What have they "done again"!?

[Jeff Quinn]

As did/does the LCP and they sold a ton of them.

Care to define 'a ton of them' a lot more specifically ??

Doesn't sound like many to me, especially from a business plan point of view.

To be honest, you have no idea how much, if any, the LCP contributed to Ruger's profit margin, whether their sales are increasing or decreasing, or whether they're even profitable at the prices that they're selling for now, and those things are all that matter to a corporation.

REV

By my calculations, Ruger has sold roughly 156 tons of LCP pistols, give or take a ton or two.

 

[jhearne]

As did/does the LCP and they sold a ton of them.

Care to define 'a ton of them' a lot more specifically ??

Doesn't sound like many to me, especially from a business plan point of view.

To be honest, you have no idea how much, if any, the LCP contributed to Ruger's profit margin, whether their sales are increasing or decreasing, or whether they're even profitable at the prices that they're selling for now, and those things are all that matter to a corporation.

REV

I wrote that Rev, you're right, I can't define that, and I have no idea how it contributed to their profits. I can only assume it helped their margins, and that they sold well. I know for the first few months, they were really hard to find in stores. I know it wasn't selling like the Apple iPad or iPhone 4 (millions of units sold), but for gun sales, I can only imagine they did OK with the sales of the LCP.

But if I had to guess, I'd say 42. You can't go wrong with 42....ever.

Josh

 

[vacextar]

As someone who just purchased an SR9c.....complaining that no one sells a good, small, THIN, light-weight single-stack 9mm WITHOUT a DAO trigger, I think Ruger missed a great opportunity to fill a niche in the marketplace here. AFAIK, the only thing that meets the above description right now is the Taurus 709.......and it sounds like that gun has had a pretty rocky start with multiple problems.

If Ruger could have equipped this LC9 with ANYTHING other than a DAO trigger, I think it would have been an instant winner. The way it is now, it's just not that much different than about 10 other guns just like it that you could throw in a bag and it really wouldn't matter which one you pulled out. About 10 different models of Kahr and Kel-tec, Sig and now Ruger.....all sub-compact single-stack 9mm's with DAO trigger.

IMO there is still a niche to be filled that no one has managed to discover yet. Maybe I'm the only one with DAO-phobia. For me, it just takes every ounce of enjoyment out of shooting the gun, and the length and weight of the trigger throws any hope of accuracy right out the window.....

Was really hoping for something "different".....not the same thing that has been available from Kahr for 20 years now.

 

[revhigh]

As did/does the LCP and they sold a ton of them.

Care to define 'a ton of them' a lot more specifically ??

Doesn't sound like many to me, especially from a business plan point of view.

To be honest, you have no idea how much, if any, the LCP contributed to Ruger's profit margin, whether their sales are increasing or decreasing, or whether they're even profitable at the prices that they're selling for now, and those things are all that matter to a corporation.

REV

By my calculations, Ruger has sold roughly 156 tons of LCP pistols, give or take a ton or two.

Great answer !!!

Did you actually calculate it out ??? I guess there's about 3,404 +/- of them per ton, or somewhere near there ?

REV

 

[revhigh]

Maybe I'm the only one with DAO-phobia. For me, it just takes every ounce of enjoyment out of shooting the gun, and the length and weight of the trigger throws any hope of accuracy right out the window......

I have the exact same affliction vacextar ....

REV

 

[dacaur]

Maybe I'm the only one with DAO-phobia. For me, it just takes every ounce of enjoyment out of shooting the gun, and the length and weight of the trigger throws any hope of accuracy right out the window.....

Was really hoping for something "different".....not the same thing that has been available from Kahr for 20 years now.

Have you shot one of the small DAO guns you so dislike? Some are better than others, but on most the double Action trigger pull is NOTHING like the double action pull on a SA/DA gun... the pre-cocking that makes them DAO takes most of the weight out of the trigger pull. My kel-tec PF9 has the length of a double action trigger pull, but the pull weight is LESS than many single action triggers I have shot... the long pull being the only safety on many of them is there for just that, safety... the pull weight isn't bad at all.... No the trigger pull isn't as nice as a nice singe action trigger, but its not all that bad either, and great accuracy is definitely possible... if you are thinking its just like the double action pull on a SA/DA, you are mistaken... try one, you may like it....

 

[doctorxring]

.


It looks like Ruger aimed for the niche between a KelTec PF9 and
the Kahr PM9. It split the refinement level between these
two pistols perfectly as well as the MSRP. There is definitely some
money to be made in that spot.

As far as the safety, totally not needed with a double action
pistol, and Ruger surely knows that. But rather than build
2 models, like Kahr has done on the PM9 to comply with some
asinine state laws, Ruger is just going to build one model.

The Kahr is king, but it costs more. LC9 is a very nice pistol for the
money. If it runs, is reliable, and has a good trigger. It will sell.
Megatons.

good shooting, dxr

.

 

[vacextar]

Have you shot one of the small DAO guns you so dislike? Some are better than others, but on most the double Action trigger pull is NOTHING like the double action pull on a SA/DA gun... the pre-cocking that makes them DAO takes most of the weight out of the trigger pull.

Ok....I'm always willing to learn new things. Yes, I have fired a few DAO guns....none of which I liked. I guess I was under the assumption (and yes, I'm well aware of what assuming can do.. ) that any gun where "pre-cocking" is involved is automatically NOT DAO.....as that would kind of go against the whole definition of "Double Action Only".....meaning that the trigger is solely responsible for both fully cocking and releasing the hammer/striker/whatever the gun is equipped with.....like a DA revolver. I guess inside my head, there is no way that a gun can be both DAO, AND have any kind of "pre-cocking" going on. Please straighten me out here if I'm mistaken?

Yes, I do realize that some DAO guns have lighter triggers than others, but pre-cocking or no pre-cocking, for me, the length of the trigger pull is still the most painfully irritating part of the whole thing. The whole squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, BANG thing just doesn't do it for me.

As I've said in a few other posts on here, I was in the market for a gun just like this new LC9 (but with either DA/SA trigger or striker fired) 15 years ago.....but no one made such a thing, so I bought a Sig P230 instead. I was never totally comfortable with the .380 cartridge, so 15 years later, I looked again......and still no one makes what I'm looking for....and I know I'm not alone. That's how I ended up with the SR9c. Still not exactly what I'm looking for, but it does the job for now.

 

[dacaur]

.
Ok....I'm always willing to learn new things. Yes, I have fired a few DAO guns....none of which I liked. I guess I was under the assumption (and yes, I'm well aware of what assuming can do.. ) that any gun where "pre-cocking" is involved is automatically NOT DAO.....as that would kind of go against the whole definition of "Double Action Only".....meaning that the trigger is solely responsible for both fully cocking and releasing the hammer/striker/whatever the gun is equipped with.....like a DA revolver. I guess inside my head, there is no way that a gun can be both DAO, AND have any kind of "pre-cocking" going on. Please straighten me out here if I'm mistaken?

Its funny, I totaly agree with you. unfortunatly the gun MFG's dont... :wink: Im on your side though, in my head DAO would automatically mean its got second strike capability, because yes, double action means its cocks and then releases the hammer. I dont know why they dont call them single action, because thats what they are, just like a single action 1911, if a round doesn't fire, you have to re-cock the gun before it will fire. (on my PF9, you only have to move the slide back about 3/8" to re half-cock it, so i cant practice with snap caps without having to reload the snap cap every time)

I guess because the trigger pull finishes cocking the hammer or striker, they call them double action... I dont agree with it, its not 100% accurate, but then, its not 100% inaccurate either. In my mind its closer to single action than it is to double action, but thats what they call it.... DAO :roll:

Basically, when you chamber a round, it half cocks the hammer or striker. on my PF9 the hammer is literally halfway through its travel, then when you pull the trigger, you get a long but easy pull, which cocks the hammer the rest of the way then releases it.., the gun fires and the slide goes back and again half cocks the hammer....

 

[Yawn]

As far as the argument about capacity and such vs safety? It's as good as the argument saying 9mm parabellum is crap compared to the .45 ACP. It's debatable yes, but you won't get anywhere. I just don't feel the need for a double stack in my instance. I could see where others wouldn't want, or find a need for one. But for me, it's easier to justify this than another SR pistol.

Josh

Hey Josh, I am a little confused... who was making the capacity safety argument?

 

[Yawn]

As did/does the LCP and they sold a ton of them.

Care to define 'a ton of them' a lot more specifically ??

Doesn't sound like many to me, especially from a business plan point of view.

To be honest, you have no idea how much, if any, the LCP contributed to Ruger's profit margin, whether their sales are increasing or decreasing, or whether they're even profitable at the prices that they're selling for now, and those things are all that matter to a corporation.

REV

No I don't care to define a ton of them, because I didn't make that statement, even though you quoted me as having said it! Check my post on page 9... I did not make that statement, Josh did (his original post where he makes that statement is on page 7)! I was giving the +1 that I also have a feeling that the LC9 will do well, but as I have said numerously, I am not sure why people will buy it in the mass that I think they will. If you are going to quote me, please quote me correctly, especially if you are taking issue with something that I supposedly said.

 

[RCT(V)]

How do you know it only comes with one magazine?

Bacause it says so . . over here . . .

http://www.ruger.com/products/lc9/features.html

No it doesn't specifically say so. Check again.

Apologies "Rugerlvr" . . . I was getting all excited, but I knew I'd seen it somewhere . . . It is in the "Press Announcement", fifth paragraph down . . . .

"One seven-round, single-column magazine is provided with each LC9 pistol . . . ."

http://www.ruger.com/news/2011-01-03.html

(Curious! . . . . I "copy-&-pasted" that twice, exactly from the Ruger web-site, and on both occasions, the
word "One" was deleted / dropped! I have no idea how or why! :shock: ).

(Edited to add: I've now caught-up with the rest of the thread, and see others had posted the same information!).

 

[RCT(V)]

. . . The LC9 looks nice enough, and correct me if I am wrong, but the new LC9 is barely smaller than the SR9c. Why not just get the SR9c?, . . .

SR9c, 17 rounds mags and 10 round mags. ships with one of each. Can be expanded to have full size grip. Comes with a mag loader as well. Glock style trigger safety. picatinny rail and the option for a SS slide.

The new LC9 has none of this and is not that much smaller or lighter. It looked a bit bigger then the LCP... and in the game of pocket pistol, the size of the gun matters. Like someone said in another post, if they had to carry it in a IWB holster, then why not get the SR9c?

Because the LC9 is hammer-fired, and the SR9c is striker-fired ?! :?

Not everyone is (as yet), prepared to go over completely to the "dark-side"

Plus, not everyone is comfortable with a "Glock style trigger safety"

 

[jhearne]

As far as the argument about capacity and such vs safety? It's as good as the argument saying 9mm parabellum is crap compared to the .45 ACP. It's debatable yes, but you won't get anywhere. I just don't feel the need for a double stack in my instance. I could see where others wouldn't want, or find a need for one. But for me, it's easier to justify this than another SR pistol.

Josh

Hey Josh, I am a little confused... who was making the capacity safety argument?

No one....yet....I was just covering all my bases as to why I would want one over the SR9c. If someone wanted my SR9 and I was able to get both, I would do that in a heartbeat and use both for carry, dependent of the situation (mainly weather and clothing).

Josh

 

[revhigh]

As did/does the LCP and they sold a ton of them.

Care to define 'a ton of them' a lot more specifically ??

Doesn't sound like many to me, especially from a business plan point of view.

To be honest, you have no idea how much, if any, the LCP contributed to Ruger's profit margin, whether their sales are increasing or decreasing, or whether they're even profitable at the prices that they're selling for now, and those things are all that matter to a corporation.

REV

No I don't care to define a ton of them, because I didn't make that statement, .

Sorry, Yawn, it was an editing error that made it look like it was you who said that .... a lower post was actually from the real poster.

No offense intended .... sorry.

REV

 

[Yawn]

. . . The LC9 looks nice enough, and correct me if I am wrong, but the new LC9 is barely smaller than the SR9c. Why not just get the SR9c?, . . .

SR9c, 17 rounds mags and 10 round mags. ships with one of each. Can be expanded to have full size grip. Comes with a mag loader as well. Glock style trigger safety. picatinny rail and the option for a SS slide.

The new LC9 has none of this and is not that much smaller or lighter. It looked a bit bigger then the LCP... and in the game of pocket pistol, the size of the gun matters. Like someone said in another post, if they had to carry it in a IWB holster, then why not get the SR9c?

Because the LC9 is hammer-fired, and the SR9c is striker-fired ?! :?

Not everyone is (as yet), prepared to go over completely to the "dark-side"

Plus, not everyone is comfortable with a "Glock style trigger safety"

Ok, those are fair arguments... this would appeal to the non-glock style group looking for a CC 9mm.

 

[Yawn]

As far as the argument about capacity and such vs safety? It's as good as the argument saying 9mm parabellum is crap compared to the .45 ACP. It's debatable yes, but you won't get anywhere. I just don't feel the need for a double stack in my instance. I could see where others wouldn't want, or find a need for one. But for me, it's easier to justify this than another SR pistol.

Josh

Hey Josh, I am a little confused... who was making the capacity safety argument?

No one....yet....I was just covering all my bases as to why I would want one over the SR9c. If someone wanted my SR9 and I was able to get both, I would do that in a heartbeat and use both for carry, dependent of the situation (mainly weather and clothing).

Josh

Well, and to be fair, i am sure that argument will come up. But you can just send anyone making that argument over to the revolver forum to have that argument discussed.

 

[Yawn]

Care to define 'a ton of them' a lot more specifically ??

Doesn't sound like many to me, especially from a business plan point of view.

To be honest, you have no idea how much, if any, the LCP contributed to Ruger's profit margin, whether their sales are increasing or decreasing, or whether they're even profitable at the prices that they're selling for now, and those things are all that matter to a corporation.

REV

No I don't care to define a ton of them, because I didn't make that statement, .

Sorry, Yawn, it was an editing error that made it look like it was you who said that .... a lower post was actually from the real poster.

No offense intended .... sorry.

REV

appreciate that my friend! Thank you very much! All is well

 

[dacaur]

The LC9 looks nice enough, and correct me if I am wrong, but the new LC9 is barely smaller thn the SR9c. Why not just get the SR9c? Ok, so it is 25% lighter then the SR9c... but the SR9c can be expanded to also have a full size feel. I don't know, if I was in the market for a small nine, this would not be it, 6 ounces and 1/2 and inch would not sell me on this...

And all it somes with is a soft case? I don't know... I think people will get it because it is a small 9 and has the LCP type title... but I just dont get it

The difference between .9" thicknes and 1.27" seems small on paper, but is HUGE when you are trying to conceal a gun under a t-shirt...

other than that, I agree, they didnt make this gun small enough... they had to make it big enough to contain all the stupid lawyer "features".... :evil:

 

[Yawn]

The difference between .9" thicknes and 1.27" seems small on paper, but is HUGE when you are trying to conceal a gun under a t-shirt...

But thats just it... isn't the idea behind the LC9 to be a pocket pistol? If you are hiding it under the shirt in a IWB, the SR9c, heck the SR9 will work fine with a good holster. But the dimensions make it almost not a pocket pistol for many folks. Seems slef defeating to me a bit. And as for firing, well, those who have fired it have so far confirmed the theory that a nine that small has a ton of kick. It seems like a lot of losses compared to the SR9c for much less gain.