RUGER LCP vs. TAURUS COPY

The LCP is a copy of the Kel-tec P3AT.
Don't know anything about the Taurus .380 except that I've owned Taurus products in the past and will not buy another.

The LCP is a ripoff of the kel-tec P3AT. The Taurus TCP is actually NOT a ripoff, even though they're similar.

LCP and Taurus "copy"

If I'm not mistaken, the Keltec AND the Taurus came out first. Taurus also had the 9 mm version out prior to the Ruger's 9mm version. It may have even been out before the LCP.

The LCP was out before the TCP, but the Taurus PT709 (which is in no way a PF-9 ripoff, as it's striekr fired) was out before the LC9 (arguably a PF-9 ripoff).

What, in you opinion(s) is the quality/reliability of the Taurus?

Click to expand...

With Taurus, you pays your money, you takes your chances!

And before I get accused of Taurus bashing, I once bought a PT145 Millennium Pro, knowing I was taking a chance when doing so (hasn't worked out so far).
I knew Taurus was a step down in quality/reliability from some other brands, but there was just so much to like 'bout the PT145.

I have a relative that's a gunsmith at a local store, and in 4 trips to the shop, 3 of those times I found him working on a new Taurus before the owner could put it in in the display case for sale.
I jest don't like those odds...

You'll no doubt hear from various owners that never had a problem with their Taurus, but in my research before purchasing my PT145, it seemed to me that Taurus quality seems to have suffered wild swings, maybe dependent on how many they're selling? I thought Taurus quality was improving, but maybe it became a victim of the boom in firearm sales.

Taurus makes the 738 TCP but i dont see it looking like a knockoff or an exact copy of the LCP it definitely has its own look

the LCP and the Kel-Tek P3AT are very similar and the Kel-Tek tends to be less expensive

JMOfartO:

I've owned a Ruger firearm of one type or another for over forty years...

So far, (excuse me for a second while I knock on wood) NEVER had a bad one.

At present in our home we have a 357mag Security-Six, bought new sometime in the early 1970's. It is my wife's choice for her "bump in the nightstand" gun..

My Son (adult) has his Single-Six Convertible (22cal.) I bought him new when he was five years old. (He's 30 now)..

I have two LCP's and one LC9.. I carry the LCP daily in a rear pocket Lisa Hedley holster, and when I chose to carry iwb it's the LC9.

My wife has her own LCP (engraved model of course ).

Years ago, against my better judgement I bought a new Taurus PT22, and it was a POS. I traded into a used Taurus PT92? (the look alike of the Beretta the military is stuck with), and it had problems.

I don't buy Tauri' any longer..

Others mileage may vary,

Best Wishes,

Jesse

P.S. My former cc 9MM choice was a fine HK P2000sk.. I have been very surprised to find my Ruger LC9 is as accurate at self defense distance as the sk, and as my experience with all my Rugers, absolutely reliable.. I won't sell the sk, it's sweet,but it's in the gun safe.

The Kel-Tec P3AT was first.
Ruger basically copied it with the LCP.
I bought a LCP when they first came out, so I have original and copy.

Taurus has a internal lock so I'm not interested.

Ruger puts internal locks on the LC9 Why? If the LCP didn't need it why would the LC9?

I won't sell my LCP since I bought it prior to Ruger sticking internal locks in things, but I wouldn't buy another, even if a new LCP didn't have the IL, out of principle.

Ruger may make a better product, but Kel-Tec wins for originality and simplicity. I would honestly rather take my chances on a Kel-Tec knowing that I might have to send it back, rather than buy from a company that sticks internal locks on some / all products.

CDW:

Everyone has his/her own opinion about the desirability or lack thereof of the "internal safeties" Ruger chose to put on the 9MM LC9..

I have an LC9 and love it. I don't care about the "additions" that cause you concern, I do care that every time I pull the trigger I know the pistol will fire, and it's more than self defense accurate.

The internal lock, manual safety, magazine safety and loaded chamber indicator of my LC9 might actually be a plus to some folks who care about such things, but I don't. The presence of these unnecessary items on my LC9 is not a plus for me, but nor are they deal breakers.

I never use the "internal lock", I'm a lefty, but wouldn't use the external lock if their were one on on both sides, the magazine safety is simply no problem for me, and surprisingly I actually like the funky loaded chamber indicator.

I have only two requirements for MY cc choice..

1. Reliability - And I've NEVER had an unreliable Ruger firearm. Period.
2. Self defense range accuracy. - My LC9 is actually MORE than self defense range accurate...

That's it..

I'm sure the addition of these safety gizmo's that annoy you were done to make the LC9 legal in some of the states that require such crap.. I don't fault Ruger for wanting the largest market available for their guns.. In this economy it's smart business.

There are actually some gun-buying folks who SEEK such things as the external safety, loaded chamber indicator, etc... Generally I would suggest it's that segment of the gun buying public who are not really "gun nuts" (such as I am, and I would suggest you are also), are NOT experienced with guns, and such things make them feel "safer"...

So, Ruger is targeting the largest market and that's smart business.

I believe those of us who have been "into" firearms for a long time (half a century in my case) recognize these unnecessary (in our opinions) additions to a very nice 9MM pistol and either decide to ignore 'em, or in your case, not buy the pistol because of them.

That's what's wonderful about America.. You can express your appreciation, or dissatisfaction with these unnecessary additions to the otherwise fine LC9 with your pocketbook..

I voted.... I bought my LC9 and it's good enough that it has replaced my previous 9MM carry pistol (HK P2000sk) for iwb carry..

Reliability ~ accurate...

No offense to you sir.. Not confrontin', just conversin'.

Best Wishes,

Jesse

Think resale, it would be easier to sell a Ruger than a Taurus.

the TCP isn't a copy of the LCP.

It is a much better gun than the LCP.

The Tauru' TCP is a much "better gun" than the Ruger LCP?

Sure it is......

"Quot capita tot sensus"......


Jesse

P.S. The search function on any firearms forum on the net on this question will be your friend....

I have a TCP and have shot the LCP that my son used to own extensively and IMO the TCP is clearly a better shooting gun than the LCP but if you have a brand bias I'm sure he TCP will work just fine for you.

Well..

I guess that settles it then..

Can't argue with a man who has fired ONE example of the Ruger LCP vs ONE example of the Tauri TCP..

I'm so depressed now hearing these facts that I'm almost tempted to sell my three LCP's..

Not...

Jesse

P.S. koka... Just messing with ya.. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinions.. I'm just glad we have choices..

PX15 said:

Well..

I guess that settles it then..

Can't argue with a man who has fired ONE example of the Ruger LCP vs ONE example of the Tauri TCP..

I'm so depressed now hearing these facts that I'm almost tempted to sell my three LCP's..

Not...

Jesse

P.S. koka... Just messing with ya.. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinions.. I'm just glad we have choices..

Click to expand...

It has been my experience that if a gun works it is going to feel the same as every other working model of that gun.

As far as the guns being "copies," that in itself I really don't care about

Click to expand...

Yeah-unless there's a clear case of theft etc, I just buy what works for me-let the lawyers figure out if company A ripped off company B etc.

As both an LCP and LC9 owner, if you can live with the size difference, you might check out the LC9 before you take the plunge on the LCP. I kinda think the LC9 is the gun the LCP should have been (mainly the slide lock after the last round and the sights-safety is a toss-up).

‘Course I realize you’re talking a little more money-I paid $65 more for the LC9 over the LCP-but you’ll soon more than regain the price difference due to 9mm vs 380 ammo costs.

Basicblur:

I concur that if the gentleman is looking for a concealed carry weapon for use with an IWB holster the LC9 is definitely the best "bang for the buck"..

For me personally, (and I have both) I find I can cc my LCP in my rear pocket holster almost anyplace, anytime as it's just smaller enough than the LC9 to allow that..

No doubt the advantages of the 9MM round over the 380rd is obvious, but if I have a choice of my LCP in my back pocket, or the LC9 at home because it was too large to carry on a specific occasion I'll take the LCP every time.

I remain amazed at the absolute reliability and surprisingly accuracy of both pistols. In fact my LC9 (at self defense range) can hang with my pricey H&K P2000sk all day long as far as shooting the smallest groups are concerned...

And THAT was a surprise....

I've been guilty (on this thread) of yanking the chain of another poster who favors the TCP over the LCP, but in reality as long as I can carry the firearm of MY choice I have no issue with which firearm another person prefers as personal preference in anything is subjective..

Best Wishes,

Jesse

PX15 said:

CDW:

I have an LC9 and love it. I don't care about the "additions" that cause you concern, I do care that every time I pull the trigger I know the pistol will fire, and it's more than self defense accurate.

The internal lock, manual safety, magazine safety and loaded chamber indicator of my LC9 might actually be a plus to some folks who care about such things, but I don't. The presence of these unnecessary items on my LC9 is not a plus for me, but nor are they deal breakers.

I never use the "internal lock", I'm a lefty, but wouldn't use the external lock if their were one on on both sides, the magazine safety is simply no problem for me, and surprisingly I actually like the funky loaded chamber indicator.

I have only two requirements for MY cc choice..

1. Reliability - And I've NEVER had an unreliable Ruger firearm. Period.
2. Self defense range accuracy. - My LC9 is actually MORE than self defense range accurate...

That's it..

I'm sure the addition of these safety gizmo's that annoy you were done to make the LC9 legal in some of the states that require such crap.. I don't fault Ruger for wanting the largest market available for their guns.. In this economy it's smart business.

There are actually some gun-buying folks who SEEK such things as the external safety, loaded chamber indicator, etc... Generally I would suggest it's that segment of the gun buying public who are not really "gun nuts" (such as I am, and I would suggest you are also), are NOT experienced with guns, and such things make them feel "safer"...

So, Ruger is targeting the largest market and that's smart business.

I believe those of us who have been "into" firearms for a long time (half a century in my case) recognize these unnecessary (in our opinions) additions to a very nice 9MM pistol and either decide to ignore 'em, or in your case, not buy the pistol because of them.

That's what's wonderful about America.. You can express your appreciation, or dissatisfaction with these unnecessary additions to the otherwise fine LC9 with your pocketbook..

I voted.... I bought my LC9 and it's good enough that it has replaced my previous 9MM carry pistol (HK P2000sk) for iwb carry..

Reliability ~ accurate...

No offense to you sir.. Not confrontin', just conversin'.

Best Wishes,

Jesse

Click to expand...

Jesse, I understand where you are coming from. Ruger makes reliable pistols, I've had a couple and they were 100% dependable. I also realize the IL is a concession to the restrictive laws of some states. Obviously I don't like internal locks, but if a company is going to use them then they should stick them on every model they produce, not just some; either they are necessary or not. I've got a S&W 686 that I've owned since 1987 and a Bodyguard from the early 1990's, neither has an IL. S&W sticks IL on their current revolvers, but not their 1911 and that is not consistent. Springfield sticks IL on their 1911's but not the XD series, again not consistent; I had a SA XDsc in 9mm and another in 40 and sold them both over the principle. Kimber, Colt, Glock, Kahr and Kel-Tec do not go sticking internal locks on their products an they will get my business. No offense taken from your well written reply sir.

The TCP is a clone of the Kel Tec, just as the Ruger is. However, Taurus did a much better job. It is a better gun in every way. And yes, I've shot both

My TCP rides in my front pocket with me every day, and I trust it 100% to do its job if it is ever called upon. I usually have it as a BUG, but sometimes I use it as a primary carry option

The Ruger may be a keltek copy but i consider it an improvement as well in quality. I've heard way too many Taurus horror stories to ever consider one.

I like the TCP much better. The trigger is far superior slide locks back after last round fired and comes with two mags. But that's just my opinion check them both out make your own choice

the trigger on the LCP sucks. the TCP, well, it's a taurus.

i'd take the s&w bodyguard over either (and not because of the cheesy laser lol)

The LCP is a ripoff of the kel-tec P3AT.

Patent rights expire, that's the way business is conducted. Would you call all the 1911s made out there ripoffs from Colt?