# Ruger announces compact version of the SR40, the SR40c



## Jed Henson

Today Ruger announced the compact version of the SR40, the SR40c. Here's an excerpt from the review written by Mike Boyle we just posted:

"Range Report
Initially, I found the thought of another compact .40 SW pistol pretty boring. What could this guy do that earlier pistols couldn't? But after shooting the SR40c, I came to the conclusion it has a leg up on many of its competitors. While my associates went off to squeeze in more trigger time with the SR1911 and Gunsite Scout, I took the opportunity to shake down the SR40c.

To get right to the point, this gun was totally reliable, accurate and a pleasure to shoot. I've often found the recoil sensation of many .40 SW pistols to be a bit snappy, but that wasn't the case with the SR40c. The dual recoil spring and polymer frame help dissipate felt recoil, and I was able to run through a couple hundred rounds in short order with no fatigue whatsoever.

I didn't perform formal accuracy testing, but I can report I was able to place just about all of my hits in the center of the Gunsite Option Target. Hammers at close range and more deliberate shots at longer distance yielded the same result. I admit the three-dot sight pattern isn't the best choice for my middle-age eyes, but that didn't seem to handicap my performance in any way.

I also tried my hand on a few man-on-man drills, facing opponents armed with the SR1911 in .45 ACP. Surprisingly, I was able to hold my own and even managed to win a few contests. Equally gratifying results were achieved on a falling plate rack."

And here's a photo:










The full review is here: Ruger SR40c Review | GunGunsGuns.net


----------



## recoilguy

Ruger got a load of crap from almost everyone when they got into the polymer market because they had a couple recalls. Today teh brand bashers still amuse themselves with witty comments about the ineveitable recall any new Ruger will have. I find them childish and offensive. Ruger may have had some problems but credit where it is due. They have fixed them and are making a pretty darn nice weapon now!!!

RCG


----------



## Packard

I have no objection to the "me too" guns. I just don't see an advantage of the new Ruger over the well-established Glock. Ruger has always made good guns; they seem in large to be derivative. They seem to take others ideas and run with them. When they exceed the original's quality it is a good deal, but if it is just a "me too" I quickly lose interest.


----------



## recoilguy

Point made. 

However just because something is not the initial item brought to market certianly doesn't make it a "me too". In many instances it is the reason the well established front runners are forced to have 3 or who knows even G4 series of the gun they brought to market initially. The first 1 2 or 3 where good but not good enough to still compete. Using the anology you have presented any gun brought to market without adjustable backstraps or improved mag releases are now religated to the me too catogory. Competition is parimount to imporvement. Being first to start is not the same as being best, it only means you start quick. I am unlike you in the fact that I lose interest in those who rest on their laurels, no matter how good they are. I enjoy competition and am always intriqued by what one company does and how they make it theirs or in their mind what they think is better. I also enjoy seeinhg what a company that touts perfection does to make perfect better. I lose interest in poor quality and unreliablility after that I am very interested and am not a big I have to drive a Ford and nothing else kind of guy.

RCG


----------



## Packard

But what substantive improvements has Ruger brought to the table over the Baby Glocks (26/27)? 

You would have a hard time supporting an argument that they have improved the quality of the weapons. Both Glock and Ruger turn out high-quality weapons. 

So it boils down to ergonomics and features.

I don't see that they have advanced the product very much.


----------



## recoilguy

1 they have made the gun more affordable, 2 the grip anle is more appealing to at least half the population, 3 the gun is better looking, 4 rear adjustable sights, 5 apendex safties........ are these improvements I think they are, I am not the definative authority however. I own both a baby glock and a Ruger. If they have advanced it even a little they have still advanced it. If they and others had not each advance the beloved design a little bit Glock would still be making G1 pistols. 

Here is something I have posted before it explains my take on this kind of thread

The evolution of firearms is similar in ways obvious to many, to the evolution of life. There are certain effective traits that show up repeatedly in convergent evolution, using the parts and structures available. Occasionally, a new trait is developed, but overall, form and function dictate change and design. Simple really

Thus, calling theSR9 a "copy" of the Glock is simplistic, and does not take into account the obvious differences in the two firearms, in relation to the general structure of that genre. It amounts to no more then petty name calling and comes off as blatant brand bias 

Ruger has always striven to produce the highest-quality firearms. It has been successful many times and has had some well publicized and perpetuated problems. They have improved their problems and the weapons they sell, thus eveoltion at work.

The SR9 may have a "Glock style" trigger, but exploded drawings will show you that the two have enough differences to be two, distinct "species". It is very easy to say copy and to point to problems, it is very difficult to do it with credibility when it is only followed by phrases like a "me too"

Personally I am not as impressed with Glock as others may or may not be. But I do acknowledge the quality, niche, and popularity of the manufacturers. There is absolutley no reason not to purchase a Glock if one is so inclined. I have, i own one, and may purchase another again one day. There is at the same time no reason to hold it against anyone or to chastises them if they choose any other weapon. It is more important that someone joins the ranks of gun owners and shooters and possibly the NRA then that they join a “club” of a specific brand owner. Gun owners in America need to unite.

I see many people on these forums who are all too willing to diminish a particular manufacturer, for reasons unknown. I believe that such tendentious statements limit the value of information on that forum. Many neophytes come to these forums seeking credible advice about firearms. When they read someone "pimp off" a manufacturer they must come away with doubts that are really not justified. The opinions of one are taken as facts by the less informed. That can only work to the pejorative of the purpose of the forum. 

RCG


----------



## Lateck

recoilguy says it real well!

I am waiting to get a 40c in my hands! :smt1099

Lateck,


----------

