Ruger SR9s...Oops

[Sonnytoo]

Just got my AMERICAN RIFLEMAN.
Wiley Clapp wrote a nice article on the SR9 and the other little brother. As the article continues, they figured out it is a SR9c.
He had 100% reliability on his target testing.
25 yard accuracy was ~2.88" with the SR9, and 3.41" with the SR9c.
Wiley figured both models are mediocre for accuracy, and the triggers were nasty, but acceptable for self-defense. Ergonomics are excellent.
For accuracy, he expected much better and he particularly loves the P345.
I'm glad that the Rifleman didn't rush this review. If they had, perhaps the reliability wouldn't have been that good. I'm glad that Ruger got the bugs ironed out, as I do enjoy my SR9c...now that it runs 100%.
I'm not quite ready to use it for my EDC; need a couple boxes of carry ammo through it first, but it has lots of nice things, such as size, accuracy, manual 1911-type safety, round capacity. I use the gun with the finger-piece mag extension for the 10-round magazine. It fits my hand very well.
I didn't "bench-rest" the SR9c, but I did rest my off-shoulder against a wall while standing, and was able to put ten WWB in one inch @ 8 yards. It shot a bit high, but I fixed that with five down clicks on the adjustable sights. That's excellent accuracy for a self-defense gun, in my estimation.
I bought this gun early in its production...and as such, I had some bugs that Ruger and I had to iron out. But I believe it's good to go now, and new production guns should really be one heck of a good deal at this point. Actually, highly recommended.
Sonnytoo

 

[gatorhugger]

Triggers were nasty?
I did not know that.
What is the pull weight? I was thinking it was a glock like 5.5 pounds.
I guess I was mistaken, so no SR9C for me. Im not buying
another crappy trigger.

 

[GrumpyOldFart]

I think their rated at 6.5 lbs and Jhearne posted up some trigger pulls around here somewhere to show actual pull weight. I will agree the trigger is a little rough out of the box, but just polishing up some metal makes it feel much smoother. If your looking for a competition grade trigger, then the SR9c is defiantly not for you. I would assume the barrel is too short anyway for competition grade accuracy. Before you make any decisions based on what is said here or in an article, you should give a try for yourself.

 

[kscott]

My trigger is actually very nice for a striker-fired pistol. I like it better than my M&P but the SR9c has had quite a bit more ammo thru it.

 

[Tam 212]

Some reviews on the pre and post-recall on theSR9 complained about it's accuracy and trigger feel. A search of the Guns & Ammo/Shooting Times/Handguns sites will yield a bunch of reviews.

Jeff Quinn on gunblast.com seems to like it and the SR9C and agrees with the above posters that it offers sufficient practical accuracy in a defensive semi-auto. As does Dave Spaulding (although I'm not sure if he's a paid endorser of Ruger).

Personally, reviews help me narrow down the choices but until I can put at least a couple hundred rounds through something, reviews don't dictate whether I will spend my hard earned money on.

Right now, for my first semi-auto, I've narrowed the choices down to either a Ruger SR9 or a SigSauer P250 or a Glock 17.

For me, the Glock has a better feeling trigger and I shot better with it but yet that gun does not fit as well. Have yet to try a Gen 4 G17...

Fortunately, a local dealer has all three that I can shoot back to back. Just a matter of obtaining a pile of 5 hundred dollar bills before I go do a range test and make a final selection.

Just my 2/100ths of a USD...

 

[Anonymous]

My trigger is great. No complaints at all.

 

[Gizmo42]

After a little polishing and a Ghost connector bar I love the trigger on mine. Could be a bit lighter but its fine for a defense gun.

 

[Raminator]

You really need to clean the guns well, paying attention to the striker bore and the striker itself. Then run about 500 rounds downrange with regular cleanings in between. My triggers cleaned right up and are crisp and light enough for reasonable accuracy and perfect for self defense.

The SR9/SR9c isn't a 1911, and that's what a lot of people need to start understanding. It acts like a lot like a double action only gun - not a single action range queen.

 

[Sonnytoo]

Triggers were nasty?
I did not know that.
What is the pull weight? I was thinking it was a glock like 5.5 pounds.
I guess I was mistaken, so no SR9C for me. Im not buying
another crappy trigger.

Most striker-fired handguns have very similar triggers, whether CZ, Glock, Smith or Ruger. SIGs are much more expensive, but their triggers are a long pull also.
Many of these can be cleaned up and lightened; i.e. GHOST products, etc. As one poster said, this is a defensive weapon; it is not designed to be an out-and-out target pistol, although 3-4" @ 25 yds is really nice for a SD handgun.
If you want a target handgun, buy a 1911. Look at a Bullseye line sometime, or check out Camp Perry...and that's generally what you see.
Sonnytoo

 

[Raminator]

FWIW, he didn't actually write "nasty" when describing the triggers. I looked for it in the article. I agree with the author that these guns are not target guns. Anyone buying one for the sole intention of putting one small hole in the center of a target at 25 yards is going to be sorely disappointed.

 

[Strange]

If your trying to compare it to a competition pistol your just plain silly, you wont find anything in its price range that will compare to a competition pistol priced 2 or 3 times more then the SR9. As far as the trigger goes, it took about 500 rounds for mine to brake in and then it was fine. Added a ghost trigger mod and its now a sweet pull. If the SR9c was a little smaller it would definitely be my weapon of choice as a CCW. Comparing a $450 pistol to a competition pistol is like comparing a mustang to a Porsche.

 

[gatorhugger]

Triggers were nasty?
I did not know that.
What is the pull weight? I was thinking it was a glock like 5.5 pounds.
I guess I was mistaken, so no SR9C for me. Im not buying
another crappy trigger.

Most striker-fired handguns have very similar triggers, whether CZ, Glock, Smith or Ruger. SIGs are much more expensive, but their triggers are a long pull also.
Many of these can be cleaned up and lightened; i.e. GHOST products, etc. As one poster said, this is a defensive weapon; it is not designed to be an out-and-out target pistol, although 3-4" @ 25 yds is really nice for a SD handgun.
If you want a target handgun, buy a 1911. Look at a Bullseye line sometime, or check out Camp Perry...and that's generally what you see.
Sonnytoo

Not true, all striker triggers are certainly not the same. You posted that the trigger was quote "nasty" per the article.
That's why I asked about the pull weight.
Ever shot a 12 pound striker trigger versus a 5 pound glock trigger?
Huge difference.
Glock triggers are actually very nice and light. It's not a "target" gun, but it's got a nice trigger.
I don't want a target handgun, but I also don't want another Sigma trigger that is why I asked what the SR9 was like.
It requires a simple answer from someone that owns a SR9, and that answer should not be "if you don't like it, go buy a target gun"
That's real helpful. :roll:

 

[jhearne]

The SR9c has a much better trigger (in terms of a batch of samples) in comparison to the original SR9. The tolerances are what Ruger changed to make this happen...they tightened them up a few notches.

My SR9 with polished internals pulls and breaks decently at 6 lbs. With my Ghost Rocket, it breaks at 5 lbs. YMMV.

If the guy was used to shooting 'nice' guns, yeah, he could find the SR9/c triggers to be a little rough. Not to mention that if it's not up to RevHigh's infamous 1" Challenge, they could say it's accuracy was only mediocre.

Josh

 

[jhearne]

Triggers were nasty?
I did not know that.
What is the pull weight? I was thinking it was a glock like 5.5 pounds.
I guess I was mistaken, so no SR9C for me. Im not buying
another crappy trigger.

Most striker-fired handguns have very similar triggers, whether CZ, Glock, Smith or Ruger. SIGs are much more expensive, but their triggers are a long pull also.
Many of these can be cleaned up and lightened; i.e. GHOST products, etc. As one poster said, this is a defensive weapon; it is not designed to be an out-and-out target pistol, although 3-4" @ 25 yds is really nice for a SD handgun.
If you want a target handgun, buy a 1911. Look at a Bullseye line sometime, or check out Camp Perry...and that's generally what you see.
Sonnytoo

Not true, all striker triggers are certainly not the same. You posted that the trigger was quote "nasty" per the article.
That's why I asked about the pull weight.
Ever shot a 12 pound striker trigger versus a 5 pound glock trigger?
Huge difference.
Glock triggers are actually very nice and light. It's not a "target" gun, but it's got a nice trigger.
I don't want a target handgun, but I also don't want another Sigma trigger that is why I asked what the SR9 was like.
It requires a simple answer from someone that owns a SR9, and that answer should not be "if you don't like it, go buy a target gun"
That's real helpful. :roll:

Don't let this one report from an article (which I'm pretty sure has some bias in there) determine the fate of you potentially buying an SR9c. Many of the new owners are very pleased with their purchases. The SR9c doesn't have a 12 lb trigger, it's closer to 6 or 5. Realistically, the Ghost (in my case) brought it down a full pound.

Josh

 

[TRanger]

You really need to clean the guns well, paying attention to the striker bore and the striker itself. Then run about 500 rounds downrange with regular cleanings in between. My triggers cleaned right up and are crisp and light enough for reasonable accuracy and perfect for self defense.

Why should a purchaser have to go through such a procedure just to get a serviceable trigger? I keep hearing of strange trigger modifications, replacement of the trigger, peening issues, etc., etc. The gun should work fine out of the box. The SR9 could have been a legitimate American-made competitor to Glock. Instead, its reputation is so severely damaged, I doubt it will ever be taken seriously by anyone but blindly devoted Ruger enthusiasts.

 

[GrumpyOldFart]

I don't know if you read any other posts but mine worked right out of the box (after cleaning I didn't try it with the grease). Every gun I have bought needed a good cleaning before being shot, but most my purchases are old war rifles packed in cosmoline. The trigger is also serviceable right out of the box, no special machining necessary, just some pins to pop out, Jhearn posted videos on how to service the trigger and all other internals of the SR9. I did polish my trigger components, but I assure you they worked fine right out the box. What are these strange modifications? I have heard of people polishing or replacing parts with ghost parts, but I haven't seen any other mods to triggers or parts, and these are far from strange and not required for a functional SR9. Only thing I had was minor peening and it stopped, so I would assume that it just needed to wear in like most mechanical devices that rub metal on metal (eg. car engine). I am no Ruger fanboy either, the SR9c is my first Ruger that I purchased along side of a Hunter MK III.

 

[TRanger]

Grumpy, I am glad yours worked right out of the box and hope it continues to do so. I truly hoped this pistol would see great success; but there have been so many complaints of issues, even from dedicated Ruger buyers who obviously want to like the pistol so much they excuse its failures, I don't see its reputation recovering. This is one case where I'd like to be proven wrong.

 

[haroldg48]

You really need to clean the guns well, paying attention to the striker bore and the striker itself. Then run about 500 rounds downrange with regular cleanings in between. My triggers cleaned right up and are crisp and light enough for reasonable accuracy and perfect for self defense.

Why should a purchaser have to go through such a procedure just to get a serviceable trigger? I keep hearing of strange trigger modifications, replacement of the trigger, peening issues, etc., etc. The gun should work fine out of the box. The SR9 could have been a legitimate American-made competitor to Glock. Instead, its reputation is so severely damaged, I doubt it will ever be taken seriously by anyone but blindly devoted Ruger enthusiasts.

I think you're wrong, but only time will tell. By the way the latest American Rifleman has an article that raves about both the full sized and compact models.

I have an SR9c that has been terrific. The trigger has no issues, right out of the box, it shot fine and felt good.

 

[Sonnytoo]

FWIW, he didn't actually write "nasty" when describing the triggers. I looked for it in the article.

You are correct; he didn't say "nasty." Otherwise, I would have quoted him.
He did say: "Both (models) are gritty and have some movement. Although not an easy system to use for great accuracy..." and it goes on to say that it's acceptable for its intended purpose of self defense.
His word (gritty) is one that I interpret as "nasty."

Sonnytoo

 

[GrumpyOldFart]

I think the issues have been ironed out. I did do my research on it (which led me to this awesome community) and it seemed when I was ready to purchase the SR9c, issues had been corrected. I won't lie when I took mine for the first range test I was nervous that I might experience issues that others were having. I was very pleased to have no FTF issues that had seemed to plague this model. Another poster (I think sonnytoo) pointed out that when his returned from service a longer striker spring had been installed, and I was able to verify that mine had the longer spring as well. I do thoroughly enjoy my SR9c as it is a perfect fit to my hand, and easy to conceal on my small frame. Now I feel the need to try a P90, as there is no way I could ignore all the great reviews on it, and I have been itching for a pistol made from metal.

 

[Sonnytoo]

Yes, I have a SR9c. I had some early problems with it, but I believe that the gun is now 100%. And note that I said this in my early post...
But I believe it's good to go now, and new production guns should really be one heck of a good deal at this point. Actually, highly recommended.

And to the fellow who likes his Glock trigger, that is fine. I'm sure he is correct. I have five Glocks and two of the five have nice triggers right out of the box. And that leaves three that need "work."
Sonnytoo

 

[jhearne]

Sonnytoo has had quite a few problems with his SR9c, and kudos for him for sticking with it and for Ruger as well to show they were willing to ultimately make it right. However, his should've functioned properly from the get-go.

As far as the issues that were there with the SR9, mainly the Peening and complaints of the trigger, they are mostly gone with Ruger's latest revisions (AKA V1.2). The peening is still a cause for concern among new and potential owners as they are still searchable by our forum and others around the web. Anyone who can use Google or Bing can find Peening without much effort I imagine. Think the biggest problem with the SR9c is information overload of negative results from forums that tend to have multiple and redundant posts about certain issues. Mainly overblown but still real issues that have since died down.

If your like me (read nerd/geek on the side) you'll know that there was big talk on the web about the iPhone 4 and it's 'issues', real but overblown IMO.

Josh

 

[GrumpyOldFart]

Nice post Josh, in any industry for any bad product or service that one customer will tell 10 other people, one satisfied customer will tell one person. I don't know if those stats hold up, but that is something I have practiced in every job I have worked.

And my iPhone 4 functions great too

 

[Casual]

Trigger schmigger. Buy the gun that suits you best. Then learn to use it.

 

[Raminator]

You really need to clean the guns well, paying attention to the striker bore and the striker itself. Then run about 500 rounds downrange with regular cleanings in between. My triggers cleaned right up and are crisp and light enough for reasonable accuracy and perfect for self defense.

Why should a purchaser have to go through such a procedure just to get a serviceable trigger? I keep hearing of strange trigger modifications, replacement of the trigger, peening issues, etc., etc. The gun should work fine out of the box. The SR9 could have been a legitimate American-made competitor to Glock. Instead, its reputation is so severely damaged, I doubt it will ever be taken seriously by anyone but blindly devoted Ruger enthusiasts.

A thorough cleaning should be the regiment of every gun owner - not just a SR9 owner. All I'm saying is that mine shot fine out of the box and the trigger continues to get better with use. Most gun triggers get better with use.

 

[Blizzard]

Mine was one of the early ones. I had my problems, but Ruger took care of them and now it is great. I am sure new ones are fine right out of the box.
I guess I was just part of R and D.

 

[Mike J]

Sonny, How well would you say the SR9c stacks up against the G26 accuracy wise? I'm just curious-I noticed you said they got a group 3.41 inches at 25 yards from a ransom rest. I saw a article in American Handgunner recently that the author said he shot a 3.5 inch group from a rest at 25 yards. I'm just wondering how well it stacks up against similarly sized guns from other manufacturers.

 

[TRanger]

I agree that a good cleaning is a part of proper maintenance. My concern was the suggestion in your post that the SR9 really needs cleaning that frequently. Does your gun require frequent cleanings in order to function or was this simply a procedure for improving the trigger?

 

[jhearne]

A thorough cleaning should be the regiment of every gun owner - not just a SR9 owner. All I'm saying is that mine shot fine out of the box and the trigger continues to get better with use. Most gun triggers get better with use.

I agree that a good cleaning is a part of proper maintenance. My concern was the suggestion in your post that the SR9 really needs cleaning that frequently. Does your gun require frequent cleanings in order to function or was this simply a procedure for improving the trigger?

It doesn't. Went 1000 rounds without doing anything other than wiping a bit of the excess gunk from the box after I got it. Zero failures, not to mention the countless I had it apart.

Edit: I keep it cleaned regularly now though, still trouble free.

Josh

 

[Raminator]

I agree that a good cleaning is a part of proper maintenance. My concern was the suggestion in your post that the SR9 really needs cleaning that frequently. Does your gun require frequent cleanings in order to function or was this simply a procedure for improving the trigger?

My first post on that was a bit vague. What I meant to convey is that you should give the gun a thorough cleaning before you shoot it for the first time. I always clean my guns thorgoughly before I take them out and it seems to work for me. I also clean my guns after each shooting trip, but that's just what I do. I'm sure the gun could go a long time without a cleaning and still function.