Smokepole14
Member
These two handguns seems to be comparable in just about every category. Curious of you guys opinions. I think the quality of the budget guns as we refer to them has soared here recently.
What issues are you having? Mine has been 100% reliable. Have you contacted Ruger about it?I have a Security 9 and I'm very unimpressed with it. I don't know anything about the Taurus but compared to the M&P Compact 9 which is a similar sized gun, the Ruger falls way short in terms of reliability. Of course the Security was cheaper. I should've known better as I'm a firm believer in you get what you pay for.
I have both. While I like the way the Taurus feels in my hand. The Ruger has it beat based on Customer Service and Performance.
They both eat any type of manufacturer ammo that I have fed them. However I reload, and the Ruger Security 9 is less finicky when it comes of OAL and has worked with all my reloads. Taurus requires a lower OAL and I have to use shorter bullets.
In terms of finish, The Ruger's finish feels better while the G3 seems dull and rougher.
The one area where the Taurus is better in my opinion, is in the bullet striking mechanism. The Ruger Security 9 is Hammer fired, while the Taurus G3 is striker fired. When using the Ruger, there is a small amount of play where the hammer moves slightly back before the hammer strikes. This can be slightly distracting when accuracy is concerned, but can be overcome. The Taurus G3 is striker fired, which doesn't encounter any of that. That is the one area where the Taurus G3 has the Ruger Security 9 beat.
When comparing it to a Ruger, and looking at all the aspects of Ruger comes out on top (Customer Service and history-Ruger, Ammo compatibility-Ruger, finish-Ruger, Accuracy-Draw Firing Mechanism-Taurus. With customer service and and history behind the product support weighing the heaviest and justifies the slightly higher cost (20 dollar difference when comparing my purchase price) makes the Ruger come out on top in my opinion.
I still, I like my G3 and you do get plenty of gun for the price, but when comparing the two, Ruger is the better value.
CH
Ewww. That's a good one. I've lived in Florida, so I know humidity there is crazy high. Both firearms have very good corrosion resistance from my experience, but I live in Texas. It's humid here, but not humid like living in a peninsula.How is the corrosion resistance of both guns? I'm on the coast in FL and I've actually considered the G3 (or G2) or the Ruger as a sometimes carry, mostly car gun.
I have the Shield in 9mm and love it, but the barrel on the Shield is only 3.1 inches. The barrel length on the Ruger and Taurus are 4 inches each. The Ruger and Taurus also have larger ammo capacities (15-17) over the Shield (<10). A more comparable M&P would be the M&P 9mm Compact 2.0 which has comparable ammo capacity and a 4 inch barrel (which, by the way is one of my personal favorites for competition). But the M&P compact in 9mm is right around 529,00 right now (prices for this one have been going up as well).I would choose pretty much anything over the Taurus. Get the Ruger. Or, look at some other guns in that price range. Sometimes you can get awesome deals on the M&P Shield version 1
Setting aside Taurus's history, the G3 is the better pistol. The Ruger Security 9 is just a big LCP II.