Ruger LCR- Thoughts?

[trickyasafox]

http://ruger.com/LCR/index.html

http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAFamily?type=Revolver&subtype=Double%20Action&famlst=65

http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2009/01/13/rugers-new-revolver-hammerless-polymer/

People used to joke that glock would make a polymer revolver- but it looks like ruger beat them to the punch. I'm excited to see a totally new revolver model come out- though it looks kinda similar to a hammerless J-frame.

what do you guys think? if it comes out for around 300 I might save some pennies.

[Geraldo]

what do you guys think?

Shooter ready :Fire:

A plastic Ruger J frame with a Dan Wesson barrel system is a great idea--if this were 1955. I hate J frames, and I've owned enough of them to know it, although God knows I'm probably brain damaged enough to buy another one in a weak moment...

Other than ankle carry, I don't understand why anyone carries a five shot revolver instead of a similar sized auto. I shoot compact autos far better than I do J frames with concealable grips, and the autos generally carry more ammo .

So for me this is a non-starter.

:Fire: Cease fire.

[handyrandyrc]

I will be interesting to see what new products may show up during the SHOT show this week.

[mike in co]

http://ruger.com/LCR/index.html

http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAFamily?type=Revolver&subtype=Double%20Action&famlst=65

http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2009/01/13/rugers-new-revolver-hammerless-polymer/

People used to joke that glock would make a polymer revolver- but it looks like ruger beat them to the punch. I'm excited to see a totally new revolver model come out- though it looks kinda similar to a hammerless J-frame.

what do you guys think? if it comes out for around 300 I might save some pennies.

your link has the msrp as way past 300....525! and almost 800 for the lasergrip version...

the only place i can see this useful is backpacking

mike in co

[kingstrider]

Wow that is an ugly little duckling for sure. I can't really see the use period. The listed weight is only marginally lighter than my Airweight and I never notice it when hiking around in the woods.

[Lloyd Smale]

rather a j frame anyday.

[trickyasafox]

Mike in Co- yea MSRP is way high- but I'm still curious to see what street value shakes out at.

I just think its neat to see someone try something pretty new with revolvers. Aside from Taurus and the occasional SW custom job, I feel like the market is kinda flat as far as innovation goes- though obviously not as far as demand is concerned.

[S.R.Custom]

I don't see this one as doing as well as their LCP... Compared to the S&W 337, it's physically larger, it weighs more, and it's butt-ugly. Not to mention, it's made of plastic, which should fill any self-respecting revolver man with scorn and loathing...

In my not-so-humble opinion, the only ones who will buy this will be those few guys who love tiny revolvers and hate Smith & Wesson. (Although, I wouldn't be too terribly upset if I found one in my box of Cracker Jack.)

[Willbird]

Potentially with the polymer grip frame it might be nicer to shoot than an airweight smith. WHOLESALE on an airweight smith chief special model 637 is $605.56. So the lure is a cheaper gun than an airweight I guess. Also from the prelims I have read the DA trigger stroke is very nice.

Like the LCP however demand will far outstrip supply, and dealers will be selling them for 1.5x wholesale price.

Bill

[S.R.Custom]

... WHOLESALE on an airweight smith chief special model 637 is $605.56.

How can that be, when retail is $430.00?

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=120494397

[500bfrman]

Compared to the S&W 337, it's physically larger, it weighs more, and it's butt-ugly. Not to mention, it's made of plastic, which should fill any self-respecting revolver man with scorn and loathing...


That's for sure. It's the gun for a girlie man

[GrizzLeeBear]

I think ol' Bill is rolling over in his grave. Ruger is all of a sudden going gangbusters after the CCW market, which he was never in favor of. Nice play on words with the rEVOLVEr, but I don't really think the revolver needs to evolve. The gunmakers just need to continue making the favorites and bring back some of the favorites from the past that they don't make anymore. All they have to do is read message boards and look at places like gunbroker, etc. to see which ones are in demand. With the developement of the airweights they got rid of one of the biggest complaints about revolvers for carry, the weight. But most people cannot handle a 13 oz. .357 mag. anyway and shoot a .38 or shoot .38's in the .357 in a carry revolver.
They brought out the .327 snubbie with much fanfair. But instead of building some nice longer barreled revolvers (like I have seen MANY people here and elsewhere expressing interest in) for the .327 as a field/range gun, they suprise everyone with a polymer airweight that NOBODY was asking for. How much engineering $$$ do you think went into devoloping this polymer grip / aluminum frame hybrid for a very crowded lightweight 38+p snubbie market?
Good luck on this one Ruger (you're gonna need it).

[monadnock#5]

Respected members of this Board have flatly stated (and I believe them) that until one has fired 1000 rounds of carry ammo in their auto, and KNOW that it functions properly, they have no business taking it to the street. Along with that, there are schools around the country that teach their students the proper methods for clearing jammed autos in a timely manner, at substantial cost in time and money.

For those who haven't taken the classes, or tested their auto for function in the proscribed manner, the LCR has it all over the LCP.

No I don't want one. Butt ugly is way too generous a description.

[Dan Cash]

Why carry a 5 shot revolver instead of a similar size auto?
Because mine is a .357 which gives a lot of horse power that I can't get in a similar size auto; because I can hide the thing and out to 20 yards you are my dead meat. M1911 in .45is still my weapon of choice and when concerned I tote 'em both.

Agree the plastic revolver is grotesque.

[Willbird]

How can that be, when retail is $430.00?

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=120494397

IC, yes, my mistake, the $605 is the airweight WITH the Crimson trace laser grips, I show $411 for the one without the laser grips.

And the one in Gunbroker would be 464 with shipping, and then another 25 or more to your ffl dealer to transfer it...so we are up to 490. Then maybe another 3% for using MC or Visa...that would put it to $504.

[Heavy lead]

Wake me up when it's over guys..........yaaaawwwwwn! I've my 642 38 that'll shoot 4 inch 25 yard groups, good enough for a gun I can stuff in my front pocket and I have no intension of starting a collection of pocket pistols. Looks like it ought to cost 75 bucks out the door, my 642 only cost me 360 brand new 2 years ago.

[S.R.Custom]

How much engineering $$$ do you think went into devoloping this polymer grip / aluminum frame hybrid ...?

From the looks of it, I'd say not much... you know, like maybe the summer interns were behind this one. :-P

[GrizzLeeBear]

How's this for timing. I made my post here at 8:16. At 8:24 I got a LCR promo email from Ruger! LOL

[nicholst55]

It's ucking fugly! And it has a lock... And it's too expensive. I don't see these things jumping off the shelf, personally. And did I mention that it's ugly?

[MtGun44]

I'd need to handle and shoot one before I gave too much of an opinion.

I have three classes of guns - historic arms, hunting arms and self defense
arms. The LEAST important feature of the self defense arms is styling,
while it may be near the top for my hunting arms. My KelTek P3AT is no
beauty but is sure rides nice in a front pocket. On the other hand my
Gold Cup is a nice piece of functional art in blued steel, like my big
N frame S&Ws are. But, Kinda hard to fit into a front pocket - Clint Smith's
recent article aside. The Hi-Power is a real beauty, the Sig P225 a pug ugly
fighting tool of great utility. Glocks are the ugliest of them all, and I will
not own one due to the basic incompatibility of my 1911 wrist angle with
the Glock frame angle, not to mention the staple gun quality trigger pull.
However, if forced to use one - it is a useful and reliable tool.

If the cam-trigger thing in the LCR is an actual improvement, and the polymer grip
frame and sorbothane grip softens the recoil, this might be a better tool than
my S&W342 which is a nasty little thing to shoot, while fairly nice to carry due to
size and weight. How much more effective is a +P .38 Spl than a .380??

Trying to keep an open mind.

Bill

[Willbird]

I'd need to handle and shoot one before I gave too much of an opinion.

I have three classes of guns - historic arms, hunting arms and self defense
arms. The LEAST important feature of the self defense arms is styling,
while it may be near the top for my hunting arms. My KelTek P3AT is no
beauty but is sure rides nice in a front pocket. On the other hand my
Gold Cup is a nice piece of functional art in blued steel, like my big
N frame S&Ws are. But, Kinda hard to fit into a front pocket - Clint Smith's
recent article aside. The Hi-Power is a real beauty, the Sig P225 a pug ugly
fighting tool of great utility. Glocks are the ugliest of them all, and I will
not own one due to the basic incompatibility of my 1911 wrist angle with
the Glock frame angle, not to mention the staple gun quality trigger pull.
However, if forced to use one - it is a useful and reliable tool.

If the cam-trigger thing in the LCR is an actual improvement, and the polymer grip
frame and sorbothane grip softens the recoil, this might be a better tool than
my S&W342 which is a nasty little thing to shoot, while fairly nice to carry due to
size and weight. How much more effective is a +P .38 Spl than a .380??

Trying to keep an open mind.

Bill

From reading here lately the only way Ruger could anger some folks here MORE would be to come out with this gun in 327 magnum :-).

Bill