Thoughts on the Ruger LCR???

I held one the other day. It felt very good in the hand, and the trigger was very smooth. If I did not have a J Frame already, I would buy one for CCW. Don't need another pistol like this, but I think it has a great deal of potential.

However, It will offend purists because of unusual looks, construction, and materials. I prefer a steel gun myself, but make an exception for concealed carry. I learned to live with aluminum in a 642, I cant see how a leap to polymer is that big a jump.

I understand the gloved hand thing.I just thought it was excessive the SP101 is not any where near that large.I am sure it will work great though.Just a thought.
roc1

I paid $380 for my LCR. I like it. The trigger pull is superior to other snubs I have fired. I do not find recoil objectionable. The little ruger points very naturally for me. The only gun that is in the same league for me when it comes to naturally pointing well is a 1911 and the LCR might be better. That is one of the reasons I like it so much. It may not work that well for everyone but it does for me.

I do not like how loud the rattle of the transfer bar is. It really bugs me. I honestly thought something was broken on the gun at first. It was much louder than I had ever heard on any revolver. Looks are in the eye of the beholder and so debating a matter of opinion is a waste of time. Time will tell how durable they are. Smiths are more proven and I wouldn't pay more for an LCR than a smith for that reason. That said I think it was a good buy at $380 and if it proves durable it could eclipse the smith in my mind.

I read two gun mags, Guns & Ammo and Gun Tests.

I've long considered G&A to be in the tank for Ruger, so I didn't pay the hype surrounding their cover story on it a while back much mind.

I do, however, tend to give weight to a good bit of what Gun Tests says, and in their latest issue they preferred the LCR to the Smith 442.

This doesn't mean I conclusively agree with them, and I'll frankly probably buy a model 60 or 649 anyway, but now I'm at least going to handle and fire an LCR before I do so.

they preferred the LCR to the Smith 442

Click to expand...

By a hair, really.

I think it's pretty safe to say that the LCR is a good gun, though, based on their eval. For $380, I'd have been really tempted. Not sure why, but I haven't seen any around here for prices lower than J-frames, which I already know I like.

Whether I would choose one or the other is probably personal preference. I'd be reluctant to buy a gun because of the grip on it. That's the easiest thing to swap out (at least if you buy something really common like a J-frame). But I understand that Gun Tests has to evaluate guns as they are shipped, to be fair and honest about them.

I have zero complaints about the 642, either carrying it or shooting it. A few days ago, I saw a used .357 Model 60 in the store in excellent condition, for $450. I bought it, since my wife's CWL finally came, and the 642 was about the only concealable gun we had unless you count a .22LR NAA Mini. Won't need to look at snubbies any more for a while.

I'm not sure about the plastic frame and recoil. I'm sure it absorbs recoil better than a stiff aluminum alloy frame, but it would have to do so by flexing. One plus about the Airweight: it shoots very tight groups, as long as you can hang onto it.

Ive handled one and was impressed with the trigger pull. The thing is ugly as sin though. I would consider it if the price was good.

I shot 5 rounds out of one at a range.....he was using plain .38's so it was "easy" to shoot vs. the weight....my wife could not shoot it even though it had .38's........
+P would hurt.
I have SP101 snub. If they come down to the sub-400 range like 375.....maybe I would buy one.

I carry a Smith J-frame regularly--have for years. Works wonderful, and has enough horsepower to change someones channel.

The people that own them seem to love them. Personally my Smith 36 is lighter than I shoot well. The LCR is way too light for me to shoot effectively

A local shop has a couple, and I have to say they look a lot better in person. Still, I'd be hesitant to buy one until it's been around for a while.

Don't worry, they'd fix it under the yet to be announced recall, I'm expecting that letter anytime LOL

When I went looking for a .38 to replace my Kel-tec P3AT I had 2 options in mind, a Taurus 85 UL and a Smith 642. Before you bash Taurus I also own a Taurus 4" 66 that has a sweet trigger and would outshoot the Smith 686 that I carried working law enforcement any day of the week so I didn't have any qualms about buying a Taurus product. I had a 642 about 10 years ago that I sold to my dad and he still has it.

Looked at the Taurus 85 first, gritty hard trigger nothing like my 66. Then I looked at the 642, yep same smooth but very hard to pull trigger that I remember so I resigned myself to the fact that if your going to carry a snubby double action only .38 you have to deal with a crappy trigger that you hope will smooth out with extended use. Then the guy behind the counter asked me if I had seen the LCR. I had watched the video and read some reviews but God the thing was ugly. He opened the cylinder and handed the ugly little monster to me. My first impression was this thing is pretty darned light. My second impression was it's not quite so ugly in person. I never did like the humpback look but it really doesn't look like an ugly flat paddle like the shrouded hammer Smith's do. Then I pulled the trigger to test it and I wouldn't give the gun back. I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that the trigger on the LCR feels like a full size DA revolver that has had some work done to it.

My 642 had a pretty good snap to it when firing +p loads through it but not really punishing until you put about 30 rounds through it. The Kel-tec was painful to shoot because the trigger guard had an annoying habit of slamming into my trigger finger every time. My girlfriend downright refused to shoot it for the same reason. I don't know if it is the polymer frame or the cushy Hogue tamer grip on the gun but for a 13 oz. .38 the LCR is downright pleasant to shoot. We burned through a box of standard .38 and a box of +p loads and would have continued shooting if I had brought more ammo with me. I could hit a pop can at 25 yards 80% of the time, something that I could never do with my 642.

Something I think that gets overlooked sometimes when talking about snubbys is how well they point. While the LCR has better sights than the 642 if I ever had to use it in an emergency I doubt the sights would even come into play. Everybody's hands are different but the LCR points for me naturally better than any other gun I own. I'm no expert on grip angle but Ruger seems to have it right with this gun.

My only complaint about the LCR is that while the Hogue grip is great for shooting at the range, it is a little thick for pocket carry which is where this little revolver belongs. I'm sure that the aftermarket will take care of this issue further down the road.

Sorry for the long post but getting a little tired of the "critics" of the LCR that are bashing the revolver that have never seen one in person let alone handled one.

I like J frames alot. I really didn't think I'd find anything as good or better in that type of gun. I have Models 36 & 60, two 642s, a 442 and carry at least one of them most of the time.

A local dealer had a new LCR that sat on his shelf for a few weeks. I fondled the LCR a few times but wasn't convinced. Because I was a frequent customer, he lowered his asking price and I bit. I really liked it and put several hundred rounds through it in a few weeks. I measured the trigger pull on the LCR vs. the 442. The LCR averaged 9.25 lbs vs. 11.75 for the 442. The normal J frame trigger pull was never a problem for me but this got me thinking.

My wife has always had very weak hands. She has a lot of trouble with the double action trigger pull on most revolvers. Single action she has difficulty with the hammer (and single action is slow for self-defense.) Semi-autos give her problems pulling the slide back.

I had her dry fire the LCR. Click, click, click - no problem at all. Guess I'm going to lose my new LCR. I went to the dealer and put another LCR on order. Guess we'll hold on to her Taurus 856 in 32 Mag until she gets some range time with the LCR. I may even sell one of my no-lock 642s.

I like the LCR. The lightweight J-frames are nice, but they just seem to be a tad bit more painful with +ps than the Ruger.

The trigger is great. I like the way the whole gun handles.

It is the first gun that I have ever bought that I didn't see anything on that needed changing.

It rides in a pocket quite nicely, too.

Sounds like a solution looking for a problem, but if it sells guns, it has a reason to exist. Very goofy-looking weapon, though.

I'm interested in them but, might wait awhile. Maybe the prices
will come down some later?

Now that I've bought one, I'm sure they will!

LCR

Reports on the Ruger forum that the LCR is experiencing problems with the hot gasses burning holes through the frame near the forcing cone, one with as little of 150 rounds down range. Is another Ruger recall in the wind?

Can't say and have no idea if what hhb has seen reported is accurate.

However, this is an example of why I don't ever feel the need to be the first on the block to own a totally new product, of a completely new design, made of materials with which the manufacturer has no real experience.

I can wait a year and let others spend THEIR money to be guinea pigs.

hhb said:

Reports on the Ruger forum that the LCR is experiencing problems with the hot gasses burning holes through the frame near the forcing cone, one with as little of 150 rounds down range. Is another Ruger recall in the wind?

Click to expand...

Seems to be an isolated case. There have been many, many LCRs (including mine) that have had far more rounds through them than this with no problems at all. Ruger says they tested several LCRs beyond 10k rounds with no wear or alignment issues before the gun was released for sale. I don't see this as leading to a recall.

i have an LCP and an SP101, and i like them both. i'm definitely not anti-ruger by any means. however, i have to say that the LCP just doesn't appeal to me much. between the price and the looks, i'll take a pass. also...i guess i just like my snubbies a bit heavier, though i'm sure that puts me in the minority.

IMO its an ugly piece of hardware. And its composite, not my personal favorite of mine in a firearm. For roughly the same price Ide rather get me ANOTHER SP101. The LCR in my opinion is really too lightweight (for my personal tastes), has a big trigger guard. Do yourself a favor if youre going Ruger, and get you a STEEL revolver like the SP101.

I've shown my LCR to about 10 gun owners in the last two weeks. They've looked at it carefully, handled it, and (even with my suggestion that some people find the LCR ugly) they've all said they like it. If they get a chance to shoot it, I'd bet they will like it even more. Between the ergonomics of the grip and the improved trigger and recoil control (vs. an Airweight J frame), I find it very comfortable to shoot.

I plan on taking one of my pre-lock S&W 642s and an S&W M 36 to a dealer for consignment sale tomorrow. I'll probably continue to carry a 442 at least part of the time until Don Hume makes the holster I want for the LCR.

Ruger LCR negative comments

I don't have a Ruger LCR and probably wont buy one. My brother bought one and I have shot it too. I personally think it to light for me , as I like steel and will not buy anthing else. However, I remember well, many years ago about all the disparaging remarks about the Glock pistol, when it came on the scene. IT WAS UGLY, PLASTIC, WONT HOLD UP ETC. But Glock proved them all wrong. Only time will tell if this new design by Ruger wil be Emulated by others, like Glock, and will it be successful in the end. I do not own a Glock either, but that in no way diminishes the fact that they are excellent firearms. My 2 cents. Sincerely Snooperman