38snapcaps
Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2003
- Messages
- 292
Went to an indoor range this afternoon that rents guns. My purpose was to try out an LCR. I've been sitting on the fence over one of these for several months and decided I'd better try one before I laid down over $400.
I have a 642, which has been my faithful companion for over three years, so I'm no stranger to snubnose revolvers.
Everyone talks about how nice the LCR trigger is, and standing at the gun counter I would agree, it is lighter than a 642. But I found, when actually shooting, you don't notice the difference.
I think under a stressful scenario the two or three pound difference in trigger pull won't matter in the least.
I didn't really give it a thought until after I was done firing live ammo. As I stood there dry firing at my target only then did I think about the lighter trigger.
The recoil is supposedly softer than a 642. My 642 has combat grips, I can't stand the boots it came with. Comparing those two grips I would say the LCR two finger grip was slightly more comfortable than the harder rubber of the three finger combats. I also have Crimson Trace LG-405's and those are definitely nicer on the hand than the LCR's. I handled an LCR with CT's and I have to say they feel just awful. The 642 with CT's is definitely the combination for me if I want short grips. The LCR is a typical snubnose hand pounder, after twenty-five rounds I didn't want any more. The polymer frame is supposed to absorb recoil better than an Airweight. I didn't feel enough improvement to make me want to pick this gun over a Centennial just because of hoping for less recoil.
Accuracy was pretty good. At 21 ft. my initial groups were three inches. As I got acclimated to the gun they shrunk down to just under two inches. This was while using two hands with careful aiming. One handed shots opened back up again to three inches.
So, overall I would say the LCR is interesting in appearance, the price is right (the shop sells them for $430, 642's run $450), and it does shoot well. Do I still want one? No. I'm sticking with my 642. I think it looks better, is a proven concept of aluminum and stainless steel, and I just feel it will last longer.
I hope this helps anyone who is thinking about one or the other and is having a tough time deciding.
I have a 642, which has been my faithful companion for over three years, so I'm no stranger to snubnose revolvers.
Everyone talks about how nice the LCR trigger is, and standing at the gun counter I would agree, it is lighter than a 642. But I found, when actually shooting, you don't notice the difference.
I think under a stressful scenario the two or three pound difference in trigger pull won't matter in the least.
I didn't really give it a thought until after I was done firing live ammo. As I stood there dry firing at my target only then did I think about the lighter trigger.
The recoil is supposedly softer than a 642. My 642 has combat grips, I can't stand the boots it came with. Comparing those two grips I would say the LCR two finger grip was slightly more comfortable than the harder rubber of the three finger combats. I also have Crimson Trace LG-405's and those are definitely nicer on the hand than the LCR's. I handled an LCR with CT's and I have to say they feel just awful. The 642 with CT's is definitely the combination for me if I want short grips. The LCR is a typical snubnose hand pounder, after twenty-five rounds I didn't want any more. The polymer frame is supposed to absorb recoil better than an Airweight. I didn't feel enough improvement to make me want to pick this gun over a Centennial just because of hoping for less recoil.
Accuracy was pretty good. At 21 ft. my initial groups were three inches. As I got acclimated to the gun they shrunk down to just under two inches. This was while using two hands with careful aiming. One handed shots opened back up again to three inches.
So, overall I would say the LCR is interesting in appearance, the price is right (the shop sells them for $430, 642's run $450), and it does shoot well. Do I still want one? No. I'm sticking with my 642. I think it looks better, is a proven concept of aluminum and stainless steel, and I just feel it will last longer.
I hope this helps anyone who is thinking about one or the other and is having a tough time deciding.
