News flash - Ruger LC9 9mm

Discussion in 'Centerfire Pistols & Revolvers' started by Just One Shot, Jan 3, 2011.

  1. Just One Shot

    Just One Shot New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    432
    Location:
    Ohio
  2. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,307
    Location:
    Indiana
  3. flintlock

    flintlock Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,059
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    I really like Ruger's guns, but did the world need another compact 9mm? A Ruger 1911 on the other hand would probably be more interesting. Except for the billboard on the side of the slide!
  4. blackspyder

    blackspyder New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    I'll have to handle one before I decide whether or not its worth buying. Sub-compact 9's are hard to come by especially well built ones given the .380 craze we had here.

    Yes I shot a Kel-Tec, I was not impressed, nice gun, not my bag though.
  5. Rick O'Shay

    Rick O'Shay New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    78
    Location:
    Southwest Michigan
  6. Just One Shot

    Just One Shot New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    432
    Location:
    Ohio
  7. group17

    group17 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    98
    Does the world need another 1911?
    I'll take another compact 9mm any day.
  8. Helix_FR

    Helix_FR New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,743
    Location:
    Imperial, MO
    So they took the LCP and and SR9C and put it in a blender and they came up with this. Hmmmm. Well if its as good as the SR9 seems to be then I'll be happy.
  9. noslolo

    noslolo New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,564
    Location:
    Johnstown PA
    They should have done this first! I know that they wanted to jump on the .380 band wagon, but a nice small 9mm, now that fits my bill a whole lot better. Well really, I'm happy with my CW40 and thats as small as I have ever gone.
  10. Boris

    Boris Former Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    701
    Rugers are great guns, but I see no reason why they need to copy the Keltec and charge soooo much more.

    I almost got a LCP from a buddy used but he wanted more than a new P3AT for it and my P32 serves me just fine. Maybe if the price was more inline with what the gun was. The extra $$ is paying for the name. JMO.......

    edit: and it does not have a rail...........
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  11. graehaven

    graehaven Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,943
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    What a surprise! Another Kel-tec rip-off! Way to go Ruger. Can't wait to see the recall on this one.
  12. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,307
    Location:
    Indiana
    Yeah, it's a bit surprising that they can take something that already works, copy it in a way that requires a recall, and still be labeled as "a real quality product, unlike that junk Kel-tec." Just my two cents...
  13. graehaven

    graehaven Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,943
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    Clearly a rip-off of the P-11, and with less capacity. Heavier too (surprise). LOL

    I hope they get sued.
  14. Boris

    Boris Former Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    701
    I hate when gun companies just copy. Just look at S&W. All they make is Glocks and 1911s. What happened in their design department? If I were the big guy I would fire anyone not skilled enough to design a S&W and just put plans for copies on my desk. They make more variations of Glocks than Glock does for cryin out loud. If Ruger can put a great gun like a SR9 out, then have to copy another design that is more than a $100.00 less... What is going on? Why not get original and do some work and not just copy copy copy.

    I seen a gun called a hellcat in SGnews that is guess what, a copy of a P3AT. So that makes 4 companies (atleast) that makes Keltec pistols......

    If I wanted a Keltec, I will buy a keltec and save some $$ doing it! A Ruger Keltec is of no interest to me unless I can get one cheaper and it is post recall made...... JMO folks..
  15. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,125
    If I bought a small 9mm, I'd probably go with one of the older Smith & Wessons. One of my dad's friends, who was a detective carried a S&W 39 and swore by it. He also said the 59 was worth looking at too. I don't know if they make them anymore or not.

    I'd go with a S&W 39 or I'd look at a Springfield EMP. Glocks are nice too, but I don't have much experience with them.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2011
  16. G-man

    G-man New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Vermont
    I picked up the LC9 and its a great pistol. No problems whats so ever clean chambering anf ejection little kick and nice grouping at 15, 30, 50 ft No RECALLs well designed light and a nice pocket piece. Way to Go ruger Like Always a nice Quality Firearm.
  17. Juker

    Juker New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Land of Lincoln
    Hey G-Man, welcome to the forum.

    I see you're from Vermont. I've read it's the only state that allows open carry and concealed carry without any type of permit - ?

    Inquiring minds want to know ... :)
  18. W. Bill

    W. Bill New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Texas
    I recently purchased an LC-9. Initially, overall loved the gun, looks, feel, sight picture and accuracy. Like most DOA pistols, the trigger pull is L-O-N-G but predictable. Didn’t like the small thumb safety, loaded chamber indicator, internal lock or the fact that the trigger will not function without magazine installed. Without the magazine installed, the trigger just moves on the trigger spring, like in neutral (more on that later). The internal lock requires a special “key” that has to go through a hole in the frame (not centered well on the gun I received, so somewhat difficult to use). When the internal lock is engaged, the trigger will not function since it, again, goes into a sort of “neutral” like when the magazine is not installed (note this is the second “safety feature” that causes the trigger to not function by putting it in “neutral”). Took the gun to the range to put 100 initial rounds through; first 89 rounds were flawless and the accuracy was very good. Round 90 Failed-To-Fire. Tap and rack did not solve the problem, second tap and rack did not solve the problem. Unloaded and field stripped; could not see a problem. The symptom was a “free-wheeling” trigger like the trigger was in “neutral”. Nothing else except the trigger would move; no internal contact with anything else except the trigger spring. No resistance, no clicks, no hammer fall, nothing. As far as the trigger is concerned, the pistol was in the same condition as if there were no magazine installed and/or the internal lock was engaged. However, the magazine WAS installed and the internal lock WAS NOT engaged. Sent the pistol to Ruger and they returned it with a replaced hammer catch, hammer spring and manual safety plunger. They reported firing 40 rounds with no malfunctions. They provided no information on whether the problem is permanently fixed with redesigned, different or better parts. As far as I can tell, they replaced the broken parts with the same, albeit new, parts that failed. Here’s the question in my mind: With 40 rounds fired, is this pistol good for another 49?; or, 149? I conceal carry 7-days a week and I will not risk my life on this pistol’s future dependability. It is one thing to have a misfeed, jam or failure to fire (all of which can/should be corrected with a tap and rack); but, to have a complete fire arm failure after 89 rounds is unacceptable. Period. P.S. I love my other three Rugers and I’m not slamming Ruger. It is obvious from other posts that there are many LC-9 success stories and satisfied owners. All I know at this point is that and mine and one other LC-9 that I’m aware of quit running unexpectedly.
  19. Double D

    Double D Administrator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    10,198
    Location:
    North Florida
    Bill, I can feel your pain. I would never consider carrying something that performed like that. I bought a new 1911 commander and have experimented with it using 4 different brand magazines and about 6 different ammo makers and a mixture of hollow points and ball ammo, and have run about 600 rounds thru it without one single failure. It has just now begun to earn the name "everyday carry gun". Some of the smaller guns require a break in period and then they are OK. I would run quite a bit thru it before I carried it, and even then I may still be wary. Good luck!
  20. AmmoForSale.com

    AmmoForSale.com New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Messages:
    44
    As much as I like the better fit and finish of the LC9 vs the PF9. I still see myself getting a PF-9 instead. I don't want or need any of the added safety features. If Ruger offered a simple no frills version I would pick it up. In the current model I'm going to have to pass.

    W. Bill issue was something I was concerned about already. While all firearms can fail. The ones with more moving parts tend to fail more often.

    __________________
    9mm ammo for sale
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
Centerfire Pistols & Revolvers old news but worth repeating.. Jun 18, 2009
Centerfire Pistols & Revolvers Bad news for the FN 57 Handgun! Jan 13, 2005
Centerfire Pistols & Revolvers 44 Magnum Muzzle Flash Captured by High Speed Camera May 17, 2013
Centerfire Pistols & Revolvers 45 GAP, flash in the pan or... May 21, 2004