Having never owned a Glock, I was wondering how one might compare in terms of accuracy, reliability, comfort, ease of operation, etc. to my Ruger P series 9mm? I assume the Glock operation is basically a Double-Action Only type platform. Any comments would be much apprecieated!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Glock 19 vs. Ruger P Series?
- Thread starter GunFool
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Two Wounds
New member
My opinion is quite biased against Glocks. I owned one for about 2 years, and had several extra magazines for it. I encountered some type of malfunction with almost every magazine-full of ammo I shot - stovepipes, failures to feed, and the like. The ammo type and brand didn't seem to make a difference.
I've also taught NRA Home Firearms Safety/Personal Protection courses for almost 7 years. In that time we (the group of instructors, each with 20+ years of firearms experience) have had about 70 students with various Glock models and different ammo brands/types shoot the 50-round-live-fire portion of the course. Only one Glock finished the course without a stovepipe, failure to feed, or something of that nature. An unusually high number could not finish the course of fire due to component failure. We have not experienced problems of this magnitude with any other top name brand firearm.
I've also taught NRA Home Firearms Safety/Personal Protection courses for almost 7 years. In that time we (the group of instructors, each with 20+ years of firearms experience) have had about 70 students with various Glock models and different ammo brands/types shoot the 50-round-live-fire portion of the course. Only one Glock finished the course without a stovepipe, failure to feed, or something of that nature. An unusually high number could not finish the course of fire due to component failure. We have not experienced problems of this magnitude with any other top name brand firearm.
I really don't think the two compare. I would give the Ruger a hands down win; BUT the main reason is that it is a full sized service pistol, while the Glock 19 is a smaller version. I have had good luck with my Glocks and really like them. I got a Ruger P89 when a guy owed me some money and couldn't repay me. I never liked them, but after I got it, I sincerely consider it a great gun. I would buy another one if I didn't have this one knowing what I do now. The action of a Glock is called a safe action. It is not a whole lot like DAO although it functions like one. By that I mean the trigger pull is a lot better than DAO. I would buy either one or both at the drop of a hat.
GunFool,
I suggest that you visit glocktalk.com to learn more about Glock.
Two Wounds,
"I've also taught NRA Home Firearms Safety/Personal Protection courses for almost 7 years. In that time we (the group of instructors, each with 20+ years of firearms experience) have had about 70 students with various Glock models and different ammo brands/types shoot the 50-round-live-fire portion of the course. Only one Glock finished the course without a stovepipe, failure to feed, or something of that nature. An unusually high number could not finish the course of fire due to component failure. We have not experienced problems of this magnitude with any other top name brand firearm."
Are you serious? I never have any problem with my two glocks (G19 and G26). If I have to pick a pistol to defend my life, I would pick one of my Glock over my other guns (Sig, Kimber, and Ruger).
YoungGun
I suggest that you visit glocktalk.com to learn more about Glock.
Two Wounds,
"I've also taught NRA Home Firearms Safety/Personal Protection courses for almost 7 years. In that time we (the group of instructors, each with 20+ years of firearms experience) have had about 70 students with various Glock models and different ammo brands/types shoot the 50-round-live-fire portion of the course. Only one Glock finished the course without a stovepipe, failure to feed, or something of that nature. An unusually high number could not finish the course of fire due to component failure. We have not experienced problems of this magnitude with any other top name brand firearm."
Are you serious? I never have any problem with my two glocks (G19 and G26). If I have to pick a pistol to defend my life, I would pick one of my Glock over my other guns (Sig, Kimber, and Ruger).
YoungGun
I have to say, Two Wounds, that's the first I've heard of that one. Glocks can't make it through 50 rounds at your school? Where's the course, under water? If Glocks couldn't go 50 rounds without a malfunction, there is no f#$%! way they could have possibly captured the market share that they have, especially among top professionals in the military, law enforcement, and training communities. No freaking way. Any Glock that cannot make it through a 50 round course of fire without experiencing a malfunction or breakage of some kind is either defective, not properly maintained, or has an owner who doesn't know how to hold it(with a firm grip and locked wrist)--pure and simple. Also, it is a known fact that Glocks require less lubrication and maintenance than any other pistol in the world. In short, it is simply not possible for a Glock in proper working condition to not be able to make it through a fifty round course held on the planet earth.
Now, the most likely cause of these malfunctions you and your colleagues have witnessed, is limp-wristing. Limp-wristing is the most common cause of stove-pipe malfunctions with the Glock, among new shooters, or those unfamiliar to the Glock. Were these newbies shooting those Glocks, or experienced Glock shooters? I'm not trying to defend the Glock at all costs, it's just that your and your colleagues' experience at your range directly contradicts the first-hand experiences of most other firearms instructors and schools around the country. If you ask top trainers, like the ones at Blackwater, Gunsite, Options for Personal Security (Andy Stanford), or Insights (Greg Hamilton), they will tell you that Glocks consistently outperform and outlast most of the other guns that go through their schools, and are equal to the rest.
Two Wounds, let me ask you, do you actually think that if Glocks were inherently less reliable than the other major auto brands, that so many professionals and civilians around the world would rely on them to save their butts? Miami PD, FBI, DEA, U.S. Customs, GSG9, Austrian COBRA, top U.S. S.W.A.T units, special operations personnel, bodyguards, and top shooting instructors all over the world, all rely on Glocks on a daily basis.
I have to say, I don't see any of these people using Rugers, now, or in the future. In fact, the F.B.I. switched from Sigs to Glocks, and it sure wasn't because the Glock is inferior. Reports from the F.B.I have been very favorable so far. Miami P.D., Coral Gables P.D., and South Miami P.D. all really like their Glocks and swear by them.
I will say it here and now--no one in their right mind should recommend Ruger over Glock, unless it is for the reason of price. Don't get me wrong, Rugers do have a reputation for going bang every time--but they are simply not at the level of a Glock. A Glock that is in proper condition, with proper lubrication(which is very little), is as reliable as any firearm in the world, save perhaps an HK P7, which is in a reliability class all by itself. You can also get a first shot off faster with a Glock, than with a Ruger, as it has a lighter and shorter trigger action and lower bore axis than the double action autos.
Basically, Two Wounds, you've gotta' be biased. It's the only explanation.
Now, the most likely cause of these malfunctions you and your colleagues have witnessed, is limp-wristing. Limp-wristing is the most common cause of stove-pipe malfunctions with the Glock, among new shooters, or those unfamiliar to the Glock. Were these newbies shooting those Glocks, or experienced Glock shooters? I'm not trying to defend the Glock at all costs, it's just that your and your colleagues' experience at your range directly contradicts the first-hand experiences of most other firearms instructors and schools around the country. If you ask top trainers, like the ones at Blackwater, Gunsite, Options for Personal Security (Andy Stanford), or Insights (Greg Hamilton), they will tell you that Glocks consistently outperform and outlast most of the other guns that go through their schools, and are equal to the rest.
Two Wounds, let me ask you, do you actually think that if Glocks were inherently less reliable than the other major auto brands, that so many professionals and civilians around the world would rely on them to save their butts? Miami PD, FBI, DEA, U.S. Customs, GSG9, Austrian COBRA, top U.S. S.W.A.T units, special operations personnel, bodyguards, and top shooting instructors all over the world, all rely on Glocks on a daily basis.
I have to say, I don't see any of these people using Rugers, now, or in the future. In fact, the F.B.I. switched from Sigs to Glocks, and it sure wasn't because the Glock is inferior. Reports from the F.B.I have been very favorable so far. Miami P.D., Coral Gables P.D., and South Miami P.D. all really like their Glocks and swear by them.
I will say it here and now--no one in their right mind should recommend Ruger over Glock, unless it is for the reason of price. Don't get me wrong, Rugers do have a reputation for going bang every time--but they are simply not at the level of a Glock. A Glock that is in proper condition, with proper lubrication(which is very little), is as reliable as any firearm in the world, save perhaps an HK P7, which is in a reliability class all by itself. You can also get a first shot off faster with a Glock, than with a Ruger, as it has a lighter and shorter trigger action and lower bore axis than the double action autos.
Basically, Two Wounds, you've gotta' be biased. It's the only explanation.
The original poster asks for a comparison not of Glocks in general, but specifically the Glock 19 in terms of accuracy, reliability, comfort, ease of operation. Having owned both, I would certainly put the Ruger against the Glock any time for reliablility. And, as I noted, when you compare the smaller sized Glock vs the full sized Ruger in terms of accuracy, reliability, comfort, ease of operation I still would definitely go with the Ruger. This of course is based merely by owning and shooting both extensively.
"Don't get me wrong, Rugers do have a reputation for going bang every time--but they are simply not at the level of a Glock." This puzzles me, if Rugers go bang everytime, how can you get more reliable than that ?
"Don't get me wrong, Rugers do have a reputation for going bang every time--but they are simply not at the level of a Glock." This puzzles me, if Rugers go bang everytime, how can you get more reliable than that ?
By the way the thought has occured to me that Two Wounds might just be either a Ruger employee, or a plant, trying to promote Ruger under the guise of a reply to a post. I realize this sounds a little paranoid, but it has been known to happen.
This type of behavior is common on other bulletin boards where people pose as members, either asking a question about something, or replying to a question, while they are actually just advertising their site. Sometimes, they even work in teams.
So, what's the story, Two Wounds? We'll take your word for it. If your last name is really Ruger, we'll forgive you.
As The Great One, Ronald Reagan, used to say--when dealing with the Soviets, "Trust, but confirm."
This type of behavior is common on other bulletin boards where people pose as members, either asking a question about something, or replying to a question, while they are actually just advertising their site. Sometimes, they even work in teams.
So, what's the story, Two Wounds? We'll take your word for it. If your last name is really Ruger, we'll forgive you.
As The Great One, Ronald Reagan, used to say--when dealing with the Soviets, "Trust, but confirm."
I am not a RUger employee, but I own a few of them, and they have all proven to be exceptional firearms. The autoloaders are also exceptionally ugly, but they work. As I said, I presently own one Glock and have owned a couple others. I love them, I would love to own a 26 and consider my 17 as one of my faviorites. But I honestly can't say it has anything over the Ruger in terms of accuracy, reliablity, comfort........ I prefer to just own them both, and enjoy them both. If I was going to carry one for self defense, it would be the Glock.
Don't forget to take you medications, I think your levels are getting a little low with this paranoia.
Don't forget to take you medications, I think your levels are getting a little low with this paranoia.
Hey 444,
I'm already on the meds, and I think they're really working for me. Now, if I can just shake this feeling that aliens are trying to melt my car...
Seriously though, I hope it was evident I was kidding. I don't like using all the smiley faces and such. I was banking that you would be able to intuit the tone. I was actually just ribbing Two Wounds, and when you chimed in, I thought it would be funny to go after you too, and give everyone a laugh.
So you know, I get what you're saying, but the Ruger is just so much more ungainly in your hand. It's bigger and fatter, sits higher over your hand, has a heavier, longer first trigger pull, and is not as refined. It is also not as battle proven under hard conditions. But I agree, it has a good rep for reliability. I must say that.
I'm already on the meds, and I think they're really working for me. Now, if I can just shake this feeling that aliens are trying to melt my car...
Seriously though, I hope it was evident I was kidding. I don't like using all the smiley faces and such. I was banking that you would be able to intuit the tone. I was actually just ribbing Two Wounds, and when you chimed in, I thought it would be funny to go after you too, and give everyone a laugh.
So you know, I get what you're saying, but the Ruger is just so much more ungainly in your hand. It's bigger and fatter, sits higher over your hand, has a heavier, longer first trigger pull, and is not as refined. It is also not as battle proven under hard conditions. But I agree, it has a good rep for reliability. I must say that.
I am not an expert, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn.
Different people like different guns. Too say the Ruger is not online with the Glock is not right. I often wonder if the Ruger was priced $200 higher if it would get the respect it deserves. Just because the FBI carries the Glock now instead of the Sig doesn't mean anything. The Seals carry the Sig instead of the Glock so does the Ohio State Patrol. Get whatever works best for you.
Different people like different guns. Too say the Ruger is not online with the Glock is not right. I often wonder if the Ruger was priced $200 higher if it would get the respect it deserves. Just because the FBI carries the Glock now instead of the Sig doesn't mean anything. The Seals carry the Sig instead of the Glock so does the Ohio State Patrol. Get whatever works best for you.
Walt Sherrill
New member
The Ruger polymer guns (P-95 and P-97) are very nice guns. The Glock 19 is also a very nice gun. Both types are more accurate than most shooters, amazingly reliable and durable, and easy to maintain. Both will generally shoot anything they're fed.
Try them both and get the one that fits your hand the best.
Or, if money is an issue, get the P-95.
(That said, my preference is the CZ-75/85 which fits my hand better, is just as durable, and at least as accurate as the Glocks and Rugers -- and in the same price range as the P-95/97. Great guns.)
The old, non-polymer Rugers are OK guns, but not as good as the new P-95/97, which are more ergonomic and have many refinements of the older designs.
Try them both and get the one that fits your hand the best.
Or, if money is an issue, get the P-95.
(That said, my preference is the CZ-75/85 which fits my hand better, is just as durable, and at least as accurate as the Glocks and Rugers -- and in the same price range as the P-95/97. Great guns.)
The old, non-polymer Rugers are OK guns, but not as good as the new P-95/97, which are more ergonomic and have many refinements of the older designs.
I've owned a couple of Glocks, a Kimber, S&W and shot a lot of others and I can tell you the Glock 19 is one very reliable pistol. Having said that, the Ruger, at least from those I've seen and read about, is a very reliable pistol and a great value. However, I think the Glock is the better pistol in several areas. One, lots of after market equip., especially sights. The Glock can be fitted with Novak, Heinie, PT, and many others. Trigger pull altered lighter or heavier and back again by the owner. Also the Glock 19 is lighter, shorter and thinner. The Glock also has a superior trigger IMHO.
As someone esle stated, get the one that fits your hand best. JohnH
As someone esle stated, get the one that fits your hand best. JohnH
I have never had a reliability problem out of any of the four Glocks I have owned. The Ruger on the other hand is a different matter. When Ruger first came out with their semi-auto 9mm My previous dept. went with it as a duty gun. We had malfunction after malfunction and We switched to the Sig 226. My understanding is that Ruger fixed the problem with the second generation and that Rugers are just as reliable as any semi-auto now.
Coupla offhand observations...
Everyone by now knows that the S&W pistols that the NJ Troopers were just issued have been returned due to quality problems. The reason for the new pistols in the first place is due to a fatal jamming incident with a trooper under fire several years ago. The weapon ? The HK P7. So, I don't know where the P7 gets it's mythical reputation for reliability, but it cost one cop his life and HK a huge contract with the NJSP.
The quote is: "Trust, but verify".
Everyone by now knows that the S&W pistols that the NJ Troopers were just issued have been returned due to quality problems. The reason for the new pistols in the first place is due to a fatal jamming incident with a trooper under fire several years ago. The weapon ? The HK P7. So, I don't know where the P7 gets it's mythical reputation for reliability, but it cost one cop his life and HK a huge contract with the NJSP.
The quote is: "Trust, but verify".
Wunderwaffe
New member
I don't like either but if I had to choose, I'll pick the Glock. Trigger, reliability, toughness, all goes to Glock. The only thing Ruger P8x-9x has "better" is price.
Two Wounds
New member
viper,
Yes, I am biased in my opinions regarding Glocks. I stated that in the opening lines of my previous post. However, my experiences with Glocks have created that bias. Why do you think I purchased one initially? It was because they were so highly rated by everyone. I would have been tickled to death if my Glock would have been a performer. Its performance would have quieted the disbelievers. Unfortuantely, it just didn't work out that way, hence, our difference in opinion.
I tried shooting my Glock using a number of different techniques including locking the wrist as well as leaving it unlocked, tightening my grip, relaxing my grip and a variety of combinations, not to mention the types and brands of ammo I fed it and several different magazines.
Our classes have students with varying firearms experience levels. Some have more experience than I; many are newbies. A number of the students can shoot circles around me. We do try to get newbies to use revolvers, but the choice is theirs.
The instructors I teach with, for the most part, are biased against Glocks too. This is all due to what we have experienced with the guns "on the line". I believe we have one Glock owner in our group of about 10 instructors. I'd venture to say that 7 of the 10 prefer revolvers.
We shoot the live-fire course regardless of the weather, except when the temperature prohibits - too hot or too cold for the average person to be outside for 3 hours or more at one time. Scuba gear is optional - ha!
I understand, viper, what you and I have experienced contradict each other. It doesn't make either of us right or wrong. What we experience strongly influences our opinions for better or worse. Although, I will not own another Glock, especially if my life may depend on it.
I don't know how a lot of things capture a big portion of the market and win approval by certain organizations and don't really care. I don't know how some seemingly poor (to me) movies get such big audiences and/or win Oscars either. Just because everyone beats down the door to buy something doesn't mean I will. There is no inanimate object that is the ideal brand or model for everyone.
You may place the blame where you will. I'm speaking of my real-world experiences with them. That's all I have to go by now. I had to discredit all the other reports I've read and heard because of those experiences.
I will admit, once when I went to the range with my Glock, it did put a Sig in its place. The Sig owner shot 5-shot groups with both guns and was amazed at the accuracy of the Glock. He was printing all over the paper with the Sig.
For the record, I'm not a Ruger fan either. I didn't even mention Ruger in my post. The only Ruger I own is a Security Six. I'm partial to S&W. Yes, I know S&W has its problems too.
Yes, I am biased in my opinions regarding Glocks. I stated that in the opening lines of my previous post. However, my experiences with Glocks have created that bias. Why do you think I purchased one initially? It was because they were so highly rated by everyone. I would have been tickled to death if my Glock would have been a performer. Its performance would have quieted the disbelievers. Unfortuantely, it just didn't work out that way, hence, our difference in opinion.
I tried shooting my Glock using a number of different techniques including locking the wrist as well as leaving it unlocked, tightening my grip, relaxing my grip and a variety of combinations, not to mention the types and brands of ammo I fed it and several different magazines.
Our classes have students with varying firearms experience levels. Some have more experience than I; many are newbies. A number of the students can shoot circles around me. We do try to get newbies to use revolvers, but the choice is theirs.
The instructors I teach with, for the most part, are biased against Glocks too. This is all due to what we have experienced with the guns "on the line". I believe we have one Glock owner in our group of about 10 instructors. I'd venture to say that 7 of the 10 prefer revolvers.
We shoot the live-fire course regardless of the weather, except when the temperature prohibits - too hot or too cold for the average person to be outside for 3 hours or more at one time. Scuba gear is optional - ha!
I understand, viper, what you and I have experienced contradict each other. It doesn't make either of us right or wrong. What we experience strongly influences our opinions for better or worse. Although, I will not own another Glock, especially if my life may depend on it.
I don't know how a lot of things capture a big portion of the market and win approval by certain organizations and don't really care. I don't know how some seemingly poor (to me) movies get such big audiences and/or win Oscars either. Just because everyone beats down the door to buy something doesn't mean I will. There is no inanimate object that is the ideal brand or model for everyone.
You may place the blame where you will. I'm speaking of my real-world experiences with them. That's all I have to go by now. I had to discredit all the other reports I've read and heard because of those experiences.
I will admit, once when I went to the range with my Glock, it did put a Sig in its place. The Sig owner shot 5-shot groups with both guns and was amazed at the accuracy of the Glock. He was printing all over the paper with the Sig.
For the record, I'm not a Ruger fan either. I didn't even mention Ruger in my post. The only Ruger I own is a Security Six. I'm partial to S&W. Yes, I know S&W has its problems too.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.