Terry G
Member
I have a LCPII, but rarely carry it. Smallest I feel comfortable with is the thirteen shot 9MM Hellcat. Ruger knows what they're doing. They know that owners of a LCP II are going to feel the need of more ammunition in their .380.
Ruger LCP max 380acp
- Thread starter Buckeye63
- Start date
- Status
WheelGunMan
Member
It's looking that way. Though it would probably be prudent to wait and heed the good advice of @chicharrones "You'll safely miss any recalls"
FAS1
Member
I have carried a P3AT daily in my pocket since before Ruger copied it and had an LCP. I haven't found anything I wanted to replace it with yet. The Micro 9's are still too big for my pockets and when out and about I just add my G26/IWB and leave the P3AT as my NY Reload.
This new MAX looks good and I will definitely be watching how it does.
This new MAX looks good and I will definitely be watching how it does.
ruger did a nice job on this gun. i am thinking hard about getting one so i only have to carry one spare mag instead of two with my lcp II.
now saami needs to approve the new 380 acp +p cartridge to get the 95 grain bullets up to 1,000 fps, in these short barrels, so the hollow point bullets will expand. new name for these guns is "pocket rocket".
just a prediction,
murf
now saami needs to approve the new 380 acp +p cartridge to get the 95 grain bullets up to 1,000 fps, in these short barrels, so the hollow point bullets will expand. new name for these guns is "pocket rocket".
just a prediction,
murf
mgmorden
Member
From a business perspective this is a great move. As others have said, they'll sell a lot of them. They've already sold a ton of LCP's and a lot of original LCP owners will buy this as an upgrade.
I'm not going to be in a rush to grab one myself but may after the hype calms down. I've still got my original LCP that works well enough for my "ultra small carry pistol" needs.
I'm not going to be in a rush to grab one myself but may after the hype calms down. I've still got my original LCP that works well enough for my "ultra small carry pistol" needs.
JR24
Member
I'm not a big fan of either .380s or pocket guns in general, but this summer I've been finding more and more an occasion or two where I really just want to toss a .38 in my pocket instead of belting real pants (and my carry rig that always goes with it) on, usually doing things like fishing across the street with the kids.
I just find the LCR I have too fat for my pockets, and something like this seems like a good deal. And with the reported street prices already, and coming with proper sights and a holster, it seems like an easy buy once I let other folks test em out for a bit.
I just find the LCR I have too fat for my pockets, and something like this seems like a good deal. And with the reported street prices already, and coming with proper sights and a holster, it seems like an easy buy once I let other folks test em out for a bit.
JCooperfan1911
member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2020
- Messages
- 2,709
What is the THICKNESS of the grips, I’m not hearing a word on that.
If they’re every bit as thick as a P365, then the gun WILL NOT be any easier to keep concealed. Thickness is the deciding factor, not barrel length.
Overall loooks like a good gun for women or youthes who lack the grip strength to rack the slide on a proper full size automatic. If it’s no smaller than a 9mm option then I have no idea why any man would wish to carry one considering the power factor is much less and the ammunition much more expensive?
Does anyone have a line on GRIP AND SLIDE thickness of the arm?
If they’re every bit as thick as a P365, then the gun WILL NOT be any easier to keep concealed. Thickness is the deciding factor, not barrel length.
Overall loooks like a good gun for women or youthes who lack the grip strength to rack the slide on a proper full size automatic. If it’s no smaller than a 9mm option then I have no idea why any man would wish to carry one considering the power factor is much less and the ammunition much more expensive?
Does anyone have a line on GRIP AND SLIDE thickness of the arm?
OP
OP
Buckeye63
Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2018
- Messages
- 2,271
Compared to the P365 .. seems to be a mystery..grips on the LCP plus , But it would have to be at least as thick as the P365 ..which is as thin as possible with a double stack with 380/9mm ammo
Yep I agree for pocket carry grip thickness is key
Yep I agree for pocket carry grip thickness is key
Last edited:
Genius move to beat Sig and Springfield to the punch with the possibility of the the Sig 365 and Hellcat 380’s coming out.
The Ruger is cheaper or will force Sig/SA to drop their price. AND the LCP Max is smaller and lighter. Ruger will own the lion’s share of that market right out of the gate.
Now, I don’t care for Ruger taking a page out of Sig’s playbook and overcharging for mags.
The Ruger is cheaper or will force Sig/SA to drop their price. AND the LCP Max is smaller and lighter. Ruger will own the lion’s share of that market right out of the gate.
Now, I don’t care for Ruger taking a page out of Sig’s playbook and overcharging for mags.
FAS1
Member
The MAX is a little larger than the LCPII, but should easily still fit most pockets. I think smoothing out the grip indentions is what made up most of the additional room for the wider magazines although I wouldn't be surprised if it's slightly wider.
MedWheeler
Member
I bought one last night. Actually went to Bass Pro to see if they still had the .22LR LCP-II I had seen there previously (they did not.)
My OOB impression is that this is a very handsome and solid-feeling pistol that will likely fit anywhere an LCP-II will. They let me handle it alongside a LCP-II "blue gun" since they didn't have an LCP-II on hand. It is clearly thicker in the grip portion. The widest part of the grip is maybe 1-2mm thicker than on either my Kel-Tec PF9 or my Taurus TCP. I did not compare it to the Ruger MAX 9, Springfield Hellcat, or SiG P365, all of which were available at BPS because I was more concerned with overall dimensions in a pocket pistol, not grip width.
The tritium front sight is easy to pick up when pointing the gun (and glowed all night last night), but I actually think it might be distracting to me since I prefer more of a point-shoot practice with guns this size. Still, I won't know until I get some range time with it. I've never had an issue with the more-rudimentary sights on my P32 or TCP. I'm going to be the outlier here and say that I think I'd like the same style of sights on this gun, given its similar mission. In fact, the MAX doesn't even fit in the pocket holster Ruger included in the box because of the sights. It does just barely fit in the DeSantis Nemesis holster in which I've carried both the TCP and the P32, but a few draw practices from the DeSantis actually drew the holster from the pocket along with the gun. The MAX does slide easily from the old Uncle Mike's pocket holster I used to use, though. The sights make the gun about a quarter of an inch taller than the TCP would be if I didn't have a fingertip extension on the magazine.
I'm not going to regret this purchase one bit. If the gun's a lemon, Ruger will fix it (and BPS will serve as the go-between for the first year.) Never had an issue with the TCP, but favored the P32 (which I got ten years ago) because of its higher capacity and that I also have a ten-round magazine for it, allowing for 18 rounds of carry (25 if I dig out the second seven-rounder I have in the safe.) It will be a few days at the soonest, late next week, before I can try it out.
My OOB impression is that this is a very handsome and solid-feeling pistol that will likely fit anywhere an LCP-II will. They let me handle it alongside a LCP-II "blue gun" since they didn't have an LCP-II on hand. It is clearly thicker in the grip portion. The widest part of the grip is maybe 1-2mm thicker than on either my Kel-Tec PF9 or my Taurus TCP. I did not compare it to the Ruger MAX 9, Springfield Hellcat, or SiG P365, all of which were available at BPS because I was more concerned with overall dimensions in a pocket pistol, not grip width.
The tritium front sight is easy to pick up when pointing the gun (and glowed all night last night), but I actually think it might be distracting to me since I prefer more of a point-shoot practice with guns this size. Still, I won't know until I get some range time with it. I've never had an issue with the more-rudimentary sights on my P32 or TCP. I'm going to be the outlier here and say that I think I'd like the same style of sights on this gun, given its similar mission. In fact, the MAX doesn't even fit in the pocket holster Ruger included in the box because of the sights. It does just barely fit in the DeSantis Nemesis holster in which I've carried both the TCP and the P32, but a few draw practices from the DeSantis actually drew the holster from the pocket along with the gun. The MAX does slide easily from the old Uncle Mike's pocket holster I used to use, though. The sights make the gun about a quarter of an inch taller than the TCP would be if I didn't have a fingertip extension on the magazine.
I'm not going to regret this purchase one bit. If the gun's a lemon, Ruger will fix it (and BPS will serve as the go-between for the first year.) Never had an issue with the TCP, but favored the P32 (which I got ten years ago) because of its higher capacity and that I also have a ten-round magazine for it, allowing for 18 rounds of carry (25 if I dig out the second seven-rounder I have in the safe.) It will be a few days at the soonest, late next week, before I can try it out.
Last edited:
chicharrones
needs more ammo
Speedo66
Member
It should glow for the next 10-12 years, not dependent on charging via light hitting it.
The Ruger site gives all the specs, including slide width, but no grip width.
unclenunzie
Contributing Member
It's cool, I keep thinking "Jumbo Shrimp". 
Three years ago I'd have bought the LCP Max if it were available, but I got the LCP II to take over for my LCP gen1. The max would be great in a pocket, 10+ reassuring.
Three years ago I'd have bought the LCP Max if it were available, but I got the LCP II to take over for my LCP gen1. The max would be great in a pocket, 10+ reassuring.
Just fondled one today at the BPS, feels good. Didn't bring my calipers, but didn't feel substantialy wider in my palm than my Tcp. I was surprised that the salesman more or less told me not to buy it yet. He said they were getting reports of them jamming a lot. Wouldn't be surprising, the added spring pressure from the magazine pressing of the slide, but that also seems like something that would get better as they wore in. Either way, I do believe one of those will be coming home with me in the near future
MedWheeler
Member
bersaguy writes:
Though none of the reviews I've read show jamming to be an issue, I could see it happening to at least some people in the "real world" (not gun-reporter world.) Of course, there could be a number of reasons for malfunctions, just like with many other subcompact pistols. Ruger claims the magazine feed lips have been "optimized" for better feeding of multiple types of ammunition; I don't know what that means. That idea of the magazine's upward pressure could be a thing, as a fully-loaded magazine is quite difficult to seat into the gun if the chamber is also loaded. Mine has loosened up a bit already and I can now press it in. The first couple of times, I pretty much had to slam the base with the heel of my hand.
Though none of the reviews I've read show jamming to be an issue, I could see it happening to at least some people in the "real world" (not gun-reporter world.) Of course, there could be a number of reasons for malfunctions, just like with many other subcompact pistols. Ruger claims the magazine feed lips have been "optimized" for better feeding of multiple types of ammunition; I don't know what that means. That idea of the magazine's upward pressure could be a thing, as a fully-loaded magazine is quite difficult to seat into the gun if the chamber is also loaded. Mine has loosened up a bit already and I can now press it in. The first couple of times, I pretty much had to slam the base with the heel of my hand.
MedWheeler
Member
murf writes:
I don't have calipers for an exact measurement but, using a ruler, the thickest portion of the grip frame appears to come in between .90 and .91 inch. That's maybe a credit card or two thicker than my Kel-Tec PF9 at that point.
The slide appears to come in between .75 and .77 or so. The difference there between the MAX and the Taurus TCP slide is practically visually indiscernible.
I don't have calipers for an exact measurement but, using a ruler, the thickest portion of the grip frame appears to come in between .90 and .91 inch. That's maybe a credit card or two thicker than my Kel-Tec PF9 at that point.
The slide appears to come in between .75 and .77 or so. The difference there between the MAX and the Taurus TCP slide is practically visually indiscernible.
MedWheeler
Member
chicharrones writes:
..compared to my Taurus TCP.
Pictures with, and without, the fingertip extension I usually have on the Taurus.
..compared to my Taurus TCP.
Pictures with, and without, the fingertip extension I usually have on the Taurus.
Last edited:
chicharrones
needs more ammo
SSN Vet
Member
Have and carry an LCP.... from my perspective, width is the most important dimension for pocket carry and giving up nearly an 1/8" in width is not insignificant.
As for sights go.... I cringe at the thought of anyone using sights on a short barrel pocket .380 for across the room head shots (please wait until I've cleared out of Dodge). I view a pocket .380 as short range, point and shoot, personal defense weapon, for up close and personal business.
Others may see it differently.
As for sights go.... I cringe at the thought of anyone using sights on a short barrel pocket .380 for across the room head shots (please wait until I've cleared out of Dodge). I view a pocket .380 as short range, point and shoot, personal defense weapon, for up close and personal business.
Others may see it differently.
- Status
