Ruger LCRx: Worth Waiting For?

T

TunnelRat

New member
Hi all,
I've been getting back into revolvers lately. I have a S&W Model 19 on layaway. But I'd also like something smaller that I could carry in case the mood struck me. I've been interested by the Ruger LCR. It seems like a decent pistol. The weight is nice and the trigger is surprisingly nice for the price. I've noticed that Ruger is also now going to produce a Ruger LCR with an external hammer. Most of my experience with revolvers has been with spurred hammers and the semiautos I shoot are DA/SA so I am just used to having a hammer. That said I still train in DA. An lgs nearby has a good price on an LCR and I was wondering if it is waiting for the LCRx? My initial thoughts are that for a snub nosed pistol it might be unnecessary but I'm not sure as S&W J frames have come with external hammers for a long time.

What do others think?
-TR
 
The LCRx would be my choice. I like the SA option in case a longer shot is required. A lot of people carry the little NAA .22s, and they're SA only.

Many people also think the hammer is a hinderance, so there you go.

Get what you want.

LCRx's can be had on GunBroker for under $400 + s/h.
 
Learn to shoot DA well.
Click to expand...

I know how to shoot DA well. :) But there are plenty of small revolvers that do come with hammers.

Seems the point of the LCR is an easily pocketed pistol. An external hammer just gets in the way of that. Yes?
Click to expand...

That is my thought, but I just wanted to see what others thought.

Get a Smith Wesson 638. The best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting revolver, thanks for pointing it out!
 
I don't mind DAO so I would say no, and due to the nature of the gun being pretty much strictly a SD/carry gun, you would probably be shooting it mostly DA anyway even if you had the hammer. You said you have a S&W 19 on the way, so if you want to do some precision SA revolver shooting at the range that should suit your needs.

As far as the hammer snagging on the pocket, I have carried snubs both with and without an external hammer, and have never had the hammer snag on anything whether it be pocket carry or IWB, so to me it's not a huge issue.

While the LCR is a fine revolver, I have a preference for J frames. Do a little light stoning and polishing, and throw in a lighter rebound spring, and you have yourself a nice shooting little revolver. I wouldn't go too light on the rebound spring though or you will find yourself short stroking during rapid fire, and speaking of short stroking, it has been known to happen that short stroking the LCR can render the gun inoperable. Maybe they fixed this, but do some research and you will see it has happened more than once. The only thing that happens when you short stroke a J frame is it skips a cylinder.
 
Last edited:
Years ago I had a S&W mod. 60 I would carry about 70% of the time IWB and the other 30% pocket carry. I then bought a S&W mod. 49 Bodyguard and started carrying it off and on when I wasn't carrying the 60.
The more I carried the bodyguard it wasn't long before I really caught on that for cc purposes, I much preferred a smoother, more rounded edged pistol for everyday use. I also started pocket carrying more frequently as well.

Before it was over, I had bobbed the hammer on the 60, removed the rear sight and had the front sight cut down and rounded.

During pocket carry with both, I never had to worry about anything snagging and I never had to worry as much of the hammer getting caught if I ever had to fire without removing my pistol from my jacket pocket.

But, the open hammer area of the 49 and 60 did present an unneeded area for lint to get into. Not a huge problem but since I always fired them DA, this was just one more area I didn't have to worry about when I switched to the S&W 642,442.


So for preference's in my mode of carry which is mostly pocket carry, I'd rather have the LCR over the LCRX as I would find a way to bob the X's hammer anyways.

FWIW, I like the 642 and the 442 but I wish I had the Bodyguard and the old 60 back.
 
Last edited:
LCRx reviews & advice....

Yankee Marshal a popular Youtube.com gun channel has new clips about the Ruger LCRx revolver. He likes it & carrys it a lot.

I'm not a fan of exposed hammer revolvers or DA/SA types. My good friend got a new Ruger LCR .38spl with a add-on Lasermax red laser in the spring of 2013. He's satisfied with it.
 
I feel like the LCR was designed as a lightweight defensive revolver you could put in your pocket meant to be drawn and fired as quickly as possible. At no point in this equation is a hammer necessary.
 
Ah ah ah....

On the surface, a DA only snub is ideal but Id add that there is some limited value to a DA/SA type revolver. If you are hurt or wounded, you might need to fire the small frame revolver single action. Your hand strength might be limited due to illness or you may need to fire one handed.
This is where a LCRx format will be handy.
 
The only reason I would have for the LCRx over my LCR is if they made It in a 4" barreled 22 rimfire for a target/plinker range toy, or kit gun.
 
The only reason I would have for the LCRx over my LCR is if they made It in a 4" barreled 22 rimfire for a target/plinker range toy, or kit gun.
Click to expand...

Sign me up! With the introduction of the LCRX, the LCR .22, and Ruger reintroducing a long barreled .22 SP101, I suspect we will see one in the next couple years. I always bring a my 22/45 on camping trips for plinking along with my shotgun, a LCR kit gun would replace the 22/45 in a heartbeat.
 
I have a single-six, so I know nothing. I'm just getting into revolvers and learning. I am asking from a novice point of view. If someone likes the idea, but worries about snagging, why isn't the 638 the most popular thing ever? Or to pose it a different way, why didn't Ruger make the hammer small? Are the bobbed hammers harder to operate? Is there a real concern of the hammer being partialy struck and dropping or being bummped?
 
Get what you like and worry about it later lol. If you are that hesitant, wait for and compare the two side by side. Its not like they are used Smiths or something and disappear lol.
 
I own a Taurus Ultralight 38 that has the hammer and I have no problems getting out of my pocket because I put my thumb on the hammer as I draw it from my pocket.

I owned a beautiful new Smith 638 that unfortunately, I found out that I could not reliably hold enough pressure down on the hammer tab to ease down the hammer on a loaded cylinder without the hammer tab slipping out from under my thumb and the hammer smacking the firing pin.

This is from nerve damage in my hands and arthritus.

Needless to say, I sold the gun.

I have wanted to buy a 642 to replace it for a very long time.

The enclosed back is snagfree and the sealed back means a lot less garbage can get into the revolver itself.

But I am thinking of getting a Smith Shield in 40,nerve damage and all.

The 642 though is such a sweet pocket carry handgun, it's hard not to get one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top