Super Sneaky Steve
New member
Normally they are all good but Ruger has been making crap lately. Maybe they are busy rushing products out the door.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Which for ccw?
- Thread starter ccwnut
- Start date
Cheapshooter
New member
My LCR is of recent manufacture, and is far from being crap. Quite reliable, accurate, well finished, for tupperware anyay, and has a very good feelng, and functioning trigger. Couldn't ask for more.
under_dawg
New member
I can't knock the SW bodyguard because I don't own one, but I'm sure it is a good gun like most Smiths. I do own an LCR and it has my CCW for a couple of years. It would be hard to beat to find a more comfortable weapon. I bought my wife one with the xs tritium big dot and wish I would have kept it for me!! I have a pocket holster and an iwb holster (iwb doesn't see much use). I love the trigger.
You will more than likely find new to revolver shooters buying the ruger and people that have more time with revolver buying the s&w metal revolvers. Much better after market if any parts or changes or wanted or needed over the decades . Want a different grip on the ruger you are very limited to any choices . Not so with s&w. Option for moon clips on the ruger ?? nope. Want a full grip on the ruger?? nope.
The Ruger LCR is exceptionally ugly. The cylinder and plastic frame make it uglier than a Hi Point. But, appearance doesn't matter to the bad guy when it's pointed at him. The advantages of the LCR are the trigger and pinned sight (so you can add a night or fiber optic front sight).
You will more than likely find new to revolver shooters buying the ruger and people that have more time with revolver buying the s&w metal revolvers.
Based on what statistical source ?
Been shooting wheel guns since I was 18 (62 now) and carry an LCR daily...
If it were me, I'd look for a Colt Cobra or Agent in good condition. I like the idea of having 20% more ammo on board (six shots as opposed to five) in a revolver intended for self-defense; weighing the same as a Smith Airweight and being not much bigger. And no silly "lock" to fret about.
Of course, the Colt will cost more and repair service is problematic.
Of course, the Colt will cost more and repair service is problematic.
I have a 442 and like it, but then, the LCR was a few years off when I got my 442. If I was buying now, I'm not sure which I'd pick. I like the looks of a metal revolver better than polymer, but I love that the LCR can be had with an XS nightsight.
Then again, after several years with my 442 as my pocket gun, my SIG 290RS, Kel Tec Pf-9 (assuming it proves reliable enough, jury is still out) and Ruger LCP are all so concealable, and much more pleasant to shoot, that I'm considering selling my 442. I may go to steel framed snubs only (I love my Taurus 85CH as an IWB gun) and going autos only for my pocket guns. The pocket 9mms and .380s and certainly the heavier steel framed snubs are so much more pleasant to shoot, and have much quicker and more accurate follow up shots, than the lightweight snubs. So, I guess really, if I was doing it again but armed with my current experience, I'd get a pocket 9mm and/or another steel framed snub (actually, I would have done that when I got my 442, but there were no affordable pocket 9's yet, the Kahr PM9 and Rohrbaugh we about the only optoins).
Now, back to your question...Handle them both (and preferably, rent them and try them both if you can) and see which you prefer. Both will be good guns for their purpose (though far from fun to shoot). Though, if you want the nightsight, and don't want to pay a small fortune for one of the handful of specialty model S&W snubs with a nightsight or fiber optic sight, you may be better off going with the Ruger.
Then again, after several years with my 442 as my pocket gun, my SIG 290RS, Kel Tec Pf-9 (assuming it proves reliable enough, jury is still out) and Ruger LCP are all so concealable, and much more pleasant to shoot, that I'm considering selling my 442. I may go to steel framed snubs only (I love my Taurus 85CH as an IWB gun) and going autos only for my pocket guns. The pocket 9mms and .380s and certainly the heavier steel framed snubs are so much more pleasant to shoot, and have much quicker and more accurate follow up shots, than the lightweight snubs. So, I guess really, if I was doing it again but armed with my current experience, I'd get a pocket 9mm and/or another steel framed snub (actually, I would have done that when I got my 442, but there were no affordable pocket 9's yet, the Kahr PM9 and Rohrbaugh we about the only optoins).
Now, back to your question...Handle them both (and preferably, rent them and try them both if you can) and see which you prefer. Both will be good guns for their purpose (though far from fun to shoot). Though, if you want the nightsight, and don't want to pay a small fortune for one of the handful of specialty model S&W snubs with a nightsight or fiber optic sight, you may be better off going with the Ruger.