Why Don't LEOs use ruger SR9/SR9C?

[Rick Courtright]

And those who do rarely fire their weapons, so the perceived superiority of Glock is nothing more than internet marketing. And if Ruger had beaten Glock to the punch back in the late 80's and basically given away weapons to police departments, they might have had the monopoly that Glock has now.

But until then, the Glock and the SR9 are essentially the same thing. Mass produced striker fired weapons that launch a bullet when they need to. Neither one is that superior to the other.

Hi,

I don't really have a dog in this fight, as Mr. Fifer, in a moment of inspired wisdom, pulled all the Ruger auto pistols off the CA market, including the Mk III .22s. Fortunately, a CZ-75B 9mm with an added Kadet .22 conversion has kept me quite happy. And I can still get a boatload of guns from other mfrs to duplicate just about anything I couldn't get new from Ruger if I wanted to. Those who've followed my thoughts on Ruger's QC will understand why I said "if"...

That being said, the Internet's full of stories, many of which may or may not have actually happened, others which might have but are quite likely "enhanced" with retellings. Among them:

When Glocks were first gaining ground, there was a lot of commotion about how "plastic guns won't hold up", so a story went around that Glock put one or more of their guns thru a 500,000 round "longevity test". As I recall the chatter at the time, the gun, or guns as the case may be, went thru it and still worked fine.

I dunno if Glock really did that or not, but I've also read of a G17 used as a range rental that went ~500,000 rounds, at which time it broke a slide. That was replaced and the writer said the original frame had ~750,000 rounds when his range closed. True or not?

Anyone ever hear of such a test, by the factory or an end user, involving a Ruger center fire pistol, either a metal or a plastic one?

Rick C

 

[Biggfoot44]

Glock waasn't the only mfg to use agressive pricing to gain LW mrket share. Back in the dau Berreyta USA outfitted the (IIRC) Ct State Police wirh M92's for free in exchange for the rights to proclaim so in advertising.

I don't know about 500000 rd tests , but in the '80s I personslly saw a rental G17 that had 100K O O. Plus rds thru it.

 

[GunnyGene]

I own five SR series pistols. all five have several thousand downrange, all five have been stellar. zero issues, good accuracy, reliability and user friendly. my Glocks feel like I am holding a cement block, great pistols but blocky and not really as reliable as my Rugers have been. the M&P, the XD's, the Kimbers all come out of the safe now and then, fine weapons, but I like my Rugers. what a great country we live in that we can even have this discussion!

May not be able to have this kind of discussion for much longer: The comment period for this proposed regulation revision is over, and the final rule will be forthcoming shortly. And if you think somebody gets to vote on this, you're wrong.

International Traffic in Arms: Definitions of Defense Services, Technical Data, and Public Domain; Definition of Product of Fundamental Research; Electronic Transmission and Storage of Technical Data; and Related Definitions

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=DOS-2015-0023

Details here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOS-2015-0023-0001

 

[kbm6893]

Anybody who thinks that police agencies pick their weapons based on the kick ass reliability of a Glock is dreaming. The best deal is what gets the nod. And if every officer was given an allowance to buy the weapon of his choice, you would see far fewer Glocks in police holsters.

When the NYPD went to the 9MM, officers had to buy their own weapons. We had a choice of the SIG 226, the Smith 5946, and the Glock 19. All came with three magazines.

I clearly remember the price tags on all 3 because we had to know the exact amount to get the money order for the weapon. No checks or credit cards. The Glock was $305. The Smith $425. The SIG $540. 80% of my class of 2400 recruits picked the Glock.

Two years later, the Feds gave a grant to the police union and the guns were now issued. All you had to pay for was the night sights, which were now mandatory but we're not when you had to pay for the gun yourself. Once the gun was free, the division was pretty even, roughly 30% picked for each brand.

Glock works. Ruger works. One might be slightly better. But I wouldn't feel naked if I had my SR9 instead of a Glock kicking in doors. And unlike many here, I HAVE kicked in doors.

And unlike most departments, the NYPD does not replace guns. So the recruit who got his gun 22 years ago is carrying that exact one today. And I remember the SIGs all got recalled for a while. Something with their finish. The guns were turning purple! And the Glock 19's were ALL recalled due to a phase 3 malfunction. Google NYPD Glock 19 Phase 3 and read all about it. Glock let cops walk the best for 2 years rather than address it, and they only dealt with it when the job was gonna replace all Glocks with Ruger P series guns. They didn't want to lose their biggest contract and have the bad publicity.

The Ruger was the one I chose (I've had Glocks and M&P's too) because of the manual safety and mag disconnect. In a striker fired weapon, those features are pretty much mandatory for me. Since I will not be shooting 100,000 rounds through it, I guess I'll never know if it is as tough as Glocks. But in the 1000 rounds so far fired, it's been reliable and accurate.

 

[revhigh]

So ... The NYPD had a 'pilot' program with Ruger SA guns and never had a problem with them ... Yet when it came time to choose a gun for real ... It wasn't even on the list ... Why ?

REV

PS ... the members of this forum are lemmings too I guess.

I've never met a cop that knew as much about guns as I do. It's the enthusiasts that know about guns and buy lots of guns ... I guess they're lemmings too. By the way of all the guns I own .... I only own one Glock ... A 26 ... For CC. I don't like Glocks too much either ... But I can't deny they're incredibly reliable. Never heard of an issue except for the .40's ... And that's a useless caliber anyway.

Sure ... The typical Guido that goes into a gunstore wants a Glock because he doesn't know any better ... But the guns sold to one-gun Guidos pales in comparison to the amount of guns sold to knowledgeable handgun buyers ... And most of them aren't buying more than one or two Glocks.

 

[kbm6893]

You really have no idea what you are talking about. The NYPD had been using Rugers for a long time. The Police Six and then the GP100 (in .38 and called the GPNY) were authorized duty weapons. The SP101 (called the SPNY) was authorized off duty, as was the Speed Six before that.

Why didn't they go to Ruger's when it came time to equipt cops with them? I don't know. Might have been financial. But I saw quite a few of those Ruger's in the early years of the 9MM. Matter of fact, I still talk to a guy that carried one until he retired. The job had been bugging him to hand it in and pick another weapon. Wasn't because they had no faith in them, because it is a verifiable FACT that when the issues with the "ultra reliable Glock" came about in the mid 90's, and Glock refused to admit any wrong-doing, instead blaming the ammo we used (that the Smith and SIG had no issues with) as the culprit, the NYPD got price quotes for over 10,000 Ruger P series guns to replace EVERY Glock in service. Then Glock got serious and did something, and the problem went away. They re-cut the ejection port to a 45 degree angle. Send a full time armorer to the range to handle the work, and issued loaner guns to cops until they completed the job.

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/phase3.html

Are Glocks reliable? Sure they are. never said they didn't. You're the one stating that a cop wouldn't trust his life to one. I call BS on that. Most cops don't have a choice as to what they carry, and those who do don't really care.

And you never met me. By definition, a member of a gun forum is gonna know more about guns. Others just repeat the same tired mantra that they hear from some commercial. I don't know which camp you belong to, and I don't really care. makes no difference to me what you believe in. You're slamming the SR series of guns based on their reliability. What have they been around for, 7 years? Against Glock's 30? They haven't had the time to build up much of a track record.

 

[revhigh]

First ... We're talking about SA's ... NOT revolvers. I figured you'd realize that. I own several GP's, 3 SRH's in every caliber, and an SP in 357, and can honestly say ... You can probably but a prettier and/or more refined revolver than Rugers, but a more rugged or reliable one ? Probably not.

Second ... I never said ANY gun wasn't reliable enough to use for LE in any of my posts.

I never slammed the SR series of guns ... Merely said there were better choices if you had a choice, and I named just a few of them them.

We were also talking about 9mm ... From what I know ... The Glock issues and problems were centered around the .40 caliber guns. So let's talk apples and apples.

You can talk all you want about potential Price quotes for 10,000 or 10 million Rugers ... It didn't happen ... Hasn't happened ... And most likely WON'T happen. All this constant interest in Rugers by the NYPD ... Pilot programs ... Price quotes ... Possible PO's ... And yet no sales ... Why not ? Remember ... They're the 'working man's gun'. 'For the money' ... They can't be beat ... So why no LE contracts? That was the gist of the OP's question.


Most guns are very reliable, have decent accuracy, and are just fine ... So you tell me why Rugers are very rarely used by LE. It's definitely not price because Ruger is probably the cheapest of all the major brands ... So why aren't they used ?

Here's a few good reads ...

http://bearingarms.com/nypd-a-dangerous-philosophy/

http://www.glockforum.com/A-Year-in-the-Life-of-the-NYPD-Glocks.html





REV

 

[kbm6893]

I know we're talking about pistols and not revolvers. I'm just pointing out the relationship existed between Ruger and the job which is probably why they got the pilot program. And it DOES matter that they inquired about replacing all the Glocks with rugers. If they didn't have faith in the platform, they wouldn't have gone through the hassle of recalling all Glocks, sending everyone to the range to qualify on them, and footing the bill for 10,000 duty holsters, since the officers had already paid for their Glock holsters and they weren't going to have to pay for another one because of a defective gun that the job told them to buy. Sure, the job was glad they didn't have to go through with the exchange when Glock finally stepped up. Saved them money and hassle. But rest assured, they WOULD have made the switch. They weren't gonna risk any cop lives or lawsuits from shot cops or their families by continuing to allow officers to carry a potentially defective weapon. And if you want MY opinion, the fact that Glock requires you to pull the trigger prior to field stripping should immediately disqualify it from police service. Too many cases of injuries or death due to that. One just happened a month ago in Florida. Yeah, the cop was at fault for not clearing the chamber, but he screwed up. He's human. Even experts make mistakes.

And if you want to know the truth, one of the reason why the Ruger was not ultimately picked as one of the 3 options was the size and weight. The department wanted a smaller, lighter weapon for female officers and small cops. They already had 2 metal, heavy guns. That's why they chose the 19 and not the 17. Smaller gun. The NY Troopers did the same with the .45 GAP. They wanted more power in a 9 MM size grip.

And while the Glock may be reliable now, it wasn't then and that is the point. And as for the "well, the 9MM models are great. I'll admit there have been issues with the .40" argument, if a company is putting out a product that works in some calipers but not as well in others, than they're a piss poor company.

And the fact is that the issues the NYPD was having with the Glock were not happening with the smith and sig. It wasn't the ammo. It was a poorly designed weapon that hadn't really been tested in such big numbers. So the odds of it showing up in some 40 member department were not as great as in a big department like the NYPD.

Bottom line, the Glock offers no substantial benefit over an SR9, and yes, THIS cop would kick in a door with one in his hand.

And I know you weren't the one who said you wouldn't kick in a door with a Glock. It was Rabon, and I responded to that post. Then you responded to my response and said "there are better choices. I'd take my CZ or SIG". Care to tell me ONE department that authorizes CZ's for their officers? That must mean they suck, right?

And I don't need to read some anti-police article showcasing the marksmanship of cops. How many shootings have you been in? How good was your marksmanship?

 

[FergusonTO35]

I chose to replace my Ruger 9mm's with Glock for reasons that had nothing at all to do with Glock's "Perfection", or lack thereof. If I owned one of the very first Glock 17's from the early 80's I can go to the Midway website (or thousands of others) and order every single thing I need for it other than a slide or frame. Yep, even a factory barrel. And those parts are very reasonably priced. I have no crystal ball but I bet 20 years from now I can do the same thing as long as the legal/regulatory situation is the same. Can't do that with a Ruger P series. So it's safe to say my Glock 19, 26, and 42 just might be lifetime purchases I can give to my grandchildren and tell them to go enjoy shooting the crud out of 'em like I did.

I loved the Ruger P series but Ruger made them walk the plank. Who's to say they won't do the same to the SR in five or ten years? The LC series appear to be trendy, flavor of the month designs that will also be thrown off the train when sales decline enough. Interestingly I always thought the Glock 17 and 19 were similar to the P series in many ways. Both are very clever and simple designs that are easy to work on. Wide as an aircraft carrier with a grip that was thick for the caliber. Ok sights, not too good trigger pull. Takes some getting used to but they actually shoot pretty well and are as dependable as it gets. I only want to change to another gun when I want to, not because I have to. From what I can tell Glock gives me that option, along with other timeless and eternally popular designs like the Browning Hi-Power, S&W K-frame, and 1911.

 

[kbm6893]

Yeah, I'll give the aftermarket support for everything Glock its due. Other companies should follow their plan. Who knows? Ruger might one day. They sell magazines more than 10 rounds now when they didn't before, don't they?

But after 25 years of shooting, and owning probably 30-35 guns in that time, I have never needed anything other than basic springs that I changed due to basic maintenance. So I don't really see the benefit in being able to buy every single factory part, or aftermarket part, for a weapon.

And the truth is, Ruger will pay the shipping for any gun I send to them, tear it down and replace whatever needs replacing, and send it back to me, usually in less than 2 weeks. Saves me the money I would spend from Smiling Larry over at Midway in both the part, and his exorbitant shipping, and it will save me the hassle of detail stripping the weapon. So would I rather pay for a part and have to put it in myself, or let Ruger do it for free, plus have them check out the gun much better than I could?

And truth be told, most people who tinker with their guns are just big boys with the grown up version of Lego's. No real need to do it, they just want to tinker.

A friend of mine inherited his father's Security Six revolver, that was bought new in the late 70's. His dad fired at least 20,000 rounds from that gun. I am sure closer to 30,000. Mostly .357 Mag. He was a reloader and used to kid me about shooting .38's in my .357 Six when he was alive. He'd say "what's it say on the barrel? That's what you shoot". His Six was the first .357 I ever fired. I was about 13 or so.

So my friend gets it, and it's a bit loose. Kind of beat up. He calls Ruger, and they say "send it in". On their dime, of course. They completely refurbish the gun. Brought it back to new specs. Even reblued it for free. (Asked him first, of course). They had it about 3 weeks. Total cost to him was zero dollars. Got the gun back looking new in a factory hard case that was thrown in for free.

They sent me 4 new factory mags for my 10/22 when I couldn't get 2 of them back together right. Just couldn't get the spring tension right. 4 new mags in packaging for 2 old ones that I screwed up. Will Glock do that? Will anybody?

So I'm not worried about maintenance. Ruger will take care of any problems I have. When Glock does that, 30 years after I buy their product, I'll be impressed. Hell, if they do it a year after I buy it, I would be surprised. And I know they don't pay for shipping. Until then, I'd prefer a weapon that the company stands behind, instead of one that blames the user for everything and has to be forced to fix a product that 10,000 cops are walking the beat with.

 

[GunnyGene]

I chose to replace my Ruger 9mm's with Glock for reasons that had nothing at all to do with Glock's "Perfection", or lack thereof. If I owned one of the very first Glock 17's from the early 80's I can go to the Midway website (or thousands of others) and order every single thing I need for it other than a slide or frame. Yep, even a factory barrel. And those parts are very reasonably priced. I have no crystal ball but I bet 20 years from now I can do the same thing as long as the legal/regulatory situation is the same. Can't do that with a Ruger P series. So it's safe to say my Glock 19, 26, and 42 just might be lifetime purchases I can give to my grandchildren and tell them to go enjoy shooting the crud out of 'em like I did.

I loved the Ruger P series but Ruger made them walk the plank. Who's to say they won't do the same to the SR in five or ten years? The LC series appear to be trendy, flavor of the month designs that will also be thrown off the train when sales decline enough. Interestingly I always thought the Glock 17 and 19 were similar to the P series in many ways. Both are very clever and simple designs that are easy to work on. Wide as an aircraft carrier with a grip that was thick for the caliber. Ok sights, not too good trigger pull. Takes some getting used to but they actually shoot pretty well and are as dependable as it gets. I only want to change to another gun when I want to, not because I have to. From what I can tell Glock gives me that option, along with other timeless and eternally popular designs like the Browning Hi-Power, S&W K-frame, and 1911.

There are some bullet launcher designs that are eternal. I agree tho, that many are not. Seems that the firearms industry is not much different than the smartphone industry in that regard. Some folks just gotta have the latest cool thing, and manufacturer's are happy to oblige. :roll:

 

[Rabon]

It seems that most LEO agencies use S&W M&Ps, Glocks, Springfield XDs, or SIGs, but very few if any use Ruger SR9s or SR9Cs. Why not? Is there something that makes the Rugers unsuitable for LEO use? The only plausible reasons I've ever heard is that the other manufacturerers give LEO agencies a break on the price and/or they don't like the Ruger magazine disconnect.

Anybody know for sure?

Tequila Jake

Ask your self a simple question.
If you kicked doors down for a living would you choose a SR9/SR9c ?

Problem is that 99% of cops don't kick down doors on a regular basis, if ever. They write traffic tickets and answer shoplifting calls. The odds of a cop even firing his weapon are so small that they're almost not even mentioning. And those who do rarely fire their weapons, so the perceived superiority of Glock is nothing more than internet marketing. And if Ruger had beaten Glock to the punch back in the late 80's and basically given away weapons to police departments, they might have had the monopoly that Glock has now.

But until then, the Glock and the SR9 are essentially the same thing. Mass produced striker fired weapons that launch a bullet when they need to. Neither one is that superior to the other.

Trying to compare an SR 9 to a Glock is nothing short of absurd. (and I don't even shoot one of the damned things) :lol:

 

[FergusonTO35]

KBM 6893, I actually agree with everything you said. I am a Ruger fan, love my 1988 Service Six even though Ruger is supposedly unable to fix them anymore. I love tinkering, my first career was as a car mechanic. I'm saving for a Ruger AR-556, their version of the most popular tinkerer gun.

 

[revhigh]

KBM 6893, I actually agree with everything you said. I am a Ruger fan, love my 1988 Service Six even though Ruger is supposedly unable to fix them anymore.

WHAT ??? WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY ????

We were just told by kbm that Ruger will fix anything ... for free ... forever ! Shipping included ... LOL.

Does anyone really believe this ? Ruger already has no P series parts. Don't believe me ? Call 'em and ask 'em if you can buy some.

REV

 

[kbm6893]

KBM 6893, I actually agree with everything you said. I am a Ruger fan, love my 1988 Service Six even though Ruger is supposedly unable to fix them anymore.

WHAT ??? WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY ????

We were just told by kbm that Ruger will fix anything ... for free ... forever ! Shipping included ... LOL.

Does anyone really believe this ? Ruger already has no P series parts. Don't believe me ? Call 'em and ask 'em if you can buy some.

REV

If they can't fix them because they no longer make them (27 years after they stopped, and the not fixing them anymore is a recent thing), they'll replace the broken gun with a new one, for either nothing, or for cost. So that new GP-100 will be 400 bucks, not 600.

I don't expect a company to completely support a long discontinued product. I do expect them to make it right in some other way, and Ruger does. So if your P series pistol craps out and Ruger can't make it right, they'll compensate you in some other way. Will Glock? Maybe they'll do right by you and send you one of their fabulous Glock entrenching tools, or maybe the Glock pistol bayonet!

And we are all just waiting for you to tell us WHY the Glock is so much better than th SR. You already admitted to having NO experience with the SR, and only minimal with the Glock. So what makes you such an expert?

And I don't care if you believe what I told you. That my friend had his Ruger six completely restored for nothing. I'm not trying to impress some stranger on the Internet. I know what I know. It's not some rumor I am repeating. The refurb did happen about 8 years ago. But if my Service Six crapped out today, I know I'd get something out of it. Would Glock sell me a new 4th gen pistol for $250 because my 1986 Glock 17 bit it?

And S&W no longer SELLS parts for the 3rd gen pistols. But the factory is still supporting them. You think MAYBE they're holding onto parts to honor their Lifetime Warranty instead of selling them to the public? And we've already established that Ruger doesn't sell parts. They want you to send them in for their gunsmiths to fit them. So calling them for a p series part was always a waste of time, even when they were brand new.

Hey. Is it OK with you if I buy n AR-556? I know it's not a Colt and the Navy SEALs don't use them, but do you think it would fire a 5.56 bullet at a target? I know Ruger semi autos aren't worth anything, but your opinion really matters to me!

Comparing Glock's customer service to Ruger's is the real absurdity. Glock gives you nothing from the second you open the box. Any problem is your fault, the ammo's fault, or the Earth's gravitational pull's fault. Never their product.

 

[revhigh]

Finally ... We agree !!!

REV

 

[FergusonTO35]

I can totally understand Ruger not being able to support the Six series anymore, after all I was in grade school when they were discontinued. The P95 was discontinued in 2013, and already people can't find recoil springs for them. That is not going to make me dump my 10/22 or Single Six, nor keep me from buying an AR-556. But it does leave a bad taste in my mouth about buying a centerfire auto from them. I'm still a Ruger fan but that is a legit criticism of them. Just like I criticize Glock for practically giving away guns to LE and military while sticking ordinary citizens with inflated prices to make up for it.

 

[kbm6893]

I can totally understand Ruger not being able to support the Six series anymore, after all I was in grade school when they were discontinued. The P95 was discontinued in 2013, and already people can't find recoil springs for them. That is not going to make me dump my 10/22 or Single Six, nor keep me from buying an AR-556. But it does leave a bad taste in my mouth about buying a centerfire auto from them. I'm still a Ruger fan but that is a legit criticism of them. Just like I criticize Glock for practically giving away guns to LE and military while sticking ordinary citizens with inflated prices to make up for it.

Have you called Ruger and asked them for the springs? Have they asked you to send it in? And I just get the "I need springs" argument. You must be shooting a LOT to need springs so often. Only ones I ever changes are on used guns with questionable round count. On a gun I bought new, it's never been an issue.

 

[FergusonTO35]

I sold my P95, decided to cash it in when Ruger discontinued it and a little buying frenzy over these guns ensued on Gunbroker. The current lack of parts from Ruger has been reported by several long time members of this very forum who own P95's. Until 2013 or so you could buy darn near any P-series part you wanted from Midway and Brownells, just like Glock. That was one big reason why I bought my P95 in the first place.

Please understand I am not trying to bash Ruger, every gunmaker has it's good and bad points. Ruger often times will send you parts free of charge if you just ask nicely, they sent me a complete new striker assembly for my SR9C just because I told them I was having light strikes. Last year I called to order some hard rubber grips for my Single Six. The guy took all my info and when I tried to give him my payment information he just said it was their little gift for being a good customer. They are a good company that usually exceeds my expectations. All that I am criticizing is the sudden vacuum of parts for a gun that was discontinued only two years ago.

 

[kbm6893]

I sold my P95, decided to cash it in when Ruger discontinued it and a little buying frenzy over these guns ensued on Gunbroker. The current lack of parts from Ruger has been reported by several long time members of this very forum who own P95's. Until 2013 or so you could buy darn near any P-series part you wanted from Midway and Brownells, just like Glock. That was one big reason why I bought my P95 in the first place.

Please understand I am not trying to bash Ruger, every gunmaker has it's good and bad points. Ruger often times will send you parts free of charge if you just ask nicely, they sent me a complete new striker assembly for my SR9C just because I told them I was having light strikes. Last year I called to order some hard rubber grips for my Single Six. The guy took all my info and when I tried to give him my payment information he just said it was their little gift for being a good customer. They are a good company that usually exceeds my expectations. All that I am criticizing is the sudden vacuum of parts for a gun that was discontinued only two years ago.

S&W did the same thing with the M&P's. Some agencies still use the 3rd gen pistols,'but try to find a part for them. They still do support the platform for warranty work though. And I bet Ruger does too.

Let's be honest how much has the Glock changed in 30 years? Still the same pistol with a few tweaks. So comparing a company that hasn't changed their product for 30 years to a company that completely shifted their focus from hammer fired to striker isn't really fair.


And I bet if your 1985 Glock 17 crapped out and for some reason they couldn't fix it (and they wouldn't even try 30 years after you bought it) They'd tell you to buy another one of their products). Wouldn't give you a dime for it.

I still bet if you sent your 5 year old P series pistol to Ruger they'd make it right.

And I just checked the Wolff gun springs site. They have spring packs for the P series guns. What else do you expect to break on them? I've never replaced any hardware (other then because I wanted to. I changed out the plastic parts on my Beretta 92 to metal) on any firearm I own. My M1 Garand, made in 1955, still keeps
Firing. There is a nice aftermarket support for that rifle, but I doubt I'll need much of it.

Certainly not worried enough about it to sell my Garand for some plastic POS modern rifle to replace it.