Ruger LCR 9 mm
- Thread starter UncleEd
- Start date
I have owned semi auto revolvers and dealing with moon clips is a pain. Doing it without a tool is an exercise in frustration. Then you need to buy a of clips so when you go to the range you will have 10 or 20 pre loaded. The fun really begins when you have to remove all those expanded cases from the clips when you get home.
When you carry the gun you will need to carry a moon clip which are almost as wide as the revolvers cylinder. I do not get it. If they designed the guns like Taurus where you do not nee da moon clip, I get it but while a moon clip is good for quick reloads, often used in competition, they are a pain for all else. You cannot even carry a 9mm and say that if is out of commission you can use its ammo in your revolver because it is not that easy due to the need for moon clips. Unlike a regular revolver where you can replace 2 spent shells to top off the gun, you cannot do that with moon clips. It is an all or nothing proposition.
My Sig P938 weighs about the same as the LCR so why would I want to carry a 9mm revolver that holds less rounds and weighs the same? I am sure that someone has a need for a LCR in 9mm but as much as I love revolvers, I have no interest in a 9mm LCR. If I want power I just load my J-frame with .357 magnum.
When you carry the gun you will need to carry a moon clip which are almost as wide as the revolvers cylinder. I do not get it. If they designed the guns like Taurus where you do not nee da moon clip, I get it but while a moon clip is good for quick reloads, often used in competition, they are a pain for all else. You cannot even carry a 9mm and say that if is out of commission you can use its ammo in your revolver because it is not that easy due to the need for moon clips. Unlike a regular revolver where you can replace 2 spent shells to top off the gun, you cannot do that with moon clips. It is an all or nothing proposition.
My Sig P938 weighs about the same as the LCR so why would I want to carry a 9mm revolver that holds less rounds and weighs the same? I am sure that someone has a need for a LCR in 9mm but as much as I love revolvers, I have no interest in a 9mm LCR. If I want power I just load my J-frame with .357 magnum.
Cheapshooter
New member
To recap my post on the other thread on this topic.
3 3/4oz heavier than the 38+P
$70.00 higher MSRP (guess the moon clips are $23 each
)
Same size as 38+P or 357 model
But somebody will buy them just because it's a popular New trend.
3 3/4oz heavier than the 38+P
$70.00 higher MSRP (guess the moon clips are $23 each
)Same size as 38+P or 357 model
But somebody will buy them just because it's a popular New trend.
spanishjames
New member
I admit, it seemed interesting at first, but you've done a good job talking me out of it. The moon clips at the range don't sound like a lotta fun.
As I said in my other post, I will be interested in one but I will wait until the hype drops off and to see if there are any recalls. After a while they will drop to the same price as the others, I really like my S&W 940 and adding another option will be great. I also like moon clips so ....
Last edited:
Cheapshooter
New member
So let's compare performance of the same priced frames. Again, 9MM loses!
There is no advantage to chambering the LCR in 9MM in size, weight, and a disadvantage in price compared to the similar ballistics of the 38Spcl+P LCR.
As I said on the other thread, it's only advantage other than being on the 9MM revolver fad bandwagon is for the feather waisted recoil shy crowd.
Dragline45
New member
Performance wise, you are right, but there is the advantage that you can buy a box of 9mm for $5-$8 less per box than .38, and up to $15 less than a box of .357. With that being said, snubs don't make great range guns, which is why I mentioned earlier in another thread I would really like to see a 4" barreled SP101 in 9mm. Would make for a great cheap to shoot revolver for the range.
Cheapshooter
New member
Let's look at it another way.
KAHR CM9 (one of my own CCW options)
6+1= 7 rounds
LCR= 5
KAHR 3" barrel
LCR 1.8"= over an inch shorter reducing velocity, and performance
KAHR OAL= 5.42"
LCR= 6.5" Over an inch longer. Even with over an inch shorter barrel
KAHR height=4"
LCR=4.5 1/2 " taller
KAHR width" .90
LCR=Well, I don't even see that on the Ruger website, but I bet it's over an inch
KAHR weight=14oz
LCR=17.2 More than three ounces heavier.
KAHR MSRP=$460
LCR=$599 A hundred and fifty bucks more.
For 2 fewer rounds, an inch less barrel, but over a an inch longer OAL. 1/2 inch taller, wider, and three ounces heavier.
But a 9MM LCR is a trendy New item.
KAHR CM9 (one of my own CCW options)
6+1= 7 rounds
LCR= 5
KAHR 3" barrel
LCR 1.8"= over an inch shorter reducing velocity, and performance
KAHR OAL= 5.42"
LCR= 6.5" Over an inch longer. Even with over an inch shorter barrel
KAHR height=4"
LCR=4.5 1/2 " taller
KAHR width" .90
LCR=Well, I don't even see that on the Ruger website, but I bet it's over an inch
KAHR weight=14oz
LCR=17.2 More than three ounces heavier.
KAHR MSRP=$460
LCR=$599 A hundred and fifty bucks more.
For 2 fewer rounds, an inch less barrel, but over a an inch longer OAL. 1/2 inch taller, wider, and three ounces heavier.
But a 9MM LCR is a trendy New item.
I can reload a box of either for close to the same cost.
YankeeIronSights
New member
The 9mm LCR may become a great backup gun for anyone carrying a semiautomatic pistol. Having a gun that will go bang every time when a semiautomatic gun may jam provides extra confidence during a SD situation. There may be other semiautomatic handguns that could fulfill the backup role offering more rounds, but nothing is more reliable than a revolver, when the going gets tough. Food for thought...
If it headspaces on the case mouth like most other semi-auto caliber revolvers, then one could conceivably fire the revolver without moonclips though the individual cases would have to be plucked/poked out of the chambers since the extractor would have nothing to bear against.
If this is the case, one could get around the bulkiness of moonclips by simply carrying the gun with a moonclip in it and a reload in a small, single-stack semi-auto magazine. When reloading, you'd simply eject the moonclip and thumb the individual rounds out of the magazine into the chambers. Of course, you'd only have one practical reload, but most people carrying a gun of this type aren't likely to carry more than one reload anyway.
I could see where a 9mm LCR might be appealing to someone who prefers a revolver but does not handload because 9mm ammo is substantially cheaper than .38 Special or .357 Magnum. I could also see it being appealing to someone who is already set up to reload 9mm and doesn't want to have to set up for another caliber. That being said, I doubt this will be a big seller simply because 9mm revolvers have been tried at various times by Ruger, S&W, Taurus, and Charter Arms and they just never seem to gain widespread popularity (the only semi-auto cartridge that's ever managed to do that in a revolver seems to be .45 ACP).
If this is the case, one could get around the bulkiness of moonclips by simply carrying the gun with a moonclip in it and a reload in a small, single-stack semi-auto magazine. When reloading, you'd simply eject the moonclip and thumb the individual rounds out of the magazine into the chambers. Of course, you'd only have one practical reload, but most people carrying a gun of this type aren't likely to carry more than one reload anyway.
I could see where a 9mm LCR might be appealing to someone who prefers a revolver but does not handload because 9mm ammo is substantially cheaper than .38 Special or .357 Magnum. I could also see it being appealing to someone who is already set up to reload 9mm and doesn't want to have to set up for another caliber. That being said, I doubt this will be a big seller simply because 9mm revolvers have been tried at various times by Ruger, S&W, Taurus, and Charter Arms and they just never seem to gain widespread popularity (the only semi-auto cartridge that's ever managed to do that in a revolver seems to be .45 ACP).
Cheapshooter
New member
So where's the cylinder gap on a semi-final? All of the expanding gas goes to pushing the bullet out of the barrel. Non escapes between the cylinder, and barrel.
In fact I do like revolvers as well as semi-autols. I also like the LCR, another of my carry options is a 38 Spcl. LCR stoked with Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel +P.
In addition I have revolvers from Ruger, S&W, NAA, Heritage, Taurus, and Cimarron in 22 reinforce, 32 S&W, 38 Spcl, 357 Magnum, 44 Magnum, and 45 Colt, and 45/410. But none in a rimless caliber designed for an auto-loader because I can find similar performance with a rimmed cartridge designed to be used in a revolver without extra gizmos.
Thinking about it, my short list is down to three, two of which are wheel guns.
Dragline45
New member
That's absolutely incorrect. Revolvers bleed energy due to the cylinder gap. You could fire the same 9mm load out of a 3" revolver and a 3" auto, and fired out of the 3" auto it will have more energy behind it.
bedbugbilly
New member
I like Rugers and own a number of them . . .
I had a .357 LCR . . . it was O.K. but traded it in on a Smith Model 36 which suits my carry needs better . . . .
As far as a 9mm LCR - I suppose if they make it folks will buy it . . but not me. I have no desire to fool with the clips, etc.
If I want to carry a 9mm, I'll carry my SR9 which is also a favorite of mine and the only semi-auto CF that I own at this time . . .
As far as revolver goes . . . I'm more than happy to stick with my 38s/357 of which I own a number of.
As far as ammo availability . . I reload both 9mm and 38/357 so it really isn't an issue. From what I've seen in the stores that I haunt . . . 9mm isn't any more available than 38 spl - all depends on the day you hit the store and what they have come in.
I had a .357 LCR . . . it was O.K. but traded it in on a Smith Model 36 which suits my carry needs better . . . .
As far as a 9mm LCR - I suppose if they make it folks will buy it . . but not me. I have no desire to fool with the clips, etc.
If I want to carry a 9mm, I'll carry my SR9 which is also a favorite of mine and the only semi-auto CF that I own at this time . . .
As far as revolver goes . . . I'm more than happy to stick with my 38s/357 of which I own a number of.
As far as ammo availability . . I reload both 9mm and 38/357 so it really isn't an issue. From what I've seen in the stores that I haunt . . . 9mm isn't any more available than 38 spl - all depends on the day you hit the store and what they have come in.
Subcompact 9mm revolvers have 1 main advantage and 1 main disadvantage compared to similar .38 Spl revolvers:
Advantage: The shorter round means that you can have a shorter cylinder and thus a smaller and lighter revolver. If, however, the implementation actually makes use of this advantage. Another advantage is that if you have other 9mm handguns, you have a common round between them. Practice ammo may be cheaper for 9mm, but then again I handload .38 Spl so that is a wash for me.
Disadvantage: Moonclips. Moonclips are a PITA. They are a PITA to deal with at the range even if you have the tool. They are something that can get lost. They don't conceal well, in a similar manner as speedloaders. Another disadvantage is that state of the art subcompact 9mm autoloaders are thinner and have higher capacity.
My take on this is that if you want a subcompact revolver, just get a .38. If you want a subcompact 9mm, get an autoloader. The 9mm subcompact revolver thing has been tried before, and failed. My prognostication is that this one will as well, for the same reasons.
Advantage: The shorter round means that you can have a shorter cylinder and thus a smaller and lighter revolver. If, however, the implementation actually makes use of this advantage. Another advantage is that if you have other 9mm handguns, you have a common round between them. Practice ammo may be cheaper for 9mm, but then again I handload .38 Spl so that is a wash for me.
Disadvantage: Moonclips. Moonclips are a PITA. They are a PITA to deal with at the range even if you have the tool. They are something that can get lost. They don't conceal well, in a similar manner as speedloaders. Another disadvantage is that state of the art subcompact 9mm autoloaders are thinner and have higher capacity.
My take on this is that if you want a subcompact revolver, just get a .38. If you want a subcompact 9mm, get an autoloader. The 9mm subcompact revolver thing has been tried before, and failed. My prognostication is that this one will as well, for the same reasons.