Ruger LC9

[nailer]

Anyone have experience or opinions with the Ruger LC 9?

[theduke]

http://search.pafoa.org/?q=lc9&cx=00...%3Avrvbtifxywe

[QuackXP]

I have a strong opinion about the LC9.

I have held it and dry fired but that is as far as it went for me after I read the spec sheet and realized there is only one model available.

Quoted are my posts from this thread:

http://forum.pafoa.org/pistols-41/13...pros-cons.html

Taken directly from the LC9 user manual table of contents.

Operation of Manual Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Operation of Internal Lock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Operation of Loaded Chamber Indicator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Operation of Magazine Disconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

The LC9 is so "safe" im betting when the time comes to use it in a defensive situation one of these "safeties" will render the gun so "safe" it will not even fire.

I mean the "safest" gun is the one you can't shoot after all?

I know that was a little tongue-in-cheek. But personaly I would not buy a firearm with those features. Now both of the autos I own have loaded chamber indicators via a peep hole but not a mechanical one like the LC9.

I like the Kahr CW9 over the LC9.

http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-CW9.asp

For a bit more fit and finish and replaceable sights, but at a more premium price is the Kahr P9.

http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-P9.asp

Also comes in all black or all black with night sights

http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-P9-Black.asp.
http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-P9-...ght-Sights.asp

I have read allot of reports from people who own the PF9 love them and if I absolutely only wanted to spend $250 or this would be a secondary weapon I would consider it. However in my opinion Kel-Tec is one of the lower tier manufactures vs. S&W, Glock, Springfield, Ruger, Kahr, Beretta, Sig, H&K, etc.

I get that a Manual Safety, LCI and Magazine Disconnect are a matter of personal taste.

The internal lock though in my opinion is completely useless. They are not uniquely keyed and anyone who would use that feature would have already used a external lock or safe that has a unique key/combination.

The internal lock's only purpose is for feel good legislation and to add extra failure points to a firearm.

I use my peep-hole LCI to double check that my firearms are loaded before carrying them. But rule #1 of firearms safety is that every gun is always loaded so no LCI is going to convince me otherwise, epically a mechanical one that could fail.

My personal prefrence is to train for a long trigger pull vs a two step action of a manual safety, especially on a firearm with an already long trigger pull.

It seems to me that the magazine disconnect came from requirements of LE agencies to render a weapon inoperable in a gun grab scenario. Again this is a matter of personal taste/department policy.

By the time I'm ready to purchase a firearm in this segment if Ruger releases a model without these features ill consider it. But its still tough competition from the Kahr CW9.

[dkf]

I can deal with the manual safety but I don't like all the other "safety" crap Ruger put on it. I'd much rather own a CM9.

[QuackXP]

I can deal with the manual safety but I don't like all the other "safety" crap Ruger put on it. I'd much rather own a CM9.

Some of the safety features are personal preference some are legislated in. Ruger put them all in to make it 50 state legal (or as many as possible) and does not offer a model for states that don't require them. So until they release a models that give you a choice ill be keeping the Kahr at the top of my list.

[dkf]

How did the LCP slip by? I should be getting my new LCP in this week. I would not have minded having an LC9 to go with it but theres no way thats happening in its current form.

[father-of-five]

I think a lot of these safeties make it "California friendly," so the rest of us get stuck with these mandatory options. The LC9 will probably be my next gun to purchase, in trying to stay with my current calibers in use. The magazine safety is a bit of a drag. I like the option of firing without the magazine ala kel tec p3-at and glock. I guess I am OK as long as it doesn't accidentially drop out of the gun. I have a bersa thunder and have never used the internal lock, so I'm not worried about it breaking from non-use. The manual safety is redundant in my opinion with that long double action only trigger pull, so I would not use that either.

If I treat it like my Kel Tec, which is the basic "platform" of the LC9, the safeties pretty much become redundant.

[Justin///M]

Beretta has that new nano coming out. Might be worth a look in the mini nine category.

[rwb1500]

Anyone have experience or opinions with the Ruger LC 9?

Kahr for the win.

Better trigger by miles, no stupid unnecessary safetys, I mean come on, would you want a safety on a J frame? Stupid...

[afultz075]

My buddy got one about a month and a half ago. I shot it a few times and wasn't real impressed. Awful trigger and not a fan of all the unnecessary safties.