Ruger SR9E

That's good...I was wondering if the trigger pull would be the same. The SR has a good trigger for a striker fired weapon, not to mention one in the sub $400 range.
 
So...they finally make a Glock now :D

Just kidding. Looks great. I would be wanting one, if I didn't just lose my job and wasn't starting my own business...can't spend anything on guns now. On the other hand though, before it gets imported to us (6-12 months usually), I should know whether or not my new business goes well and if I can afford it.
 
modrifle3 said:
What type of business?
Don't want to get too off-topic here. Will be doing two things. One - making replicas and reconstructions of historical artifacts, both for reenactors and for museums. Two - selling survival/self-reliance gear and also making some. Might also get involved in importing gun accessories, but not sure about it yet.
 
Leucoandro said:
I might just have to pick one of these up.

96/44,

Could you check to see if it has a magazine disconnect?


Charlie

It does have the magazine disconnect. They ship it with the SR series instruction manual, and it seems that the frame/fire control group is identical to the SR9. Trigger pull is very decent, same as any of the newer SR's. I do like the cleaner look of the slide without the LCI and extra serrations.
 
The magazine disconnect is incredibly easy to remove on the SR series pistols. Assuming that hasn't changed on these, then that isn't a concern. If you don't want it, you can remove it in a couple of minutes...and, you can put it back in just as quickly and easily, if you ever need to send the gun in for service.

The cheapest regular price I can find locally on SR9s is $415. If the SR9e sells for $350, and I have to pay $40 or more for a 2nd magazine, that's not such a bargain over the standard SR9 pistols. If it sells closer to $300, which is about the price of S&W SD9VEs in my area, then it will be a pretty good buy because of the better trigger, compared to the SD9VE. S&W does include two magazines with the SD9VEs, though.

I do like the fact that it doesn't have the LCI. I could care less what kind of box it comes in. I actually like the look of the slide serrations better on the SR9e over the SR9, but I'd like to see how they feel. The other two things to consider in person are the sights and finish. I'll be interested to see one of these guns in the case!
 
96/44,

Thanks for checking that. Can you see any differences in the striker cover. Not sure why they list it as a different part from the other handgun.


Charlie
 
Leucoandro said:
96/44,

Thanks for checking that. Can you see any differences in the striker cover. Not sure why they list it as a different part from the other handgun.


Charlie

Is it possible it's because its made out of some type of metal now? I've been asking for that for years. It would be amazing if so.
 
Rei40c said:
Leucoandro said:
96/44,

Thanks for checking that. Can you see any differences in the striker cover. Not sure why they list it as a different part from the other handgun.


Charlie

Is it possible it's because its made out of some type of metal now? I've been asking for that for years. It would be amazing if so.

It would be nice if they plugged the giant hole in the back as this is a real issue for duty carry and dirt entering the striker channel. Just a bit of fine desert or beach sand would lock this thing solid. I always wondered why they and springfield put the hole there. It makes it easy to see if the weapon is cocked or not, but the draw back seems greater.
 
A metal firing pin "tail" makes for a much better trigger pull on this pistol. I got one from TDR Machine for my SR9C. Yeah it is pretty silly and unnecessary to put a hole there.
 
PCnotPC said:
Cheesewhiz said:
No mag safety...

Where have you seen it specified that there is no magazine safety? Nothing I have read by Ruger states that. Either that or I am just blind. If they put this gun out without the magazine safety I would buy one in a minute!

It's really easy to take out the magazine disconnect. I now have mine in a small ziplock bag in the pistol case. I think I watched a couple of youtube videos. It's super simple. I have an SR9C with the DLC coating by the way.
 
doberman said:
It's really easy to take out the magazine disconnect. I now have mine in a small ziplock bag in the pistol case. I think I watched a couple of youtube videos. It's super simple. I have an SR9C with the DLC coating by the way.

Hopefully without going down the same old back and forth arguments some people won't carry a self-defense gun that's had factory safety features removed. Simple as that.
 
Why SR9 and other Rugers will no longer need California/lawyer features...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/robert-farago/breaking-ruger-stop-selling-semis-california/
 
DA_TriggR4Ruger said:
Why SR9 and other Rugers will no longer need California/lawyer features...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/robert-farago/breaking-ruger-stop-selling-semis-california/

Good for Ruger... Cuck Falifornia!
 
It appears A LOT of manufacturers are allowing their guns to fall off California's approved list. Not just Ruger and S&W. Maybe the only way to facilitate any change is to make those who want it, demand it. I have friends and family in Cali. This information is not to start anything negative towards them at all. The rest of us need to take heed though... once you lose something its harder to get it back! So fight for it while you have it. I've noticed the same could be said about relationships too! But that's for a different thread.
 
modrifle3 said:
Rei40c said:
Leucoandro said:
96/44,

Thanks for checking that. Can you see any differences in the striker cover. Not sure why they list it as a different part from the other handgun.


Charlie

Is it possible it's because its made out of some type of metal now? I've been asking for that for years. It would be amazing if so.

It would be nice if they plugged the giant hole in the back as this is a real issue for duty carry and dirt entering the striker channel. Just a bit of fine desert or beach sand would lock this thing solid. I always wondered why they and springfield put the hole there. It makes it easy to see if the weapon is cocked or not, but the draw back seems greater.

They changed the number because the little disassembly notch at 5 o'clock has been eliminated. I prefer the striker to come back through the hole in the plate like that. With my thumb over the hole, I can tell if my trigger gets lodged against something, and hopefully prevent a true UD, rather than the typical ND.
 
DA_TriggR4Ruger said:
I can't picture what's being described here. Please post a pic. I'm not aware of any giant holes in the back of the SR9 series

It's the hole where the striker position indicator comes through the plate. Glocks don't have it, XDs have a small one and in my opinion Rugers have a very large hole.
 
The magazine safety is a non-issue. It takes 5 minutes or less to remove... simple. On Ruger's web site the schematic of the SR9E shows the magazine safety in place just like the SR9. If you remove the striker the magazine safety lifts right out of the slide. I removed them from my SR9 and SR45 the first day.
 
modrifle3 said:
DA_TriggR4Ruger said:
I can't picture what's being described here. Please post a pic. I'm not aware of any giant holes in the back of the SR9 series

It's the hole where the striker position indicator comes through the plate. Glocks don't have it, XDs have a small one and in my opinion Rugers have a very large hole.

DSC02040.jpg


"Hello!" ... ... "Hello!" Holy crap that is a huge hole. I heard an echo!

Lol watched predator and can't stop laughing!
 
I'm late to the party but I bought a 9E yesterday and there's no mag. safety. A hole remains at the 12 oclock position on the barrel rear where the nose of the loaded chamber indicator used to drop into. I suppose you can look down the hole to see the brass, when the chamber is loaded. I like the spaced cocking serrations much better on this model. My thought is Ruger sells 3-4 SR9c's for every SR9 sold. Release of the 9E is a marketing ploy to boost full size sales.
 
Bluto said:
I'm late to the party but I bought a 9E yesterday and there's no mag. safety. A hole remains at the 12 oclock position on the barrel rear where the nose of the loaded chamber indicator used to drop into. I suppose you can look down the hole to see the brass, when the chamber is loaded. I like the spaced cocking serrations much better on this model. My thought is Ruger sells 3-4 SR9c's for every SR9 sold. Release of the 9E is a marketing ploy to boost full size sales.

I wouldn't say a ploy . . . Ruger is changing its image. The LC and SR series left a bad taste in the mouths of the civilian and professional community. The LC9s and 9e represent a departure from CA compliant thinking and a move to what the people who use firearms want.

Also, this is how Ruger has always released new models.

To note few change overs.

Mini-14 to Ranch Rifle

P89 to P95
P90 to P97
P90 to P345

P345 to SR45

P95 to SR9

At some point in the next 2 years I think we will see the LC9 phased out and the SR series phased out in favor of an expanded "E" series or the E series rebadge and redesigned as the SR series.

The 9e and LC9s are the first models to be released in 30 years that present an image of professional functionality that will take Glock market share.

Ruger only kills a line with out warning if it either has to many design issues, such as the P97 or sales are just not there. Don't jump on me for the P97 comment. I really like mine but poor slide release design is why this gun could not unseat the P90. Then based on the political environment it made sense to redesign it to P345.
 
Just picked up a 9e and there is a magazine safety in the pistol.That is not correct ,I should have said there was a magazine safety in the pistol :roll: . Doug
 
FWIW: My 9e purchased new, hasn't had, or never has had, or never will have, a magazine disconnect.
 
Back
Top