As we've concurrently noted, it's almost as if Ruger was a victim of its own marketing back in the day. The P85/P89 (and, for that matter, pretty much the entire subsequent P-Series guns) were marketed as a sort of latter-day volkspistole, less expensive than their competition. That casting required proportional larger components for strength (combined with William Ruger's predilection to make things at least twice as strong as they needed to be for organizational forecasted lifespans) meant that the guns were larger in some aspects-but their engineering and design ameliorated a significant portion of that (such as the dished in grip panel insertions in the receiver frame, and the redesigned safety/decocker and slide release levers). Rugers pricing and market positioning may have moved a lot of guns, but also reinforced a prejudiced view of them as a second-rate product... Ironically, there was a strong rumor in the industry that Glocks only cost $70 or less to produce but were deliberately priced comparably (or only relatively slightly below) their competition.
Intrinsically, the P89s are a very. very good gun. They were significantly enhanced even further at least two points during their manufacturing cycle. I too had a Walther P88, a second generation product improved one-and other than arguably slightly better ultimate accuracy, the P89 was a better gun in my opinion in almost all operational aspects.
I like also the DA triggerpull and DA/SA transition of the P89. It isn't often talked about, but in my experience the Ruger's have an excellent DA/SA. In actual use, the DA/SA transition is not difficult to master.
Best, Jon
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by JonInWA
