Ruger PC, now in 40S&W!

[onelight]

I am glad to see it I like the 40 and I like 9 it’s cheap to shoot and I like 45 the bigger the bore , the more I feel it will be effective with simple cast flat points I like all three but can’t help but think the smaller you go in these three the more dependent you are on “magic bullets” provided by the major manufacturers perfectly designed to penetrate through 4 layers of denim on a 12 to 16” gel block at $1.00 a shot . I carry HST and gold dots but there are places you can’t even buy them.
Without magic bullets frontal area and sectional density win my vote.

[DocSavage]

For a 45 carbine what's so hard about 2 adaptors,1 for standard 1911 mags the other for Glock mags. A 9x23 Win might be pushing things abit in a blow back type of rifle IIRC the 9x23 operates at 50 K psi.

[cwlongshot]

I agree, they SHOULD definitely go the extra and include a 1911 mag insert adaptor. the design is perfect for any number of magazine adaption.

It was a huge part of my buying a 45 Marlin Camp Carbine some twenty years ago!!

CW

[waco]

They got the hook in my mouth but haven't set it yet. So darned ugly and I have two ars in 9mm but do want a carbine in 40. had a highpoint and it was a good gun but even uglier. If I happen on to one around 500 bucks I might just let them set that hook.

I think these look pretty cool.https://www.ruger.com/products/pcCar...ets/19117.html

[Lloyd Smale]

45acp-45gap
9mm-380
475 Linebaugh-480
6.5x55-6.5 creedmore
06-270 280 2506
Seems today that theres more of a trend toward going less powerful then more. Whats comical to me is the craze to go back to the 9mm. Seems they have some convinced that the 9 is just as good of a round because of modern bullets. What they fail to say is those modern bullets are made for the 40 too. Only advantage the 9 has over the 40 is recoil period. People cant handle a little bit of recoil so have to find a way to justify going smaller without looking like a wimp. Truth be told the 40 with the same "high tech" bullets should if anything not be dieing but gaining steam. It shoots those high tech bullets as fast as the 9 does its high tech bullets and compare it to the 45 and you give up some weight but have a 200 fps or more advantage in velocity which makes it much closer in the real world to the 45 then it is to the 9. If the 40 is short and week then the 9 should be loaded with pink bullets.

I actually prefer .45 ACP. But the .40 Short and Weak is just that. It's one of the few times in cartridge history where the full power round came first then the lower power round came second. I love it though. About 6 months ago I picked up a 22 glock like new for 300 bucks with 3 mags. I asked the kid (and he was a kid) behind the counter why it was so cheap. He said nobody wants them anymore because the 9s are more powerful!!!! Thank God for stupidity.

.38 SPL -> .357 Mag
.44 SPL -> .44 Mag
.22 short -> .22 LR
10mm -> 10mm Mag
.38 ACP -> .38 Super

vs

10mm -> .40 Short and Weak.

It's shorter and weaker than the round that proceeded it.

I'll have to look at my 9mm PCC and see if it would be possible to adapt it to a .45 ACP sized magazine. Looking at pictures it appears that it would be possible to have a .45 ACP mag and adaptor in the current magazine well.

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree and that's the one id be buying.

I think these look pretty cool.https://www.ruger.com/products/pcCar...ets/19117.html

[Chainsaw.]

Two thoughts.
1. I think .40 in this particular carbine is a welcome addition, perhaps more so than 9mm. Might have to go find a street price on it.

2. There alot of ego waving in this thread.

[FergusonTO35]

I think the .40 is a sweet cartridge when loaded to duplicate .38-40 performance. I use 4.2 grains Bullseye under a Lee 175 in my Glock 22 for an accurate and easy shooting 900 fps. With a slower powder and a carbine barrel I bet the .40 would really shine, no reason you couldn't use it for deer and hogs within reasonable range.

[Idaho45guy]

I have no need for the Ruger Carbine, but others definitely do, and I applaud the addition of a more powerful caliber choice.

I have an Extar EP9 PCC in 9mm, but it is more useful to me than the Ruger for the following reason:

1. The Ruger is too big and too heavy. The whole purpose, FOR ME, for a PCC is to have something with greater capacity and accuracy than a pistol, but is still compact and easily stowable. Yes, the Ruger can be taken down, but what good is it in two pieces?

Attachment 239978

My Extar EP9 is under 2' and under 4lbs. It accepts Glock magazines without an adapter, and is extremely accurate.

I'm sure the Ruger is a fine range toy, but for it's size and weight, you can get an AR-based firearm that has many more options for customization. But for a truck gun for the ranch in which a more powerful caliber is not wanted, then the Ruger would be just fine.

I just think that if I'm going to restrict myself to a pistol caliber, then I want it as light and handy as possible...

Attachment 239979

[Burnt Fingers]

45acp-45gap
9mm-380
475 Linebaugh-480
6.5x55-6.5 creedmore
06-270 280 2506
Seems today that theres more of a trend toward going less powerful then more. Whats comical to me is the craze to go back to the 9mm. Seems they have some convinced that the 9 is just as good of a round because of modern bullets. What they fail to say is those modern bullets are made for the 40 too. Only advantage the 9 has over the 40 is recoil period. People cant handle a little bit of recoil so have to find a way to justify going smaller without looking like a wimp. Truth be told the 40 with the same "high tech" bullets should if anything not be dieing but gaining steam. It shoots those high tech bullets as fast as the 9 does its high tech bullets and compare it to the 45 and you give up some weight but have a 200 fps or more advantage in velocity which makes it much closer in the real world to the 45 then it is to the 9. If the 40 is short and week then the 9 should be loaded with pink bullets.

I don't see a lot of people abandoning .45 ACP for .45 GAP. Glock hasn't even put it in the Gen. 4 pistols.

[cwlongshot]

Yea the gap has proven to be a real red headed step child of the Glock line.

Looks good on paper, addressing the larger grip diameter. Simply said, many shooters like to complain and NEED something to complain about!

CW

[sukivel]

I had an original PC4, it was a really fun gun to shoot but I hated the odd trigger.

Hopefully they remedied that...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BHill]

Yea the gap has proven to be a real red headed step child of the Glock line.

Looks good on paper, addressing the larger grip diameter. Simply said, many shooters like to complain and NEED something to complain about!

CW

Need a like button for this.

[cwlongshot]

I also wish we had a like button!!

So many great comments from Like minded individuals!

CW

[Burnt Fingers]

I had an original PC4, it was a really fun gun to shoot but I hated the odd trigger.

Hopefully they remedied that...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The trigger on my PCC was pretty decent out of the box. I have the MCarbo spring set I'm going to install. Supposed to bring the pull down into the 2.5-3 lb range.

[Lloyd Smale]

ive got a 9mm ar15 from psa with a 4.5 inch barrel that even more compact they yours. thinking seriously about making it into a folder too. that said there just isn't the availability in the ar market for 40s like there is 10s. That and I already have the 9 if I want serious packability. To be honest I really could care less if this one was a take down. There usually just more finiky to get to shoot anyway. My only real problem with the ruger is im not paying 600 bucks. They need to make an entry level non takedown gun (kind of like they did with the stripped down lc9)with a floated m-loc or key-loc forend on it. Also they could save some money by just making it to use glock mags. Probably 90 percent of the buyers aren't going to bother with ruger mags anyway. Get the real world price down to 400 bucks and id bet theyd sell a bunch of them. People have no qualms about spending 350 on a highpoint. A 400 dollar ruger would probably capture most of high points business.

I have no need for the Ruger Carbine, but others definitely do, and I applaud the addition of a more powerful caliber choice.

I have an Extar EP9 PCC in 9mm, but it is more useful to me than the Ruger for the following reason:

1. The Ruger is too big and too heavy. The whole purpose, FOR ME, for a PCC is to have something with greater capacity and accuracy than a pistol, but is still compact and easily stowable. Yes, the Ruger can be taken down, but what good is it in two pieces?

Attachment 239978

My Extar EP9 is under 2' and under 4lbs. It accepts Glock magazines without an adapter, and is extremely accurate.

I'm sure the Ruger is a fine range toy, but for it's size and weight, you can get an AR-based firearm that has many more options for customization. But for a truck gun for the ranch in which a more powerful caliber is not wanted, then the Ruger would be just fine.

I just think that if I'm going to restrict myself to a pistol caliber, then I want it as light and handy as possible...

Attachment 239979

[Lloyd Smale]

never said the lighter powered rounds were fantastic sellers. Point was that every new round that has came out in recent years isn't a faster version of something before it. market isn't flush with 38 supers either and good luck finding something chambered in 10mm mag.

I don't see a lot of people abandoning .45 ACP for .45 GAP. Glock hasn't even put it in the Gen. 4 pistols.

[Burnt Fingers]

ive got a 9mm ar15 from psa with a 4.5 inch barrel that even more compact they yours. thinking seriously about making it into a folder too. that said there just isn't the availability in the ar market for 40s like there is 10s. That and I already have the 9 if I want serious packability. To be honest I really could care less if this one was a take down. There usually just more finiky to get to shoot anyway. My only real problem with the ruger is im not paying 600 bucks. They need to make an entry level non takedown gun (kind of like they did with the stripped down lc9)with a floated m-loc or key-loc forend on it. Also they could save some money by just making it to use glock mags. Probably 90 percent of the buyers aren't going to bother with ruger mags anyway. Get the real world price down to 400 bucks and id bet theyd sell a bunch of them. People have no qualms about spending 350 on a highpoint. A 400 dollar ruger would probably capture most of high points business.

PSA recently had the Ruger PCC for $399

[Lloyd Smale]

ya I saw that but it will be a while before the 40s get that cheap. When the 9s first came out people were estatic to get one even at 600 bucks. I would do 400 but I think im going to be waiting a while for them to get there. Never know though. Theres been a trend to bash the 40 for a while and ive got real good deals on 40 trade ins. Seems some idiots actually believe the ** that the 9 is just as good. Maybe the ruger 40 carbine will flop and places like psa will have them cheap sooner then I think

PSA recently had the Ruger PCC for $399

[Burnt Fingers]

I paid $499 for mine back in July. They had two at Academy. First ones I had seen on the shelf.