TexasCHLforum.com

I will be in the market soon for a compact 9mm for my wife to eventually carry when she gets her CHL. Took her to the gun show this past weekend to get some ideas on which guns that she felt comfortable holding. We have some others to try, but so far she has narrowed it to either the Ruger SR9c or the Taurus 709 Slim.

I would like to ask any of you who have experience with either of these models, to weigh in with pros & cons, reliability, etc.

I haven't shot the 709 but I have the SR9c. I liked the SR9c's trigger, crisp and not too heavy. The safety disengaged positively. I like how it fits in my hand and how it points. I don't care for the magazine disconnect safety. Shooting, the muzzle flip felt stronger than other compartively sized guns such as the Glock 26 and S&W M&P9c. That said, rapid fire was still quite managable. The SR9c was my second choice behind the Glock 19.

I was looking at the 709 but some of the stories about the catastrophic failures made me shy away.

I recommend she shoot both to see what she likes. I was leaning towards an M&P and barely considered the Glocks until I rented a bunch of guns and shot them. The M&P fell well down on my list and the Glock rose to the top. Have her try as many as she can, even some she thought might not work at first.

I cannot comment on firing the 709 Slim but I did handle it at an outdoors store. I'm a medium size guy with hands that wear size 10 to 11 gloves and I didn't like the way the 709 felt. It seemed TOO slim in my hand. Now, I do own a Ruger SR9c and it fits me pretty well. I say this in relation to a Glock, for instance. The grip angle of the Glocks causes the muzzle to point downward when I hold it correctly and simply point it forward. The Ruger sights line up almost perfectly for me, though (as does my 1911). I like the way it shoots and it does have a good trigger, but not as good as a SIG P226, for instance. The Ruger has digested all of several brands of ammo I have put through it including Federal "Champion", Wolf steel case, Sellier and Bellot, and Remington UMC. In fact, the only brand it had trouble with was MFS (some Hungarian brass-case) but I also had trouble with that brand in .45 ACP in my Springfield 1911 "GI Model". It fed okay, but some rounds wouldn't fire, despite seeming to have good primer strikes. The SR9c uses 10 round flush fit magazines, but can also use the longer 17 round SR9 magazines, with or without the adapter sleeve. The Ruger, being a compact model, does take some hand strength to rack the slide, since it has a shortened double spring setup. I can't simply grasp the rear serrations and pull back, but have to wrap my hand around the whole slide and pull back. Also, and this may not be an issue depending on whose opinion you get, I cannot release the slide from locked back by pressing the stop/release lever. Some folks will say that any semi-auto pistol should release this way, and others will tell you that you should never do that and always pull the slide back to release it. I will say that other semi-autos I have don't have a problem releasing the slide with the lever. All in all, though, I like it. It carries well in a couple of different holsters made for the SIG P228/229 (shoulder rig and IWB). I got it for a reasonable price (a bit over $400 NIB). I hope this wasn't too much of a ramble and that it helps a bit. Good luck and remember you have to find what fits and works for YOU.

I love my SR9c.

The only issues I have had have been a couple of stovepipes when firing left (week) handed. I have pretty big hands, but I find the grip on a Glock, M&P, xD, etc to be a bit big for me. It fits my hand really well - it is one of the thinnest double stack grips. It also seems, to me, to have a grip angle comparable to a 1911. I really like the grip.

I didn't like the magazine safety. But that is ok, I took it out. It has proven very accurate. It has a really good trigger and a nice reset, IMO.

That said, I do not think my wife could shoot it. She is small anyway and she had her right hand crushed and rebuilt when she was a teenager. As HP pointed out, the slide spring is very stout. We have tried and she cannot reliably rack the slide. The only times she was able to do, it was too uncomfortable for her. Also, give the couple of stovepipes I have seen shooting with my left, I would be concerned about her limp wristing it. My 13 year old daughter can shoot it very well, however.

SQLGeek wrote:I haven't shot the 709 but I have the SR9c. I liked the SR9c's trigger, crisp and not too heavy. The safety disengaged positively. I like how it fits in my hand and how it points. I don't care for the magazine disconnect safety. Shooting, the muzzle flip felt stronger than other compartively sized guns such as the Glock 26 and S&W M&P9c. That said, rapid fire was still quite managable. The SR9c was my second choice behind the Glock 19.

I was looking at the 709 but some of the stories about the catastrophic failures made me shy away.

I recommend she shoot both to see what she likes. I was leaning towards an M&P and barely considered the Glocks until I rented a bunch of guns and shot them. The M&P fell well down on my list and the Glock rose to the top. Have her try as many as she can, even some she thought might not work at first.

Very easy to remove the magazine disconnect safety.

http://rugerforum.net/ruger-pistols/240 ... -sr9c.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My wife has a 709 Slim and loves it. My advice would be to rent one of each and let her decide before you buy. The trigger on the 709 is just what my wife wanted because the other small .380 and 9mm pull was so heavy. The grip is good and it has a manual safety it could do without in my opinion. But she likes it so I got her one.

JJVP wrote:

SQLGeek wrote:I haven't shot the 709 but I have the SR9c. I liked the SR9c's trigger, crisp and not too heavy. The safety disengaged positively. I like how it fits in my hand and how it points. I don't care for the magazine disconnect safety. Shooting, the muzzle flip felt stronger than other compartively sized guns such as the Glock 26 and S&W M&P9c. That said, rapid fire was still quite managable. The SR9c was my second choice behind the Glock 19.

I was looking at the 709 but some of the stories about the catastrophic failures made me shy away.

I recommend she shoot both to see what she likes. I was leaning towards an M&P and barely considered the Glocks until I rented a bunch of guns and shot them. The M&P fell well down on my list and the Glock rose to the top. Have her try as many as she can, even some she thought might not work at first.

Very easy to remove the magazine disconnect safety.

http://rugerforum.net/ruger-pistols/240 ... -sr9c.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's good to know if I end up picking one up, thanks.

In regard to the comments about the slide being stiff, I don't remember that being the case but I will check my notes on that. I also don't slingshot the slide but rack it using an overhand method.

I own a 709 slim and I like it okay. The trigger is terrible you have to pull and pull and pull and I have seen a couple folks stop and think maybe the gun was not loaded because it was not going bang. It fits my hands fair and it is only 17 ounces unloaded with 7 +1 which is more than a lightweight revolver. I use it as my summer gun in a desantis softtuck and have carried it for 8-10 hours with no issues. The slide did bite my dad pretty good on one occasion but that was his fault. Overall a servicable piece for under 400 bucks but in hindsight I wish I had bought glock 26 or saved a little more for a Springer 1911
Btw my "winter piece is an XDM chambered in .40.

I enjoy my SR9c a great deal. I have big hands as well, so the normal SR9 magazines with the extension or the 10-round compacts with the pinky extender both make it more pleasant to shoot for accuracy at the range, but it sits deep in the palm of my hand and doesn't flip much with the flush compact mag. It's very comfortable to conceal IWB; I use a Galco made for a Glock 19 which works perfectly (I couldn't find a SR9c specific holster in person, and I don't buy holsters online unless I've tried them out first hand).

I'm actually in the market for a 709, or a Ruger LC9, or a Keltec subcompact 9mm-ish type pistol. The 709 has a better trigger than the LC9 as I measure things, but I like the LC9 more overall. However, I'm not a fan of being an early adopter, so I haven't gotten either. I might end up with a Kahr CW9 for the sake of a more proven track record than the other options.

I vote SR9C hands down. I too have heard quite a few stories from fellow shooters about failures with the 709. Even still, there isn't much I would carry instead of the SR9C. It is incredibly comfortable to both shoot and carry. The size is great. I can shoot very accurately with it, and anyone I've let shoot it agrees. It's far more accurate than you would expect from a compact. I've turned several people on to the SR9C, and everyone has loved it. I carry one everywhere I go, and like it so much I bought a second one. I shoot competitively with the SR9C as well, while most guys are out there with their very expensive, custom target pistols, I hold my own with my little Ruger. I also don't think you can beat Ruger for reliability, though some would disagree. Get an SR9C, you'll never look back!

I own the Ruger SR9 and love, love, LOVE it, but I haven't ever shot the compact version. I purchased the 709Slim a few weeks ago and I don't like it. As mentioned, the trigger pull is looooooong. I can shoot an entire magazine straight in the center of a target with my Ruger (and other guns!), but shoot low and left every single time with the Taurus. I know...operator error. Gonna take some practice and some patience, but I must admit to being a little disappointed. My husband can shoot it fine, straight to the X, so I know its just me. The guys at Spring Guns & Ammo where I purchased it had some good advice for me, so I haven't given up all hope. Just not as much fun to shoot as I had hoped. And I sure don't feel like I can carry it every day and use it effectively if called to do so, which is why I purchased it. It is very slim, light, easy to carry, and I wanted a 9mm instead of my .380 LCP, so it gets high marks in every area except for that stinkin' trigger!
Chris

I also own a PT709 "Slim", It's an ok handgun but not something I will recommend lightly. The closest product in the Ruger line up to the slim is the LC9,comparing the SR9c and the 709 is like comparing apples and oranges. Given a choice between the 709 (I own one) and a SR9c (I have shot one) I would go with the SR9c for a number of reasons, here are my top 3:

#1 The SR9c is larger and easier to control.
#2 The SR9c has a larger capacity magazine
#3 For more capacity the SR9c can use SR9 mags (Grip adapters are available).

Personally, I would buy the Ruger before a Taurus just based on their reputations for customer service.

In the event there is a product problem, Ruger will take care of you and stand behind their product. Taurus? Not so much.

I have had both, and the LC9 is more like the 709 than the SR9c. I never could get the sights to adjust for elevation on the 709. Positive aspect is that it is compact.

Thanks to all for your comments! Seems the consensus is the SR9c may be a better choice. Will have to try to rent one and let her shoot it before "pulling the trigger" on the purchase.