Ruger American Pro 9mm

B

Bartholomew Roberts

Moderator
I had the chance to shoot one of these. I was impressed by how light it was. That is also the lightest trigger I've seen on a factory striker-fired gun in some time. I didn't get a scale on it, so perhaps it was just perception; but it reminded me a lot of Ruger's LCP Pro trigger.

Sights were good, practical hi-vis, 3-dot sights. You can get your hand way up on the grip to where it almost feels like you are behind the bore - which definitely shows in the lack of muzzle-flip. It does feel weird though and the gun is so light, you have to pay attention to a good trigger press to keep from moving the muzzle off target.

Accuracy was excellent even with ball ammo (trigger issues above aside). The reset is short; but a little on the sloppy side for my tastes.

Overall, if there are no safety issues and the pistol can hold up to high volume shooting, I think Ruger has a real winner on their hands at that pricepoint.
 
Goes to show that perceptions are relative, because at 30 oz the new Ruger is definitely on the heavy side, it has a steel insert, and is just a large pistol in every regard! I found the trigger totally typical of the genre, and the gun front heavy!
 
The 30oz weight is with an empty 17rd mag inserted. So compare to the S&W M&P9 at 24oz with no magazine. I thought it was pretty light myself; but that could be relative as I'm used to carrying a Hi-Power that is 32oz with no magazine.

I'd also note that the Ruger American Pistol comes in both a "Standard" (heavier trigger & manual safety) and "Pro" (lighter trigger, no manual safety) model.

I can say if you've shot the LC9 Pro, you pretty well know hat to expect on the American trigger.
 
Fondeled on at LGS, answer to my question is no the mags don't interchange:mad:

I'd also note that it lacks a firing pin block, IMHO you removed one too many safetys Ruger.
 
Lacks a firing pin block? That is a very surprising statement. These are the people who put the safety billboard on the side of their guns, yet they don't include the primary item to prevent firing if the pistol is dropped? :eek:

Bartholomew, I can't help wonder if not having a manual safety on the Pro model is a good idea, since the trigger is so light. Wouldn't that be almost like carrying a cocked but unlocked 1911 or HiPower? Again, :eek:

I'd definitely go for the version with a manual safety.

Bart Noir
 
I'd also note that it lacks a firing pin block, IMHO you removed one too many safetys Ruger.
Click to expand...

I find this really hard to believe, especially from a company that loves safeties. Ruger's website for the pistol mentions:
Safety features include internal, automatic sear block system, integrated trigger safety and no trigger pull required for takedown.
Click to expand...
http://www.ruger.com/products/rugerAmericanPistol/models.html
I'm not sure what they mean by automatic sear block system, but my guess is it performs similar to a firing pin block.
 
I'm not sure what they mean by automatic sear block system, but my guess is it performs similar to a firing pin block.
Click to expand...
Trust me it surprised me too, I actually mad the guy pull the slide off, all it does is holds the sear up and the sear holds the striker back. I'll just keep my SR9E with the mag safety removed, I don't mind a thumb safety and I really hate the fact that they got rid of a bunch of parts and charge $100 more.
 
That can't possibly be true? What makes up for the firing pin block?

That is so dangerous, even for just a range gun. I value my life way too much.
 
Trust me it surprised me too, I actually mad the guy pull the slide off, all it does is holds the sear up and the sear holds the striker back.
Click to expand...

No offense meant, but I'd need someone familiar with the whole internal operation of the pistol on a design level to sound off before I believe there is no drop safety component on the pistol (that's the principal goal for the firing pin block). It'd be beyond bizarre.
 
A sear locked holding the striker back is drop safe...., but maybe too complicated.... I like my striker block to engage the striker. I dont know the Ruger design.

A gun only really needs 2 safeties. A striker/firing pin block and a manual trigger block.

FWIW, the original 1911 doesnt block the firing pin directly either, but that stresses some people out.
 
Ruger has issued recalls for both the LCP and SR9 discharging when dropped. So, on the one hand, it looks like they have tried to use some non-firing pin block safety in the past. On the other, you'd think they'd have learned their lesson by now.

The American Rifleman reports "although it does have an internal, automatic sear-block system that prohibits striker movement until the trigger is completely pressed to the rear."

If the striker can't move until the trigger is pressed completely to the rear, that solves the problem I'd think.
 
Last edited:
FWIW, the original 1911 doesnt block the firing pin directly either, but that stresses some people out.
Click to expand...
A 1911 doesn't have a spring that'll drive the firing pin into the primer if it isn't held.

If the striker can't move until the trigger is pressed completely to the rear, that solves the problem I'd think.
Click to expand...

As long as every thing is in tolerance and the striker doesnt break. I haven't seen how much the striker is actually "cocked" when the trigger is at rest but if it's enough to fire the gun IMHO this is a poor design from a manufacturing standpoint.
 
The LCP is a hammer fired DA partially cocked. The recall was based on new owners manipulating the gun in their homes and shooting the carpet and tv.

Doesn't sound like a block with the firing pin issue, sounds like a block with the head issue.

Yes Ruger is very safety conscious but it doesn't mean that every design will accommodate a firing pin block. The 1911 they make doesn't have one. The Colt version with block isn't well received in some corners - and the 1911 design is noted for discharging when dropped when it hits the hammer, defeating two safeties.

I'm not going to hold up my index finger and say, this is my safety, but you can have only so much of it to protect clumsy owners with inadequate training. Ruger does more than the average but they cannot protect us from ourselves.

Hence the reason we have the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms, which the anti gunners are now going after. I suppose Rugers costing twice as much would be OK?

By the way, I've seen hundreds of M16's get dropped on concrete in my career, the first 8 years in a Training Battalion, and they never went off. No firing pin block, or even a detent spring. When chambering the round the firing pin hits the primer enough to actually mark it. Normal operation.
 
Yes Ruger is very safety conscious but it doesn't mean that every design will accommodate a firing pin block. The 1911 they make doesn't have one. The Colt version with block isn't well received in some corners - and the 1911 design is noted for discharging when dropped when it hits the hammer, defeating two safeties.
Click to expand...

I'd point you to mavracer's comments above.

I'm not going to hold up my index finger and say, this is my safety, but you can have only so much of it to protect clumsy owners with inadequate training. Ruger does more than the average but they cannot protect us from ourselves.

Hence the reason we have the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms, which the anti gunners are now going after. I suppose Rugers costing twice as much would be OK?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure no one here is advocating for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms to disappear. There's no need for that kind of hyperbole.

When every manufacturer of a current production striker fired pistol incorporates some kind of firing pin block, it's fairly understandable to point out and wonder about a manufacturer that does not. As I said above, Ruger may well have another device that accomplishes the same task internally. But that may still require some explanation on their part. I don't think anyone here is saying that personal responsibility doesn't matter.
 
The SR1911 uses a titanium firing pin, depending on ammo and whether it fully chambers, it will misfire compared other designs. The Ruger P89 uses a firing pin lock/block.
 
striker fired pistols don't need a firing pin block unless you are carrying it "decocked".......

......who the HELL carries a decocked Glock or M&P?

The striker is being held back at all times when loaded and ready to use or carry.

I suppose the firing pin block is necessary if the striker foot breaks off. That would be a problem.
 
I believe the striker of the Glock won't protrude from the breechface cocked or uncocked without the striker block pressed in. Recently toyed with it because I wanted to see the striker protrusion and pin tip. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top