FX-9 or Ruger PC9
- Thread starter drago403
- Start date
I have both. Here's a quick comparison from my experience.
1. Controls - FX9 is fantastic - safety is near thumb like an AR (Ruger's safety is a crossbolt near the trigger), trigger is good on both, charging handle takes a bit to get used to on the FX9 - could be bigger. Lots of space for optics. Mag release is great - right where index finger is. The Ruger mag release is not in a great spot.
2. Weight - PC Carbine with aluminum handguard is heavy. FX9 weight is very good.
3. Takedown - PC Carbine is great - easy to take apart into two for stowing away / backpacking. This is probably one of the best features about it - the takedown into two pieces.
4. Disassembly and Cleaning - advantage to the FX9 all the way. Two pins and everything comes out. Very easy to clean. But FX9 gets dirty fast. PC Carbine - you need some hex tools. More involved steps to disassemble. Bolt assembly - recoil rod and especially the shock buffer somewhat annoying to take apart, and then there is the bolt itself with two pins for the bolt face and a pin on the side for the extractor. Shock buffer and clip is really annoying - cheaply made and goes out of alignment, causing issues with trigger assembly aligning for pins. The two hex screws / bolts (under front of receiver, the one that screws in the grip) - one of them is starting to strip. They are "captive" or whatever, so they don't come out all the way.
5. Accuracy - hardly scientific and I am not a great shooter, but out of the box, the FX9 is more accurate. I know others will disagree. I use the same red dot sight on both guns.
6. Ammo - FX9 documents say to use 115gr to start. FO told me there is no break in period. FX9 should not use aluminum ammo according to the documents. Others have indicated FX9 is ammo picky. I have shot 115, 124 and my usual 147. No issues. The PC Carbine has eaten everything without issues
7. Last round bolt hold open. My PC carbine does not like Glock mags - the bolt hold open consistently does not work with those. Similarly FX9 has some issue with Glock mags, though it didn't at first. Magpul PMAGs and ProMags no issue
8. How it comes from the factory - the FX9 is bone dry. Lube it. Ruger PC Carbine came generously lubricated.
9. Looks - personally I think the FX9 is a better looking gun
10. Price - about the same. For me the PC Carbine with adjustable stock and aluminum handguard was 1149.99 + tax. The FX9 was 1349.99 + tax.
11. Overall enjoyment - for me, it's the FX9.
12. Other - the PC Carbine comes with a SR9/S9 magwell and magazine but also comes with a Glock magwell (no magazine). The FX9 (at least mine) didn't come factory with any Glock magazines but the retailer added one. Both guns accept Glock 17 and 19 mags.
13. Other - Part II - the bolt lock for the FX9 seems to release with jolts or movement intermittently. The Ruger PC Carbine one stays put until manually engaged.
Last edited:
hatman1793
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I found the Ruger carbine to be front heavy. Heavy enough that upon wielding it, it seems that you have to compensate for the extra weight out front…..for example, bringing it up from the “Low~ready” position, it’s easy to surpass the target X ring & you might have to moderate it back down
I found the FX9 carbine is just heavy overall & keeping it on target takes some getting used to the extra weight. Plus the extra long barrel seems a waste.
I really liked the Beretta Storm carbine the best but……well…. You know… Stupid Liberals is as Stupid Liberals does…..
I found the FX9 carbine is just heavy overall & keeping it on target takes some getting used to the extra weight. Plus the extra long barrel seems a waste.
I really liked the Beretta Storm carbine the best but……well…. You know… Stupid Liberals is as Stupid Liberals does…..
I wonder how much of this though, is influenced by the paperwork and instructions from FO indicating to use 115gr of particular brands of ammo, as well as no aluminum cased ammo being used. It does seem to prompt common questions with regards to ammunition compatibility.
Conversely this can also be attributed to the regular reports of the first generations of FX9s having extraction problems which if memory serves me correctly, a bolt modification resolved - since then FO has fixed this issue on all new models.
When I first got my FX9 it was having some trouble which I though were caused by ammo. But after a lot of trial and error it turned out to be mag related. The pinned Pmags work best with no issues what so ever.
Based on my experience, the second gens with the chamfered bolt aren't guaranteed to be reliable. Mine sure as hell wasn't, it was a jamomatic until I replaced the featherweight garbage buffer and spring with much heavier components.
My vote is for the Ruger.
My vote is for the Ruger.
My FX-9 had a bit of a learning curve that cost me $1.50 to figure out. It wouldn't strip the first round from a 10 round magazine reliably and fully chamber it until I put six Canuckian quarters into the bottom of the buffer tube, pre-loading the buffer spring a bit. Now it chambers just fine and runs all day, no issues whatsoever besides the classic dislike of Glock mags for last round bolt hold open. Works perfect with SGM and PMAGs though. I'm going to order an ETS mag or two and try those as well, they seem to work fine in FX-9s from what I've heard. You can get see-through blue mags - oooh, aaah!
I like the FX-9 over the PC9 for looks, ergonomics and as mentioned above ease of cleaning. Thegazelle nailed it all above really, totally spot on. You get a bit more play room if you like to tinker and customize with the FX-9 in terms of stocks, grips, lights and other rail-mounted things, buffers, springs, triggers, sights, etc. Cost is roughly the same when you factor in everything you'd do to either rifle. Check out the TandemKross chassis for the PC9, that's the direction I'd go in if I went with the PC9. Improved ergonomics and the mag release would now be accessible to my trigger finger for faster mag changes in competition.
I like the FX-9 over the PC9 for looks, ergonomics and as mentioned above ease of cleaning. Thegazelle nailed it all above really, totally spot on. You get a bit more play room if you like to tinker and customize with the FX-9 in terms of stocks, grips, lights and other rail-mounted things, buffers, springs, triggers, sights, etc. Cost is roughly the same when you factor in everything you'd do to either rifle. Check out the TandemKross chassis for the PC9, that's the direction I'd go in if I went with the PC9. Improved ergonomics and the mag release would now be accessible to my trigger finger for faster mag changes in competition.
I have an X95 but not in 9mm. Still, I think the prices of that 9mm version is, what, $2400 or something like that. If it is as reliable as the 5.56 version, it would be good, but that's a very steep price to pay for a PCC - particularly since Poly has been lobbying the government to ban all PCCs. Even at $2000, my Kriss Vector was steep - I still like shooting my PC Carbine and FX9 more, so price doesn't necessarily equate to enjoyment.
