Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'GSSF' started by btolliverjr, Jan 17, 2010.
In your opinion, which one is better; the Ruger KP89 or the S&W 5906 and why?
The Ruger is a decent gun but I like the Smith better. 3rd Gen Smiths are one of the best autos on the market.
Now that's a question for 20 years ago.
Why is that? They still exist, and they're still available. Back to the OP. The 5906 is a far better handgun, in my not-so-humble opinion. I prefer all steel over aluminum/steel.
I owned a P95 and a 5904 and would give the slight nod to the 5904. Both are tank like but the 5904 was simply more refined. As a matter of fact the 5904 is sitting in my safe right now, the P95 is long gone (my brother has it I think).
sorry, I was only 6 years old 20 years ago
S&W no doubt.
Both are good, but if I had to chose between them, I'd go for the 5906.
Why, because they aren't plastic?
I don't know about better but I much prefer the 5906, in terms of both ergonomics and shooting. Balance is better too. The trigger guard on the P89s come down kind of far and the pistol doesn't sit right in my hand. The Hogues with finger grooves help though.
Both pistols work and are built like tanks.
Either one would be a fine choice, though.
I like them both, but prefer the 5906, for the same reasons noted above: The smith is all steel (unless you go with the 5904), and fit and finish will most likely be nicer, but this is not always the case. I owned a 1990 vintage 3904 that was a fantastic shooter, but had some prominent and ugly toolmarks on the topstrap. Ditto a 586 made the same year. Both were excellent, reliable shooters, but wouldn't win a beauty contest against a Ruger.
At any rate, either gun you mentioned is an excellent choice. A pistol doesn't have to be the latest in plastic technology to be worth owning. In fact, in my opinion, older designs that have proven themselves are a better choice for many. Notice the popularity of the 1911.
I like Ruger autos, but the S&W is the better gun.
There's nothing wrong with the question and there's wrong with comparing any two guns as far as I'm concerned. It just struck me as pretty unusual for 2010. It was probably a question that got asked a lot more 20 years ago. If anyone inferred what I said as a criticism, it wasn't. Heck, many of my favorite guns are much older.
Ruger makes a solid auto, albeit somewhat clunky.
However, the 3rd gen Smiths are hard to beat.
Glocks were around 20 years ago, right?
Yeah, but you said it, not me.
Not because it's better (they are both AWESOME guns!) but because it is probably more affordable.
I bought my LIKE NEW Ruger P-89 at a gun shop for $250!!!
The sapre mag was never even used!!! They said the guy had the gun sitting around and didn't ever use it, so he wanted to get rid of it I was happy to take it off his hands.
What I said and what you evidentally inferred are two different things. If I didn't like either or both of those guns, then I would have said so and elaborated as to why. Of the pistols that I carry, none of the designs are under 15 years old.