Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,363 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Considering one of these for CCW. Striker fire, external safety, round indicator, excellent trigger, adjustable sites is what I have deducted so far. How are these in the area of reliability? I saw one and they look a little bulky.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Great gun -- mine runs very well, does not seem to be sensitive to different kinds of ammo, and is very accurate. More of a compact size than a subcompact. I would not hesitate to recommend the SR9C.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BW64

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,053 Posts
I had one, but never fired it. I sold it when the SR40C came out and picked one up. It is actually a good carry size, it should not be considered a sub-compact as stated above, more of a compact. I had a klydex holster made for my Colt defender and the SR40C fits it perfect.
As for the pistol, I recommend it, well built, good size, manual safety and eats almost anything you can shove in the mag. Matter of fact, it is so close to being perfect maybe it should say Taurus on the slide......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,961 Posts
I love my SR9c. It has a sweet trigger with little recoil and gets back on target in a hurry. I don't think you can go wrong with one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,347 Posts
I love my SR9c. It has a sweet trigger with little recoil and gets back on target in a hurry. I don't think you can go wrong with one.

What he said +111111. Trigger is smooooooooth!! After more than 1000 rounds it keeps getting better!!


BW
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zylo_X

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,994 Posts
DITTO, All the above!!! I've been a 'Ruger Guy' since the P-series (85-95) and while the SR is definitely a 'new & improved' line, it still has that Ruger rugged, reliability in spades. If I can recover my photo file, I'll post some pics. I have the SR9C along side the 24/7G2C-45, and they are practically the same over all size. I'm used to a larger grip, and have a Hogue sleeve on mine, and it is very comfortable. Also put Mepro night sights, and a Ghost trigger. Even with my eyes, it is a comfortable, natural shooter (for me), and has ambi controls. It is my very comfortable EDC in a Remora holster with 10+1, and the 17 for back up.

If I had to choose between my dog, and my SR9C, I might go with the SR, because it has eaten everything but the carpet, and has never taken a dump on me!!! :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: RevolverFan

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,348 Posts
I like Zylo am a Ruger pistol guy -- I have owned at least five over the years. I debated mightily between buying the SR40, and the SR40c. The 40c fit my hand great w/ the adapter, not so much so without. I wasn't going to use it for CC anyway, so I went with the SR40. However, I personally would skip the 9c and go with the 40c if you are leaning toward the compact. The .40 has more punch than the 9mm, and from what everyone says, shooting the 40c is a pussycat kind of situation!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,347 Posts
I've shot the 40c also & can't tell the differenve between that & the 9c!


BW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,439 Posts
An SR40C (stainless) is my newest edition. It is really sweet!


View attachment 25227

(above) With 9 round mag w/finger grip. Flat baseplate and 15 round mag with extension/spacer shown.


View attachment 25228

(above) With 15 round magazine with spacer. Standard SR40 15 round mags (and 10 round mags in restricted states) fit and function fine. Extra spacers are available at a nominal price.

This is the easiest pistol to strip, even easier and gaster than a Glock, PT709/740, or even a 1911!

View attachment 25229

Recoil for a .40 was surprising mild, and as others have said, about the same as a 9mm.

My personal preference was for the flat backstrap on the rear of the grip, but it takes only seconds to reverse to the arched backstrap. There is a pin on the bottom rear of the grip which can be removed, the backstrap slid down and off, reversed, and then inserted. Quicker to do than explain. Note that one side of the reversable backstrap is flat, the other arched.

SR40C-Backstrap2.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,363 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 · (Edited)
I was a P-95 guy(first gun) and had a LCR (Great Gun) but did not warm up to the plastic snubbies. I have had no success in attaining a reliable enough Taurus snub nose so I have decided to consider this striker fire. I have never had an issue with Ruger quality and love the striker fire platform. My Glock 17 is awesome but too bulky. Not a fan of the Glock 26. I heard the sr9's and 40's have amazing triggers and very reliable. I also like the price point. Last but not least with striker fire, light trigger compacts I prefer the safety. I have trained with firearms that have safety's and it is pretty easy to acclimate to one extra little step. I like ammo consolidation and want to compliment my G17 with 9mm. I don't know too many folks that could walk away from a multiple double tap of 147 grain 9mm center mass. With a light striker fire trigger and reliable accurate handgun I can dump a magazine with great control, speed and accuracy. I train allot so ammo price point is important. I can still get 9mm for dirt cheap.

Thanks for that in depth review of the grips Texas Deputy! I forgot that the one thing I really like about that firearm is it fits my hand like a glove as apposed to the compact and sub-compact Glocks. For some reason the G17 fits my hand but the G19 and G26 not so much, weird!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,779 Posts
I have both the SR9c and the SR9. BOTH will eat anything that fits in the chamber. Both are accurate, and neither has bobbled in over 500 rounds. Triggers are MUCH better than earlier Ruger offerings. Great little guns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,813 Posts
Ruger autos are typically overbuilt and in the case of the SR-9c it is heavy for its size and in its class. IMO, the MilPro, 24/7, 809 compacts and SA XDsc are lighter and therefore better carry weapons for a high cap pistol. I have nothing against Rugers, it is just that their philosophy is to overbuild and in a CCW that means more weight and at the end of a long day that weight drags on you like a boat anchor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,713 Posts
I have nothing against Rugers, it is just that their philosophy is to overbuild and in a CCW that means more weight and at the end of a long day that weight drags on you like a boat anchor.
I think that's somewhat subjective. I carry mine all day in a Theis holster and barely notice it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,779 Posts
"IMO, the MilPro, 24/7, 809 compacts and SA XDsc are lighter and therefore better carry weapons for a high cap pistol. I have nothing against Rugers, it is just that their philosophy is to overbuild and in a CCW that means more weight and at the end of a long day that weight drags on you like a boat anchor."

Actually, yes and no.

Weights are:

SR9 26.5oz.

SR9c 23.4 oz.

XDm 3.8 28 oz.

XDm 4.5 32.0 oz.

XDsc 23.6 oz w/o magazine.

24/7 27.2 oz.

809c 24.7 oz.


Out of the entire group, the SR9c is the lightest weight gun.

Of the full size group, non-compact designation, the SR9 is also the lightest gun. These are factory weights.

While shapes, grips, and triggers are at least as important than weight, the two Rugers, contrary to statements, are actually lighter than others given. Couple this with the admittedly overbuilt factor, and they make a remarkably well-priced choice.

As to the minimal differences in weight, several ounces difference can be made up with proper selection of holster type and material. We often forget that the weight on the hip and back includes the holster, spare mags, and their carrier.

There are any number of tangible, or intangible, features that make a particular pistol a better choice. In this case, however, weight isn't one against the Ruger pair.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,813 Posts
Pick one up, they feel heavier regardless of what they claim for weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,779 Posts
" Pick one up, they feel heavier regardless of what they claim for weight."

Ok, re-read post my post on this page. I own both. My postal scale agrees with Ruger's weights. So, the "claim" is really one that they "feel heavier", not the actual weight.

Your opinion is noted. I also said this.

"While shapes, grips, and triggers are at least as important than weight, the two Rugers, contrary to statements, are actually lighter than others given. Couple this with the admittedly overbuilt factor, and they make a remarkably well-priced choice."

How they feel is a personal item, and is not subject to weight, or shape, information printed on a sheet of paper. One of those factors may well influence your interpretation of the gun's ergonomics. So be it.

However, the matter of weight is easily verified, and I have done so.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top