LCR Confessions

Help Support Ruger Forum:

bnewberry

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
226
Location
MICHIGAN
I love revolvers. I'll admit it, I'm old fashioned that way.

I love Ruger Revolvers.

Anytime anyone posted a Ruger wish list I was the first one to reply, "Make an alloy 5 shot .38 special revolver."

When Ruger announced the LCR I was stunned. Could it be what I have long wanted?

But I'm old fashioned, and I'm having trouble getting past the looks of a revolver that has a part plastic frame essentially riveted to the aluminum parts.

Am I the only one that wishes the entire frame would have been one piece (casting) of aluminum?

Maybe I can learn to love this gun, but it will take a while. For now, I'm waiting for it to get approved for California and to live through the first year or so of production to be sure it is going to make it.

But secretly I'm hoping Ruger will wake up and make the entire frame out of alloy!

Am I the only one?
 

Knuckles

Buckeye
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
1,219
It's weird to me too... Ruger has the chances to smash 'em out of the park and they seem to be hell-bent on "WEIRD" at times.

They make up for it in other places of the market but... they're a strangely directed company... occasionally.

I sure like Ruger revolvers and rifles though. :wink:
 

clayflingythingy

Single-Sixer
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
360
Location
ky
bnewberry":i05s275n said:
Maybe I can learn to love this gun, but it will take a while. For now, I'm waiting for it to get approved for California and to live through the first year or so of production to be sure it is going to make it.
?

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/ ... model=5401

According to Ruger it IS Ca approved.

I recently passed on the LCR and bought a Smith 442. Strangely, I can shoot the 442 better than the 637 Chief Airweight that has been my main CCW for a number of years now.
 

ab4ka

Single-Sixer
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
255
Location
Lakeland, Florida
I think if Ruger's frame was alloy, no one would be talking about it. They'd sell a few but I doubt they'd take much of the market from S&W or Taurus. With the polymer frame, it's big news and they're selling them by the boatload (I'd love to have one). As popular as polymer pistol frames are and have been, I'm surprised no one has done it before now.
 

bub

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
245
Location
NE Ohio
I haven't had a chance yet to handle an LCR, but I'll throw in my $0.02 worth.

Before Ruger announced the LCR, I was wishing that they would just come out with an aluminum-framed SP101. Just replace the steel frame and trigger housing with aluminum. Would fit all existing holsters and all existing accessories would work without any modification whatsoever. It wouldn't be as light as one of the S&W aluminum snubbies, but it would be a HECK of a lot lighter than the SP101.

When Ruger announced the LCR, my first thought was, "That's ugly as sin.....I WANT ONE!!!!!!" IMHO, the LCR is innovative, unique and seems to be working out very well. My only complaint is that the factory Hogue stocks seem to be kinda chunky (keep in mind, all I have seen is pics of the LCR, I've never handled one, so they may not be chunky at all) for the size of the gun. Having said that, I'm in the market for an alloy framed snubbie and, if someone comes out with wood stocks for the LCR, I'll jump all over one. Call me weird if you want, but a revolver deserves wood stocks, even a partial-poly-framed one like the LCR. Not to mention, wood stocks won't get stuck to your pocket and should slide out a LOT easier than Hogue-style ones.

Bub
 

DMZ

Bearcat
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
33
Location
E. Oregon
bub":28rvczy9 said:
and, if someone comes out with wood stocks for the LCR, I'll jump all over one. Call me weird if you want, but a revolver deserves wood stocks, even a partial-poly-framed one like the LCR. Not to mention, wood stocks won't get stuck to your pocket and should slide out a LOT easier than Hogue-style ones.

Bub

I am with you on that. Every week I do a search online to see if anyone is marketing wood combat grips for the LCR. The factory Hogues work fine, but they are not wood. I think a nice Congalo Alves boot grip would not only improve the looks of the LCR, but make it an even better pocket CCW.
 

nn

Single-Sixer
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
427
Location
NC
It is working well for me, an inclement weather gun.
Have not shot +P ammo and regular .38 spl SD ammo is enough recoil for me.
 

steveodtw

Blackhawk
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
988
Location
SE Michigan
I too thought the LCR was butt-ugly. Now that I've put 500+ rounds through it, it has become my pocket gun, and summer carry with Hornady Critical Defense .38 +P. It shoots great at 21 ft. As simple as it gets. The grip is very adequate for the recoil, trigger's very controllable.

I don't usually like ugly black guns. I prefer wood and steel. But my LCR is a welcome addition to my No. 1B, English stocked Gold Label & Red Label, 10/22 RSI. and my SR9, all esthetically very pleasing to my eye.
_________________
 

claydoctor

Bearcat
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
86
DMZ":50ncb7sz said:
bub":50ncb7sz said:
and, if someone comes out with wood stocks for the LCR, I'll jump all over one. Call me weird if you want, but a revolver deserves wood stocks, even a partial-poly-framed one like the LCR. Not to mention, wood stocks won't get stuck to your pocket and should slide out a LOT easier than Hogue-style ones.

Bub

I am with you on that. Every week I do a search online to see if anyone is marketing wood combat grips for the LCR. The factory Hogues work fine, but they are not wood. I think a nice Congalo Alves boot grip would not only improve the looks of the LCR, but make it an even better pocket CCW.

In theory, I agree. My S&W 642 has custom wood grips but the Ruger is meant to be a working gun, hence the name, Lighweight Combat Revolver. The key word there is lightweight. The gun itself is not particularly pretty and while while wood grips look nice, you are going to find recoil cosiderably more objectionable, even with standard loads, if you replace the Hogue grips. Pain itself is not the issue. Less recoil translates to better control and more accuracy in a defensive weapon.
 

AzRebel

Single-Sixer
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
216
Location
Next to the creek, under a pine
In theory, I agree. My S&W 642 has custom wood grips but the Ruger is meant to be a working gun, hence the name, Lighweight Combat Revolver. The key word there is lightweight. The gun itself is not particularly pretty and while while wood grips look nice, you are going to find recoil cosiderably more objectionable, even with standard loads, if you replace the Hogue grips. Pain itself is not the issue. Less recoil translates to better control and more accuracy in a defensive weapon.

I use a S&W 637, and I actually find that wood grips give me slightly better control than the factory rubber grips do.

Even so, I don't use either on the gun. Instead, I opt for a set of CT Lazergrips. In reality, none of the grips give me uncontrollable recoil. The recoil of a lightweight .38 snub just isn't all that bad, even with +p loads.

Daryl
 

bnewberry

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
226
Location
MICHIGAN
Please don't get me wrong! I'm not disparaging the functionality of the design. And I'm even open to the possibility that the design offers some benefits that an all alloy gun might not have.

And yes, I suspect you are correct ab4ka, in your post you said that if the gun was all alloy it wouldn't have attracted the attention that it has.

Still, there has always been something about a revolver (and the 1911) and the design aesthetic of these designs that appealed to me in ways that the very functional and effective polymer auto pistols don't have.

Like I said, I'm old fashioned in some ways.

That said, I'll be checking out the gun stores to see if any LCR's show up so I can handle one.

And I'll keep reading reports about them here. Thanks to all who write them.
 

Redhawk4

Single-Sixer
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
124
Location
UT
I'm not knocking the concept or design at all, it's nice to see a truly modern take on the classic revolver concept. But having said that, if I were to buy an LCR it would have to be totally based on function as it's appearence leaves me utterly cold. If I analyse my gun buying to date, I've usually researched what I'm looking for in terms of caliber, function and price, but within the models that fit my criteria and handle satisfactorily, eventually my heart ends up making the decision and I buy the one that appeals most to me visually.

That's why the LCR, so far, doesn't work for me. Based on my LCP experience, I would also want to wait a while before buying one to see if there might be any gremlins. So it may work out in the end, there have been a number of things over the years that I have thought were ugly but have grown on me over time. So never say never, but I wouldn't bet on it either.
 

DocGlock

Bearcat
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
66
claydoctor":3i5k9gjy said:
the Ruger is meant to be a working gun, hence the name, Lighweight Combat Revolver.

Not really meaning to nit-pick, but it's Lightweight Compact Revolver, not Combat. Not that it really matters.
 

bronco45

Single-Sixer
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
173
Location
Mosocw,Idaho USA
FWIW: I have handled an LCR and I'm waiting to see on durability. In all fairness to Hogue I wish they would make that grip available for the SP series.

The two things that impressed me about the LCR was the DA. It was good, real good. Smith is going to have to hump to beat it. And secondly, the grip. When my hand went around that Hogue, and I'm not a Hogue grip lover, I loved that grip.

I think the SPs would gain in control in 357s with that grip. The grip is chunky but not as long as the traditional bottom screw hogue.
 

bub

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
245
Location
NE Ohio
claydoctor":3pj1qpgf said:
In theory, I agree. My S&W 642 has custom wood grips but the Ruger is meant to be a working gun, hence the name, Lighweight Combat Revolver. The key word there is lightweight. The gun itself is not particularly pretty and while while wood grips look nice, you are going to find recoil cosiderably more objectionable, even with standard loads, if you replace the Hogue grips. Pain itself is not the issue. Less recoil translates to better control and more accuracy in a defensive weapon.

In theory, you are right. However, I have found that the shape of the stocks, for me anyway, means a lot more than the composition of the stocks. Also, I don't suppose that the stocks would have to be wood; a rigid polymer would work just as well, as long as they are not rubber. I don't want Lasergrips, either.

I've tried pocketing my SP and a friend's S&W snubbie, both with rubber stocks, and have found that, for me, the rubber stocks "grab" the pocket lining and won't easily let go. This means that I have a hard time getting my hand around the butt, since the pocket material gets in the way. Thus, my need for wood/rigid poly stocks. They won't get stuck to the pocket material and prevent a hasty grip if needed. I'd like some good, pretty wood grips, but whatever would work is fine with me.

Bub
 

claydoctor

Bearcat
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
86
DocGlock":3ou5cmx4 said:
claydoctor":3ou5cmx4 said:
the Ruger is meant to be a working gun, hence the name, Lighweight Combat Revolver.

Not really meaning to nit-pick, but it's Lightweight Compact Revolver, not Combat. Not that it really matters.

I stand corrected. The eyes don't connect with the brain the way they used to and to AzRebel who thinks the reccoil of a lightweight snubbie..."isn't all that bad even with +P loads"..you are a better man than I am.
 

steveodtw

Blackhawk
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
988
Location
SE Michigan
Claydoctor, if you haven't shot the LCR yet, you should. Going though a box of .38 SPl is enjoyable, and accurate. No flinches. And shooting +P Hornady Critical Defense is only slighlty more recoil, still controllable and flinch-free. A combination of the Hogue factory grips and the fine DA trigger makes this a fun lightweight snubbie to shoot.

I've shot .357 in the SP101. You're right. Not fun. Like whacking the web of your thumb with a broomhandle each shot.
 

gobe

Bearcat
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
94
Location
Eastern MO
steveodtw":1we2opf1 said:
I've shot .357 in the SP101. You're right. Not fun. Like whacking the web of your thumb with a broomhandle each shot.
I've got a SP-101, .357 Mag and usually shoot .38 Spl's through it on the range. I always finish up with at least one cylinder of .357 Mag's and really don't find that really objectionable. The 101 is a heavy 'snubby'.

I also carry a S&W 442 with .38 Spl.+P's. It's about half the weight of the SP-101. It's 'snappy' and I cannot imagine shooting .357 Mags in a 13 oz. lightweight J-frame, but some people do!
 

NMCB3

Bearcat
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
54
Location
Wasilla Alaska
I think the LCR looks kinda cool in a tool sort of way because too me its just that, a tool. Like a hammer or a saw I don't really care what it looks like as long as it does its intended job well. For me the LCR fits the bill nicely.
 

Latest posts

Top