Ruger LC9 Recommended

[Toolbox X]

The safety is there as a part of making it roster-able. This is a good thing, as it means that CA residents have access to a high-quality, low price CCW piece without going through a bunch of single-shot or PPT hassles to get one.

The safety is designed so that it is easy to disengage, but much more difficult to engage. It's almost a necessity to use 2 thumbs. As such, you can reliably carry it disengaged without worry that it would accidentally engage and foul you up when it counts.

I'm glad to hear the safety is hard to engage. If that's what it takes to get them here I understand.

Thanks for posting that info.

[les3547]

Why in the world did they put a safety on that thing? Are they trying to purposely make it hard to get the gun into a fire-able condition when someone is under a gigantic stress situation? Anything that prevents a gun from going bang when you desperately need it to go bang is just dangerous. Ruger is aware the LC9 is a CCW piece, right?

I am not an expert, so take my opinion with a grain of salt but . . . I don't see what the problem is, why not just leave the safety off?

So far I have never accidentally put the safety on. It is difficult to inadvertently do because of a) when off it is not very easy to get at (i.e., with the thumb of the gripping hand), and b) how much energy is required to move it to the safety position combined with the lack of thumb strength when trying to push toward the "safety on" position. Going the other way, however, the safety comes off very easily, so it seems they were smart at least about how to include a safety. To tell you the truth, I like having the option of a safety as long as it is such an unobtrusive little thing.

I watched a video of a former national shooting champion instructing police on how to grip a gun, and he had them with their gripping thumb high on the side, which on the LC9 would put it on top of the safety. I have practiced shooting that way and like it because it gives me something extra to hold onto, and naturally turns off the safety without having to think about it.

As I said in the opening post, I believe this gun has its place, but likely not in everyone's pocket! It is affordable, dependable (I have even purposely tried to jam it by shooting one-handed and limp-wristed, and so far no jams), conceals nicely, American made, backed by Ruger's great customer service, has that neat little finger grip on the magazine so you can use your whole hand to hold it, shoots a decent man-stopping round, legal in CA . . . it suits my needs just about perfectly. If there was anything I'd want, it might be to find some way to better control the recoil (maybe something like Beretta's revolving barrel?).

[RollingCode3]

I am the guy that gave the LC9 a C+. . I sold it after I shot a box of ammo through it. The guy that bought it from me... guess what? He sold it after he shot 2-3 mags through it. The gun is very reliable and easy to conceal but the trigger sucks badly if you compare it to the other trigger system out there. The LC9 trigger and the Kahr trigger are day and night. The kahr CW9 is the same size as the Ruger LC9. The Kahr PM9/CM9 is much smaller and fits inside my pocket much better.

Kahr Cw9 = 7+1 single stack (I paid $350 for it) IWB
Kahr CM9 = 6+1 single stack (my next gun on the list... $400) pocket carry


Ruger LC9 = 7+1 single stack $345

I don't know the answer to your question, but I feel exactly the same way (which is why for my next guns I have looked carefully at the CZ and Beretta models). It doesn't seem like Ruger is going to give us that in a compact or smaller. On the up side, less stuff on the sides (like a decocker) makes the gun slimmer and less likely to snag on anything being pulled out of the pocket.

I saw this posted elsewhere, but I thought it high praise that Hickok45 liked the LC9 so much. As someone who really loves guns and to shoot, I don't think he'd call it a winner if it weren't to him (not like his somewhat faint praise for the Ruger SR9c:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeLxP6Kywzk

Hickok45 likes guns. I haven't seen him give one bad review yet. Especially guns that the manufacture sent to him to review.

I'm glad to hear the safety is hard to engage. If that's what it takes to get them here I understand.

Thanks for posting that info.

The manual safety has nothing to do with the roster or meet the requirements to be on the roster. It needs to have the loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect to be on the roster.

[les3547]

I am the guy that gave the LC9 a C+. . I sold it after I shot a box of ammo through it. The guy that bought it from me... guess what? He sold it after he shot 2-3 mags through it. The gun is very reliable and easy to conceal but the trigger sucks badly if you compare it to the other trigger system out there. The LC9 trigger and the Kahr trigger are day and night. The kahr CW9 is the same size as the Ruger LC9. The Kahr PM9/CM9 is much smaller and fits inside my pocket much better.

As far as the reviews, if you do a search at Youtube, you will find far, far more positive reviews of the LC9 than the couple (which I've also seen) bad ones. In fact, supposedly the LC9 is one of the hottest selling gun in the US right now obviously because so many people like it. (BTW, I did find the trigger got nicer after about 200 pulls).

In any case, I didn't mean to suggest your review was somehow lacking (except when you said the LC9 isn't concealable), but rather that the LC9 simply didn't meet your needs, and that it might meet others' needs. I imagine those in need of a gun who see things as you do might agree with your C+ rating, and that gun seekers who are looking for what I was might agree the LC9 is a dandy little pistol.

[KandyRedCoi]

the good Kahrs are quite expensive, and KEL-TEC is NOT sold in CA, so the LC9 makes a decent choice for CCW imho...and thats just it, its good for CCW, its not a range gun or a "service" pistol

my .02

[zdragon]

i give my LC9 a solid B+ base on the following observation:

unquestionable reliability
simple take down for routine maintenance
feel good all around concealable back up weapon
single stack 9mm
hammer fired
real sights
better than average DAO
affordable
esthetically sound.

[RollingCode3]

i give my LC9 a solid B+ base on the following observation:

unquestionable reliability
simple take down for routine maintenance
.

unquestionable reliability? really? The gun is only a few months old. I personally know two people that had to send the LC9 back to Ruger. We have one member on calguns had to send his back to Ruger too.

Simple take down? You need a tool to take the gun apart. How is that simple?

[zdragon]

observation exclusively based on my own LC9
mine runs like clockwork since April(once a week +/-150rds)...my own reloads(5.1gr W231/124gr Xtreme bullet).
take down is relatively simple regardless.....have you tried taken down a ruger MKIII?

[pyromensch]

i was actually going to go to sportsman's warehouse in rockilin, to buy one, they were supposed to be on sale, for $339, but the wifes car broke....really broke, so it may be 6 months before i am able to try that again

[Toast]

unquestionable reliability? really? The gun is only a few months old. I personally know two people that had to send the LC9 back to Ruger. We have one member on calguns had to send his back to Ruger too.

Simple take down? You need a tool to take the gun apart. How is that simple?

A lot of people with 1911's put super tight barrel bushings on that require a tool to remove. I don't see needing a small tool as a deal breaker, the pin is supposed to loosen up eventually so it'll come out on it's own.

[kennytt]

Very nice review, thanks.

[Toolbox X]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVbwG5PcGo8&feature=player_embedded

Go to 6:50. I'm not happy about what he has to say about the safety.

[Ron-Solo]

I love mine.

[dmeiners]

Yes. I am not a fan of the trigger on this gun. pull is way too long and the reset too. I guess thats what you get with DAO? Bought my LC9 a month ago and this is my first DAO trigger.

Slightly off topic, does anyone know why Ruger went with DAO? I know it approximates a self defense revolver and maybe that's the answer - but the LC9 is a nice flat semi-auto.

I much prefer DA/SA, and I'm half tempted to wait and see if an LC9 variant like that comes out. Is there something technological that makes DA/SA harder to fit in a small gun? Seems unlikely - many small guns like the Bersa Thunder and I think some Berettas are DA/SA. Maybe its just the idea that DAO is better in a small SD gun?

[Sicktone]

LC9 @ 800 rounds

Just my $.02.

Bought this gun on a whim. I wanted something easy to house carry and got a good deal. The trigger is tough to get used to,but like every Ruger I've had, it gets better with a few hundred rounds.
I do have to alter my shooting style a bit, but I've never had a problem with any of the eight brands of ammo I've put through it. The sights are awesome for a pistol of this size.
At my local range, I ran into a USMC instructor who was busy firiing 100 rounds into two ragged holes from his 1911. I asked him if he would like to try this Ruger "squirt gun". His skills allowed him to put all the rounds into a very tight group. He is about 6'4" and had issues with the crazy long trigger pull, but shot great.
I've had friends that hate the gun, but I've learned that a good design is a good design. The better or more disciplined shooters can adapt to the LC9. If you need the form factor it can do the job. Would I prefer my G17 or 30--yep...but I don't want to carry them. Hope this helps.