Tweet
I generally am not a great fan of the .380 as a defensive handgun option, but I have to confess I'm somewhat intrigued with this gun.
For the last 10 years the name of the game has been making pistols smaller and lighter. The first wave were the micro-.380s like the LCP followed by a second wave of mini-9mms like the LC9. The problem with such guns is that the recoil is rather fierce. For a typical user, this makes the gun at best hard to control and commonly results in slower shooting and poor bullet placement due to a lack of practice with the gun. For most of us, 10 to 12oz is too light for a .380 and 17oz not enough mass for a 9mm.
As a practical matter, most people would be better served by a somewhat heavier and somewhat larger handgun and I think Ruger has "broken the code" with the LC380 as an alternative to the LCP. Based on my experience, a "nice usable weight" for a .380 is around 16oz and half again as much (24oz) for a 9mm. At these weight levels practice is more-or-less pleasant rather than punishing and in combat one won't be wrestling with the gun as well as fighting the goblin.
For most people what you give up with buying the LC380 rather than the LCP is pocket carry, but you are likely to be better served with belt carry anyway. By using a heavier slide, Ruger can also allow a significantly easier recoil spring, a real advantage for many smaller and older shooters. Because it is a locked-breech design, the recoil impulse is much better distributed than a revolver or blow-back pistol of the same weight. Perhaps the LC380s biggest utility is as an "old folks gun." As I get older I've become increasingly aware that I don't have the grip strength I once did and understand that this is a fairly common problem. For someone of advancing years, A small but soft-kicking .380 would be an attractive alternative to toting a heavier 9mm or the snappier recoil of a blow-back .380 of roughly the same size and weight.
For the last 10 years the name of the game has been making pistols smaller and lighter. The first wave were the micro-.380s like the LCP followed by a second wave of mini-9mms like the LC9. The problem with such guns is that the recoil is rather fierce. For a typical user, this makes the gun at best hard to control and commonly results in slower shooting and poor bullet placement due to a lack of practice with the gun. For most of us, 10 to 12oz is too light for a .380 and 17oz not enough mass for a 9mm.
As a practical matter, most people would be better served by a somewhat heavier and somewhat larger handgun and I think Ruger has "broken the code" with the LC380 as an alternative to the LCP. Based on my experience, a "nice usable weight" for a .380 is around 16oz and half again as much (24oz) for a 9mm. At these weight levels practice is more-or-less pleasant rather than punishing and in combat one won't be wrestling with the gun as well as fighting the goblin.
For most people what you give up with buying the LC380 rather than the LCP is pocket carry, but you are likely to be better served with belt carry anyway. By using a heavier slide, Ruger can also allow a significantly easier recoil spring, a real advantage for many smaller and older shooters. Because it is a locked-breech design, the recoil impulse is much better distributed than a revolver or blow-back pistol of the same weight. Perhaps the LC380s biggest utility is as an "old folks gun." As I get older I've become increasingly aware that I don't have the grip strength I once did and understand that this is a fairly common problem. For someone of advancing years, A small but soft-kicking .380 would be an attractive alternative to toting a heavier 9mm or the snappier recoil of a blow-back .380 of roughly the same size and weight.
God Did Not Create All Men Equal, Colonel Colt Did.
Comment