Ruger LC Carbine Glock 10mm

[RBShooter]

Didn't see any threads on this new carbine. OMG would I love to get my hands on this. Too bad it has to get Californicated to be legal here. Comes in a few calibers but mine go-to would be 10mm. I should probably just buy the PC 9mm instead, since that comes w/o a handgrip. A PC with a Magpul Backpacker.

https://www.budsgunshop.com/product_info.php/products_id/171077/ruger+lc+carbine+10mm+semi+auto+rifle+w+folding+stock+flip+up+sights+30+1

Anyone shoot one yet?

[k1dude]

Keep in mind it's 7.5 pounds for a PCC. That's really heavy.

[Capybara]

I just bought the Ruger PC Backpacker and so far, I love it. I don't give a crap about 10mm, ammo is too expensive, 9mm is where its at for me. Weighs 6.2 lbs, not a feather but fine.
Screenshot 2025-06-13 at 3.59.55 PM.jpg for me.

[BrokerB]

pretty nice setup

[Capybara]

The American Rifleman just did a review of the LC Carbine in this most recent issue this month. They raved about it and gave it a huge thumbs up. Because in lame a*s*s* California, you are not legally permitted to have the stock fold, I found the PC Backpacker better for a small, breakdown gun. But the LC seems to be a good gun for sure, but it would irk me to buy a gun intended to fold and not be able to fold it.

[RBShooter]

The American Rifleman just did a review of the LC Carbine in this most recent issue this month. They raved about it and gave it a huge thumbs up. Because in lame *** California, you are not legally permitted to have the stock fold, I found the PC Backpacker better for a small, breakdown gun. But the LC seems to be a good gun for sure, but it would irk me to buy a gun intended to fold and not be able to fold it.

Completely agree. And with the myriad of Glock 9mm mags I have, the PC Backpacker is probably a better fit for me.

[vf111]

Disappointed Ruger didn't design this and the 45acp to be 50 state compliant

[W.R.Buchanan]

I got my PC Carbine a few years ago. It is chambered in .40 S&W Cuz my Glocks are mostly .40 S&W adn I don't do 9MM anything. I added the Magpul Backpacker Stock and Fore End and a Bushnell TRS25 Red Dot Sight.

I knew the 10 MM and .45 ACP would be completely different guns because I was told that by Ruger. The more powerful cartridges have too much Bolt Thrust for the Earlier gun, in fact the .40 S&W had Several Mods over the 9mm gun to get it to work right. The original PC Carbine was "Essentially" and scaled up 10-22.

[Spyder]

The American Rifleman just did a review of the LC Carbine in this most recent issue this month. They raved about it and gave it a huge thumbs up. Because in lame a*s*s* California, you are not legally permitted to have the stock fold, I found the PC Backpacker better for a small, breakdown gun. But the LC seems to be a good gun for sure, but it would irk me to buy a gun intended to fold and not be able to fold it.

Have you ever seen them, or any other magazine that makes a profit off of having companies send them free stuff to test and "review", not rave about a product? If they didn't, then companies wouldn't send them anything anymore.

[Spyder]

The American Rifleman just did a review of the LC Carbine in this most recent issue this month. They raved about it and gave it a huge thumbs up. Because in lame a*s*s* California, you are not legally permitted to have the stock fold, I found the PC Backpacker better for a small, breakdown gun. But the LC seems to be a good gun for sure, but it would irk me to buy a gun intended to fold and not be able to fold it.

Have you ever seen them, or any other magazine that makes a profit off of having companies send them free stuff to test and "review", not rave about a product? If they didn't, then companies wouldn't send them anything anymore.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Spyder: I have seen exactly one gun Writer have the stones to criticize a Gun Company while writing about a product.

I recently saw an Article in "Rifle Magazine" by Brian Pearce, on the new S&W 1854 rifle. Brian Pearce wasn't exactly complimentary about the guns many MIM Parts that he felt were not appropriate for "the Price of the Gun !" which is a little high considering the Manufacturing Processes used. I agree with his assessment. Also the guns being shipped now are much rougher operating than the original batches that went out a year or so ago that were very smooth operating. I [picked one up at my local gun store the other day and was pretty taken aback by how rough it ran. It's like there was no finish work on the internal parts before they were put together.

Randy

[W.R.Buchanan]

Spyder: I have seen exactly one gun Writer have the stones to criticize a Gun Company while writing about a product.

I recently saw an Article in "Rifle Magazine" by Brian Pearce, on the new S&W 1854 rifle. Brian Pearce wasn't exactly complimentary about the guns many MIM Parts that he felt were not appropriate for "the Price Point of the Gun !" Which is a little high considering the Manufacturing Processes used. I agree with his assessment. Also the guns being shipped now are much rougher operating than the original batches that went out a year or so ago that were very smooth operating. I [picked one up at my local gun store the other day and was pretty taken aback by how rough it ran. It's like there was no finish work on the internal parts before they were put together.

Randy

PS Why am i getting Err Codes every time I try to post a comment???? This is happening a lot.

[Capybara]

Have you ever seen them, or any other magazine that makes a profit off of having companies send them free stuff to test and "review", not rave about a product? If they didn't, then companies wouldn't send them anything anymore.

Well, I used to be the editor of HD Video Pro Magazine. Different subject matter but it was a magazine (remember those?!?) and website that had reviews and articles on professional video and filmmaking gear. I own plenty of pro video gear that I was given as review copies. We always stated when we were reviewing a copy of a piece of gear that it was given to us for review and we never let factor that influence our reviews of the gear.

I will say that often, especially on the more expensive gear, it was just loaned to us for review and they manufacturer wouldn't give us a camera or lens, just loans on expensive stuff. More often we were given less expensive gear like small lights, software, accessories, etc. As far as gun reviews, I would
imagine it works similarly. I know some of my favorite gun writers, they are given a gun for review and they make a point in the article of saying it was loaned to them for the review and then they liked it so much that they ask the manufacturer if they can buy the gun. I've never written professional gun reviews for a publication though so I don't know how many guns are given versus loaned to writers.

I have reviewed gear that was badly designed, conceived, manufactured and have told the distributor or manufacturer that the piece of gear has a problem and ask them if the problem is normal or is a defective piece of gear and I have seen gun and optics reviews do the same thing. I have seen some pretty scathing reviews for guns that performed poorly. I think the key is the reviewers skills as a writer. They should try to be diplomatic and if there is a physical problem or defect, the manufacturer should be given an opportunity to replace it with a review copy that functions as intended, I think that's fair. Anything mass produced, there are bad copies, lemons, that just happen.

Based on my experience, I don't blanket think that many modern gun writers are taking free product in exchange for good reviews. I'm sure some do but I don't think the majority do because it would end their career as a writer or reliable source if word got out that the gun was a piece of crap and they said it was good. As far as the American Rifleman, who knows? I don't think all of their regular reviews even credit a single writer, they are anonymous or compiled by several staff. My own review process with guns I vet the gun from several sources to try to come to a logical conclusion about the gun itself. I have bought guns that had some negative reviews and have been very happy with them and conversely, I have bought guns that were universally well reviewed by several sources but I end up not liking it. Doesn't mean its a bad gun, just means that it doesn't appeal to me personally. I guess there are a lot of different parameters that can be used to call a gun bad or lousy but based upon the many Rugers I own, generally I find they make reliable, good quality guns so I feel confident than the LC Carbine in 10mm is probably a well built gun. As far as is it practical, shoot well, accurate and reliable long term, if I was interested in one, I'd try to source at least three or four other published reviews and watch at least the same amount of YouTube reviews of it to see what the overall consensus on it is.

I really prefer to hold, examine and shoot any guns that I buy but that's more often not possible so we have to just take a leap of faith. I did that with my Ruger PC Backpacker. I couldn't find anyone who owned one or rented one at a range so I read a ton of reviews, watched a ton of YouTube videos and then went to my LGS, examined it and then bought it. So far, no surprised or dashed expectations, it shoots exactly how I thought it would and I really enjoy it. It's well built and versatile.