This past Saturday, I was able to put my hands on the new Ruger Security 9. To be honest, I was torn between trading for a classic Ruger P95 and the new Ruger Security 9. Initially, I was impressed with the Security 9: a great grip, good sights, a good trigger, and good size. This compact hammer-fired 9mm was poised to "Out-Creed" the Walther Creed.
But the P95 was classic Ruger late 20th Century design: beefy, durable, and enough steel in it to make 2 K-Frames. It was Ruger's first 9mm design with a polymer (long-strand fiberglass) frame: ambidextrous frame mounted safety, ambidextrous magazine release, and three-dot sights. And, smartly, magazines from the pre-existing P85 and P89 designs were interchangeable.
So, the proof for me would come with one basic thought: would the Security 9 take the magazines from the readily available SR9 magazines? Really, why wouldn't they be? I mean this was a no-brainer, right?
So I tried the first SR9 magazine in the Security 9. It didn't lock into place. No joy.
The SR9 magazine fit, but would not lock in the Security 9. Upon closer inspection, the SR9 magazine locks up on front via a rectangular hole in the front. The Security 9 magazine has the same rectangular hole in the same location, but it also has a traditional 'side lock' magazine hole on the right side only. Which further tells me the magazine release is not reversible on the Security 9.
The Security 9 has much going for it. But, on Saturday, I walked away with the ambidextrous P95. And 3 extra OEM magazines for cheap. And, at least in my mind, the better Ruger 9mm compact. And several questions for the current leadership at Ruger.
But the P95 was classic Ruger late 20th Century design: beefy, durable, and enough steel in it to make 2 K-Frames. It was Ruger's first 9mm design with a polymer (long-strand fiberglass) frame: ambidextrous frame mounted safety, ambidextrous magazine release, and three-dot sights. And, smartly, magazines from the pre-existing P85 and P89 designs were interchangeable.
So, the proof for me would come with one basic thought: would the Security 9 take the magazines from the readily available SR9 magazines? Really, why wouldn't they be? I mean this was a no-brainer, right?
So I tried the first SR9 magazine in the Security 9. It didn't lock into place. No joy.
The SR9 magazine fit, but would not lock in the Security 9. Upon closer inspection, the SR9 magazine locks up on front via a rectangular hole in the front. The Security 9 magazine has the same rectangular hole in the same location, but it also has a traditional 'side lock' magazine hole on the right side only. Which further tells me the magazine release is not reversible on the Security 9.
The Security 9 has much going for it. But, on Saturday, I walked away with the ambidextrous P95. And 3 extra OEM magazines for cheap. And, at least in my mind, the better Ruger 9mm compact. And several questions for the current leadership at Ruger.