Ruger's new "Security 9"

[Slater]

So is this just a compact version of their American Pistol? Wonder if there'll be a "Security 40"?

https://www.ruger.com/products/security9/models.html

[Tokarev]

Nope. It is a different design. Not based on the American but rather the LCP II.

The American is striker fired and is a chassis gun. The LCP II is a hammer fired gun and the frame's internal mechanism isn't removable as a group. The Security 9 is also hammer fired and doesn't have a removable chassis.

Other differences between the American and Security 9. No ambi controls on the S9 and no interchangeable grip panels.

Guns are shipping now. One sold yesterday on gunbroker for $285. I assume the price will drop to $250 or so in a couple weeks. At prices like this Ruger is bound to sell a bunch of them. For that kind of money I'll pick one up after the holidays to play with.

This video helps demonstrate what the gun's internals look like.

https://youtu.be/ZqaOTEcH-GQ


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[m4brian]

Hammer type reminds me of the Creed.

[jaholder]

Meh. I wasn't a big fan of Smith and Wesson rebranding their new polymer pistols under their old Military and Police line, I've got the same feelings about this as well. When I first saw this I thought Ruger was maybe bringing back the old revolver, color me old, set in my ways and disappointed.

[ritepath]

First ruger pistol other than the LCPs that I've had any interest in for a long while. For that price I could put one in each car, and my tackle bag.

[Tokarev]

Meh. I wasn't a big fan of Smith and Wesson rebranding their new polymer pistols under their old Military and Police line, I've got the same feelings about this as well. When I first saw this I thought Ruger was maybe bringing back the old revolver, color me old, set in my ways and disappointed.

I don't know what else they can do. They've pretty much gotten all the mileage they can out of "American."

Should've called it the Security 15 or 16, no?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

http://www.recoilweb.com/ruger-relea...-9-132331.html



Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[SomeOtherGuy]

Nope. It is a different design. Not based on the American but rather the LCP II.
The American is striker fired and is a chassis gun. The LCP II is a hammer fired gun and the frame's internal mechanism isn't removable as a group. The Security 9 is also hammer fired and doesn't have a removable chassis.

So the $250 question is... why? This is very close in size and capacity to the "American Pistol", which is still a relatively recent design. The RAP isn't awesome, but it doesn't seem to have any terrible flaws either (both comments based on my personal experience with one that I own). Why is Ruger introducing this "Security 9" to compete with its own recent design? This is starting to make me think of the Taurus model, "build everything we can think of, change it yearly, and abandon it quickly." Not a good model IMHO.

[m4brian]

I think a DAO pistol with that many safeties is unethical. 🙂

[Tokarev]

So the $250 question is... why? This is very close in size and capacity to the "American Pistol", which is still a relatively recent design. The RAP isn't awesome, but it doesn't seem to have any terrible flaws either (both comments based on my personal experience with one that I own). Why is Ruger introducing this "Security 9" to compete with its own recent design? This is starting to make me think of the Taurus model, "build everything we can think of, change it yearly, and abandon it quickly." Not a good model IMHO.

I ask myself the same question. Why bring this model to market when, clearly, a midsize American would make more sense. Ruger could sell the entire pistol or just a 4" slide kit, mag and grip module.

I can only think of two reasons why Ruger has chosen to go this route:

1--They wanted something that was cheap to compete with the Taurus and other imported pistols. Such a gun is designed to compete at the bottom end of the market and not against Glocks, Americans, M&Ps, etc.

2--The American has been more or less a sales flop and Ruger has no desire to spend more marketing funds and R&D money on a gun that hasn't sold like they'd anticipated.

I guess I'm thinking the answer is probably a combination of these two.

There's really nothing wrong with the American but it really doesn't offer anything or do anything that can't be had with other more established designs. It is also rather big and heavy compared to competing designs. Ruger also completely missed the boat with the chassis design. Why make a chassis that isn't common across the full- and compact-size guns? And why not sell parts that make use of the chassis?

I've had an American since that gun was first launched. It is accurate and reliable. But, at the end of the day, I would call it "adequate."