Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Semi-Auto Handguns > Ruger sr9 VS Beretta 92fs

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-01-2010, 09:50 AM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
007BondJamesBond007's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Farmington Hills, Michigan,Michigan
Posts: 428
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by indyfan View Post
ive heard bad things about crimson trace
Can you elaborate? I own the Crimson Trace and have no issues with it. It is a very effective tool In the SHTF situation I want the laser. You may not acquire good sight picture. You can shoot from the hip if you have to. Not trying to highjack the tread I only added the laser as a accessory for the Beretta. The OP only ask to compare between the Ruger and Beretta.
__________________

“There are hundreds of millions of gun owners in this country, and not one of them will have an accident today. The only misuse of guns comes in environments where there are drugs, alcohol, bad parents, and undisciplined children. Period.” Ted Nugent

007BondJamesBond007 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 11:08 PM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Major Kusanagi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 372
Liked 29 Times on 17 Posts
Likes Given: 46

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWGaryM View Post
The biggest problem people have is it has a very heavy trigger pull. Sigma is pretty much S&W's bottom line and, in my opinion, not a very good gun. The one I shot jammed several times but my biggest issue was also the trigger pull being very heavy. You can find a Sigma in the high $200's-low $300's. For the same money I'd prefer a Taurus, Kel-Tec or Witness.
+1

My Dad's Sigma had several feeding and firing issues. That and the trigger sucks too. I mean the old adage of you get what you pay for is true for S&W's bottom line of semi-auto pistol. I'm sure there are some good Sigma's out there, but they seem so hit and miss anymore that I would rather buy a Taurus for that price. At least I know I am going to get about the same odds if not better with that. Of course if it was me, I would just spend the extra $100-$200 more and get a new S&W SD (which is pretty much a Sigma with improvements) or a S&W M&P.

Anyway back on topic boneman13, I would say to have your buddy try the Sigma first before a purchase. If your friend can get around the trigger then I say go for it. Just keep in mind that it is not uncommon to have problems with those pistols either. If your friend decides to buy it, hopefully he will have many years of enjoyment shooting it.

I also forgot to mention that if you are dead set with Beretta, check out the PX4 series too. I hear that they are ten times better than the 92 series and are about the same price in many instances too.
__________________

"Surpress all compassion and you bear a weapon far greater than any held in the hand." - The Psychology of the Assassin


Last edited by Major Kusanagi; 10-01-2010 at 11:24 PM.
Major Kusanagi is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2010, 12:57 AM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
M14sRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,539
Liked 32 Times on 23 Posts
Likes Given: 45

Default

If you like the feel of the SR9, have you considered an M&P? How about an FNP?

When Ruger introduced the P85 I was all excited to get one. Then a guy at the range let me shoot his. Yuck. It cycled in slow motion, had a miserable SA trigger, bad muzzle flip, the list goes on. Ruger continued peddling the same low priced, durable guns with the P89, P90, etc... HATE THEM ALL. Durable? Yes. Reliable? Yes. Still worthless. Suitable for conscripts.

BUT, the SR9 looks to have corrected the earlier issues. They feel great, have a low bore axis, etc. If they carry the durability/reliability gene of the P89,P90, etc, and blend it with great ergonomics and "user friendliness" they will be great.

__________________
NRA-Life
CRPA-Life

SAF-Life
PEIAPOI


"Obama has ordered the launching of more Tomahawk cruise missiles than All the other Nobel Peace Prize winners combined."
M14sRock is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2010, 12:28 PM   #24
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Westy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 405
Liked 20 Times on 15 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Did you search for "SR9" or "Ruger SR9"? I can't believe there isn't a few posts out there on this board if you look.

I think the SR9 is a great firearm, and it is my main carry piece when I can actually conceal it. (I wear allot of tee shirts in the summer). I also think the Beretta's are top notch. I have a 92 in ss, a 96, and two Cougars in .45 ACP and 9mm, so I guess you could call me a Beretta man. The SR9 fits my big hand well, and is a great shooter. It's always in my console when I'm on the road with an extra mag. (100 miles a day). The full size 92's & 96's are too large for me to carry. If you like the Beretta's, you might want to check out the Cougar. Until the SR9 came along, the Cougar was the way to go for me.

My thoughts are get to a range if you can shoot them, and buy what you like. You really can't go wrong with the function of either on of these. I also have two Ruger GP100 revolvers, and there rep. is spotless. Your going to get allot of recommendations here (try this, how about that) and it's great that folks here try to help. You're the one who is going to be using it though so get what works for you. Both Ruger and Beretta are very reliable firearms.

__________________
Si vis pacem, parati para bellum

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian."
Westy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2010, 05:20 PM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Roswell,New Mexico
Posts: 50
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Haven't had experience with the guns that were mentioned in this discussion except the SR9. Bought one new about 3 months ago, put about 200 rounds through it and love it. It's light weight and fits my hand great (I have relative small hands for a guy that's 6 ft. tall. I use it for target shooting and it's my home defence weapon. Well that's my 2 cents worth, shoot the SR9 and I'll bet you'll like it. Good Shootin', Bernie

__________________

It's not the amount of breaths we take in life, but the moments that take our breaths that count.

bernielink is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2010, 07:09 PM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Fort Lauderdale,Florida
Posts: 66
Default

As pointed out by many posts above. Rent each and let experience answer your own question.

Personally I'll take a metal Beretta over a plastic Glock Wanna-Be every time but that is just my choice. When Ruger first came out with the SR9 they even marketed it as "Ruger's Answer To The Glock".

__________________
ElvisIsDead is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2010, 03:41 AM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: IL
Posts: 6
Default

why pick these 2 to compare?

one's a polymer glock look-a-like that can be had for $400 with mixed reviews..the other's a full steel full-size with military contracts, with most complaints only about size, that even 10 years old still go for over $400 on a bad day?

sr9 vs. the cheapest glock 9mm would be a better comparison...

__________________
MidwestRookie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2010, 12:17 PM   #28
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5732 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M14sRock View Post
When Ruger introduced the P85 I was all excited to get one. Then a guy at the range let me shoot his. Yuck. It cycled in slow motion, had a miserable SA trigger, bad muzzle flip, the list goes on. Ruger continued peddling the same low priced, durable guns with the P89, P90, etc... HATE THEM ALL. Durable? Yes. Reliable? Yes. Still worthless. Suitable for conscripts.

BUT, the SR9 looks to have corrected the earlier issues. They feel great, have a low bore axis, etc. If they carry the durability/reliability gene of the P89,P90, etc, and blend it with great ergonomics and "user friendliness" they will be great.
Doesn't the highere bore axis kinda go along with the hammer-fired design when compared to the striker-fired setup?
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2010, 02:37 PM   #29
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
M14sRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,539
Liked 32 Times on 23 Posts
Likes Given: 45

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
Doesn't the highere bore axis kinda go along with the hammer-fired design when compared to the striker-fired setup?
Yep. Hammers need the space.
__________________
NRA-Life
CRPA-Life

SAF-Life
PEIAPOI


"Obama has ordered the launching of more Tomahawk cruise missiles than All the other Nobel Peace Prize winners combined."
M14sRock is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2010, 05:00 PM   #30
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
FCross7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M14sRock View Post
Yep. Hammers need the space.
Unless you're talking about the SP-01. It has a much lower bore axis than either of my striker-fired guns(XD45 and XDm45).

-Fred
__________________

"Breathe when you can, shoot when you should."
-Rob Leatham

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

"Qui desiderat pacem, bellum praeparat; nemo provocare ne offendere audet quem intelliget superiorem esse pugnaturem"

FCross7 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Beretta 90-two vs 92fs roosterjuicer Semi-Auto Handguns 8 08-16-2012 05:05 AM
Beretta 92FS The_Rican Semi-Auto Handguns 11 05-19-2010 11:22 AM
Beretta 92FS weld Engraving & Refinishing 4 08-23-2009 02:24 AM