My DA/SA Traditional: Ruger P89

[JAH 3rd]

When I bought my Ruger P-90, I gave it a once over, paying attention to the owner's manual. Sometimes the manual of arms from different manufacturers call the same part a different name. Depending on the manufacturer the crane or yoke is what supports the cylinder on a revolver. Or a slide stop or slide release in a pistol.

So when I was activating the thumb safety on the P-90, I noticed the firing pin moved forward in the slide as the safety dropped. So when the hammer fell, the firing pin was far enough forward that the hammer never could touch it. Just thought this was an interesting take when comparing it to my S&W 5906 or Beretta M9 commercial and the way the safety works on those two pistols.

[TheNewbie]

With the earlier P85 MkII, early P89s with the "nub" safety shelf, a bit of a challenge. Once Ruger switched to the larger shelved and better positioned/angled shelf, not a problem.

Best, Jon

How would you say it compares to the 92FS safety?

I think the Ruger P345 hade some potential, at least theoretically, but the ILS would be a deal killer for me.

[Joe in PNG]

My first centerfire handgun was a P-95DC- filled with Cor-Bon JHP's no less.

[JonInWA]

How would you say it compares to the 92FS safety?

I think the Ruger P345 hade some potential, at least theoretically, but the ILS would be a deal killer for me.

I think that the later safety lever on the P89s (and similar on the other P-series Rugers) compares favorably with the levers on Beretta 92-series pistols. The earlier Ruger lever configuration, not so much.

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

Although I was pretty pleased with the Hogue Fingergroove rubber grips,

I had see-sawed for a period back to the OEM Xenoy grips, as I liked both their durability (I've literally never heard of a grip plate breaking or cracking) and their thinner profile. However I had two problems with them: 1) the sharp tang at the upper left grip curvature, even after some judicious filing and sanding, and 2) their relative slick surface, not providing a firm enough grip for me. I has experimented by having my gunsmith lightly bead-blast them, and while it provided a nice subdued matte finish, grip effectiveness wasn't significantly improved. The OEM Ruger grips had horizontal grooves molded in, much like World War II Walther P38 grips; they provided some grippiness over a smooth surface, and were easy to clean dirt and detritus out of the grooves, but were not particularly effective in significantly increasing the grip.





As part of the updating Ruger did when the P93 and P94 were created, in addition to the more streamlined slide and receiver, the grips, while remaining of excellent Xenoy material, were modified in three ways; 1) The grips were dished in more significantly, increasing users grip on the receiver by reducing the size of the grips, 2) The horizontal grooves were replaced by a form of polymid checkering, similar to what Glock ended up with on their Gen4 and Gen5 receivers. The last modification, 3), was that the upper left grip protruded out further from the frame due to it covering a revised spring setup on the P93/94 compared to the P85/89; this provided a flush fit to the P93/94 frames, but protruded out as a shelf when placed in the P89 frame.

Replacing the P89 OEM grips with the P93/94 OEM grips for increased grippiness was suggested to me years ago by Mike Smisko, one of Rugers P85/P89 project engineers; he stated that while the grips came from different molds, the fit specifications were essentially the same, and the P93/94 grips would be workable in the P89 receiver with some minor reworking. I filed that in the back of my mind, but didn't think to go that route for many years after we discussed it.

So-why the change? Well, as good as the Hogue rubber fingergroove grips are, they still add some bulk and additional hand displacement to the frame. Additionally, over time some devulcanization can occur, giving a tacky feel, and some surface degradation (which I found slightly occurring on the inner grip retaining tabs). While dealable by applying rubbing alcohol, I really wanted to side-step both issues by going back to the improved Xenoy Ruger grips.

William Ruger was exceptionally demanding of inherent quality and durability of all his gun's components, and the P85/P89 was a very personal flagship project-he very much wanted to win the DoD pistol trials of the 1980s, and have a Ruger as the US military's issue sidearm. The P85 wasn't quite ready for the XM9 trials, but was ready for the subsequent XM10 trials. From what I've been able to gather, the modified P85s submitted passed the trials with flying colors, but the XM10 was Beretta's to lose-which they didn't...so there was no Ruger M10 (although as a Group XO and when in the Corps Forward Field Tactical Operations Center, I did carry one as my personal defensive weapon, but that's another story...) I discuss some of the history of the P85 and P89 in a previous p-f thread for any interested: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....onal-Ruger-P89

I easily and inexpensively found a set of lightly used P94 OEM grips on eBay, for about $15. After thoroughly cleaning and drying, I found that they almost perfectly fit in my P89's receiver, needing but light taps with the polymer head of my Lyman gunsmithing hammer, and the screw holes aligned perfectly



The right grip snapped immediately into place, with a flush fit. The left grip plate at the grip top protruded shelf-like in the P89 frame, necessitating light filing and sanding to bevel the shelf for comfort when using, and to blend in at the top rear curve of the grip tang.




In all other dimensions, the left grip provided a perfect grip in the receiver grip recess, after being lightly tapped in.

In use, I've found the following:

1). Better overall ergonomics, due to the slimmer grip receiver dimensions;

2). Increased grippiness, due to the much more effective polymid molded checkering;

3) Increased grippiness and index due to the beveled upper shelf for my strong-hand thumb-a nice unexpected benefit.

I embellished (or made ridiculously garish) the appearance by using a red Lacquer-Stik to fill in the "Ruger" molded in the grip surface-hey, it's my gun....

So there you have it. I much prefer the P94 grips on the P89 to the OEM horizontally grooved Xenoy grip for their reduced grip dimensions, and increased grippiness, and I prefer them to the Hogue rubber fingergroove grips due to the decreased bulk (and probably longer lifespan). Years ago, I had tried and used for years the Craig Spegel-designed Uncle Mikes Santoprene rubber checkered grips for the P85/P89, but I eventually experienced deterioration in their retaining tabs which compromised their retention in the gun, so I also consider the P94 grips to be a superior solution to them (I assume that they also pop up occasionally on eBay and similar, usually at pretty inflated prices).

I doubt that this discussion will result in land-office sales rates for surplus or used P94 OEM Xenoy grips, but they are a very viable option for period P85/P89/P91 users-and pretty much plug and play.

Best, Jon

[Crusader]

I bought a P89 quite literally because of Desperado.

Ha ha, you and me both. Sure wish I still had it.

[JonInWA]

I suspect that many people bought these because of their price point and advertised features, as well as Ruger's marketing and positioning, without really realizing just how good they actually could be.

Two product improved serial number sequences to look for are 304-70000 and later (where Ruger modified the barrel and slide relationship and positioning, with the rear breechblock of the barrel slightly rising at a subtle angle above the plane of the slide when in battery) and the magazine tubes and magazine catch cut-out modified in shape and position to allow the magazine to be positioned slightly higher in the receiver, facilitating an improved (more straight) path for cartridges from the magazine into the chamber; these and subsequent serials had increased accuracy due to these modifications. The second serial sequence is 315- and higher, and look for the right side rollmarkings underneath the slide ejection port to be the stylized Ruger eagle (but with only a "R" in its center) and the rollmarking of "RUGER" superimposed above a smaller font "Prescott, AZ USA"

Best, Jon

[Moped]

For the money, I thought the P89 was the best Wonder 9mm out there. They were tanks compared to pretty much another 9mm SA. I purchased one in November of 1990, just prior to my Army Reserve Battalion getting activated for Desert Storm. I left it at home with my wife for HD. As I remember I purchased it new for $289 at a local gun show.

The one drawback to them was they were bulky and heavy. Definitely not a very concealable pistol. I thought they would have made a great service pistol for the U.S. Military. I never found any 9mm ammunition that they wouldn't feed. Including the cheap Egyptian 9mm Submachinegun ammunition you could buy through Shotgun News. You know, the stuff with the hard primers.

I've often regretted trading that pistol away. Wouldn't mind having another one. I find that they are getting higher and higher in price (like everything else).

[TheNewbie]

Ruger should forget about the American series and update these as a new polymer version. Full size, mid size, compact affordable, quality, reliable DA/SA guns.



There is a reason I post on gun forums vs working for a gun company. My ideas likely wouldn’t make money.

[Guerrero]

The second serial sequence is 315- and higher, and look for the right side rollmarkings underneath the slide ejection port to be the stylized Ruger eagle (but with only a "R" in its center) and the rollmarking of "RUGER" superimposed above a smaller font "Prescott, AZ USA"

Best, Jon

Curse you and your attention to detail that we can use to search, but there might be one on Gunbroker right now.