yhtomit
Member
I like mine.
I have a 22/45 (stainless barrel), which is IMO as good as any gun in the world (ever) for getting a new shooter (including "test shooter" -- that is, a person who I have bribed or cajoled into the range on the basis that it will be as non-scary as possilbe) into safe, fun, range plinking.*
Since this was the first gun I ever bought, it also has some sentimental value. Not that I don't go through a similar cycle of curiosity, interest, desire, anticipation and then (hopefully!) happiness with the purchase of each gun of the few I've got now, I think everyone who wasn't raised with guns always to hand goes through a lot of mind-wrestling over whether to get a gun, and then what kind. A .22 pistol with a grip angle I like and hard-to-break industrial design is what I settled on. I liked the bull barrel and the reputation for accuracy, too, but in reality I think reasons like that are mostly tacked on to the mostly visceral connection to a particular gun. The 22/45 I think deserves a place in the Museum of Modern Art at least as much as does the Movado watch or an Apple computer, both of which are represented.
I also have a P345, stainless slide, and find it a very solid, accurate gun. I will not say it is (yet) 100pct reliable, because (thanks to schedule and budget) I probably have less than 500 rounds through it at this point. Therefore, the handful of FTFs I've had I suspect are part of its (ultra-slow) break-in period. I am not saying it has been anything like troublesome, though -- just the opposite. The grips fit my smallish hands well, and the sights are to my taste. It is, like Ruger products tend to be, solid and chunky to a fault. I am pretty sure I could run it over a few times and to do nothing but hose it off.
When I bought the 22/45, I was not clued in to gun politics at all, so Bill Ruger's political machinations or sympathies had no effect on me. By the time I bought the P345, I'd become aware of them, been disappointed, but was also not all that affected. The P345 is a reasonable-capacity, good quality and fairly slim pistol which I didn't think matched any perception of Ruger (the company) as demoting or discounting the right to self-defense weapons. (And note, when I say "reasonable-capacity," I don't mean in some abstract sense requiring the approval of the Congressional Committee on Whether Things Are Reasonable; I mean that 8+1 suited me fine.)
I've now fired the SR9 for an hour at the range, and other than the incredible effort that loading its mags took (just getting in 6 rounds was a mighty struggle, never mind 17), I was very impressed. If a 17-round mag would bother Bill Ruger, then I hope he's not very good at haunting the office nowadays. The politics of Ruger the company at least (if you could magically speak to the company as if it were a person and ask the question) don't seem to favor mags limited to California or Massachusetts levels. Maybe that's just the market speaking -- but well, that's the market speaking, and Ruger listening, and the happy upshot is fine with me.
Cheers,
timothy
* Yes, I know "range plinking" may sound like either a redundancy (if, like me, you consider mild, informal target shooting just what the gun range is perfect for) or an oxymoron, on the basis that "if you have to leave your porch, it ain't plinkin!'" That is an old-time country expression which I just made up. For some reason, though, that sentiment reminds me of my dad's favorite saying, "You can't *buy* a decent watermelon!"
** (Thanks to the mentioned budget and time constraints, too much of my "gun time" is (and will be for a little while yet) vicarious, through things like THR
)
I have a 22/45 (stainless barrel), which is IMO as good as any gun in the world (ever) for getting a new shooter (including "test shooter" -- that is, a person who I have bribed or cajoled into the range on the basis that it will be as non-scary as possilbe) into safe, fun, range plinking.*
Since this was the first gun I ever bought, it also has some sentimental value. Not that I don't go through a similar cycle of curiosity, interest, desire, anticipation and then (hopefully!) happiness with the purchase of each gun of the few I've got now, I think everyone who wasn't raised with guns always to hand goes through a lot of mind-wrestling over whether to get a gun, and then what kind. A .22 pistol with a grip angle I like and hard-to-break industrial design is what I settled on. I liked the bull barrel and the reputation for accuracy, too, but in reality I think reasons like that are mostly tacked on to the mostly visceral connection to a particular gun. The 22/45 I think deserves a place in the Museum of Modern Art at least as much as does the Movado watch or an Apple computer, both of which are represented.
I also have a P345, stainless slide, and find it a very solid, accurate gun. I will not say it is (yet) 100pct reliable, because (thanks to schedule and budget) I probably have less than 500 rounds through it at this point. Therefore, the handful of FTFs I've had I suspect are part of its (ultra-slow) break-in period. I am not saying it has been anything like troublesome, though -- just the opposite. The grips fit my smallish hands well, and the sights are to my taste. It is, like Ruger products tend to be, solid and chunky to a fault. I am pretty sure I could run it over a few times and to do nothing but hose it off.
When I bought the 22/45, I was not clued in to gun politics at all, so Bill Ruger's political machinations or sympathies had no effect on me. By the time I bought the P345, I'd become aware of them, been disappointed, but was also not all that affected. The P345 is a reasonable-capacity, good quality and fairly slim pistol which I didn't think matched any perception of Ruger (the company) as demoting or discounting the right to self-defense weapons. (And note, when I say "reasonable-capacity," I don't mean in some abstract sense requiring the approval of the Congressional Committee on Whether Things Are Reasonable; I mean that 8+1 suited me fine.)
I've now fired the SR9 for an hour at the range, and other than the incredible effort that loading its mags took (just getting in 6 rounds was a mighty struggle, never mind 17), I was very impressed. If a 17-round mag would bother Bill Ruger, then I hope he's not very good at haunting the office nowadays. The politics of Ruger the company at least (if you could magically speak to the company as if it were a person and ask the question) don't seem to favor mags limited to California or Massachusetts levels. Maybe that's just the market speaking -- but well, that's the market speaking, and Ruger listening, and the happy upshot is fine with me.
Cheers,
timothy
* Yes, I know "range plinking" may sound like either a redundancy (if, like me, you consider mild, informal target shooting just what the gun range is perfect for) or an oxymoron, on the basis that "if you have to leave your porch, it ain't plinkin!'" That is an old-time country expression which I just made up. For some reason, though, that sentiment reminds me of my dad's favorite saying, "You can't *buy* a decent watermelon!"
** (Thanks to the mentioned budget and time constraints, too much of my "gun time" is (and will be for a little while yet) vicarious, through things like THR
)
