun. I used to own one, found it was too big for me for everyday carry, and sold it to pay for a Kahr CW9. My P95 always went bang, didn't care what 9mm ammo I fed it, and was easy to clean. For me it is an excellent handgun for range practice, home/car defense, and concealed carry in the winter when I am wearing enough clothes to easily conceal it. It has a DA/SA action. I don't think it is the best choice for shooting sports like IPSC or IDPA. I think it is a good choice for the 80% of people who own handguns.
taddster21
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 10
Thanks a lot everybody! Very helpful!
DustyVermonter
Member
I have one, I have a sentimental weakness for it and have considered selling it a number of times, but just can't bring myself to put it out to pasture.
Its not in my carry roatation or anything as it is a little on the "clunky" side, but it is a very comfortable feeling gun even though it is a little thick.
Had I not put a pachmayr rubber grip on it years ago, I probably would have sold it, but that grip totally makes that gun in my opinion, without it my overall opinion of the gun's fit and feel plummets.
Ruger P95 sales would skyrocket if the pachmayr gun glove came standard with the P95's.
Its not in my carry roatation or anything as it is a little on the "clunky" side, but it is a very comfortable feeling gun even though it is a little thick.
Had I not put a pachmayr rubber grip on it years ago, I probably would have sold it, but that grip totally makes that gun in my opinion, without it my overall opinion of the gun's fit and feel plummets.
Ruger P95 sales would skyrocket if the pachmayr gun glove came standard with the P95's.
marv
Member
Personally I don't find the P95DC any uglier or blockier than any of the other of today's plastic guns. Maybe even better looking than some. Mine is utterly reliable. Anything I put in the mag goes out the spout. A piece of bike innertube took care of the slick grip.
NoobCannon
Member
It was one of my considerations when I was looking into a budget handgun. Like others here, I wasn't keen on the appearance, but it does look a helluva lot better than a Hi Point, and IMO, a Glock(I don't like pistols that look like they were put together using legos). That being said, its reliability and no-frills attitude were one of the reasons it was on my compare list. Heck, when I finally talked my dad into looking for a pistol, one of the first we looked at was the P95 because its price, NEW, was cheaper than the Taurus I got used. He turned it down because it didn't fit his hand properly.
That's the important thing when looking for a gun. Reliability and price are key factors as well, but if it isn't comfortable in your hand, you won't want to shoot it as much. My Taurus feels great in my hand, so I feel like shooting it as often as I can.
Back on topic, a Ruger P-Series is like a Brick. Not necessarily pretty, but it will get its job done no matter what!
That's the important thing when looking for a gun. Reliability and price are key factors as well, but if it isn't comfortable in your hand, you won't want to shoot it as much. My Taurus feels great in my hand, so I feel like shooting it as often as I can.
Back on topic, a Ruger P-Series is like a Brick. Not necessarily pretty, but it will get its job done no matter what!
Yarddog
Member
GREAT Gun shoots & shoots, Never a problem, Accuratcy is as good as I am ; )
Y/D
Y/D
easyg
Member
I had one for a while....
I didn't like the magazine release at all...it's small and less sure than the typical release.
You don't press inward so much as forward.
I also didn't care for the decocker/safety design and location.
I'm also not such a big fan of SA/DA pistols in general.
It's a good pistol for the price.
But I think the SR series is definitely a step up and not for much more money.
I didn't like the magazine release at all...it's small and less sure than the typical release.
You don't press inward so much as forward.
I also didn't care for the decocker/safety design and location.
I'm also not such a big fan of SA/DA pistols in general.
It's a good pistol for the price.
But I think the SR series is definitely a step up and not for much more money.
Last edited:
easyg
Member
double post.
mgmorden
Member
easyg: is that just an inner-tube on your P95's grip or is it something more purpose built? I would like to put a little something on my P95's grip as well, but I've already got one of the Hogue slip-on's on my CZ-52's grip and I don't care for the finger grooves nor the palm swells.
Off-topic, but that grip extension on the SR9c is quite nifty. I didn't know that even came with them until this weekend when I was watching some of hickok45's videos and he mentioned it. That actually took the SR9c up into a possible purchase for me as I've been looking for something small for CCW (I've got an LCP for pocket carry but I'd like something for my belt under a jacket for colder months), but when just shooting at the range I like a a more full grip.
I swear I'm not a Ruger fan-boy but it seems like despite my best efforts I keep ending up with more Rugers.
Off-topic, but that grip extension on the SR9c is quite nifty. I didn't know that even came with them until this weekend when I was watching some of hickok45's videos and he mentioned it. That actually took the SR9c up into a possible purchase for me as I've been looking for something small for CCW (I've got an LCP for pocket carry but I'd like something for my belt under a jacket for colder months), but when just shooting at the range I like a a more full grip.
I swear I'm not a Ruger fan-boy but it seems like despite my best efforts I keep ending up with more Rugers
.JR47
Member
While the magazine release is a forward motion, it's in the exact same place as the SR9C.
The decocker/safety location is in the same place as virtually all new pistols.
Not being a fan of DA/SA is a personal opinion that has nothing to do with others use of a gun.
The MSRP of the P95 is $393-424. The MSRP n the SR9C is $525.00. Even discounting them for street prices leaves the SR9C about $100 more.
We have a pair of P95DCs, one blue, one a K series. Both have thousands of rounds through them without a single problem. They will shoot ammo that they like into 2" @ 25 yards when I do my part.
For a Home defense gun, truck gun, or glove-box gun in the car, they can't be beat for the mix of reliability, accuracy, and price. The SR9C is more for CCW, IMHO.
HoosierQ
Member
I have the 95DC which I like a lot. Mine was used very sparingly and was "during ban" so it came with two 10-rounders. I sprung for two Ruger branded 15-rounders. Mine has the smooth plastic rather than the stippled.
Really like the de-cocker. The trigger is very odd to me...i cannot get a decent pull with the fingertip and must use the crook of my finger...which seems odd given the gun's "blocky" reputation.
Trigger notwithstanding...and which really doesn't bother me much...I am very pleased with it. I plan on getting an SR9c which is getting great reviews and seems to be pleasing even the Ruger haters.
Really like the de-cocker. The trigger is very odd to me...i cannot get a decent pull with the fingertip and must use the crook of my finger...which seems odd given the gun's "blocky" reputation.
Trigger notwithstanding...and which really doesn't bother me much...I am very pleased with it. I plan on getting an SR9c which is getting great reviews and seems to be pleasing even the Ruger haters.
easyg
Member
It's just a piece of inner-tube.
But I think that it does make the handle less slippery.
easyg
Member
While the location of the magazine release is virtually the same, the one on the P95 is smaller, requires a forward push, and just doesn't work as well.
This is probably why Ruger decided not to use that style mag release on it's more recent designs.
And this is probably why no other gun maker that I know of has copied that style release.
Not true.
Alot of new pistols don't have a manual safety or a decocker at all (like Kahrs, Glocks, XDs, M&Ps).
And plenty of new pistols have a manual safety that is on the frame and not on the slide that clicks downward to fire (like Ruger SR series, some XDs, some M&Ps, FNs, some CZs, 1911, and Hi Power pistols).
This is much more intuitive when drawing to fire rather than an upward click on the slide.
And some have decockers on the frame like Sigs.
But I don't think that many new pistols have a decocker/safety on the slide like the P95 uses.
Beretta 92s do, but they're nothing new.
True.
But I thought the original poster wanted our personal opinions.
It wouldn't be much of a gun forum if no one was allowed to give their opinion.
I'm not exactly rolling in dough, but an additional $100 bucks is not that much more when it comes to handguns.
- Status
