So that new Ruger Security-9...

If it's the Kel Tec hammer design (which it is) people have already tested this design. At least on Kel Tec, it ain't drop safe. This is *probably* true of the Kel Tec hammer designed LCPII and is also *probably* true of the Security-9.
 
Carguy Chris, I couldn’t test the thumb safety at the show.

There is an American Rifleman review online that covers the Security 9 and the new PC9 rifle.

They had no trouble with the thumb safety,though they said the slide lock was very stiff.

Oh, but they also say the Security 9 has a lightweight titanium firing pin with a strong firing pin spring, preventing firing without a hammer strike....
 
I bought one about 3 weeks ago. I have about 425 rounds though at this point. I guess I'm not the target market because I'm already over the ammo allotment someone has said the buyers would shoot though it. :) I have had 3 fail to extract using crap steel cased ammo. With actual SD ammo it as been great.

The FP spring seems very strong, but I don't have a way to actually measure it. Pushing a flat head screw driver against it (while disassembled) it takes a fair amount of pressure to push the FP out. Much more pressure then it would take to do the same with a KT P11 I had. I do agree that a actual FP block would have been a great additional safety feature. But I guess that it would have taken more engineering to get it there. IMO Ruger really should have used the LC9s design and made it a double stack.


The thumb safety locks both the trigger and the hammer, I would guess it's blocking the sear. The thumb safety does get easier to engage after a few 100 rounds.
 
wild cat mccane said:
If it's the Kel Tec hammer design (which it is) people have already tested this design. At least on Kel Tec, it ain't drop safe. This is *probably* true of the Kel Tec hammer designed LCPII and is also *probably* true of the Security-9.
Click to expand...
Do the Kel-Tecs have a hammer block like the Ruger?

Also, most of what I've seen online seems to indicate that the problem with the Kel-Tecs is a combination of a too-massive firing pin and an inadequately stiff firing-pin spring; IOW the drop-fire issue has to do with independent firing-pin movement and not the hammer dropping at an inappropriate time. What have you seen to indicate that the K-T hammer design has a problem?
 
johnwilliamson062 said:
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.
Click to expand...
That's why I'm such a Glock fan. All their magazines work the same across all gens, so long as you're a right handed shooter, which most people are.

It's like, even the LCP II, while it can work with LCP mags, it doesn't have last round hold open. Why Ruger didn't put that feature in the original LCP makes no sense because it also had a slide stop, it's just that it never served any function during operation. What a great use of time and material putting a useless part.

And you're right, Ruger is the worst offender of this that I've seen. In 30 years they've had several different pistols and magazines and then they come out with new pistols that take new magazines... it's become absurd. I'm hesitant to buy into either the LC9s or EC9s because I get the feeling Ruger is going to come out with a new single stack 9mm that will have some really cool feature (a mini RMR that folds when carried, unfolds and turns on when drawn from a holster) but it will use different magazines!!!

In the box for all new owners of the Security 9, Ruger should offer a 1 time rebate to cut the notch in all the SR9 mags that owner has that he wants to use in the Security 9 and free of charge.
 
Holsters work across all generations of Glock also, don't they?

Between mags and holsters I certainly have more than he cost of the pistol invested in accessories. Maybe I am in a minority on this subject, but it is a definite plus for Glock on my tally.
 
johnwilliamson062 said:
Holsters work across all generations of Glock also, don't they?

Between mags and holsters I certainly have more than he cost of the pistol invested in accessories. Maybe I am in a minority on this subject, but it is a definite plus for Glock on my tally.
Click to expand...
No, the later railed Glocks won't typically fit in holster made for the earlier models.


Larry
 
WARNING - HANDLING

Do not load the pistol until you are ready to use it, and unload it immediately when you have completed shooting. (See “Unloading Warning” on page 17.)

If dropped or struck, the pistol may fire. Keep chamber empty unless actually firing! For maximum safety when carrying the pistol with a loaded magazine in place, the chamber should be empty, and the slide should be closed. If placed into a holster, check it to be sure that the slide is not retracted far enough to chamber a cartridge from the magazine.
...
ANY GUN MAY FIRE IF DROPPED
Click to expand...

Honestly, if you feel you have to write that in your manual, go ahead and cancel the product launch. Unloaded pistols are of no value to me.

I hat to say this because I really like Ruger.
 
I had the chance to handle and dry fire one of these pistols at my local gun store. I think the trigger is quite nice and if I didn't already have a Sig P320 Compact 9mm I would have bought the Ruger on the spot.
 
This thread hints at the Kel Tec drop tests and you don't have to go to the vile KTOG forum: https://www.thektog.org/threads/test-fail-to-dishcarge-when-dropped.198932/ This thread is about all the the tests in general.

Remember, the drop testing for the P3AT/PF-9 hammer and the P-11 hammer was done over a decade ago. I believe a guy named (Don) Golden Loki did the test? This guy left American and his site went down 2012. Google's wayback machine has it....http://web.archive.org/web/20121003044251/http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/tests.htm

I was wrong. It was 1bad6-. Just found the P-11 test that was the gold standard for the P-11 (different hammer than the P3AT--what the LCP copied). http://1bad69.com/keltec/droptestresults.htm Drop heights of 3ft, boom.

Some of us know our stuff about Kel Tec designs. Being so poor in the early years, customers had to do Kel Tec's work of bringing a functioning gun to market. I put my years taking about P3ATs, PF-9s, and P-11s. Trust me, unless we know more about the firing pin, Ruger's warning about not carrying loaded is accurate on the Kel Tec hammer-regardless if this message was in their other model manuals.

Also, the LCPII is most likely to be a real threat to safety when dropped. As you will read, the fact the trigger is so light and travel is so little, that's the problem. The Kel Tec hammer can't physically do that safely.
 
Last edited:
According to American Rifleman, the Security 9 has a TI firing pin and heavy pin spring; they directly address this in their review:

The trigger’s inner safety lever is another component that works to prevent unintentional discharges. It also acts as an inertial block. Lastly, a lightweight titanium firing pin is paired with a strong return spring. The lighter pin requires a blow from the hammer to move forward with enough force to fire a chambered cartridge. Dropping the gun on a hard surface does not provide enough directed energy to move the firing pin. The Security-9 does not have a magazine disconnect safety and will fire if the trigger is pressed while the magazine is removed.
Click to expand...


So if this is the 'Kel-Tec' hammer, it's been updated significantly.

Larry
 
Even with the crummy trigger (I replaced mine) hickock45 still shot the taurus pt111 g2 mill pro better than this ruger. So while it might have the ruger name behind it I suspect its just another middle of the pack budget polymer.
 
wild cat mccane said:
Yes.

Ruger is using the Kel Tec hammer.
Click to expand...
While Ruger may be using a similar layout, geometry, materials and implementation all come into play in the final product; and as noted, Ruger is using a TI firing pin, so they obviously addressed at least some of the potential defects in the design.

I still think some in-hand testing will be required to see if the Ruger is totally drop-safe; just as it is with all new designs.

Larry
 
wild cat mccane said:
Ruger is using the Kel Tec hammer.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. The Ruger design is SIMILAR to the Kel-Tec design but it's not the same. More than the hammer is involved. Your analysis seems to be based on the general similarities of the designs but ignores the differences, and at least one of the differences could be significant!
  • Ruger's hammer block safety which, when engaged, will keep the hammer from striking the firing pin if the gun is struck or dropped. Will this mechanism (when used) ause the gun to behave differently than the Kel-tec design when the gun slammed or dropped? [Note: This is a restatement of what Ruger shows on their website; my original language was not as clear as it should have been.]

  • If the Ruger hammer block is not engaged, will the Ruger's firing pin weight, hammer weight, and firing pin spring resistance cause the gun to perform differently than those same components of the Kel-Tec design when the gun is slammed or dropped? (Is the Ruger design, when the safety is not engaged, more or less resistant to inertial discharge than the Kel-Tec design?)
Until we get answers to those questions, your wariness is probably appropriate, but NOT your apparent certainty about the Ruger's lack of safety. We need more facts and test results.

In the meantime, if someone owns a Security 9, it will probably be a good idea to use that hammer block safety when carrying -- because then there seems no question about that the gun will be safer if dropped or slammed when the safety is engaged.
.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top