Vote for or against the LC9

[Knuckles]

Why would anyone vote total bust?

Because of the way Ruger hyped the gun before revealing it.

How can anyone say it is a must have? I don't want a gun like this at all. Even for those who do it sounds to me like there are many other options. So there is no sense in which it is a must have except for those who collect every Ruger ever made. The people who say it is a bust are not Ruger marketing and sales professionals, they are not Ruger VPs, and they are not trying to rain on the parade of those of you who like the gun. They are simply saying it failed to excite them in any way proportionate to the hype and the boast that this would be their next must have gun.

I didn't vote bust but I think that most of us who did vote negative to neutral have expressed a belief that it will sell well and please those of you who are interested in it. So enjoy your gun! If Ruger had just announced a gun that I felt was a must have and you were uninterested in it, I'd feel sorry for your disappointment and I would enjoy the heck out of the gun. I don't think it is possible for Ruger to come up with a gun that every single one of us would regard as a must have.

Ken

Yeah'... what he said! 8)

 

[dacaur]

Why would anyone vote total bust? Ruger is filling a gap in it's product line. Do you all hate on Smith & Wesson for bringing out yet another variant of a snub-nose .38 when they do it? They aren't even filling a gap, they're just putting it out because they know it will sell.

Do you guys on the Ruger forum not want Ruger to be a full-line gun maker?

Yes they are filling a gap in their line, and yes it needed filling, heck I have been ASKING them for a single stack 9mm... BUT, they just did a bad job filling that gap. You cant just throw any slack jawed yokel into a gap in the defensive line and expect the fans to cheer..... I mean, i guess if there were trying to make the "safest CC gun in the world" they succeeded :lol: .... My main concern is that Its too big for the market its made for, other than that, show ONE other small DOA CC pistol that has a LCI AND a mag disconnect AND an internal lock AND a manual safety... even rugers other small CC pistols dont have more than one of those features, its just too much... The manual safety is one thing, I can handle that, redundant on a DOA gun, but I can live it it, but the others features I mentioned have absolutely no business on a CC gun....

Two interesting points. First, they lawyered the gun for 50 state sales..., but the gun is marketed for concealed carry... and most of the states that require the lawyer parts dont readily allow for conceal carry.

Thats a darn good point...

 

[ncvikingfan]

I have carried a KelTec P11 quite a bit in front pockets with the right holster. No problems at all. I voted not right now because I already have the aforementioned P11. Maybe sometime in the future though as I have considered a PF9. I supect that Ruger's reputation for solid, well built hand guns at an affordable price will sell this platform well. None of the above will be target range kings. That is not their design. I initially was hesitant to purchase a KelTec because of the price. Lower pricing = lesser quality thought process. I have found it to be a good CC weapon (no failures at all). I agree with an earlier post that Ruger's design for a "50 state" gun does not make much sense at all though.

 

[gobe]

I bought a Kahr PM9 about a year and a half ago. It is smaller and lighter than the LC9 with same capacity. Don't need two in the same nitch. If the LC9 had been around at the time, I might have bought it at almost half the price of the PM9. Pretty though. Wish the PM9 was 'melted' like the LC9, but I think I've got what I want in that nitch.

I'll bet Ruger has sucess with it. Lot of us folks that like 9mm's for CC.

 

[gig]

Did a close physical comparison of the Ruger LCP and Kel Tec P-3AT today then compared an in hand Kel Tec P-11 with pictures and specs of the Ruger LC9.

I am beginning to think Ruger has a new R&D dept in Florida and now am wondering how many LC9 must be sold to pay for the Kel Tec blue-prints.

But with either gun, I would still lean toward the one with Ruger stamped on it,,,,,go figure......

 

[chopprs]

I think it is a shame that a big company like Ruger has to literally copy the small guy not once but TWICE!!!.......then we do a poll on the RUGER forum and find that 89% of the people on THE RUGER FORUM will not be running out to buy one. IMHO this is a major blunder for a big company like this.....someone is getting fired over this, likely the goobers in charge of design and advertising.

 

[agentadam]

And unfortunately allot of the people that do buy one will go "meh" and trade it back in shortly after. I saw a brash of people selling LCP's on the used market the first year or two. And allot of the meager 20 percentile that claim they are gonna buy one will not. For instance I "gotta have" a Ruger sp101,gp100,.44 carbine,10/22 magnum,PC-9 carbine, LCR,MKI,MKII,and others but I don't have the funds and might never get around to it.

The lines are good,looks great, feels good in hand, and your thinking its a nice pistol but then you get it home and find out it has that cheesy trigger bar system with a stretch hammer spring, is held together with plastic pins,no double strike capability,ect. Sure the Ruger is more refined(prettier) but i trust KT 10 year track record,that police have come to trust, more. I'm not even going to get into quality CNC machined forgings vs cast/molded. And don't expect to make a range banger out of it because they are only rated for 6,000 rounds.

Like i said they look great but they are just not high quality pistols with features like the Bobcat,Tomcat,North American Arms,Seecamp,Colt Jr.,Colt Pony,Micro Eagle(Kevin),PPK,PPS,ect.

 

[dacaur]

I think it is a shame that a big company like Ruger has to literally copy the small guy not once but TWICE!!!.......then we do a poll on the RUGER forum and find that 89% of the people on THE RUGER FORUM will not be running out to buy one. IMHO this is a major blunder for a big company like this.....someone is getting fired over this, likely the goobers in charge of design and advertising.

why is everyone thinking this is a clone of a kel-tec? Yes the LCP is a clone, but I dont see any kel-tec guns that match the specs on this gun. I dont believe its a clone. Comparing a gun in hand to pictures is not a good way to determine if they are the same. All of these little guns use a similar operating system, so yea they are going to look similar, but that does not make them clones of each other....

 

[gig]

why is everyone thinking this is a clone of a kel-tec? Yes the LCP is a clone, but I dont see any kel-tec guns that match the specs on this gun. I dont believe its a clone. Comparing a gun in hand to pictures is not a good way to determine if they are the same. All of these little guns use a similar operating system, so yea they are going to look similar, but that does not make them clones of each other....

Yes, your right about the clone business; but I feel it is all about the money.
We see many wishing for a Ruger "1911",,why?
Maybe they feel Ruger would make a good one, as are most Ruger products, but at a lower price point than most good 1911's on the market.

Now, concerning the LCP and the LC9, they are very similar to other firearms just as a 1911 would be; however they are not at a lower price point than the Kel Tec's (of course to some the Ruger name means more than the Kel Tec name).
A clone (including reliability) at a lower price point is one thing; but one that is no better than the market presently offers but at a higher price point is another thing.

Personally I would have liked to see a SR45 with Ruger quality comparable to Springfield or Glock; but a lower price point.
And true, it could be argued this also would be somewhat of a clone; however IMO price makes all the difference.

Again, personally, I would like to assemble a balanced armory without breaking the bank.

 

[Nicodemus]

The LC9 looks like a nice gun and there is definitely a need for thinner subcompact 9mm handguns. I bought a Kahr CW9 about 3 years ago and it is every thing that I want in a CCW plus it doesn't have all of the unnecessary safety crap to protect me from myself.

My setiments exactly, as I have also had my eye on the CW9.

 

[Lance0812]

I'm thinking it would just duplicate my Taurus 709.

 

[gig]

I'm thinking it would just duplicate my Taurus 709.

I've been wondering about that since I have had a 709 on my mind as my next purchase.
Should I wait until the LC9 is available????

I have a SR9c and it is great, very nice trigger which lends itself to my accuracy with the gun. And I will say so far I have been able to hit everything within reason I have shot at.

I also have a Kel Tec P-11 which is very difficult for me to shoot accurately because of the long, stiff trigger pull.
The difference is the P-11 is a hammer drop design requiring the trigger pull to also cock or load the hammer; while the SR9c is a striker fire in which the slide "pre-loads" the striker spring and all the trigger pull is doing is releasing the tension. (at least this is my understanding from observation)

If you read Jeff Q's reviews of the LC9 and the 709 it seems the LC9 is a hammer drop design like the Kel Tec, or the LCP for that matter; while the 709 is a striker fire like the SR9c.

I certainly have not shot a LC9; but I am guessing the 709 trigger will be much more to my liking.
I wish Ruger had chose the 709 to copy rather than the Kel Tec.

 

[Yawn]

101 positive to 63 negative and 30 don't care. If this is a microcosm of the grand scheme, I doubt the LC9 will be nearly as big a hit as the LCP, but it does appear early on that they will do alright with it.

 

[dacaur]

I also have a Kel Tec P-11 which is very difficult for me to shoot accurately because of the long, stiff trigger pull.
The difference is the P-11 is a hammer drop design requiring the trigger pull to also cock or load the hammer; while the SR9c is a striker fire in which the slide "pre-loads" the striker spring and all the trigger pull is doing is releasing the tension. (at least this is my understanding from observation)

No, the difference is not hammer vs striker, the difference is pre-cocking vs not precocking. the p11 doesn't pre-cock the hammer. The Sr9c pre-cocks the striker, but only halfway, the trigger is still cocking the striker the rest of the way, then releasing it. The LCP, LC9, and even kel-tec's PF9 all pre-cock the hammer halfway, then the trigger finishes cocking it and then releases it. The result is a lighter DA trigger pull that that of a "true" double action pull, like on your P11.

If you read Jeff Q's reviews of the LC9 and the 709 it seems the LC9 is a hammer drop design like the Kel Tec, or the LCP for that matter; while the 709 is a striker fire like the SR9c.

I certainly have not shot a LC9; but I am guessing the 709 trigger will be much more to my liking.
I wish Ruger had chose the 709 to copy rather than the Kel Tec.

I dont believe this ruger is a copy of any keltec, it just doesn't match the specs like the LCP does...

That said, the fact that the lc9 uses a hammer rather than a striker doesn't automatically mean that its going to have a hard trigger like your p11. My Kel-tec PF9 uses a hammer and has a much lighter trigger pull (5.75lbs) the LC9 is (6.3 lbs), the taurus 709 (5lbs in SA and 5.75lbs) in da, the p11 btw is at 8.5 lbs for comparison purposes....

All of the guns mentioned so far are DAO, The taurus 709 is really in a different class. its SA/DA.. Racking the slide completly pre-cocks the striker, and the trigger simply releases it. I am not a fan of a SA trigger on a defensive handgun, because in the heat of the moment, you are more likley to discharge the gun before you want to if you have only a short SA pull, than you are with a long consistent DA pull.

 

[Cheesewhiz]

I also have a Kel Tec P-11 which is very difficult for me to shoot accurately because of the long, stiff trigger pull.
The difference is the P-11 is a hammer drop design requiring the trigger pull to also cock or load the hammer; while the SR9c is a striker fire in which the slide "pre-loads" the striker spring and all the trigger pull is doing is releasing the tension. (at least this is my understanding from observation)

No, the difference is not hammer vs striker, the difference is pre-cocking vs not precocking. the p11 doesn't pre-cock the hammer. The Sr9c pre-cocks the striker, but only halfway, the trigger is still cocking the striker the rest of the way, then releasing it. The LCP, LC9, and even kel-tec's PF9 all pre-cock the hammer halfway, then the trigger finishes cocking it and then releases it. The result is a lighter DA trigger pull that that of a "true" double action pull, like on your P11.

If you read Jeff Q's reviews of the LC9 and the 709 it seems the LC9 is a hammer drop design like the Kel Tec, or the LCP for that matter; while the 709 is a striker fire like the SR9c.

I certainly have not shot a LC9; but I am guessing the 709 trigger will be much more to my liking.
I wish Ruger had chose the 709 to copy rather than the Kel Tec.

I dont believe this ruger is a copy of any keltec, it just doesn't match the specs like the LCP does...

That said, the fact that the lc9 uses a hammer rather than a striker doesn't automatically mean that its going to have a hard trigger like your p11. My Kel-tec PF9 uses a hammer and has a much lighter trigger pull (5.75lbs) the LC9 is (6.3 lbs), the taurus 709 (5lbs in SA and 5.75lbs) in da, the p11 btw is at 8.5 lbs for comparison purposes....

All of the guns mentioned so far are DAO, The taurus 709 is really in a different class. its SA/DA.. Racking the slide completly pre-cocks the striker, and the trigger simply releases it. I am not a fan of a SA trigger on a defensive handgun, because in the heat of the moment, you are more likley to discharge the gun before you want to if you have only a short SA pull, than you are with a long consistent DA pull.

dacaur, I'l be glad to explain the difference between SA and DAO and DA/SA and striker fired guns to you any time.
...you are all over the place on this and maybe confused or something.

 

[dacaur]

I also have a Kel Tec P-11 which is very difficult for me to shoot accurately because of the long, stiff trigger pull.
The difference is the P-11 is a hammer drop design requiring the trigger pull to also cock or load the hammer; while the SR9c is a striker fire in which the slide "pre-loads" the striker spring and all the trigger pull is doing is releasing the tension. (at least this is my understanding from observation)

No, the difference is not hammer vs striker, the difference is pre-cocking vs not precocking. the p11 doesn't pre-cock the hammer. The Sr9c pre-cocks the striker, but only halfway, the trigger is still cocking the striker the rest of the way, then releasing it. The LCP, LC9, and even kel-tec's PF9 all pre-cock the hammer halfway, then the trigger finishes cocking it and then releases it. The result is a lighter DA trigger pull that that of a "true" double action pull, like on your P11.

If you read Jeff Q's reviews of the LC9 and the 709 it seems the LC9 is a hammer drop design like the Kel Tec, or the LCP for that matter; while the 709 is a striker fire like the SR9c.

I certainly have not shot a LC9; but I am guessing the 709 trigger will be much more to my liking.
I wish Ruger had chose the 709 to copy rather than the Kel Tec.

I dont believe this ruger is a copy of any keltec, it just doesn't match the specs like the LCP does...

That said, the fact that the lc9 uses a hammer rather than a striker doesn't automatically mean that its going to have a hard trigger like your p11. My Kel-tec PF9 uses a hammer and has a much lighter trigger pull (5.75lbs) the LC9 is (6.3 lbs), the taurus 709 (5lbs in SA and 5.75lbs) in da, the p11 btw is at 8.5 lbs for comparison purposes....

All of the guns mentioned so far are DAO, The taurus 709 is really in a different class. its SA/DA.. Racking the slide completly pre-cocks the striker, and the trigger simply releases it. I am not a fan of a SA trigger on a defensive handgun, because in the heat of the moment, you are more likley to discharge the gun before you want to if you have only a short SA pull, than you are with a long consistent DA pull.

dacaur, I'l be glad to explain the difference between SA and DAO and DA/SA and striker fired guns to you any time.
...you are all over the place on this and maybe confused or something.

Which part did you not understand?

 

[Cheesewhiz]

No, I didn't understand any of it to be honest.

Actually calling a striker fired gun anything but striker fired is a misnomer, yeah, I know some manufacturers will call them DAO or SA but that's just a description and not the real truth.
A DA/SA is always a hammer fired semi-auto pistol. A DA revolver can be fired as a single action by cocking the hammer but that is not a gun function. The trigger pull on a DA/SA pistol is heavier in the DA mode. A DA/SA pistol will fire the first round in DA or SA mode depending on what state you have it in prior to firing the first round. All rounds afterwards are in SA for an uninterupted cycle.
A DAO pistol only fires in a DA mode, the hammer is not cocked back when the slide is pulled back manually or cycles and the trigger pull fully sets and releases the hammer to fire and all rounds fire with the same DA trigger pull.
A SA pistol needs to have the hammer cocked on a loaded chamber in order to fire the first round and all other rounds will be fired with the same SA trigger pull.
A striker fired gun does pre-cock the striker spring when the slide is pulled or cycled back and the trigger pull cocks it even further before releasing the striker to fire a round and then cycle again for the same pull and that is for every round. The reasoning behind a striker fired gun was originally to have a very safe gun at ready with a shorter and possibly smoother pull then a DA pull.
...but the triggers were never great at first because the pre-cocking was only maybe half way and the trigger did the rest. Remember I said "very safe gun", the pre-cock spring tension wasn't enough to set off a primer on the first striker fired guns, you could drop them loaded and never worry about them going off.
...but Dr. Glock figured it out by putting a safety trigger (double trigger) and making the pre-cock about 3/4's so the trigger pull was less and it was still safe gun.

The Taurus 709 is a striker fired gun and not DA/SA, the trigger pull is always the same just like all striker fired pistols.

 

[dacaur]

Hmmm...Sorry, but I think Ill just go with the entire gun industries standard of DAO rather than an "internet expert".. While I agree that a DAO "should" be able to fire every time the trigger is pulled, that doesnt make it so, the gun industry says my pf9 is a DAO, they say a ruger LCP is a DAO, etc etc etc...

The Taurus 709 is a striker fired gun and not DA/SA, the trigger pull is always the same just like all striker fired pistols.

Says the person that has never held the gun so doesnt know what hes talking about :roll: ..... a taurus 709 is completly pre cocked when you chamber a round, When you pull the trigger, you get almost no resistance untill just before it fires (hmmm, kinda like the SA pull of a SA/DA gun...) if the round doesnt fire (or you just dry fire it) and you pull the trigger again without racking the slide, you have a completly DIFFERNT (heavier) trigger pull, with resistance all the way though... kinda like the DA pull of a SA/DA pistol. Before you go shooting your mouth off about it again, head to a gun store and check one out...

 

[Cheesewhiz]

Hmmm...Sorry, but I think Ill just go with the entire gun industries standard of DAO rather than an "internet expert".. While I agree that a DAO "should" be able to fire every time the trigger is pulled, that doesnt make it so, the gun industry says my pf9 is a DAO, they say a ruger LCP is a DAO, etc etc etc...

The Taurus 709 is a striker fired gun and not DA/SA, the trigger pull is always the same just like all striker fired pistols.

Says the person that has never held the gun so doesnt know what hes talking about :roll: ..... a taurus 709 is completly pre cocked when you chamber a round, When you pull the trigger, you get almost no resistance untill just before it fires (hmmm, kinda like the SA pull of a SA/DA gun...) if the round doesnt fire (or you just dry fire it) and you pull the trigger again without racking the slide, you have a completly DIFFERNT (heavier) trigger pull, with resistance all the way though... kinda like the DA pull of a SA/DA pistol. Before you go shooting your mouth off about it again, head to a gun store and check one out...

dacaur, my guess is I put more rounds down range in a week than you do in 6 months but that's just a guess.

My point on striker fired guns is correct, the companies that make them call them DAO (Glock) and SA (Springfield) and they work the same the triggers may feel a bit different but they are in design, the same.
I actually have a friend who likes Taurus guns, I believe I commented on his 809 about a year back and he does have a 9mm 709 that I have fired before. The trigger is fairly light about SR9c like but it is functioning the same as all other striker guns, although Taurus claims it's different but the description doesn't make sense and I never noticed it when firing it.

This is from Taurus:

New Unique SA/DA Trigger System
The PT24/7 Pro Trigger system solves the double action/single action dilemma once and for all. Figure 1 shows the trigger at full rest. When a round is chambered, the trigger sets in single action mode with the trigger traveling freely to the crisp break point shown in figure 2. The trigger resets to DA mode until another round is chambered.

See, they talk about the trigger doing something without a round in the chamber, are they referring to it resetting? Oh boy, did they figured out how to get a trigger to reset on a striker gun? That's a function of a striker fired gun, that's the pre-cocking. So the trigger moves, big deal, they all do. Marketing idiots and you bought it.

 

[Mike J]

Springfield Armory XD is actually single action. The striker is fully cocked. The trigger only releases it. I think that's why they put a grip safety on it.