Ruger LC9

[gyrfalcon]

Maybe three times the price

well poop on my parade then...
figured.
Oh well, a guy can still look at pictures and drool.

Rohrbaugh looks cool, but then you also need to replace the springs in it every 100 rounds... When you combine complexity, lots of service, and expense it really becomes much less of a self-defense/concealed carry weapon, and more of a trinket to collect.

[EJSG19]

Maybe three times the price

well poop on my parade then...
figured.
Oh well, a guy can still look at pictures and drool.

Rohrbaugh looks cool, but then you also need to replace the springs in it every 100 rounds... When you combine complexity, lots of service, and expense it really becomes much less of a self-defense/concealed carry weapon, and more of a trinket to collect.

Ah, yeah didn't realize the spring issue yet.

I'd have to respring it 3 or 4 times before I'd be comfortable carrying it then...

Realistically I don't see the quality/size being so much better that it has to cost upwards of $1k anyway. But if somebody wants a Rolls Royce, then by all means...

My practical side holds me to that of the Keltecs, Rugers and my Rolls Royce is considered to be the Kahr level.

[1911fan]

My R9 was under a grand,NIB from Al in WBL. Recoil springs from Wolff were cheap and I easily went well past a two hundred rounds of WWB with no signs of spring death.

That said it's not a range toy. It's a shoot a hundred then carry it, maybe shoot another two or three mags per range visit. It's good for what it is, the deepest cover 9 you can find.

[dleong]

Interesting. I might pick one up after the first recall.

[Quasar]

Specs and price do look pretty good. Looks to be striker fired like the Kel Tec Pf-9. Ruger should sell holsters for it as that is always an issue with new models.

+2 for the anticipated recall.

[Joe Camo]

LC9 looks nice & about time, hope it has a better trigger than the Kel-Tec and Kahr (at least on the few I've shot). For the price, I'd probably still lean towards an SR9c if I wanted a compact 9mm to carry.

JC

[mnglocker]

Specs and price do look pretty good. Looks to be striker fired like the Kel Tec Pf-9. Ruger should sell holsters for it as that is always an issue with new models.

+2 for the anticipated recall.

The PF-9 has a hammer, just like the Ruger.

[White Horseradish]

Looks like Ruger is courting the Cali market.

SAFETY FEATURES include internal lock, manual safety and loaded chamber indicator which provides visual and
tactile indication that chamber is loaded.

Manual safety on a DAO gun is questionable to me, but it's just the kind of thing California would require. AFAIK, KelTecs aren't Cali approved.

[Rem700]

http://www.realguns.com/archives/192.htm

[EJSG19]

http://www.realguns.com/archives/192.htm

I'll only buy that when they make a lever action rifle in the same caliber!

[NDB_MN]

I like the looks of the LC9, but it's a lil big for pocket carry (length-wise 6" is too long for most of my pockets)

I'm curious that they decided to compete with the PF-9 and not kahr's PM9 or SIG's P290.


THIS is what I'm interested in though:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/solo

[DocLRRP]

Sorry I'll take the New Sig P290 SUB-COMPACT 9MM.
The big plus is night sights you can see.

Ruger LC9 / Walther PPS 9mm, .40 / Kel-Tec PF-9 / Sig P290
Length 6.0" / 6.34" / 5.85" / 5.5 "
Height 4.5" / 4.41" / 4.3" / 3.9"
Width .90" / .91" / .88" / 0.9 (1.1 in with slide catch lever)
Barrel length 3.12" / 3.19" / 3.1" / 2.9"
Weight empty 17.8 oz / 19.4, 20.8 oz / 12.7 / 20.5 oz w/Mag
Magazine capacity 7 / 6-7-8, 5-6-7 / 7 / 6 - 8
Sugg. retail $443 / $665 / $333 / ?









Dorian

There seem to be some reported problems with the new Sig P290. A few of which are a 9lb trigger pull and no double strike capability.

[EJSG19]

The p290 looks like one to consider for sure. Don't like any kind of exposed hammer on something I might, repeat might, want to consider the option of firing from inside a coat pocket. Piece of cloth between hammer and gun and its a show stopper...

Can't figure out why somebody who designs firearms as a living, makes a deep concealment gun with an exposed hammer.

They must have different priorities than me.

ETA: After consideration of my rant... it appears the "hammer" on pistols like the sig p290 don't come all the way back like a 1911's hammer for example. It only tilts back about 20 degrees or so judging by the pictures I can find on Sig's website. So maybe there isn't as much of a gap between hammer and gun to cause a problem.

Otherwise, I stand by my rant.

[Bessy]

So Ruger copies a Kel-Tec PF-9?

Watch, in a year they'll have a twin tube 12ga bull pup.

Which will still be faster than kel-tec brings it to market if it's anything like their RFB.

[DocLRRP]

The p290 looks like one to consider for sure. Don't like any kind of exposed hammer on something I might, repeat might, want to consider the option of firing from inside a coat pocket. Piece of cloth between hammer and gun and its a show stopper...

Can't figure out why somebody who designs firearms as a living, makes a deep concealment gun with an exposed hammer.

They must have different priorities than me.

ETA: After consideration of my rant... it appears the "hammer" on pistols like the sig p290 don't come all the way back like a 1911's hammer for example. It only tilts back about 20 degrees or so judging by the pictures I can find on Sig's website. So maybe there isn't as much of a gap between hammer and gun to cause a problem.

Otherwise, I stand by my rant.

That 20 degree space you see is the trigger safety 'set' point. When you squeeze the trigger, the hammer comes back to full (about 30 more degrees and then the hammer spring slams the hammer forward to strike the firing pin/ spring assembly. Then, the hammer "relaxes" to that 20 dgree offset you see in the picture.So, your original premise is still valid for your circumstances.
maybe a live fire test will prove you right or wrong.