Glocktober: Glock vs Everything: Glock 19 vs Ruger RXM

When it comes to compact handguns, the Glock 19 has long been the gold standard, reliable, simple, and widely adopted. This Glocktober, we tested how it stacks up against some challengers on the market. First up is the Ruger RXM, a Glock-style design that promises many of the upgrades shooters usually install aftermarket, right out of the box.

RXM Ergonomics and Controls

The Ruger RXM comes with a slightly more aggressive grip texture, and the frame has a pronounced ledge that serves as a clear reference point for proper thumb placement and grip. Rounded edges on the grip improve comfort, and the undercut on the trigger guard helps achieve a higher, more natural grip. The trigger is a modest upgrade from the stock Glock trigger, and Ruger removed the signature hump at the lower part of the grip found on many stock Glocks.

The slide is cut to accept RMR, RMSc, and DDP footprints, giving plenty of options for optics. It features front and rear serrations, blacked-out rear sights, and a big-dot front night sight that will co-witness with most optics. The most notable upgrade is the Fire Control Insert, which allows full customization of the platform.

Specs at a Glance

On paper the two guns are very close. Unloaded weight is roughly 23.2 ounces for the Ruger RXM versus 23.63 ounces for the Glock 19. Magazine capacity is 15 rounds for both. Barrel length is 4.00 inches for the RXM versus 4.02 inches for the G19. Overall length measures 7.15 inches for the RXM compared with 7.36 inches for the Glock 19. These are small differences that, combined with the RXM’s factory ergonomics and optics-ready slide, make it feel like a Glock with many common upgrades already installed.

Range Tests and Drills

We put the RXM to the test against a few Glock 19s using three drills.

Six-Shot Plate Rack

The RXM posted a time of 6.19 seconds, clearing the rack in seven hits. A stock Glock 19 ran the same drill in 5.65 seconds. The noticeable difference came down to getting used to the RXM’s slightly different trigger and emphasizing proper grip pressure due to the RXM’s thinner handle. Neither result indicates a flaw; it is simply a matter of recognizing and adjusting to the platform differences compared with the commonly used Glock 19.

Throttle-Control Drill

This drill engaged 12 targets at varying distances and speeds. With the RXM the time was 14.09 seconds with 14 shots, including two makeup shots. With the Glock the time was 13.60 seconds with 13 shots, including one makeup shot. Again, the RXM’s slightly different trigger feel and slimmer grip required conscious attention to grip pressure and trigger prep. Those small neuromuscular adjustments accounted for most of the time difference rather than any mechanical shortcoming.

Six-Target Plate Rack with Three Reloads

The RXM finished this drill in 7.89 seconds while the Glock 19 finished in 7.50 seconds. The gap tightened as I shot more. As I became familiar with the RXM’s ergonomics and trigger, times moved closer, reinforcing that the differences were largely about adaptation rather than performance deficits.

Conclusion

The Ruger RXM brings useful factory upgrades to a familiar platform. Its ergonomics, optics-ready slide, and customization options make it an attractive alternative for shooters who want common enhancements without aftermarket modifications. In raw performance the Glock 19 still posted slightly faster times in my drills, but the RXM closed the gap as I adapted to its feel. For many shooters the decision will come down to how quickly they adapt and whether the RXM’s factory ergonomics and optics options match their preferences.