Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/8/2003 9:15:36 AM EDT
I'm looking into buying a P series Ruger, but want to know what the general consensus is on their quality and funcionality. Any input is appreciated. Thanks.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 9:17:27 AM EDT
I've got a P85, and it's a heavy, bulky thing. However it eats whatever I feed it, and absolutely refuses to jam. YMMV.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 9:28:12 AM EDT
I've got a P93DC (9mm). It eats any ammo I feed it, is very accurate and hi-cap mags are not that hard to find. Like Gloftoe said, the P-series pistols are on the bulky side. That's about the only down side I can think of. It's one of my favorite pistols.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 10:29:33 AM EDT
i've got the P95 and i like it alot
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 11:26:30 AM EDT
I've had my P-89 for about 10 years and have no complaints.

The P-Series Rugers aren't the prettiest or the most accurate, but they are a very good all-around gun.

BTW: Hi-cap mags are still fairly inexpensive and easy to come by for the Rugers.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 11:27:03 AM EDT
My mom has one. My expirience with hers echos everything that has been said so far: Reliable, reasonably accurate, but a bit bulky in the slide. (Won't fit my wifes small hand either.)
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 11:52:33 AM EDT
I've had a P-90 for about 10 years. It's heavy, ugly, and kicks butt. It's my 3rd favorite.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 1:00:31 PM EDT
I love my P97 (.45). Digests everything I run through it- including over 500rds of Wolf. It's lighter than the P90, but certainly no lightweight. Solid pistol.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 2:33:35 PM EDT
For the price, no complaints from me.
Depending on the model chosen, Hogue grips make it feel even better.
You would have to work hard to blow one up, very hard.
The blued versions seem to rust prematurely, the stainless models finish seems to last forever.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 2:57:27 PM EDT
A lot of people seem to forget that the P85 was developed with the military in mind. After the Beretta was chosen and the cracked slide reports began to surface, Ruger developed the P85 and featured all of the military design requirements. They tried to get the trials opened back up and even offered testing claiming that the P85 was stronger and more reliable than the Beretta. I don't know if anyone recalls this, but it [Ruger's testing] was featured rather prominently in Ruger ads from 1990 or so.
Link Posted: 5/8/2003 4:06:54 PM EDT
a p95DC was my first handgun

i've fed it nothing but dirty ass wolf ammo, several thousand rounds

the only time it jams is when i use a crappy USA mags high cap that i stupidly bought at a gunshow
Link Posted: 5/9/2003 6:15:26 PM EDT
yipper got a P85 have had it bout 12 years now..shots like a charm..i would consider it "clunky" but it is pretty accurate and shoots whatever i can put in it.
Link Posted: 5/9/2003 6:26:57 PM EDT
My best friend owns a P95. He absolutely swears by it. I can't remember the exact model number but it has a hammer with a spur and the decocker. I've shot it and find it a pleasant gun to shoot. Somewhat large, but overall comfortable.


-REAPER2502
Link Posted: 5/9/2003 9:10:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/9/2003 9:11:21 PM EDT by Fenian]
I've got a P90...I haven't had it that long, but it's never caused me a problem, and shoots everything I've fed it so far. I got the 2 tone model with the Hogue grips...I really like the way it looks, but it is BIG. I've got fairly small hands, and there's no way in hell I'm able to hit the slide release with my right hand.

Of all my pistols, this is the only one that doesn't shoot point of aim...it shoots about 2" left. I'm fairly certain that the size is the issue here...my grip is probably a tad off due to the size. I'm too poor to buy .45 right now, so I'm not shooting it much. I think a little more range time would help me get it on target.
Link Posted: 5/9/2003 11:45:49 PM EDT
I had one of the .45s and it went bang every time...
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 7:56:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:
A lot of people seem to forget that the P85 was developed with the military in mind. After the Beretta was chosen and the cracked slide reports began to surface, Ruger developed the P85 and featured all of the military design requirements. They tried to get the trials opened back up and even offered testing claiming that the P85 was stronger and more reliable than the Beretta. I don't know if anyone recalls this, but it [Ruger's testing] was featured rather prominently in Ruger ads from 1990 or so.


Jim the P-85 was developed for law enforcement and commercial sales as production didn't start until 1986 and the contract for the M9 was given in 1985. Yes, Ruger submitted the P-85 twice afterward; one test in early 1988 was canceled and the other one followed through in late 1988. The M9 concerns did not happen until late 1987 and this is when Ruger "jumped" into the game. That being said; Quality and ego's have improved with the P series over it's life and they are a good basic choice. They can be accurate, tend to feed very well but to me their only downside is they just donn't "feel" right. I think their low price has kept them alive; if they would just shave them alittle and balance them better.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 8:06:20 AM EDT
Wow, thanks for all the information. I guess now I should ask how much I should pay for one. What are good prices on a bbl or ss P89? Thanks in advance.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 8:21:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/10/2003 8:44:37 AM EDT by Jim_Dandy]

Jim the P-85 was developed for law enforcement and commercial sales as production didn't start until 1986 and the contract for the M9 was given in 1985.

WRONG. From Ruger's website:

"The Ruger P-Series pistols, introduced in 1987, were the first firearms produced at Sturm, Ruger’s Prescott, Arizona plant. Designed by practical shooters, they were the result of a long development program to build state-of-the-art pistols, offering rugged dependability under adverse conditions."


From Ruger's first ad for the P85:

"Additional Features

Although the Ruger P85 pistol meets all U.S. military specifications designated in the mandatory categories of the Joint Service Operational Requirements, it also includes a number of the Operational Requirements desirable optional features, such as an oversize trigger guard which permits shooting with the gloved hand, a recurved trigger guard bow to accommodate the non-shooting hand in a two-hand hold, a lanyard loop, fifteen-round magazine capacity, proper functioning with various U.S. commercial and foreign 9mm Luger caliber ammunition, and an expected service life in excess of 20,000 rounds.


Summary

The advantages of the Ruger P85 9mm double action semiautomatic pistol, its suitability for police and military applications are summarized as follows:

  • Meets or exceeds all Joint Service Operational Requirements.

  • Simple, compact, straightforward design.

  • Unique four-point safety mechanism.

  • Fewer parts, with no complex subassemblies.

  • Rugged construction with ample metal in critical, highly stressed areas.

  • Reliable functioning.

  • Accuracy with light perceived recoil and quick recovery between shots.

  • Simple takedown and maintenance in the field.

  • Cost-efficient manufacturing and low unit cost."




The guns didn't start making it into dealer inventories until early 1988 and then only in limited quantities due to problems with subcontractors and teething problems with the firing pin (hence the P85MKII). Ruger didn't start actively marketing them to law enforcement agencies until about 1991. In other words, AFTER the contract hopes didn't pan out.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 1:17:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

Jim the P-85 was developed for law enforcement and commercial sales as production didn't start until 1986 and the contract for the M9 was given in 1985.

WRONG. From Ruger's website:

"The Ruger P-Series pistols, introduced in 1987, were the first firearms produced at Sturm, Ruger’s Prescott, Arizona plant. Designed by practical shooters, they were the result of a long development program to build state-of-the-art pistols, offering rugged dependability under adverse conditions."


From Ruger's first ad for the P85:

"Additional Features

Although the Ruger P85 pistol meets all U.S. military specifications designated in the mandatory categories of the Joint Service Operational Requirements, it also includes a number of the Operational Requirements desirable optional features, such as an oversize trigger guard which permits shooting with the gloved hand, a recurved trigger guard bow to accommodate the non-shooting hand in a two-hand hold, a lanyard loop, fifteen-round magazine capacity, proper functioning with various U.S. commercial and foreign 9mm Luger caliber ammunition, and an expected service life in excess of 20,000 rounds.


Summary

The advantages of the Ruger P85 9mm double action semiautomatic pistol, its suitability for police and military applications are summarized as follows:

  • Meets or exceeds all Joint Service Operational Requirements.

  • Simple, compact, straightforward design.

  • Unique four-point safety mechanism.

  • Fewer parts, with no complex subassemblies.

  • Rugged construction with ample metal in critical, highly stressed areas.

  • Reliable functioning.

  • Accuracy with light perceived recoil and quick recovery between shots.

  • Simple takedown and maintenance in the field.

  • Cost-efficient manufacturing and low unit cost."




The guns didn't start making it into dealer inventories until early 1988 and then only in limited quantities due to problems with subcontractors and teething problems with the firing pin (hence the P85MKII). Ruger didn't start actively marketing them to law enforcement agencies until about 1991. In other words, AFTER the contract hopes didn't pan out.


Well Jim, the remarkable thing about history is facts and not advertising; you ought to know that. Sure sounds great making the public think it was designed for the military; sales. Talk with Stephen K. Vogel who was general manager of the Prescott division at the time and I think you'll get a different story. Yes the P85 had a rough start with a change in barrel design, slide stop, etc. but production DID start in 1986 for a commercial and law enforcement market as to enter the "high cap" race; just as ALL other manufacters did. Bill Ruger has always over designed his firearms for strength and durability, but never really for the military. He stated that many times. Remember a few Mini 14 ads? He saw a chance and took it but that's all. Now let's not use advertising as fact Jim, now THAT would be a dandy.
ar15zams: Off the top of my head your looking at mid to high 3's with SS going for 50 more. I donn't "shop" much though.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 1:55:28 PM EDT

Well Jim, the remarkable thing about history is facts and not advertising; you ought to know that. Sure sounds great making the public think it was designed for the military; sales. Talk with Stephen K. Vogel who was general manager of the Prescott division at the time and I think you'll get a different story.

I doubt it. Ruger designed a pistol and "just happened" to get it meet the JSOP standards and "just happened" to submit it for those same trials, but it was meant to be a civilian product? BULLSHIT. You're choosing to ignore the obvious. Don't bother to ask the Prescott Product Service Manager any of this, he won't give you the answer that you want to hear. I seem to remember the same thing in the Wilson book.



but production DID start in 1986 for a commercial and law enforcement market

WRONG AGAIN. Production didn't begin until latter 1987. Already provided proof, but you've again chosen to ignore that.



Now let's not use advertising as fact

As opposed to what proof are you offering? Not much.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 4:27:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

Well Jim, the remarkable thing about history is facts and not advertising; you ought to know that. Sure sounds great making the public think it was designed for the military; sales. Talk with Stephen K. Vogel who was general manager of the Prescott division at the time and I think you'll get a different story.

I doubt it. Ruger designed a pistol and "just happened" to get it meet the JSOP standards and "just happened" to submit it for those same trials, but it was meant to be a civilian product? BULLSHIT. You're choosing to ignore the obvious. Don't bother to ask the Prescott Product Service Manager any of this, he won't give you the answer that you want to hear. I seem to remember the same thing in the Wilson book.



but production DID start in 1986 for a commercial and law enforcement market

WRONG AGAIN. Production didn't begin until latter 1987. Already provided proof, but you've again chosen to ignore that.



Now let's not use advertising as fact

As opposed to what proof are you offering? Not much.


Jim, calm down. If you remember all the press generated back in the 1980's it is easy enough to find my "proof", it's history . I guess all the interviews given by Mr. Vogel and the press reports are all wrong and made up. That's why the original P85 design had many changes to it to pass all the requirements before test submission; they just squeaked in the 40 pistols needed for submission. TECOM was only going forward with further testing due to pressure from the over blown GAO/NSIAD-86-122. Nobody could have forseen this. Hmmmm Jim, the Wisconsin state police adopted the P85 in 1987. Guess that's made up too.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 5:16:01 PM EDT

Jim, calm down. If you remember all the press generated back in the 1980's it is easy enough to find my "proof", it's history . I guess all the interviews given by Mr. Vogel and the press reports are all wrong and made up. That's why the original P85 design had many changes to it to pass all the requirements before test submission; they just squeaked in the 40 pistols needed for submission. TECOM was only going forward with further testing due to pressure from the over blown GAO/NSIAD-86-122. Nobody could have forseen this. Hmmmm Jim, the Wisconsin state police adopted the P85 in 1987. Guess that's made up too.

Well, let's see what we have here:

What the manufacturer [Ruger] says versus some anonymous wag on the internet. You haven't shown any proof of any substance and unless your surname happens to be RUGER, SHOVE OFF.

Show some data, pal.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 5:36:39 PM EDT
My personal opinion, for what it's worth: I don't care for Ruger centerfire P-series. I like their .22 MKII series and their revolvers and their rifles and shotguns, but have never been able to "warm up" to their autos. They just don't have a good feel in my hand and the accuracy in the ones I have shot has never been anything to write home about. If I'm going to spend around $450.00 for a pistol, there are a lot of other makes and models that fit me better and shoot better, and I prefer to spend my money on one of those.

Don't mean to flame, but this was starting to sound like the Ruger P-series mutual appreciation society and FANatic club.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 5:54:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ar15zams:
Wow, thanks for all the information. I guess now I should ask how much I should pay for one. What are good prices on a bbl or ss P89? Thanks in advance.



I've had a 95 which I sold to a buddy of mine. Had no problems with it, just sorta big for my hands. I have a P-90 (Davidson's 2-tone) w/Hogue grips, 2 7rnd mags and 3 10 rnd mags that hasn't been shot a lot (I replaced it with a Kimber) in basically new condition with papers, case and the original grips that I'll sell you for $300 + shipping if you want. Same thing goes on this one. Just a bit big for my hands.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 6:51:30 PM EDT
P85x2 not the most accurate.

P90(original models)x2 not for sale.

A few others...

I like my Rugers.
Link Posted: 5/10/2003 7:35:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ar15zams:
Wow, thanks for all the information. I guess now I should ask how much I should pay for one. What are good prices on a bbl or ss P89? Thanks in advance.

you can get the 89 around here for about $380
Link Posted: 5/11/2003 6:27:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

Well, let's see what we have here:

What the manufacturer [Ruger] says versus some anonymous wag on the internet. You haven't shown any proof of any substance and unless your surname happens to be RUGER, SHOVE OFF.

Show some data, pal.



Gee Jim, anybody that followed the XM-10 project and Ruger itself knows that more has been published than most are willing to read; including Ruger itself. Guess you have some reading to do.
Link Posted: 5/11/2003 7:17:31 AM EDT

Gee Jim, anybody that followed the XM-10 project and Ruger itself knows that more has been published than most are willing to read; including Ruger itself. Guess you have some reading to do.

And still no proof. Show some proof.
Link Posted: 5/11/2003 7:47:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/11/2003 7:51:57 AM EDT by TomJefferson]
I have a P95. It features SS upper and composite frame. Mine is light, durable, good acuracy, and has fed flawlessly. Although I bought it just for the corrosion resistance and use on a boat, I found I really have become attached to it. It feeds P89 15 round high cap mags which are availble on line for around $20.



I don't have a problem what's so ever recommending one.

You can pick one up right now about anywhere for about $430 with the rebate. Should be able to do better at a gunshow. They are very popular and quite available.
Link Posted: 5/11/2003 1:10:23 PM EDT
Thanks for all the info. JTW2, I'm still waiting on my pistol permit here it CT, and it could take a while. Thanks for the offer, and if you still have the gun when I get my permit I will defenitly get in touch with you. And you guys arguing about when the P85 came around, no offense but I don't care, and thats not what this topic is about. If you want to argue and get all pissed at each other, knock yourselves out but do is somewhere else. You kinda hijacked my topic.
Link Posted: 5/11/2003 2:46:24 PM EDT
Sorry ar15zams, some misleading info. was added by an individual and like many on these boards; a pissing match starts. It's ended at your request.
Link Posted: 5/11/2003 3:56:47 PM EDT

some misleading info. was added by an individual

Yes, your information WAS misleading and you never offered any proof.
Top Top