Ruger PC9 released with adjustable stock, pistol grip.

[seezur]

TFB Review: The New and Refreshed Ruger PC9 Chassis Model


If you were thinking about buying one of those $$$ chassis systems, looks like it might be cheaper to buy the whole kit from Ruger. Appears there are ban state "compliant" models, but even they are too scary for NY.

 

[Modean]

Nice. Too bad we can't have it in New Yorkistan. I'll have to be content with my standard PC9 buttstock. Great little carbine.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Ugh...

 

[toxophilite]

sourest grape ive seen so far..don’t like it

 

[ArmedCorgi]

sourest grape ive seen so far..don’t like it

But, but.. they tried to make it into an AR. Why don't you like it?

 

[nortatoga]

The Ruger model has no open sight's. Though you can mount flip ups on the hand guard which may co-witness with a red-dot better.



The Midwest Industries model still works with the factory open sight's

 

[garyv350]

What a waste. Just build an ar-9 at that point.

 

[BDinPutnam]

What a waste. Just build an ar-9 at that point.

At 800 bucks MSRP it is WAY cheaper than my AR9 was. Of course I went a bit over the top on parts, you certainly *could* build one at or below the $800 mark.

 

[Phauxtoe]

does it have barrel thing that goes up?

 

[Marine Cpl]

There are still some benefits to this compared to an AR9. Takedown is easier than separating the lower from upper and recoil is less than an AR9.

Cons

Unless you mount on the barrel, you will lose zero.

 

[BDinPutnam]

There are still some benefits to this compared to an AR9. Takedown is easier than separating the lower from upper and recoil is less than an AR9.

Cons

Unless you mount on the barrel, you will lose zero.

I thought maintenance and cleaning was annoying compared to an AR?

 

[Marine Cpl]

I thought maintenance and cleaning was annoying compared to an AR?

Oh yeah. Forgot that one. Yes. Major pain. Lots of screws.

 

[@thewheels]

Dammit Ruger! Forget the chassis and make it in 357 Sig and/or 10mm already!

 

[ArmedCorgi]

I think the more guns that come in pistol grip the better, for obvious common usage reasons, but at the same time it just irks me how it seems like every rifle has to have an aftermarket chassis that tries to replicate the AR platform. I mean, with the exception of Fightlite and other options that exist purely to get around AWBs, you don't see kits that try to turn the AR into a mini 14 or a PCC9.

 

[Podmonkey]

I think I prefer the original model. If I want a "tactical" PCC there are options that interest me more chief among them the AK-V.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I mean, with the exception of Fightlite and other options that exist purely to get around AWBs, you don't see kits that try to turn the AR into a mini 14 or a PCC

Because going to the traditional stocked rifle from a pistol gripped rifle is inferior for lots of reasons. There’s no market for it.

-no adjustable stock
-no folding stock
-no magazine release reachable with index finger
-No multitude of sling points unless modifications are made
-Extra length
-less straight line bore axis thingy
-optics have to be mounted lower or a raised cheek pad is needed
-harder to choke up and get a nose to charging handle type of hold for CQB unless you have long arms

 

[PDR_AR15]

Have you done a test not mounting a scope to the barrel and mounting to the rail to see if you lose the zero after each disassemble and reassemble? If so - how many times did you do it and how much was the change each time?

There are still some benefits to this compared to an AR9. Takedown is easier than separating the lower from upper and recoil is less than an AR9.

Cons

Unless you mount on the barrel, you will lose zero.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Because going to the traditional stocked rifle from a pistol gripped rifle is inferior for lots of reasons. There’s no market for it.

-no adjustable stock
-no folding stock
-no magazine release reachable with index finger
-No multitude of sling points unless modifications are made
-Extra length
-less straight line bore axis thingy
-optics have to be mounted lower or a raised cheek pad is needed
-harder to choke up and get a nose to charging handle type of hold for CQB unless you have long arms

I'm not arguing against the superiority of the AR platform. I am arguing against the fad of trying to turn different and often more expensive guns, that were designed differently, into AR's. To the company who's design it is: if that is where you are looking to take the design, then just build it like an AR. To the person who would want to turn it into an AR, just get an AR! Each rifle design has it's pros and cons. I like the Mini 14, for instance, because of how it is designed and how it looks (traditional yet slightly tactical and bad ass. Like the M14) I didn't get the Mini 14 because I really want it to be like an AR. The AR already exists and is a VERY modular, customizable and affordable rifle. No reason not to buy the AR if that is what you are looking for in the first place. You don't see people putting vette engines into Ford Mustangs.

I bought the PCC9 because I liked the 50 state legal/traditional design that also incorporated some tacticoolness. I think Ruger was successful with bridging those two worlds with this gun. It's an original design that they started to expand upon but then NOPE they go ahead and try to make it into an AR. Jumping the shark.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Have you done a test not mounting a scope to the barrel and mounting to the rail to see if you lose the zero after each disassemble and reassemble? If so - how many times did you do it and how much was the change each time?

Yes. I lost a little that’s why I mounted mine on the barrel. At 25 yds art had a 5 shot group in the center. After a few cleanings it was slightly off center of the bulls.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I'm not arguing against the superiority of the AR platform. I am arguing against the fad of trying to turn different and often more expensive guns, that were designed differently, into AR's. To the company who's design it is: if that is where you are looking to take the design, then just build it like an AR. To the person who would want to turn it into an AR, just get an AR! Each rifle design has it's pros and cons. I like the Mini 14, for instance, because of how it is designed and how it looks (traditional yet slightly tactical and bad ass. Like the M14) I didn't get the Mini 14 because I really want it to be like an AR. The AR already exists and is a VERY modular, customizable and affordable rifle. No reason not to buy the AR if that is what you are looking for in the first place. You don't see people putting vette engines into Ford Mustangs.

I bought the PCC9 because I liked the 50 state legal/traditional design that also incorporated some tacticoolness. I think Ruger was successful with bridging those two worlds with this gun. It's an original design that they started to expand upon but then NOPE they go ahead and try to make it into an AR. Jumping the shark.

For someone like me who will eventually move, this stock would be ideal. Also the recoil is a little less since the heavy bolt isn’t moving that far like it has to in an AR buffer tube. Somebody else may prefer that over an AR.

My previous AR9 recoiled pretty bad until I got a special buffer and a .308 spring to minimize it.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

For someone like me who will eventually move, this stock would be ideal. Also the recoil is a little less since the heavy bolt isn’t moving that far like it has to in an AR buffer tube. Somebody else may prefer that over an AR.

My previous AR9 recoiled pretty bad until I got a special buffer and a .308 spring to minimize it.

Every gun has it's pros and cons. I'm not an Engineer, but I know enough about design to say that wanting one thing usually means you are sacrificing another. The AR9 may have it's heavy recoil impulses, but that is a side effect of the design. As you have stated, there are parts you can get to minimize that and I wager the market for AR9's is strong enough that there will continue to be improvements made.

I get that someone may want the best of both worlds. That brings me to the notion of Ruger (or whichever company in question), instead of coming out with a chassis that accepts AR parts and for the most part makes the rifle more like an AR in looks and parts, why not design those features to fit the original gun? I understand the cost effectiveness of making a chassis that is compatible with an already established after market of parts, but I also see value in creating features to fit the gun. I'm not against the PCC having a pistol grip, I just want it to be a grip designed for the gun and not just a way to slap an AR pistol grip and stock on it.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I don’t understand your beef. I do not understand what you mean about the grip being designed for the gun. Isn’t that what they just did right now by designing this stock ?

You don’t have to buy if it doesn’t suit you. Just like you don’t have to buy a new Mlok hand guard set for your AR if a newone comes out with more features.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

I do not understand what you mean about the grip being designed for the gun. Isn’t that what they just did right now by designing this stock ?

No. They designed a chassis to take an AR pistol grip and an AR stock...yawn. They made it look like a gun it wasn't originally designed to be.

I don’t understand your beef.

My beef is with the lack in creativity and innovation. It's with the predictable and often immediate drive towards making any gun like an AR by way of finding a way to slap AR furniture on a gun it wasn't meant for. What is the problem with developing the features you want so they fit the lines and style of the gun?

You don’t have to buy if it doesn’t suit you. Just like you don’t have to buy a new Mlok hand guard set for your AR if a newone comes out with more features.

Obviously. I'm not telling anyone to not buy it. I am just expressing my opinion.

 

[nortatoga]

As with the 10/22 I can see a lot of different accessories and mods coming out for the PC9! I have mine sent up the way I like now, though I did call Tech-Sights to see if they had anything in the works for this little carbine? (not at this time)

The only option I REALLY REALLY want is a mag-well for the S&W M&P as I have 12 mags for my pistol! Would really like to pair them up.

 

[Paxal]

TFB Review: The New and Refreshed Ruger PC9 Chassis Model


If you were thinking about buying one of those $$$ chassis systems, looks like it might be cheaper to buy the whole kit from Ruger. Appears there are ban state "compliant" models, but even they are too scary for NY.

I’d love to have one with a standard stock with a pistol grip. I like pistol grips, but don’t care much for most adjustable butt stocks. I’ve been searching for something like that for my Mini 14. The minis standard stock isn’t great, but add a pistol grip to it, and IMHO it would be nice. It would be light, accurate, and comfortable to shoot. Why no one makles something like that I don’t know.

 

[Marine Cpl]

My beef is with the lack in creativity and innovation. It's with the predictable and often immediate drive towards making any gun like an AR by way of finding a way to slap AR furniture on a gun it wasn't meant for. What is the problem with developing the features you want so they fit the lines and style of the gun?

Not trying to beat up on you but rather just point out that it’s one or the other with slightly different variations. It’s either going to be another traditional stocked gun with perhaps some slight angle change like the Magpul one or a pistol gripped gun with some slight variation like an AR.

There is no innovation unless you want a grip that’s shaped like a ball or a stock that’s shaped like a hexagon. It’s one or the other. Traditional or AR pattern.

 

[Eddie Gunks]

Ha ha ha.
Ruger figured out to finally get in the “ar” bandwagon.

looks like an ar. Shoots like a mini....ha ha ha

go with the ar

 

[ArmedCorgi]

It’s one or the other. Traditional or AR pattern.

I understand what you are saying and I think that maybe innovation was the wrong word. However, I think my point still stands as far as taking those patterens and designing them to fit the original design of the gun, instead of simply making an adaptor to fit features originally intended for another type of gun.

Also, I know this rifle needs no introduction, but there is innovation within the industry. I'd posit that this rifle falls under neither pattern listed above.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I understand what you are saying and I think that maybe innovation was the wrong word. However, I think my point still stands as far as taking those patterens and designing them to fit the original design of the gun, instead of simply making an adaptor to fit features originally intended for another type of gun.

Also, I know this rifle needs no introduction, but there is innovation within the industry. I'd posit that this rifle falls under neither pattern listed above.
View attachment 54738

That is a no grip version of their existing bull pup with a grip. So in the bull pup world it’s the same thing as in the regular rifle world. Pistol grip or no pistol grip. Again. One or the other with a slight variation in shape.

 

[BDinPutnam]

The only thing to like about that bullpup is that it looks kind of like a LAWS.