It's anything but slim. I've handled it. It's not bad but the grip is pretty small for a slide that size. Also looks like it slides directly against polymer. It's basically a full size pistol with the limitations of a compact, ie low cap mag, heavy weight, and short barrel.
I like and prefer 1911's as well, but facts are facts and the P345's grip is slimmer than every 1911 style compact on the market. Widest part is the safety on both sides of the slide and it's only 1.1" thick. Grip handle is even thinner.
Thanks for your opinion, but I also wouldn't call 4 1/4" a very short barrel, as there are plenty compacts out there in the 3 + inch category.
I must have misremembered the 345's barrel length. I thought it was in the 3 inch range.
Grip width may be smaller than a 1911, but what about slide width? I prefer the wider grip and thinner slide on a 1911 over the thin grip and huge slide of the P345.
If you HANDLE both and prefer the 345, then I have nothing ill to say of your choice. I liked the 345 very much on paper. When I actually handled one and saw it taken down, by opinion dropped dramatically.
I have a Ruger P345 and to be honest, I've come very close to trading it in for a S&W 1991SC.
I don't mind the size at all, but I don't like the trigger and sights, and from the first time I bought it have been looking to replace both of those. I've also only put about 250 rnds though it (with occasional wipe down and barrel cleaning - no slide removal) and it's already started jamming with the slide back.
I'm guessing it does have Ruger P-Series reliability. I never even touched one of these new P345's, but I do know my P95DC NEVER failed me, and that's a pretty good thing. I'm guessing these guns have the same basic action. Right?
A forum community dedicated to hunters and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, trails, clubs, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more. The friendliest gun forum on the Internet!