So that new Ruger Security-9...

1

1940izhevsk

New member
Personally, I'm shocked at it's $379 MSRP, for a mid-size, striker-fired polymer wondernine. I've seen listings on Gunbroker for $275-$325, which again, astonishes me.

Has anyone had personal experience with the pistol yet? Is it worth buying, or no?
 
1940izhevsk said:
Personally, I'm shocked at it's $379 MSRP, for a mid-size, striker-fired polymer wondernine. I've seen listings on Gunbroker for $275-$325, which again, astonishes me.

Has anyone had personal experience with the pistol yet? Is it worth buying, or no?
Click to expand...
Two words:

HELL YES.

Check out this review from Hickok45:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EM7Z2zQG4k

The Ruger Security 9 is set to be an awesome contender for a defensive carry pistol. Excellent firearm from all preliminary reports.
 
It just came out and will take time to see how it does with reliability and durability. I am surprised that the internal frame is aluminum rather than steel but they had to cut costs on it to get to that price point.
 
Check out this review from Hickok45:
Click to expand...

I like Hickok. I think of him as the granddad of shooting. But he doesn't really do "reviews". He steps out into his yard and plinks away at some steel targets while talking. That's fair and he doesn't claim to be doing anything more.
 
I look forward to seeing if Mr Gunsngear will be doing a review. He doesn't strike me as a shill like most of the others these days.

I have no interest personally in the Security-9, but I have lots of people that come to me, wanting to get into shooting, and usually on a budget. If this pistol turns out as good as I think it will, it could start being one of my recommendations. After I spend some time with it, too, of course.
 
I'm astonished when a polymer, striker fired pistol has an MSRP of over $350. The S9, a looks challenged (IMHO), aluminum gutted pistol is nothing to get excited about. Just my opinion. I don't understand why so many polymer guns are, well, dumb looking. It is possible to make a decent looking polymer, striker fired, pistol. But it seems almost impossible for some makers to do so. Oh well, I like hammered guns anyway.
 
I think what hurts the looks of polymer guns is they're always black. If companies would make some white frames and satin stainless slides, people would point and say, "pretty" in the gun store.

I've found myself liking the silver cerakote LC9's and LCP's. FDE is nice too. A little color makes a world of difference.
 
I think this will be a great seller for Ruger, here are some minor negatives:

Why did Ruger put Glock style sights on the Security 9? They work okay but it's one of the features on a Glock a lot of people complain about.

Is Ruger a firearms manufacturer or a magazine manufacturer? Why is there no magazine compatibility between the SR, American, and Security 9 lines?
 
Watch how many gun rags and reviews will be comparing the Security9 to the Glock 19. I bet a dollar to a doughnut that you will see many. Is Ruger trying to copy the Glock like they did with the Keltec and LCP?
A Ruger/Glock for $300.00? Sounds crazy, but Ruger might be playing a really smart hand.
 
sigarms228 said:
It just came out and will take time to see how it does with reliability and durability. I am surprised that the internal frame is aluminum rather than steel but they had to cut costs on it to get to that price point.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the move to aluminum rather than steel had to do with keeping the weight down? For no more material than is involved, I doubt the difference in cost would be that great.

The Glock 19 is sort of the "gold standard" for a compact semi-auto firearm, and a design that has withstood the test of time. Producing a semi-auto that is very comparable to the Glock 19 for 1/2 to 2/3rds of the Glock 19 price might be a very smart marketing move -- particularly when offered by a company with a reputation for reliability that is in many respects quite similar to Glock's.

The fact that the gun is hammer-fired rather than striker-fired will attract some folks who HATE striker-fired actions. (Ruger does know how to build striker-fired compacts -- I have a SR9c and I like it a lot.)
 
Producing a semi-auto that is very comparable to the Glock 19 for 1/2 to 2/3rds of the Glock 19 price might be a very smart marketing move -- particularly when offered by a company with a reputation for reliability
Click to expand...

Maybe. Though it's not like Ruger is the first company to do this. The Smith and Wesson Sigma line (and its derivatives) has been doing this for a long while without making major in-roads into the market.
 
I feel the same way about Hickcock. I have to say I love watching his channel. I love watching him shoot and dream of having my own compound. However I also take him with a grain of salt. I know that he has certain bias's toward some guns. Heck, that is only human. And I understand that many guns he shoots for reviews have not been really tested for durability, etc. Take the Security9, we all know that he loves Glocks. And the Security9 might down the road eat the Glock for Lunch. On the flip side, the light material and build quality, might mean the gun falls about beyond 3,000 rounds.
I have no dog in this fight. I am a Ruger fan, but not all Rugers. I saw and handled the Security9 and yes, it seems based on the LCPll of which I am no fan. Not a fan of Glocks, but that does not mean they are not great guns. Just not for me.
The Ruger LCPll was the top selling gun of 2017. That does not mean it is a great gun. Marketing and perception has a lot to do with Purchasing. On this basis, knowing that Ruger spends a ton on Marketing. I think this gun will start off being a great success especially with comparing to the Glock another well know brand and lots of fans. Just like the Glock is a "Gold Standard" means nothing to me, and most likely repeated by Glock fans. That is a personal perception and does not seem based on facts. I think Blonds are the Gold Standard. That is until I see a Redhead. Or in many cases a Brunette.
 
Last edited:
Lohman446 said:
Maybe. Though it's not like Ruger is the first company to do this. The Smith and Wesson Sigma line (and its derivatives) has been doing this for a long while without making major in-roads into the market.
Click to expand...

If S&W had not had so many missteps getting that gun where it is today (which include a Glock lawsuit which S&W lost) -- and post-lawsuit models that only looked a bit like a Glock 19 -- it took S&W a long time to get the gun where it is today.

The newest version of that original gun is a reasonably priced, basically solid gun with a reasonable trigger. Had it first hit the market in its current form it would likely have been a success.

But now, it's a bit like Ford bringing out an improved Edsel. Crappy reputations are hard to live down. Besides, S&W is selling a LOT of M&P and Shields and that basic design seems to be doing quite well.
 
Last edited:
Besides, S&W is selling a LOT of M&P and Shields
Click to expand...

As others have noted the LCP sold well so I may be off on this. Still trying to enter the "basic function of a Glock but cheaper" niche is not simple. Not because of Glock directly but because this niche is so well populated. Can Ruger pull it off? Possibly but it is not this wide open field either.
 
I think the security-9 will compete more with S&W and Taurus than with Glock. I haven't had the chance to shoot one yet but if I'm just looking at the specs and reviews of others it appears to be a great value for the compact 9mm market.

One thing that confused me though, Why the Glock sights?? That's the one big complaint people have about Glocks.
 
I wonder if the move to aluminum rather than steel had to do with keeping the weight down? For no more material than is involved, I doubt the difference in cost would be that great.
Click to expand...

Could be but I tend to doubt that at it's price point. The Ruger American, which is higher priced, has a steel inside frame I believe as does SIG P320, Ruger APX, and newer M&P 2.0 advertises strengthening frame with more steel. Many of us would rather have a steel slide riding on steel rails for long term durability concerns.
 
Many of us would rather have a steel slide riding on steel rails for long term durability concerns.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, how many rounds is someone really going to fire who buys a pistol primarily based on price (when for high volume shooters the cost of ammo will easily eclipse the price of the pistol itself)? This isn't me disparaging people looking for a deal. Each person has a budget that he/she has to operate in and I'd rather someone have an option for a firearm that he/she can afford than not. I'm simply pointing out that if you were really looking for long term durability on the order of thousands or tens of thousands of rounds I'm not sure you'd be in the market for this pistol in the first place. My experience with many people that purchase Ruger handguns is they get shot on a more limited basis than some other manufacturers. This is just my experience and I have no doubt there is an exception to that, if not multiple exceptions, on this forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top