Pocket Carry - S&W 642 or RUGER LC9

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EVIL

Member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
249
Location
Wright-Patterson AFB
First off, I don't want this to be a revolver vs. semi-auto debate. I like & have both revolvers & semi-autos and carry both IWB. I also have both calibers & like both. What I am looking for is decent accuracy, decent fixed sights and comfort is a pocket. I will pocket carry the aforementioned as a both a BUG and a primary as a NY reload. They are the exact same price at my LGS - so cost is not a factor. Any experience pocket carrying and shooting these diminutive pistols?

Right now I am leaning towards 642 the mainly because I reload .357/.38 already - but it's not like 9mm breaks the bank either. The 642 would also use the same HKS speed loaders as my RUGER SP101, so if that was my primary I would have loader commonality (reloads would be .38 not .357.) I can shoot the SP101 reasonably well at defensive distances DA, but I like to shoot SA at the longer ranges too. I am uncertain about a DAO revolver. But since this is a purely CCW it will merely be used for proficiency training at the range - I am not looking for a range gun here. The LC9 has the edge on capacity.

Thanks in advance!
 
Have to lean toward LC9 for capacity (as you already mentioned) but also you said you carry IWB. HKS speed loaders are chunky & thick compared to an extra LC9 mag. If it's purely CCW, slimmer is better.
 
For years I carried a J-frame in a pocket holster.
I now carry the LC9 in that pocket. It was a hard
decision to make, but I feel that the switch is an
improvement. You get 7+1 capacity and the gun
and reload are both more flat and conceal better.
 
Between those two only i would stay with a 5 shoot revolver. I carried a revolver for 20 years. I don't want a saftey on a stricker fired pistol. For its size the lc9 ain't light or thin. You could buy a kahr cw9 for IWB . Same weight, higher cap, no saftey, only a touch bigger and thinner. or stay with a revolver.
 
I frequently pocket carry a 642 with one speed loader and two speed strips. I also frequently carry a Kahr PM9. Both work, and I have no preference. Sort of depends on my mood when I get dressed. Keep shootin'
 
As long as you select the gun that you shoot best (if you can shoot them first), or at least feels best in your hand you can't really go wrong either way. Also, if you lucky the shop owner might just let you try the guns in your pocket with a holster to see which works best for you. The LC9 is flatter, but the x42 might draw easier with it's rounded backstrap.

I went with a 642 myself. For me to trust a small auto (they can be finicky), I'd have to put an absolute minimum of 400 rounds (100 of those being my carry ammo) through each magazine, trouble free. That can get pricey, so it is something to at least consider. Then again, some folks are content with a 50 round box of FMJs and one mag of JHPs.

A revolver needs to be reliability tested as well, just not to the same extent IMO.
 
I have both the Kahr CM9 and LC9, I would personally carry the Kahr before the LC9, and the wheel gun before the LC9. I would carry the Kahr over the wheel gun though...
 
I have both. The j-frame is a little lighter, but thicker, and holds 3 less rounds. The LC9 is thinner, holds 3 more rounds, and recoils less. It really depends on the mood I'm in...
 
I'm like these guys... it's a mood thing for me. I tend to go with whichever one suits me on that given day. I favor the semiauto mostly because of its slightly greater capacity. But also because of its thinness.
 
Have you tried sticking an LC9 in and out of your pocket? I guess it depends on which pocket too....I found it to be too big to carry in my pants pocket, but a larger coat or jacket it's OK.
My 442 fits in any of my pockets.
 
After having carried a Colt snub for years, I recently converted to an LC9.

Why?

My means of concealment dictated a "flat" design.

LC9 is "flatter" (fits in relaxed jeans/slacks pocket better than my snubbie)
I can shoot it more accurately
extra mag stores better and it's easier to reload
higher capacity
allows for a Crimson Trace laser (they didn't make one for my Colt D frame)

that about sums it up for me

YMMV

DesantisLC9004-1.gif

LC9Desantis002-1.gif
 
A s&w 442 is longer and wider than a lc9,height and weight are about the same.Why wouldn't an lc9 fit in the same pocket as a 442?
Click to expand...

As you noted: the cylinders on all my 5 and 6 shot snubs are significantly wider than an LC9.

And the LC9 shape tends to be sharper and more "square" when trying to get it out of a pocket, especially with the pinkie extension.

Takes a little practice, but I can draw mine with decent "speed".

Hope this helps.

btw: mine's an accurate little heater

first mag down the pipe
("revolver-like" trigger is a plus for me)
TargetLC9-1.gif
 
A s&w 442 is longer and wider than a lc9,height and weight are about the same.Why wouldn't an lc9 fit in the same pocket as a 442?
Click to expand...

It's not so much as fitting in the pocket, as it is drawing through the pocket opening. One potential snag (literally) with autos is the slide above the web of your thumb. I say potential because it depends on the size and shape of the pocket opening. Whearas the rounded, smooth backstrap of an enclosed or shrouded hammer revolver will just slip right out on drawing, the slide of an auto can get caught up.

A couple of weeks ago I was talking to a friend about this that owns a Kel-Tec PF9. He was practice drawing with an empty gun and managed to snag the slide on a lop of loose thread at the top of the pocket. Probably only delayed him by a second or two, but that can a big deal if the real thing happens. Now he checks his pockets for loose thread every time before he puts them on.

Something to think about.
 
Yes, it takes practice.

I draw using my fingers, shaping them like you were making the symbol of a duck quacking, not reaching in an curling my fingers around the grip.

Went to the clothing store and bought jeans that helped prevent the LC9 from printing, had deeper and wider pockets, Lee "Relaxed Fit" as shown in the photo.

Comfy, concealed, accessible = win
 
For me the snag was with the 442 rubber grips.I found the old style wood magna grips easier to draw from the pocket but harder to control while firing.It's a fine line with pocket carry between a gun thats small for concealment and just the right size to get a good grip on it!
 
I carry both, and find that in almost every mothod of carry, the LC9 has the advantage. Width is almost always the most important dimension in carry, and the LC9 is MUCH thinner.
 
Jimbo:
For me the snag was with the 442 rubber grips.I found the old style wood magna grips easier to draw from the pocket but harder to control while firing.It's a fine line with pocket carry between a gun thats small for concealment and just the right size to get a good grip on it!
Click to expand...
Jimbo, if you want to improve on that fine line - consider the wood grips and a Tyler T-Grip adapter.

Best of both worlds, IMO.
 
That ain't bad press thats baddly trained leos that need to keep a finger off the trigger unless your going to kill someone. But remeber same people that have a 13lb NY trigger on there glocks. How many here whin about kahrs now being to long and heavy at 6 to 7 lbs.
 
I chose a 642 over all the various small 9mm's. If you're moving up to a larger pistol, the equation is different (I have a Glock 19 then) but for the pocket, a 642 & Buffalo Bore +P, thank you very much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
LC9 or S&W 438
Replies
2
Views
342
Teachu2
T
J
  • Locked
s&w 642 VS ruger lc9
Replies
15
Views
3K
skt239
S
W
  • Locked
Pocket Carry
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
ruger357
R
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
Pocket carry poll: Do you pocket carry a revolver or semi?
2 3 4
Replies
87
Views
5K
CutMan
C
G
  • Locked
True Pocket Carrys for under 400
Replies
24
Views
1K
mgkdrgn
M
Back
Top