Got to handle a Ruger SR9 Thursday

[TN_Mike]

Our local gun shop and range has a brand new Ruger SR9 in the case and I got to handle it Thursday.

All I can say is, the grip is amazingly thin. I had read several articles on the gun before actually holding this one and I knew it was thin but you really don't understand fully what the authors are saying until you actually have one in your hand. It's amazingly thin for a gun with a double stack mag that holds 16 rounds.

Other than that, I wasn't real impressed. It isn't that different from any other polymer framed gun except for the thinness of the grip.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[citizen510]

I fondled one last week also and I have to agree with you, Mike. It was like a thin Glock with a thumb safety and just not that impressive. I do like the idea of having more than 8+1 but even with 2 extra 8 round mags, my single stack .45 has more grams of lead at 230 gr. per round than 2 17 round mags+1 of 115 gr. 9mm. Also, quality of placement would beat quantity of lead anyway.

On the other hand, at $529.00 it is tempting.

[kpw]

It is thin. Overall it had a decent feel. The trigger was a bit gritty and heavier than I like but, if it cleaned up easy enough, that wouldn't be much of an issue. Price was $409 and I was told it may come down a bit as supply increases. If it does, I think Ruger might sell a bunch of them.

[sisco]

Handled one at the gunshow yesterday; $320 at one table, $330 at another.

[Raider39a]

accuracy is subpar though as per capt. ayoob in a recent review in guns mag. can anyone out there verify how this pistol shoots?

also, wuz up with the large price difference? 300s vs. 500s.

[Seraph]

accuracy is subpar though as per capt. ayoob in a recent review in guns mag. can anyone out there verify how this pistol shoots?

also, wuz up with the large price difference? 300s vs. 500s.

I got in on the the first production run (had to buy a batch of them without even knowing what they were!). I immediately designated one of them as a range rental gun. Took it out of the box; fired two 17 round mags at a CM1 target, through a ragged hole at 7 yards. Moved the target out to 15 yards, and still kept all shots easily within the 10-ring. The trigger is nothing to write home about, but, if you can manage the trigger, the pistol certainly has mechanical accuracy potential. Anyway, I don't know about Ayoob, but I find I can do about this well with a lot of pistols that people claim are inaccurate. As for the ~$300 prices being quoted, these guns are either used, or are being liquidated at below dealer cost.

[sisco]

Handled one at the gunshow yesterday; $320 at one table, $330 at another.

My bad, they were $420 & $440. (I called one of the dealers to verify the price.) I looked at so many guns yesterday the prices got kinda blurred.

[Sergeant Mac]

A friend of mine bought one recently, and I got to fire it when we went to the range.

It IS very, very slim.

The trigger is a bit gritty, and "stacks" fairly heavily. It's not horrible, but it's nothing like a nice 1911 trigger. Slightly less pleasant than a factory Glock trigger, for that matter.

Accuracy seemed adequate, though this particular one had the sights a bit off - point of impact was about 3" left of point of aim at 7 yards. Groups were decent, though.

Between the two of us, we went through 150 rounds, and there wasn't even ONE malfunction.

Bottom line: reliable, accurate, and concealable - but not pleasant (to me)

[psychophipps]

I do have to say that I like how Ruger is sending these puppies out to the gun writers. You usually hear a gun rag report of a gun that was run through a custom gunsmith shop to be polished, tweaked and otherwise made to be a lot better than a stock factory model. Ruger is just ending out fresh-from-assembly guns if the trigger and sights reports are any indicator.