LCR now in .357

[Vern Humphrey]

Be my guest.

 

[ahpd1992]

So how long until the 9mm and 327 federal loadings in this gun?

To each his own, but the more choices the better I say. I like that Ruger is being innovative, you dont know until you try right? If Ruger can afford the manufacturing costs to do it why not bring more choice to the marketplace. Smith makes a fine revolver, but I like to call their catalogs more of dream books as availability always seems scarce.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I think there should be a 9mm or a 357 sig version made. Now there would be a great cc gun.

What would those do that a .38 or .357 won't, aside from give up performance?

P.S.

Bottleneck cartridges have never faired particularly well in wheelguns. They tend to push back hard against the frame when the case expands and drives the shoulder forward. See the .256 Winchester and .22 Remington Jet.

If you want to learn physics the hard way, try shooting a gun that weighs less than the bullet it fires.

Those .45-70 Derringers are very close to that line. I only know two people who've fired one, and one of them ended up needing hand surgery.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Those .45-70 Derringers are very close to that line. I only know two people who've fired one, and one of them ended up needing hand surgery.

Hand surgery or brain surgery?

 

[ijosef]

I think the .327 magnum would be an excellent choice for the LCR. Ruger already offers it in their other wheelguns, so the LCR should be next. It would give you a capacity of 6 instead of 5, as well as superior performance to the .38spl+P with comparable recoil.

 

[harmon rabb]

What would those do that a .38 or .357 won't, aside from give up performance

a 9mm wheelgun would have superior performance to a .38spl wheelgun, yet with shorter cylinder bores. this would reduce the size of the gun, making it more concealable.

.38spl was originally a blackpowder cartridge. there's a lot of extra space in there.

 

[MachIVshooter]

a 9mm wheelgun would have superior performance to a .38spl wheelgun,

Not once you factor in the cylinder gap. I agree if we're talking about standard pressure loads only. But any modern revolver can handle +P.

As for .357 sig, even without the loss from cylinder gap, it falls well short of .357 Magnum performance.

yet with shorter cylinder bores. this would reduce the size of the gun, making it more concealable

Except that 9mm revolvers have always been done on .38 frames, so you just get more freebore. I agree that a revolver built around the 9mm with an appropriately sized cylinder would be handy, more for the weight savings than the 1/4" in length. But I don't think there's enough of a market demand with tiny auto's like the Kahr and Kel-tec already being in the 12-15 ounce range, thinner, and offering 7 or 8 rounds instead of 5.

 

[ahpd1992]

I like 9mm in short barrel guns because of the fast burngin powders a 9mm will generally get more velocity out of snub nose than most other calibers, maybe not enouhg to make a difference, but more velocity none the less

I think I will hold out for the 327 federal chambered LCR. I really like that caliber. If Ruger doesnt build it, well then Im liking the 357 magnum and Im glad they did it

 

[sonier]

Oh wow i want to try that in with sme full mag H-110 and 125 grain hollowpoints, itd be one of those things, hmm will the gun blow up on me or will the badguy be DRT

 

[B-One]

I get bullet pull with Buffalo Bore 158 gr +p loads in my 13.5 oz LCR. I don't with my 17 oz Taurus. I assume that a 17 oz LCR would act the same with the BB loads as the Taurus.

I will be getting one.

 

[ColeK]

I don't think I want a LCR .357 Mag.
I once had a S&W Model 340 PD. It was a fire breathing dragon and recoil real bad. I'll stay with my Model 60.