Ruger Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've overlooked the SR as kind of the budget gun among similar offerings from other companies and never taken it seriously. As I'm currently looking for something to use as a dedicated vehicle pistol the polymer framed, striker fired guns have my attention. They are reasonably priced, good performing alternatives to pistols I have costing twice as much or more.

My previous favorite was the Springfield XD in the service size. I like the grip safety in particular as it's a logical device on a single-action striker with no manual safety. While it has a substancial feel to it, there is also substancial mass in it. It's wide, tall, blocky and almost clumsy feeling compared to the SR. It does point well has a nice trigger feel, yet has that slippery grip indicative of others in the class. Easy to fix with stick on panels, but that really is a band aid that looks terrible and degrades rather quickly.

The S&W M&P series looks promising, but the grip shape leaves a lot to be desired. No doubt it is a quality, dependable firearm, but the entire grip frame just doesn't work for me. An ambi slide release that is useless is a feature that has always puzzled me.

Lastly is the Glock. The grip angle has always been all wrong for me, but the latest factory "beavertail" grip adapters coming with the gen 4 fixes that quite nicely. My main issue with these firearms is that the 2nd gen model I fired years ago had the sharpest recoil of any 9mm I've fired. I'd have to shoot a 4th gen to see how that one handles. The lack of an additional safety is debatable. Left with the stock trigger I'm comfortable with it. Even with the adapter the grip leaves something to be desired. The main selling point with Glock seems to be the "lore" and popularity of the pistol combined with a massive aftermarket following, and cheap factory magazines.

That brings me back to the SR. With an upgraded connector it'd make a great glovebox/range gun. The grip is perfect as is, with a texture that affords a good purchase (how hard is it for other manufacturers to offer a checkered surface on a polymer gun!). It is slim and elegant in appearance; having a less substancial feel than the others.

All said, I'm tempted to buy another decocker CZ...but I don't know if I'd be comfortable leaving that in the car :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,096 Posts
I'd go with the SR series. Outside of Ruger, the Sig SP2022 in 9mm or .40S&W is very nice. But to leave it in a car is a shame, maybe some in the used revolver market? What about the Ruger P95?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,595 Posts
I liked the one I had, but it was a while back and plagued with QC issues. If they have addressed those, I'd recommend a close look, anyway. I'm happy with my M&P, but nothing's perfect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,531 Posts
I was just wondering wich SR you were referring to.
All of them in general or one specific?
SR22, SR9, SR9C, SR40, SR40C, SR45, SR1911 or the SR1911CMD.
I guess when in doubt buy them all!:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
LOVE my SR9 and am getting ready to get an SR22 - hope next week!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,984 Posts
I have nothing, but good things to say about my SR9. Nearly 5,000 rounds now without a single malfunction of any kind. It eats any ammo I feed it without a hickup. Great pistols!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
460 Posts
I've overlooked the SR as kind of the budget gun among similar offerings from other companies and never taken it seriously. As I'm currently looking for something to use as a dedicated vehicle pistol the polymer framed, striker fired guns have my attention. They are reasonably priced, good performing alternatives to pistols I have costing twice as much or more.

My previous favorite was the Springfield XD in the service size. I like the grip safety in particular as it's a logical device on a single-action striker with no manual safety. While it has a substancial feel to it, there is also substancial mass in it. It's wide, tall, blocky and almost clumsy feeling compared to the SR. It does point well has a nice trigger feel, yet has that slippery grip indicative of others in the class. Easy to fix with stick on panels, but that really is a band aid that looks terrible and degrades rather quickly.

The S&W M&P series looks promising, but the grip shape leaves a lot to be desired. No doubt it is a quality, dependable firearm, but the entire grip frame just doesn't work for me. An ambi slide release that is useless is a feature that has always puzzled me.

Lastly is the Glock. The grip angle has always been all wrong for me, but the latest factory "beavertail" grip adapters coming with the gen 4 fixes that quite nicely. My main issue with these firearms is that the 2nd gen model I fired years ago had the sharpest recoil of any 9mm I've fired. I'd have to shoot a 4th gen to see how that one handles. The lack of an additional safety is debatable. Left with the stock trigger I'm comfortable with it. Even with the adapter the grip leaves something to be desired. The main selling point with Glock seems to be the "lore" and popularity of the pistol combined with a massive aftermarket following, and cheap factory magazines.

That brings me back to the SR. With an upgraded connector it'd make a great glovebox/range gun. The grip is perfect as is, with a texture that affords a good purchase (how hard is it for other manufacturers to offer a checkered surface on a polymer gun!). It is slim and elegant in appearance; having a less substancial feel than the others.

All said, I'm tempted to buy another decocker CZ...but I don't know if I'd be comfortable leaving that in the car :p
I actually disliked Ruger's SR series before I ever held one much less shot one. That changed when I went to my LGS to buy a certain other brand of compact 9MM and they were out of them. Reluctantly I picked up a SR9c and purchased it mostly because that was what he had at the time. Now after carrying it and shooting it I like it more than my other carry pistols. It just feels right and carries well. As for buying another decocker CZ; if you can find one you better jump on it. I was talking to a CZ rep and he said they were not going to be anywhere near fulfilling US orders this year. I have a PO1 and was trying to get a PO7 or a PO6 in but they are few and far between. Those selling on GB are bringing extortion prices. I also wanted a 527 in .17 Hornet but that ain't happening this year either.:(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,970 Posts
I have the SS SR40 and would not trade it of any of the guns you mentioned, its solid and shoots like a dream, i have fed every type of ammo thru her without a complaint :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I don't know whether to go 9mm or .40S&W. I like the forty better as a defensive cartridge, the nine better as a target load. Shooting a couple hundred full powered forty rounds at a time can beat the hands and wrists up a bit. A nine I could shoot all day with little fatigue.

I'd have to shoot a Glock gen 4 and a Ruger side by side to see if I'd still go Ruger (that's how I picked a P89 over a G17 many years ago). Nothing else really has my interest.

The CZ's have completely dried up locally in the last few months here as well. It seems like word of them getting hard to find started a buying frenzy. No problem, I'm not a big fan of redundancy. There is only one type of firearm I have two of, and those AR15's are worlds apart (one being a pistol build). The lightweight of the polymer guns is nice as well. The polymer CZ's feel all wrong to me. The compact frame size also feels best, and I already have one of those.

Another thing that makes the Ruger look more enticing is that I can get one for about $100 less than the Glock. The Glock would likely stay stock (save for an extended slide release), and the Ruger would get a trigger upgrade.

Thanks for the input.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
460 Posts
I'm confused. My Glocks feel like they need a trigger upgrade and my SR9c does not. Anyway, I'd opt for the .40 if you have other 9MM pistols. The full size SR40 is about as soft shooting as any I have shot. Either the Glock or the Ruger will make you a good gun; just get the one you like the best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,105 Posts
That's an easy call........Hi Point. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,733 Posts
The trigger on my SR45 very good and the recoil is manageable. No soreness in the hand after 200 rounds. Shoots accurately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I have an SR9c that I really like. Eats everything I feed it, handles great, fits my hand well. I also have an S&W M&P 40 that I bought used that I really like. The 40 is larger, but shoots well. I bought the SR9c for CCW when Illinois finally gets it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
That's an easy call........Hi Point.
Which do you recommend :confused:

They all look so good :rolleyes:

My Glocks feel like they need a trigger upgrade and my SR9c does not.
That's not a surprise. The 9c has a better trigger from the factory than the standard SR9. I'm not sure if they did the same with the 40c.
 

·
Spellign Bee Champ
Joined
·
15,320 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
I would suggest looking at a Rock Island Armory 1911-a1 compact and stick an 8rd mag in it or the Ruger SR45, SR9c would be a great candidate, but you would end up packing it and put whatever your packing now in the cabinet..


The only problem I would see is if you get any of the firearms I mentioned above, they can easily replace the more expensive pistols you already own.. If you shoot the SR45 you will own more SR series guns before its over with and same goes for the Rock Island.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
You have the right idea, shoot them side by side and go from there. I have been a long time die-hard Glock guy for years. They just work no matter what I did to them. I shot IPSC for a few years with my modified G22 and a stock G20 and no matter how hard I beat them, they never failed. I do not care for the Gen4's at all though....

With that said, I recently picked up an SR9C and an SR45 and can honestly say this SR series has won me over. I did completely disassemble the upper before shooting and cleaned all of the factory grease out, polished some key points, lubed things lightly with Break Free LCP and then reassembled.

Took to the range and shot only reloads, the SR9C has 1500 rounds through it and the SR45 has about 800. No FTF or FTE and both are very accurate. More accurate than the stock Glocks IMHO. My G22 has a KKM Precision barrel in it and the SR series is just as accurate. And they are built very well from what I have seen when I took them apart. I like the safety set up but dislike the loaded round indicator. This will be the only mod I make - cut down the loaded round indicator a bit so it barely sticks up. My only other beef is magazine cost and lack of availability, but this should change after they have been out for a while.

From a cost standpoint, the SR series is a winner hands down. IMO they are jsut as good as the Glock and run about $100+ less. Hope this helps....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,709 Posts
Which do you recommend :confused:

They all look so good :rolleyes:


That's not a surprise. The 9c has a better trigger from the factory than the standard SR9. I'm not sure if they did the same with the 40c.
For the past 1-2 years, the full sized SR series striker models have all had the same trigger as the SR9c.

That trigger is better than the stock glock trigger, IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
mndoggie is right IMO, the stock trigger beats the Glock by a fair margin. I have ran the ghost 3.5# connectors as well and the SR9C is just as good.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top