[MarkCO]

You know what I meant Commando.

No clue what you meant to say. When you state a false claim, how do you expect anyone to figure out what you meant if that's not what you meant?

Childish name calling does not clarify your false statements either.

 

[denny4850]

Yet another cheap Glock clone.

Its always hilarious here to see folks claim that Glock needs new innovations yet Glock’s design is copied continuously by other firearms manufacturers and upstart companies (generally quick to fail).

I would never classify any Ruger as a cheap Glock clone. I have both. Like both. They're both well made and are far from cheap.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

ruger and junk are interchangeable words.

Although ruger does charge a lot for their low end junk.

 

[denny4850]

It's like the label inside the visor in your car. That's really wacked out putting a warning label on a gun, like your mom told you, watch out johnny.

I could care less about inscriptions. I just want the gun that's good for my size of hand, grip strength, joy to shoot etc. Example, I like the 21 for bedside and long car trips. Carried a 17 for decades, then went to a 19. Switched to a PC10C when they came out for build, accuracy, etc., with a backup 380 Ruger for my pocket. They all work best for me and I never gave the writing on any of them so much as a thought.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

ruger and junk are interchangeable words.

Although ruger does charge a lot for their low end junk.

Yeah, not really. Their older stuff was far from junk, and was pretty reliable. If we're gonna get into that argument, that's fine; Glock had issues and even some minor issues as recent as Gen 5. Sig, S&W has horrible QC, again, etc.

Yes, you're correct that their newer low end stuff like a Security 9 is comically overpriced, I'll agree. Affordable and well made aren't junk.

The OG SR9 series was far from junk. I own them, have worked on them, and they're finely crafted as far as polymer guns in the $500-700 price range goes.

Their revolvers, although far from refined like a nice Smith, are bombproof. Also, it's not hard at all to refine a Ruger revolver. My GP100 and SP101 both have triggers on par with any factory Smith wheelgun. My GP100 4 inch is on par with my 686 I wish I'd kept.

The old P series seemed like junk to many, but that's because they were affordably priced, because their investment casting methods allowed them to make all metal guns for reasonable prices. Albeit a bit chunky, due to that investment casting process, but still reliable, and durable as hell.

There's an old story apocryphal about Gaston wanting to price Glocks very low when they were entering the civilian market in the 80s, to make them affordable. He was promptly advised to price them higher, or people would assume that new gun called Glock was cheap plastic junk. He priced them accordingly higher. The rest is history.

Stating that all Rugers are interchangeable with the word junk is categorically false, and shows me that you have little to no experience with the brand. If you have experience with the brand, I'd predict that it's extremely minimal and was probably a bad experience, which has tainted and biased your opinion. If I'm wrong, and you have lots of experience, I wouldn't understand... If I'm wrong and you have zero experience, well.... No further clarification required.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

Yeah, not really. Their older stuff was far from junk, and was pretty reliable. If we're gonna get into that argument, that's fine; Glock had issues and even some minor issues as recent as Gen 5. Sig, S&W has horrible QC, again, etc.

Yes, you're correct that their newer low end stuff like a Security 9 is comically overpriced, I'll agree. Affordable and well made aren't junk.

The OG SR9 series was far from junk. I own them, have worked on them, and they're finely crafted as far as polymer guns in the $500-700 price range goes.

Their revolvers, although far from refined like a nice Smith, are bombproof. Also, it's not hard at all to refine a Ruger revolver. My GP100 and SP101 both have triggers on par with any factory Smith wheelgun. My GP100 4 inch is on par with my 686 I wish I'd kept.

The old P series seemed like junk to many, but that's because they were affordably priced, because their investment casting methods allowed them to make all metal guns for reasonable prices. Albeit a bit chunky, due to that investment casting process, but still reliable, and durable as hell.

There's an old story apocryphal about Gaston wanting to price Glocks very low when they were entering the civilian market in the 80s, to make them affordable. He was promptly advised to price them higher, or people would assume that new gun called Glock was cheap plastic junk. He priced them accordingly higher. The rest is history.

Stating that all Rugers are interchangeable with the word junk is categorically false, and shows me that you have little to no experience with the brand. If you have experience with the brand, I'd predict that it's extremely minimal and was probably a bad experience, which has tainted and biased your opinion. If I'm wrong, and you have lots of experience, I wouldn't understand... If I'm wrong and you have zero experience, well.... No further clarification required.

Ah…but I do have experience.

The older ruger revolvers (both single and double action) were good to go.

The mini 14 was terrible junk.

Ruger’s entry into ar15’s a few years ago was a flop. Newbees at the range who bought them always ended up asking me to fix them (walking hammer trigger pins due to non-symmetrical receiver holes, loose castle nuts on the buffer tubes along with no staking, etc. Most replaced the problematic piston receiver top end with BCM units.

The sr9 was a flop no different that the S&W sigma.

YMVV

 

[Jarhead Al]

the S&W sigma.

What a piece of fecal matter

 

[DrewBone]

What a piece of fecal matter

Have you ever owned one, or are you just parroting the usual BS about these handguns? If it's from actual experience then I'm sorry to hear of your troubles.

I own two Sigma SW40F's. These were the handguns that were so close in design to Glock that Glock sued S&W for patent infringement and won; they settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of $$ and S&W was to change the design and/or be fined for each subsequent sale of the original models after the settlement.

They're rumored to be P'sOS, but these pistols have got surprisingly comfortable ergonomics (Glock could take a lesson from this), they're a pleasure to shoot for a polymer pistol chambered in .40S&W, they're as accurate as any other polymer pistol, and they've gone BANG whenever I pull their triggers, the latter of which I never had a problem with; these were never designed to be target pistols with matching target triggers.

I paid <$250 for each used, and don't feel the least bit cheated. Other than the huge Ruger-esque warnings on their slides, I actually like their smooth and simple lines and the fact that they don't have accessory rails.

 

[Jarhead Al]

Have you ever owned one, or are you just parroting the usual BS about these handguns? If it's from actual experience then I'm sorry to hear of your troubles.

I own two Sigma SW40F's. These were the handguns that were so close in design to Glock that Glock sued S&W for patent infringement and won; they settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of $$ and S&W was to change the design and/or be fined for each subsequent sale of the original models after the settlement.

They're rumored to be P'sOS, but these pistols have got surprisingly comfortable ergonomics (Glock could take a lesson from this), they're a pleasure to shoot for a polymer pistol chambered in .40S&W, they're as accurate as any other polymer pistol, and they've gone BANG whenever I pull their triggers, the latter of which I never had a problem with; these were never designed to be target pistols with matching target triggers.

I paid <$250 for each used, and don't feel the least bit cheated. Other than the huge Ruger-esque warnings on their slides, I actually like their smooth and simple lines and the fact that they don't have accessory rails.

I was issued one in the 90s. Our agency had multiple issues, lots of sights falling off during firing. The one I was issued didn't give me problems. We traded 5906s for the Sigma 40. S&W gave 100% when we traded to 4006s, so they did us right. We eventually went to Glock 22.3s and I am unaware of any WML issues at our agency.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

@Singlestack Wonder

Ah…but I do have experience.
It seems you do, but to that limited degree. Most of this seems indirect and anecdotal to very limited at best.

The older ruger revolvers (both single and double action) were good to go.
Yes, and even the new ones aren't bad. People are upset about machining issues, fair, but again, Smith is suffering pretty heavily here. Should've seen the Colt a forum member here brought up. Wasn't horrible, but for a pricey revolver such as a pony, it better be perfect. Ruger wheelguns cost typically half that, and my SP101 bought recently was pretty nice out of the box. Sample size of one. I believe it was @racer88

The mini 14 was terrible junk.
Barrel whip was an issue on earlier Mini-14s, and their accuracy even before heating up was sub par at best. Especially considering how much they want(ed) for one. I had a couple Minis over the years, early thinner barrel models with that unimpressive accuracy. I did decide I wanted an M1A or a Mini-14, and I bought a brand new Mini-14 several months ago. I didn't wanna get into a new caliber and I'd heard the new Minis since 2003 (580+ series) were pretty solid with a heavier barrel and improved manufacturing. All that is true; very minimal complaints online about 580 and later series rifles. I'm glad I didn't end up keeping the older Minis, and dropped the horribly shiny coin on a new one. Accuracy is superb, and Minis of the last 20 or so years are up to this standard and are good to go. The two Minis I had owned previously would jam here and there, even with OEM Ruger mags. This new one is AR-15 reliable, no jams at all.

Ruger’s entry into ar15’s a few years ago was a flop. Newbees at the range who bought them always ended up asking me to fix them (walking hammer trigger pins due to non-symmetrical receiver holes, loose castle nuts on the buffer tubes along with no staking, etc. Most replaced the problematic piston receiver top end with BCM units.
Some of that is fair, but piston ARs are just funny, regardless of who makes them. Sorry to kinda change the subject, but yeah... Piston ARs were a fad, and they're slowly dying back off. It also does not seem you have more than a few instances at ranges. Entry level ARs such as Ruger, M&P, PSA, etc are just gonna have those here and there issues. Get an LMT or BCM or DD if you don't want issues, or get a modern day Colt... wait... scratch Colt, again.... Those are also going to cost typically 2-3 times as much.

The sr9 was a flop no different that the S&W sigma.
No, actually it was not. It was produced for over 10 years, and was really only discontinued because Ruger decided to go with the horrible RAP and Security 9 type stuff; this was Ruger's first big miss, the RAP and killing the SR series. While the SR series wasn't ever going to "Kill Glock" (that cringey Glock Killer crap) or any of that, it did do pretty well during its run, and is a solid design modeled closely after Glock (internally) but not a clone. Ruger isn't a best seller in centerfire pistols in the US. Never has been, never will. Does not mean that they didn't do well. Just because LE agencies never used something doesn't mean it didn't do well.

The Sigma was a direct copy of a Glock, as you know, and yeah... I have no ill will towards the Sigma.

Again, not being combative, but debating your points which are largely based on opinion and anecdotal or very limited personal experience evidence. Call me white knighting or fanboying for Ruger, don't care. If you wanna crap on Ruger, crap on them in the correct areas, like the RAP, or their newer Taurus type stuff that costs $50-100 too much, like the Security series...

We forgot, that Ruger is indisputably the KING of awesome .22LR stuff. Their focus on .22LR stuff is next level, and I can't think of a manufacturer that does it as well as they do.

Lastly, their Customer Service is simply #1. No one is better than Ruger, although, one could argue that you shouldn't need it as much as one has over the last few years at Ruger. Sig and S&W are close in terms of excellent service, in my limited experience having to use them.

YMVV

 

[boilergonzo]

ruger and junk are interchangeable words.

Although ruger does charge a lot for their low end junk.

My experiences differ. Sure, Ruger has made bad guns, but they have also made good guns, and they seem to be held up as a good gun company by most.

I would trust Ruger and their customer service just as much as I would trust Glock. And that isn't a knock on Glock. I view them as a good gun company, as well!

 

[boilergonzo]

I know this is blasphemous to most but I used to think USPs were just okay looking. But now I honestly think besides Shadows they are some of the best looking pistols.

I think USP's are a decent cosmetic upgrade from Glock, but if I were passing out scores, a Glock is a 5 and a USP is a 6.5! Neither will be prom queen (or king)!

A SIG 230 of 232 in stainless is a 10.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

My experiences differ. Sure, Ruger has made bad guns, but they have also made good guns, and they seem to be held up as a good gun company by most.

I would trust Ruger and their customer service just as much as I would trust Glock. And that isn't a knock on Glock. I view them as a good gun company, as well!

Well put, well put.

 

[boilergonzo]

"Running"🏃‍♀️ hundreds & hundreds, with plans on thousands, of more rounds of ammo to out Glock a Glock with a non-Glock. I think I'll just keep on Glocking.

Fair. To each their own. But remember, there were people who recognized the potential of future up-and-comers when others mocked them as wanna-be's and thought it was stupid to consider buying them.

For example, Toyota/Lexus, Glock, Apple, and Google.

I still remember the BlackBerry and Nokia people scoffing at those weird iPhones!

My point is, somebody has to try the new offering to see if it is a viable competitor in the marketplace. It may flop, it may compete, or it may prevail.

But nobody knows until somebody tries! We could all still be using AltaVista, WebCrawler, and Yahoo! search engines, but this crazy thing starting out as "Backrub" had some brave folks who were NOT closed to new ideas start trying it around 1998, and now it is has grown to such a dominant search engine brand we even adapted its name into everyday language and folks sometimes say "just google it".

Times change. New offerings emerge. Open minded people examine the new concepts to see if they like them better than the way things were before. And opinions vary.

 

[Para-bellum]

I think USP's are a decent cosmetic upgrade from Glock, but if I were passing out scores, a Glock is a 5 and a USP is a 6.5! Neither will be prom queen (or king)!

A SIG 230 of 232 in stainless is a 10.

i don’t know why but i really love how these look

 

[boilergonzo]

View attachment 1356546
i don’t know why but i really love how these look

Sweet guns, for sure. It is a rugged sort of beauty. I don't have one of the USP45 handy, but here is my HKUSP-9SD.

But the 230/232 is a work of art in my opinion! A truly beautiful firearm!

 

[MCPreacher]

However, upon taking down and cleaning it after I had posted that range trip update, there was some chattering in the very front 1/2 inch of the barrel. .

You are not alone. If you look in the barrel from the crown side, you might find what several owners have found, a jagged cut across the lands, about 6-8mm into the barrel. I am trying to get a response from Ruger about this, but nothing yet.

 

[vart]

I just checked mine and it also has the defect...

 

[PilatusTurbo]

I just checked mine and it also has the defect...

View attachment 1356709

View attachment 1356710

You are not alone. If you look in the barrel from the crown side, you might find what several owners have found, a jagged cut across the lands, about 6-8mm into the barrel. I am trying to get a response from Ruger about this, but nothing yet.

My 2nd RXM had this issue. I thought I brought it up in a recent post, but there's a lot of posts. Call Ruger, they'll get you a label to send it back. Mine is currently up the road in Prescott. My first RXM does not have this issue, and is a later serial in the series. They'll apologize, and they will get it made right for ya.


At this point, I'd call, wait on hold. Politely then inform them that you know of several people online showing pictures, and you want a new barrel overnighted or 2nd day air with an SASE. If they require the pistol to come back, at this point, I'd be disappointed.

However, it is a risk we take/took being an early adopter. I knew stuff like this would happen, but Ruger is solid, so I'm not stressed.

 

[pgg00]

I just checked mine and it also has the defect...

View attachment 1356709

View attachment 1356710

You need to try accuracy with the defect and then with the new barrel