Poll: Ruger 57, Yea or Nay

[Five-0]

I looked at the Ruger 57. Ended up spending my money on a CZ 75 SP01. It just made sense to stick with a caliber I already had. I really liked the capacity of the 57, but you can get high cap mags for all so that was a non issue. As soon as the county tells me I can pick it up I will be putting it through its paces.

 

[micdude]

Reloading it is difficult from what I hear

 

[CountryGent]

I looked at the Ruger 57. Ended up spending my money on a CZ 75 SP01. It just made sense to stick with a caliber I already had.

Funny you mention it because I did almost exactly that. Albeit a CZ-75BD and some very large capacity magazines.

 

[03A3Sporter]

Years ago I owned an FN 57 IOM and honestly it did nothing for me . The little cartridge is neither fish nor fowl and it was designed with one purpose in mind . To give people who do not need a rifle in the course of their duties the ability to penetrate body armor with a compact PDW or pistol. Considering that the cool guy ammunition isn't really available to the plebes the guns that fire it are less than appealing to me.

Just my two cents but life is all about variety I suppose.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I voted NO, like said above, the ammo is the real issue, as we cant really get the good stuff, it's not worth the squeeze, add to that the funky PS-90 with all it's coolness, also limited by the lack of decent ammo, and it's a lost cause! Absolutely LOVED the PS90, hated the ammo situation, so it went byby, and the HK-53 took it's place for funky coolness, and back to a combat pistol for short stopping!

 

[The Heretic]

According to some tests some have done on readily available ammo the 28 gr (SS198LF green tip), some ammo can penetrate some soft armor (e.g., Level II armor rated for handguns).

Whether someone should buy a gun depends on what they want it for.

Fun? Can you afford it? Yes? Buy it.

Personal defense? Depends on your situation. Does it fill a niche that you are likely to encounter or need to fill? Then buy it. Otherwise?

However, for SHTF purposes I have three Five Sevens which are better for SHTF than the 57. Why? The open top of the 57 vs. the enclosed slide of the Five Seven.

YMMV

 

[Kruel J]

Ruger-57™ Safety Bulletin

www.ruger.com

Why am I not surprised?

 

[spookshack]

While I personally think Ruger could and should do a better job with their QC, at least they admit there is a potential issue/problem with their products and issue a recall and or safety bulletin. I can think of a Tupperware brand that just issues "upgrades".

 

[DirectDrive]

1) The 57 pistols are ugly.
2) The AR57 has that ridiculous magazine system.
3) The little round looks like it would be a PITA to reload.

Other than that they are great !

 

[Kruel J]

While I personally think Ruger could and should do a better job with their QC, at least they admit there is a potential issue/problem with their products and issue a recall and or safety bulletin. I can think of a Tupperware brand that just issues "upgrades".

It's really not that big of a deal, the 57 recall. I mean it's the manual safety switch after all.

 

[CountryGent]

Forgot about this thread. This was many a gun-related mental flatulence incidents ago.

 

[Anonymous 510]

I own one it is definitely fun to shoot I don't know if its worth the 699 price tag I paid when it first came out but is cheaper compared to fn's 57... But the only major issue has been ammo I don't have a good amount but it seams to be a ghost round like .357 sig when it comes to availableilty

 

[Anonymous 510]

Dang auto correct I do** have a good amount..

 

[Camelfilter]

Dang auto correct I do** have a good amount..

IIRC the cartridge has some coating on it too, so ad that into any supply chain issues & its another hurdle for manufacturers. And I believe only a couple companies make the ammo anyhow.

We have a bunch, but not a comfortable bunch, so haven't been shooting the FN's hardly much.