So that new Ruger Security-9...

Also, the polymer-frame Ruger P-series pistols had the steel slide riding directly on the frame, and I have yet to hear of someone wearing one of those out. :)
 
Fishbed77 said:
And yet SIG Sauer P220-series pistols have been running just fine for decades with steel slides on aluminum rails.
Click to expand...
Yes and I have a P220, but the aluminum is thick and anodized which protects the aluminum. No mention of anodizing the aluminum frame for the Ruger. Even so with the SIGs there are some concerns longer term and recommended use of grease to protect the frame rails minimizing wear on the anodizing.

As mentioned the target consumer for this pistol as almost almost always a low volume shooter.
 
TunnelRat and carguychris, I am with you in having concerns about the mechanics of both the pistols under discussion. I would not make a purchase without studying it much more carefully, and the mechanics each of you describe would, once confirmed, keep me from using them as carry pistols.
 
2 Security 9 's on sale will be about the same price as one Glock 19. You could arm two family members on the cheap.
I wouldn't mind picking up 2 of these myself.
 
The question about drop safety might suggest that the Security 9 isn't a good carry gun, and that point certainly warrants more investigation. (It'll be interesting to see whether California will allow it to be sold there.)

That said, the Security 9 might be a reasonable home security gun, particularly if it's kept loaded, but with an empty chamber in a secure but accessible location when the home owner is at home. (That woudln't be my first choice for a gun that must be put into action quickly, but this Ruger could be a cost effective weapon for some folks when the budget is tight.)
 
For those completely uniformed about how the Kel Tec hammer works, go to KTOG, but don't stay too long with those people, and see why some of us in the know-know this isn't a safe system.

Even the Kel Tec P-11 with its 11lb trigger is not entirely drop safe. I can dig up the test showing it dropping the hammer if challenged.

An unaltered Kel Tec P3AT with factory springs is safe and will be drop safe. Not safe is an altered P3AT- why the LCPII concern is real.

Same principles of the hammer apply here for the Security-9 which uses the Kel Tec hammer. Unlikely, but without the block and the safety off, yes. Technically it can fire when dropped.
 
I too held one of these recently and didn't really care for it. I didn't shoot it though. I think if I were in the market for a sub-$300 pistol, I'd lean heavily towards the Sar CM9 Gen2.

Sent from my BTV-W09 using Tapatalk
 
After all this perhaps the real bargain is the Ruger American. That is if you can get past the horrible weight and that trigger with the Glock dingus that can sink below the level of the trigger face and hurt your little trigger fingee.

I kind of like the American's steam punk looks, cast steel chassis, and genuine Novak's sights.

Oh...I forgot. The Novak's tapered design preclude your cocking the gun with one hand. So if you are wounded in a firefight and don't have use of both arms, you are screwed. Strange how this is never a concern with Novak's when put on 1911's

:):)
 
Last edited:
The thing I find must interesting about this is it seems to be a lot like a Glock 19, but without all the features added in gen 4 and 5. If Glock had simply continued producing the simpler pistols it started with they might be close the the price point.
Maybe Glock should release a G19 Classic at a similar price point without all the features.

As another poster noted, I'm amazed almost NONE of their mags are compatible. Every other brand seems to understand people like that feature, but Ruger seems set on blowing off the consumer and keeping everything proprietary and model specific.

Magazine issues are what haunt many models. The way to design a pistol would seem to be to start with a proven magazine.

It is called the security and I am willing to bet it will be a big hit with armed guards who aren't gun people. I wouldn't mind having one, but not near the top of my long list, let alone on the short list.
 
I handled at Security-9 at the LGS the other day.

The pistol feels cheap-ish, but I was expecting that, and I don't consider it to be a deal-killer. Same goes for the odd trigger; smooth and light, but without a well-defined break.

I was seriously off-put by the safety, which as I previously discussed, IMHO must be used for safe operation of this pistol. It's very small and it's not ambidextrous, which is obvious (albeit odd, given the new MkIV's blatantly oversize ambi safeties). :rolleyes: However, my main complaint is that the lever was VERY hard to move into the SAFE position, as in hard enough that both myself and the counter guy were initially worried that it was stuck; I let HIM force it because I didn't want to be the guy who broke a brand-new gun. :(

This may be related to a peculiarity of the design; unlike most thumb safeties that slide without pivoting or pivot at the rear of the frame, the pivot point of the S-9 safety is well in FRONT of the lever. Consequently, the lever wants to move slightly forward as you push it upwards, the opposite direction that your thumb is moving. It took a slight shift in my grip to move the lever in the direction it wants to move. However, it was also pretty obvious that the detent on this particular pistol was MUCH too strong.

NOT impressed. :(
johnwilliamson062 said:
As another poster noted, I'm amazed almost NONE of their mags are compatible. Every other brand seems to understand people like that feature, but Ruger seems set on blowing off the consumer and keeping everything proprietary and model specific.
Click to expand...
I'm not certain that the S-9 magazines are as model-specific as we think.

First, the Ruger webpage for the new PC Carbine says this, my emphasis in boldface:
Interchangeable magazine wells for use of common Ruger® and Glock® magazines. Ships with SR-Series Pistol and Security-9® magazine well installed and an additional magazine well accepting Glock® magazines is included*. Ruger American Pistol® magazine well is available at ShopRuger.com.
Click to expand...
"Magazine well" is singular, implying that the SR9 and S-9 utilize the same adapter in the PC9.

Second, although the SR9 and S-9 magazines have different Ruger parts numbers, they look absolutely the same in stock photos.

I wonder if this is a situation similar to the S&W SW9VE and SD9 VE: identical magazine bodies and followers, but different plastic base plates to match the differing grip frame styling. Trim to fit, or simply ignore the non-matching appearance, and they're effectively interchangeable.

To know for sure, we may have to wait until someone here physically tries to use an SR9 magazine in an S-9 and vice versa.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is there is an additional cut-out on one of the mags and they are not compatible, at least not both ways. The security may work in the others, but the others not in the security.

I'm not sure. Ruger isn't clear. Glock makes it simple.
 
Tried one of these at the show Sunday. Grip feels good, much better than the awful clunky American.

Carguychris and others, does applying the safety make the new one drop safe? Would prevent hammer from dropping I presume.
 
Mosin44az said:
Tried one of these at the show Sunday. Grip feels good, much better than the awful clunky American.
Click to expand...
I'll agree with you there. My main criticism of the American is the peculiar grip shape, which IMHO seems like it has pressure points in odd places, like the designer wasn't really familiar with human anatomy. :confused: The S-9 grip is not like that, although it's no ergonomic wonder.

I did think that the grip texture could be more aggressive, but perhaps Ruger is assuming that owners will add tape, sleeves, Talon Grip, etc. as it suits them. I actually think there's something to be said for this design approach.

All that being said, IMHO the S-9 falls short of the SR9 in the ergonomic and trigger quality department, as does the American.

Regarding my earlier comments: did the sample you handled have unusually stiff safety engagement?
Mosin44az said:
Carguychris and others, does applying the safety make the new one drop safe? Would prevent hammer from dropping I presume.
Click to expand...
Ruger claims that the pistol incorporates a hammer block. From the Ruger Security-9 webpage:
Safety features include... [a] hammer catch to help prevent the hammer from contacting the firing pin unless the trigger is pulled.
Click to expand...
However, the issue I (and TunnelRat and others) have is that there is no positive trigger-actuated firing-pin block, so the firing pin is free to move at all times. Thus, the pistol could discharge if the muzzle or aft end of the frame strikes a hard surface with enough force for the firing pin's own inertia to cause it to move independently of the slide.

This is by no means unique—the M1911 and many other older pistols are like this—but it's unusual in a newer design.

Of course, firing-pin blocks themselves are never failsafe, but I would argue that a pistol with one is MORE drop-safe than a pistol without one.
 
carguychris said:
However, the issue I (and TunnelRat and others) have is that there is no positive trigger-actuated firing-pin block, so the firing pin is free to move at all times. Thus, the pistol could discharge if the muzzle or aft end of the frame strikes a hard surface with enough force for the firing pin's own inertia to cause it to move independently of the slide.

This is by no means unique—the M1911 and many other older pistols are like this—but it's unusual in a newer design.

Of course, firing-pin blocks themselves are never failsafe, but I would argue that a pistol with one is MORE drop-safe than a pistol without one.
Click to expand...

You could also argue that every pistol would be MORE drop-safe with a manual safety than a pistol without one. However, we know that many pistols have other safety mechanisms that make them adequately drop-safe without a manual safety.

Springfield Armory 1911s use a different approach to deal with an inertial firing pin in the absence of a firing pin safety. Has anyone actually tried to determine Ruger's design approach or are the complaints about the lack of a firing pin safety simply uninformed talk?
 
gc70 said:
Springfield Armory 1911s use a different approach to deal with an inertial firing pin in the absence of a firing pin safety. Has anyone actually tried to determine Ruger's design approach or are the complaints about the lack of a firing pin safety simply uninformed talk?
Click to expand...
You're presumably referring to a lightweight firing pin and a stronger firing pin spring.

I'm actually quite curious about Ruger's design approach here. I haven't been able to verify anything since the info on the pistol's webpage is pretty sketchy.

My main point is not necessarily that the S-9 is categorically unsafe, but rather that I'd like to know what sort of safety measures Ruger has taken in lieu of a firing-pin safety, particularly when the thumb safety is disengaged.

So yeah, it's arguably uninformed talk. :)
 
Last edited:
carguychris said:
My main point is not necessarily that the S-9 is categorically unsafe, but rather that I'd like to know what sort of safety measures Ruger has taken in lieu of a firing-pin safety, particularly when the thumb safety is disengaged.
Click to expand...

Me too, just said differently. :)
 
Personally, I think this requires someone doing a plastic mallet dance all over the Security 9, like they did with the Sig 320; all the rest is supposition. It could be (I don't know if it is or isn't) that Ruger's 'neutral sear' and hammer catch work perfectly, and the firing pin is either TI or otherwise engineered to be drop safe.

Larry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top