I stumbled across that video as I was doing some research tonight. I immediately jumped to this forum to see what I could learn about that gun. How new is it? I notice that nobody else responded. Is it even out there yet?

No one on this forum seems to have any interest in it.

Check out this forum:

http://www.rugerforum.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3765

WM

Yea they're out. Saw reviews on other boards.

Double stacked, polymer framed, striker fired 9mm.

AT one time (10 or 20 years ago), that might have been interesting. I guess some Ruger fans will buy them. It's probably a pretty decent pistol. No where near as ugly as the rest of the Ruger center fire pistols.

What I am hearing is their having feeding problems with them. Lots of jams. Think I would wait about a year or so if I wanted one.

Originally Posted by Baldy

What I am hearing is their having feeding problems with them. Lots of jams. Think I would wait about a year or so if I wanted one.

Thats interesting I have heard the same thing about the P345. My P94 has never had a failure of any kind so the issues it's surprising to me although Ruger hasn't been into the plastic pistol making all that long.

Originally Posted by TerryP

Thats interesting I have heard the same thing about the P345. My P94 has never had a failure of any kind so the issues it's surprising to me although Ruger hasn't been into the plastic pistol making all that long.

Ruger will get it worked out I am sure if there is a big problem. Heard it at a gun shop and down at the range. Different people at different times makes think think something might be up. Most new guns have to get the kinks out like anyting else.

I have one of the first P345's and it feeds anything I put through it. I don't reload, but have used several HP's and Ball and it has never malfunctioned. I would buy one without hesitation.

I held one of these 9mms today at a guns how. The backstrap is made of rubber - it's too "sticky" compared to the rest of the polymer frame. And, its shaped strange. I really didn't like that part of it - but the rest seemed interesting.

I was just looking at one at the gun store. You almost have to have fingertips of steel to operate it. Everything had to be pushed on so hard it hurt my fingers. The take-down of it was a little to tricky, you have to have something to push the pin through with then pull it out. They redesigned the way the magazine release works also. It rotates about half a turn instead of sliding out like the older models. While pulling the trigger it felt like they threw it in the sand then handed it to me. It was very comfy to hang on to though, very comfy for me at least.

Jeff Quinn got his hands on one and here is his report:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SR9.htm

Both my brother & I purchased one of the new SR9's & took them to the range. I cleaned mine before shooting it & brother did not.

Flawless is the word that I would use for both with both ball and JHP's.

The mag's are a bit of a pain to load but they are beginning to load more smoothly with use. I use the uplula universal magazine loader and they are no problem other than a couple of tight spots.

The trigger is not to be compared with either my Sig's or Kimber's but then I would not expect it to be. The trigger is ok and it too is beginning to smooth out with use.

All in all, I believe that Ruger may have a winner on their hands and in mine. Easy to shoot well.

Here's John Farnam's initial take on it, for what it's worth: http://www.defense-training.com/quips/23Oct07.html.

Originally Posted by Baldy

What I am hearing is their having feeding problems with them. Lots of jams. Think I would wait about a year or so if I wanted one.

I read in a magazine on an airplane last week that the writer went to Arizona and ran 12,000 rounds without cleaning through a brand new, out of the box SR9 with zero (0) problems.

He was/is an anti-Ruger guy but was impressed with the gun.

Well I am by no means against Rugers as the last one I bought was 1981 model and I paid a hefty price for it. I am just relaying some gossip I heard from two different sorces. I am looking at this model myself is the only reason I paid any attention to them at all. I also just got done reading the same test article on them and I think I would beleive that over gun shop gossip any day.

Roadrnnr69: Sir; I've read several reports of similar experiences at RugerForum.com. 1,200-3,500-10,000 by different authors. All seemed impressed with how the testing was and still is going. Trigger grittiness was the number 1 complaint or grumble. Seems to work itself out after approx.400rds.
I try and find and read all the reports, only a couple have had problems feeding, or magazine ?dropping? I have no idea what that means.

I haven't fired one yet but I do like the reports I've read so far. I would like to try one at the range if the shop has a rental available.
I looks like a nice gun at a good price

Nice in black I think...

for the money i would buy a glock. or a xd.

I think any new model is going to have some growing pains. That is why I wait until I buy something that is new. I handled an SR9 the other day and I liked it. It's very thin and the back strap is reversible. One side is arched and the other is flat. It has a magazine safety, but that is easily disabled by the owner, or so they say. It's a pretty small package for a 17+1 pistol. It's a lot less blocky than a Glock or an XD and I think the design shows promise once the initial problems are worked out. All new guns have them.

There are now 3 SR9 being shot by my self and family members. Believe me when I tell you... NO PROBLEMS, PERIOD.

Originally Posted by Hogwild45

There are now 3 SR9 being shot by my self and family members. Believe me when I tell you... NO PROBLEMS, PERIOD.

Over time that seems to be the prevailing opinion that it fires without problems. I also understand if the mag disconnect is removed then the problem with dry firing without a mag in place goes away as well. The SR9 is moving up the list of got to have even though I'm not a 9MM fan.

Mine has been great to date. No problems of any kind. Unlike everyone else who has them, I'm not crazy about how it feels in my hand. Of my Rugers, I like the feel of the KP345 the best. Anyway, it is more accurate than it needs to be and functions pefectly so far. I removed the magazine safety, not because of problems, but because I don't like them.

Originally Posted by bophi

for the money i would buy a glock. or a xd.

...Or, M&P in .45 ACP. It operates smooth as silk and is a very nice gun. Although the M&P is going for $50. to $100. more, that is a gun the SR-9 will compete with. So the SR-9 better be a good'un. Gun Tests Magazine just did a comparison of the M&P, Glock 21, and H&K, and they we're very impressed with the M&P. They rated it ahead of the other two...and the H&K was twice the price of the M&P.
I try to keep an open mind when selecting guns. And I like Rugers (I have a Super Blackhawk and love it). But I'd probably wait a year or so instead taking the plunge for an SR-9 right now. It's going to have pretty stiff competition. I really like a very reliable, smooth operating, 9mm though. Although I'm a .45 ACP man, there's no arguing 9mm is a very versatile and useful caliber, especially with smaller, more concealable guns. I'll be watching for reports on the SR-9. Might be one I'd consider for my petite wife or just all-around cheap shootin'.


Tom