Why hasn't Ruger offered more in the LCRx line?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pokajabba

member
Joined
Apr 19, 2016
Messages
108
Location
East of the Pacific Ocean, West of London, England
Been reading through some posts in the revolver section and have seen others say what I've been saying about Ruger's LCRx revolver, which is "Why are they just making them in .38 and nothing else?"

Personally, I would pay my left leg for an LCRx in .22 LR and I'm sure I'm not alone in that opinion. I'm sure that some would love to have it in .357 Mag and with the adj. sights and longer barrel, that would be a much more effective choice than the regular LCR in .357.

And it's not like Ruger doesn't have an abundance of cylinders, hammers, and other parts on the shelves for the LCR that they can drop right into a new LCRx in .22 or .357.

So other forum people, what do you think about this? What gives?
 
I don't think the 9mm would jump crimp out of the longer barreled and slightly heavier LCRx

I'd buy the 9mm version immediately
 
I agree (I've posted a couple of times about this).

I got to looking at close-ups of the LCR and LCR-X. The plastic grip peg is attached to the frame slightly differently for the LCR-X and the LCR (@ top/rear), so maybe that's why they have not introduced the 327, 357 or 9mm in -X yet; maybe the -X grip peg attachment is not strong enough for the 357/9/327?

Sure would be nice!

Andy
 
I own a LCRx 3" in 38 Special...

Nice gun and shoots great. It is a good gun if you want a light weight carry revolver. My use for this gun is an "in the woods" revolver where I don't need bear protection.

Complaint: I think the grips are too vertical and I wish the single action trigger pull was a bit lighter.

Overall, this is a great revolver.

Edmo

imagejpg1_zpsa76fa173.jpg
 
The only convertible revolvers Ruger makes are single actions; I don't know if it would be possible to make a convertible with a swing-out cylinder.

A .357 version would interest me; a .22LR version would too but for the .22 shortage.
 
Both Charter Arms and Taurus have made 22/22mag double action revolvers before. I don't know that anyone does currently though. Ruger would corner the market!
 
I thought the LCR was built from the ground up as a DOA pistol - and that's what made the DA trigger so good. The SA trigger on the LCRx is an afterthought.
 
Ruger should create a new cartridge (like the .327 with Federal) called the .22lrm. (similar to .22mag but with same dimensions as .22lr but longer, like .38/.357) Make revolvers that will fire this and the .22lr. If the round flops, the guns will fire loads of .22lr.
 
Would buy one instantly if they put it out in 327 federal


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
"The only convertible revolvers Ruger makes are single actions; I don't know if it would be possible to make a convertible with a swing-out cylinder."

I have the Taurus one. It works just fine. Their solution to a convertible DA revolver was clever, imho. (Or they copied someone else's clever idea.)
 
edmo01 said:
I own a LCRx 3" in 38 Special...

Nice gun and shoots great. It is a good gun if you want a light weight carry revolver. My use for this gun is an "in the woods" revolver where I don't need bear protection.

Complaint: I think the grips are too vertical and I wish the single action trigger pull was a bit lighter.

Overall, this is a great revolver.

Edmo
Click to expand...
I want that same model but in 327.
 
Tallball said:
"The only convertible revolvers Ruger makes are single actions; I don't know if it would be possible to make a convertible with a swing-out cylinder."

I have the Taurus one. It works just fine. Their solution to a convertible DA revolver was clever, imho. (Or they copied someone else's clever idea.)
Click to expand...

In 1962, Smith and Wesson introduced the Model 53 chambered for the .22 Jet cartridge. Not a successful idea because when fired, the tapered Jet brass would set back against the recoil shield and tie up the revolver. The 53 came with adapters that allowed the use of .22 LR. Available at extra cost was dedicated .22 cylinder that could be interchanged with the Jet cylinder. A guy showed up with one at a recent NRA basic pistol class. He had the .22 S/L/LR cylinder in the gun, but said he had all the other accessories, paperwork, original box, etc. Was a lovely handgun. So yeah, interchangeable cylinders can be done and Taurus wasn't the first.
 
Sergei Mosin said:
The only convertible revolvers Ruger makes are single actions; I don't know if it would be possible to make a convertible with a swing-out cylinder.

A .357 version would interest me; a .22LR version would too but for the .22 shortage.
Click to expand...
Depends on what it takes to remove the crane. :cool:
 
Ruger's problem is that no matter what the model is, folks what it for a different chambering, barrel length, sights option, whatever.

And they can't meet the demand for the version they are making.

Even though they recently bought a new factory they're still behind.

When (or if) things slow down you'll be more likely to get whatever you want - at least within reason.
 
sign me up for a 3" ruger lcr-x in 22lr. i have a s&w 317 that cylinder binds after 50-60 range rounds. my lcr 22lr never binds, but the extra 1" barrel would add oomph to the 22lr.
 
Personally I don't see the point of the LCR-x. I just don't see how all metal guns of the same dimensions are too heavy to carry IWB or OWB comfortably. The entire point of the LCR was light weight and small size for pocket carry.

If I'm going to carry a 3" LCRx sized revolver any where other than my pocket, I'm going to carry a gun that soaks up some recoil, and carry it on my waste..... just like my SP101.

But I suppose one person's lite weight revolver is another person's boat anchor.
 
460Kodiak said:
Personally I don't see the point of the LCR-x. I just don't see how all metal guns of the same dimensions are too heavy to carry IWB or OWB comfortably. The entire point of the LCR was light weight and small size for pocket carry.

If I'm going to carry a 3" LCRx sized revolver any where other than my pocket, I'm going to carry a gun that soaks up some recoil, and carry it on my waste..... just like my SP101.

But I suppose one person's lite weight revolver is another person's boat anchor.
Click to expand...
The point of the LCRx, imo, is a lighter revolver with greater potential accuracy and higher velocity. I understand what you mean by having a heavier gun that's not a pocket gun so it can have lesser felt recoil, but the .38 or .22 isn't going to have much recoil anyway. The story is different with .327 and .357, but I don't see the LCRx being chambered for those when the SP101 already exists.

One thing I can say is that Ruger doesn't make much in the way of double action .22 revolvers; one in the SP101, one in GP100 and the LCR is it.
 
One thing I can say is that Ruger doesn't make much in the way of double action .22 revolvers; one in the SP101, one in GP100 and the LCR is it.
Click to expand...

Demand for .22 revolvers has somewhat softened because the ammunition has been difficult to find and expensive when you do. Eventually this will likely change, and then we should see more .22 models.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Macchina
  • Locked
Has anybody heard any news about a Ruger LCRx .22?
Replies
0
Views
340
Macchina
Macchina
SteadyD
  • Locked
Ruger LCRX 22lr
Replies
16
Views
844
sean m
sean m
2
  • Locked
Ruger LCRX??? Need Quick Feedback
Replies
10
Views
2K
Vodoun da Vinci
V
CharlieM.
  • Locked
Ruger lcr .22lr vs lcrx .22lr
Replies
22
Views
5K
greg_r
G
TTv2
Tell me about the LCRx .22
Replies
21
Views
2K
TTv2
TTv2
Back
Top