Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Ruger Security-9 Pistol Review || Whittaker Guns

I wouldn't even consider the pistol as currently configured, with the half-assed safety.

WTF is your problem?? I own 3 Mini 14's and 2 Mini 30's, and enough cheap to moderate price AR's, to know that a $499 Smith/Ruger/Bushmaster/Windham AR is a better deal than an $800 Mini 14. Feel free to enlighten me, hot stuff....

Didn't I say you shouldn't worry yourself over it? If you had a need for the mini configuration, and were motivated to look into it, you would find that your assumptions are a bit off. If you have no reason to prefer what makes the mini different, why do you even own one? If that was my position, I'd be rid of 'em.

And it's got class.

Seeing as how all but one was bought used (all for less than $450, and even the new one was less than $600, bought in hopes that the "new" barrel configuration would greatly improve accuracy), I was content with my purchases. I can "appreciate" the Mini for what it used to be, a semiauto centerfire introduced when the only real alternative was $1000+ Colts, back in the 70's/80's.

Neat looking?? Yes. "Retro"??? Yes. Handy?? Yes. An affordable alternative to an AR (which is why they sold so many in decades past)?? Not anymore.

The only "assumption" I made regarding the Mini, is that it has transitioned from a "cheap" plinker to an "expensive" plinker. Perhaps it is "competitive" with Springfield Armory's M1A's. If YOU somehow "assume" that it is a match grade target rifle, a long range varmint rifle, or a viable modern law enforcement weapon, I'd say there are plenty of folks who'd disagree with you.

My experiences with the Mini-14 are only with older versions. Let's just say I prefer the handling of a Mini-14 over an AR. But accuracy left a great deal to be desired.

I had intended to use it ( a Mini-30) as a brush gun in West Virginia, though I never did. With my charge of H335 and a Speer 125 grain it would put two shots close together but then progressively open up. Doesn't matter, only shots one and maybe two really count deer hunting. Shots 3 and above are really kind of irrelevant.

Man if that was your first attempt, well done Looks like a great store you have there

Sadly, in 2008, the French Government replaced them (after 30 years service) with an offering from H&K, and then deactivated all of them (rendering them non-functional) for sale to the French public as collectors items.

Hence, why I included the term "modern" in my post. 😜

PS I'm done hijacking...

Hard for me to think of 1978-2008 as outside of the classification of modern.

As much as I hate to wade into an argument that really isnt even germane to the discussion at hand......I got to.

In all of the patrol rifle schools, qualifications, and inservices I have attended and assisted with that have had a Mini 14 show up....they have failed in some way. Every single time. Even the nastiest, crustiest LESO/1033 M16A1s have proven themselves more reliable and more accurate. Luckily, we haven't seen a Mini in use in a number of years....The proliferation of affordable, reliable AR platform rifles have made them irrelevant for LE use.

As for the pistol...meh. Its yet another example of Ruger centerfire handgun malaise.

The Security 9 looks like a beefed up LCPII but with a safety. I have the LCPII and it has been a good little pistol for me but I did do one upgrade based on problems I read about the regular LCP. I replaced the take-down pin with a beefed up (harder) and better designed Tandemkross pin. A very common complaint of the LCP was that the take-down pin would sometimes shear or fail to be retained by the little spring that holds it in place, with the result of the pin flying out and the slide/barrel ending up on the ground. Since the Security Nine has the same pin take-down system, I would be very suspicious of it until extensive real experience shows that it is tough/secure enough. While Ruger customer service is legendary, their engineering and QC has been suspect of late.

As such, I still would much prefer the S&W M&P or Glock pistols to this new pistol. You're not going to worry about the Smith or Glock leaving you looking at your slide on ground and hunting around on your hands and knees for that pin. The Smith and Glock are time tested. The M&P Shield that I have has the external safety and that does not bother me at all. If you don't like them, don't engage it. You're not going to accidentally engage them, especially if you use a holster that covers that part of the pistol, as all mine do. I've never had it accidentally engage. I have purposely engaged it while handling it at the range for an extra margin of safety. There has also been cases where when holstering a Glock they have accidentally fired when part of your clothing (like those springy buttons on adjustable draw strings) has gotten caught in the trigger guard while holstering the pistol. With an external safety, one can engage the safety, start holstering the pistol and then take the safety off just before it is fully inserted into the holster. This is something I typically do, especially when wearing bulky layers of clothing. Anything I can do to prevent an AD/ND is worth that little effort.

Engage the safety when when you holster, then disengage after its holstered? Really?

As afraid of guns as many people are, its astonishing folks still carry them.

He's an idiot

I was leaning that way, but I am trying to be a nicer [bleep].

So trying to be as safe as possible makes me an idiot. A friend of mine is a now retired LEO and was an armorer and shooting instructor for his agency. One of their officers experienced the actual scenario I outlined. The drawstring tensioner on a windbreaker got into the trigger guard and his Glock fired causing injury. They then changed their holstering procedure from holstering without looking at your holster to making sure they cleared their clothing and looked their pistol into the holster. Since my Shield has a safety, I feel it is safer to do it the way I described. How does that make me an idiot? As to being afraid of guns, hardly. Exercising as much safety measures as possible is the smart thing to do. You do it however you want. Ok?

To the point that they used a recycled , regurgitated old name , "Security"

Reminds me of S&W , probably 90% of their stuff has the M&P moniker hung on it to the point where it's meaningless


Mike

The name has little to do with it.

The safety is not an issue for me. I've been flipping off the safety on 1911's for 40 years. It's second nature too me, and it happens without me having to think about it, I've also been running a Glock for 25 years, and have no issue switching back and forth between the two. And have probably run at least 100,000 rounds through both after shooting IPSC for years.

The big draw to me of the new Security Nine is the price. And the fact that it's a Ruger. It will be mainly used as a plinker for me, and in the training of some of my Concealed Carry students.

Shortactionsmoker, does the Security Nine use any of the previous Ruger 9mm magazines?