Ruger LCR In 9mm - Anybody In For One?

RE Cheapshooter: Venom1956 pretty much sums up my point entirely. I only own popular calibers and won't deviate from them: 7.62x39, .223/5.56, 9mm, .22 LR, and 12 gauge. I've thought about down gunning to a .380--too expensive. I've toyed with the idea of 10mm (sold my EAA Match when it didn't run right--it would have been too expensive to figure out what ran in the gun).

Some day I'll add 7.62x51 for long range shooting and deer hunting, but my collection will have to be fairly well filled out as far as the types and purposes of guns I want. I've also been playing with the idea of getting a .460 S&W or a .454 Ruger Super Red Hawk, but the only way I'd do this, is if I sent the cylinder in to get them cut for .45 ACP moon clips so I'd actually be able to shoot the darn gun without crying (also, I'd probably have to take up reloading).

Which brings me to 9mm in a snub-nosed revolver... I think it would be a really fun gun to shoot. It's an expert's gun (meaning it's difficult to shoot), because of it's short sight radius and long-DAO trigger pull. But, that's exactly why I want it. Because of the 9mm chambering, I can put 500 rounds through it in a hurry. I've already shot many of the screws loose in my 986, and I plan to put thousands of rounds through that gun. The LCR would be no different for me. It'd be a shooter. Also, the moon clips make the gun even more fun for me. Not to mention the LCR has a pretty danged good trigger for a factory DAO trigger (at least in non-rimfire chamberings).

Finally, yes, perhaps my caliber selection is boring. True. But I more than make up for my boring caliber selection by obsessively and compulsively customizing my firearms. I may have a smaller firearm collection, but I really like the guns that I have and I shoot them a lot.

RE Reader850: If you want a full-sized 9mm revolver, I would highly recommend a S&W 986 or a 929. From the factory, my 986 is nigh perfect (except the front sight and grip... small gripes soon to be changed) and just fun, fun, fun to shoot. It's probably now my favorite centerfire pistol in my collection.
 
9mm in a short barrel makes sense. It has a fast burning powder.
With most 357 cartridges, the bullet is long gone, but the powder is still burning. Lots of bang and flash, with only a little improvement over 38+p.
 
The only way that I can see an advantage over owning the 9mm LCR over the .357 LCR is if the owner already has a huge stash of 9mm ammo.
 
The only way that I can see an advantage over owning the 9mm LCR over the .357 LCR is if the owner already has a huge stash of 9mm ammo.
Click to expand...

Thats assuming .357 and 9mm cost the same? you can almost get double the amount of 9mm for the cost of .357.
 
includes chronograph tests...
Click to expand...

I must have slept through that part. Didn't see any chrony tests, or table of results. Just something about not losing a lot of velocity in the revolver.
It did look like fumbling with the moon clips is a pain. One more concern, what if you use the loaded moon clip to carry a spare load, and a couple rounds get twisted around enough to pop out. Now you have a partial reload that you have to either put the cartridges back in, or put the partial clip in, and hope you get a live round undress the hammer. He showed you could load without a moon clip by just dropping rounds in the chamber, but nothing about a partially loaded clip. Then if you do load, and fire five rounds without the moon clip, you can't get the empties out with the ejector rod.
Sure like that rim on the 38 Spcl, or if I want more power, the 357 Magnum!:D
Speaking of both, if recoil is of concern it sure didn't look like the 9MM LCR he was shooting had any advantage over one chambered in 38 Spcl.
 
I can see the niche this serves for certain loads. The popular 125 grain .357 magnum loads have roughly the same ballistics as a 124 grain 9mm +P when fired from a sub 4 inch barrel.

You probably could find a boutique load that might move a 125 grain .357 magnum at 1300 or 1400 fps from a short barrel, but the slow follow-up shots may not be worth it for many. So, the 9mm revolver would likely have 80% of the ballistics with a fraction of the recoil...at least when comparing 124 grain to125 grain loads.

A lot of people make up the difference by using a heavier bullet in their snub nose revolvers, like the 158 grain at about 950 fps, the FBI Load. Easier to control and good stopping power.

That load has less energy than a 9mm +P, 124 grain @ 1200 fps, but stopping power probably wouldn't be that much different. Heavy and slow vs. light and fast...momentum is the same for both, power factor of about 150.

I can see the appeal for people looking to consolidate calibers or looking for better performance from lighter bullets. Not for me, but I get it.
 
"...I must have slept through that part. Didn't see any chrony tests, or table of results. Just something about not losing a lot of velocity in the revolver..."

Apparently you didn't bother to read the linked article, as there is a table full of ammo test results.
 
Apparently you didn't bother to read the linked article, as there is a table full of ammo test results.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. No, I didn't read the article, just watched the video. Didn't really even notice the article.
 
Glenn E. Meyer wrote:
Moonclips - nope - not for me. They are hard to carry for a reload.
Click to expand...

I've heard of guys using a film canister to hold them for J-frames. I've never tried it. Then again, I never had a gun that was cut for moon clips. Do you normally carry a speed loader and if so, how?
 
I use speed loader pouches and carry two moon-clips loaded with 9mm rounds in each (one on top of the other). The top load is easy to fetch, the bottom is a bit slower, but if you are down to that you are probably in over your head anyway.

I have never had a moon clip I carried this way get bent, twisted or had any rounds come loose.

Some in this thread appear determined to dissuade any and all from a 9mm revolver, but I've never suffered any of the ills they keeps inventing to justify their agenda.

RugerSP101-9_zpse4cb6dbb.jpg
 
I didn't skim through the whole thread but this also allows a good solid back up gun to someone, like LEO to have a solid reliable back up gun to share ammo commonality to their main gun. Some like moon clips because they are the fastest way to load a revolver. 9mm gives you higher ballistics than .38 but not the horrific recoil of the .357 in a small gun. That said I'll stick with my 13 ounce .38 version. Though I still see a demand for the 9.
 
I didn't skim through the whole thread but this also allows a good solid back up gun to someone, like LEO to have a solid reliable back up gun to share ammo commonality to their main gun
Click to expand...

Not really an advantage. Although some departments use 9MM, many others use 40 S&W, or 45ACP. But if they do use the 9MM, small, pocket 9MM semi-autos like the Sig P938, Kahr Arms PM/CM pocket pistols, Kimberly Solo, Beretta Nano, Ruger LC9, and more are lighter, thinner, more easily concealable, and have a higher capacity.

As far as trying to dissuade people, I really don't care, and hope Ruger sells a ton of them. The question in the OP was "Is anybody in"? I'm just stating the reasons I'm not. Mostly because I don't see any appreciable advantage. Especially with the same size, and weight of the same gun in 357 Magnum.
 
I also thinks it's nice if you primary carry guns are 9mm auto loaders and you want a revolver in the mix.
 
LarryBG

I would be more interested in the Charter Arms that doesn't use moon clips.
Click to expand...

I have only read a bit concerning this model but I am curious what in absence of moon-clips one would use for rapid reloads...?

I like guns in general so I would get a 9mm revolver just because but even for BUG one could pocket carry something like a Kel-Tec P11 or PF9 which has much more capacity and ease of reload.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top