Debate: SR9c vs Glock 19 (for an SR9 owner)

[jhearne]

Size wise, the SR9 is to the G19 as the SR9c is to the G26. Just based off of size specs, not by what the manufacturer is labeling them. The comparable sized sub-compact M&P is a 9c I believe as well. Sig and Springfield term their poly guns the same way as Glock does, Full size, Compact, Sub Compact and even Tactical in some cases. IMHO the SR9c means that the SR9c is the more compact version of the SR9.

The LCP is a pocket pistol or 'mouse gun', and a single stack too. I think most any purpose built single stack carry gun shouldn't be compared to a double stack or Hi-Cap pistol, regardless of it's intended use.

Josh

 

[HuttoAg96]

I handled more than a few 9 mils before I settled on the Ruger. The way the glock and sr9/sr9c feel in your hand are totally different. I went with the sr9c because of the way it felt in my hand. I wasn't a fan of the glock at all, plus I wanted a thumb safety.

 

[buckshotshorty]

Isn't the SR9c a sub compact while the Glock 19 is a compact?

The way companies label the size of their guns is somewhat ubiquitous. Ruger lists the SR9C as compact, yet it is the exact same size as the Sig P250 subcompact. Is that because most of the guns in the Sig line are quite large to begin with? And, there are many other like examples. There doesn't seem to be any dimensional parameters that would make it one or the other; a company can label it as they see fit.


pb

 

[Texasgunner]

I handled more than a few 9 mils before I settled on the Ruger. The way the glock and sr9/sr9c feel in your hand are totally different. I went with the sr9c because of the way it felt in my hand. I wasn't a fan of the glock at all, plus I wanted a thumb safety.

That was a BIG factor on getting the wife one --
Also a deciding factor when i was trying to decide between my SR9 & Glock 17 8)

 

[Sonnytoo]

As Mike J said earlier, I've posted these before, but here is the link for the Glock 26 vs the SR9c. Note that the G19 is a full 1/2 inch longer than the G26.

http://rugerforum.net/ruger-pistols/214 ... -26-a.html

My SR9c has been a source of irritation to me, although I like the gun. I won't carry it until it is 100% for several hundred rounds.

As a p.s., I sold my G19 yrs ago, and kicked myself ever since. I am eyeing a G19 from a local gunsmith friend and will pick it up soon. I have or have had 8 Glocks over the last 20-30 yrs, never one lick of trouble.
Sonnytoo

 

[Sonnytoo]

I handled more than a few 9 mils before I settled on the Ruger. The way the glock and sr9/sr9c feel in your hand are totally different. I went with the sr9c because of the way it felt in my hand. I wasn't a fan of the glock at all, plus I wanted a thumb safety.

That was a BIG factor on getting the wife one --
Also a deciding factor when i was trying to decide between my SR9 & Glock 17 8)

Hey Texas, I like the thumb safety also, as I'm an old 1911 guy. But that gun's gotta be 100% or...
Sonnytoo

 

[Yosemite Sam]

I realize this is a G19 vs. SR9 discussion, but if you want a thumb safety on a reliable poly pistol, check out the S&W M&P series. No offense to Ruger, but I've heard of far less problems with the M&P than the SR9.

I like Glocks due to aftermarket support (parts, accessories), but have to admit the M&P looks to be a nicely styled, ergonomic, and reliable weapon.

-- Sam

 

[revhigh]

Yeah, the M&P's aren't bad looking and shoot OK ... but it's STILL a Smiff and Western .... and they're not allowed in my gunsafes. LOL.

REV

 

[Takedown]

I realize this is a G19 vs. SR9 discussion, but if you want a thumb safety on a reliable poly pistol, check out the S&W M&P series. No offense to Ruger, but I've heard of far less problems with the M&P than the SR9.

I like Glocks due to aftermarket support (parts, accessories), but have to admit the M&P looks to be a nicely styled, ergonomic, and reliable weapon.

-- Sam

I was debating the M&Pc v the SR9c until I saw how wide the thumb safety is on M&P, no thanks, Ruger did it right; thin and easy to operate.

 

[revhigh]

thin and easy to operate.

That's not what I've been hearing for the last several years ... I've heard too small and HARD to operate.

REV

 

[CanonLyles]

Don't get offended guys. :roll: To me if you can't fit your whole hand around the grip it's a sub. Something in the G19 size would be a compact.

Yep. It's very comparable to the G26 in terms of size from the pics that were posted here. My theory, if it was a compact, it would hold 13-15 rnds of 9mm.

 

[Mike J]

Unless I am badly mistaken Ruger actually considers the SR9 a compact. Ruger compacts tend to be really close to other companies full size models others are the P95 & the P345.

 

[ConradM]

Unless I am badly mistaken Ruger actually considers the SR9 a compact. Ruger compacts tend to be really close to other companies full size models others are the P95 & the P345.

I think they do... Cause it's not quite a full-size gun.

 

[Takedown]

I've always considered the G19 to be a mid-size frame with full size capacity. The G17 is full sized and comparable to the SR9. The SR9C is comparable in size to the G26 except a little thinner. I am not sure what you would consider the G26 to be, but whatever you choose to call it, the SR9C would be in the same category.

 

[revhigh]

I am not sure what you would consider the G26 to be, but whatever you choose to call it, the SR9C would be in the same category.

The G26 is generally considered to be a sub-compact, while the G19 is considered a compact, although I think the G19 is a 'large' compact. LOL

ERV

 

[Casual]

I think I'm gettin' dizzy....

 

[Texasgunner]

HUH :shock:

 

[buckshotshorty]

I have a G19 and an SR9C....Given that they have both been 100% reliable, I'd rather carry the Ruger. Even though the published width is the same, the Ruger's grip is thinner and carries better in my opinion.

 

[Anonymous]

The only reason I like the subcompact Glocks is since Glocks are so ugly, there's less to look at. :lol:

I'll also add that I find the SR9 safety about perfect. Very easy to sweep off with the thumb. Maybe not as easy to engage, but there really is no reason for it to be. I'll take the thinner profile over a big safety lever that is easier to engage, for no real good reason.

 

[revhigh]

The only reason I like the subcompact Glocks is since Glocks are so ugly, there's less to look at. :lol:

That's a good one 89, and I tend to agree, having a G26 !!

I WILL tell you though, that the G26 is very well known to be an ourageously accurate gun for what it is .... I know mine is. I didn't know that when I bought it, but since I've owned it and done even more research on it I've found that for some reason it is known to be able to shoot very, very tight groups for a subcompact pistol.

Here's mine, along with it's Ross pocket holster ... a great combination if you wear cargo pants with big pockets. Not so good for tight jeans LOL.

I really like the way the 26 is 'melted' to be anti snag for pocket carry, and the +2 extension matches the Glock finger grooves EXACTLY. Nice thing about Glocks is the accessories that are available for almost every single model. NOTE: No stupid piccatinny rail OR front slide serrations .... just as a compact pistol should be ... stippled and grooved exactly where it should be ... ya gotta give credit where credit is due ... they make a great tool.

REV