I didn't vote because I swing both ways on this one.
And one or the other at the night stand......
Is this the one you are talking about?
Ruger’s Radical New Lightweight Compact Revolver .38 Special LCR
by Jeff Quinn
photography by Jeff Quinn & Boge Quinn
January 14h, 2009
A few months ago, rumors were circulating that Ruger was working on something very different for them. Last year, at the 2008 SHOT Show in Las Vegas, they entered the pocket pistol market in a big way, and the .380 LCP auto was an overwhelming success. Ruger has sold many thousands of the little pistols, and the demand is still high. This year at SHOT in Orlando, which opens tomorrow (January 15, 2009), Ruger will again be the talk of the industry with their new LCR .38 Special Plus P five-shot pocket revolver. The lightweight five-shot revolver market is very popular, and Ruger is set to take a huge chunk of that market for themselves. Ruger has produced quality revolvers for decades, and their SP101 compact revolvers are very popular, but most find them too heavy for pocket carry. More citizens everyday are choosing to go heeled in our society, and lightweight revolvers are very popular among those who carry concealed. With the LCR, Ruger is aiming straight at the Smith & Wesson J-frame buyer, not with a copy of that design at all, but with a revolver that is a radical departure from conventional revolver design. The frame of the LCR is made up of two components. The cylinder frame is made of aluminum, which is a pretty conventional material for a lightweight pocket gun. However, the grip frame is made of a high-tech polymer, and extends below and to the rear of the cylinder frame, cradling that unit, and contains all of the fire control parts, such as the hammer, sear, and trigger, along with the necessary springs and pins to contain and provide fulcrums for those moving parts. The cylinder and internal parts are made of stainless steel. The polymer grip frame is not a stressed part. It comes out of the mold ready to assemble, and requires no hand fitting to the cylinder frame nor to the internal parts.
Back in early December, I was invited to the Ruger factory in New Hampshire to have a look at the LCR. While there, I saw some other very interesting future Ruger projects, but for now, we are looking at the LCR. I gave my word and have been sworn to secrecy until today, the day before SHOT, to keep quiet about the LCR. Today is the day that Ruger is introducing the LCR to the outdoor media, and this is the day that I have permission to tell you about this little revolver. I got to shoot the LCR at the factory, and I was expecting to have a gun in for a full review by now, but it has yet to arrive, so I have to go with what I have. Ruger has put a lot of time and money into the design of the LCR, particularly the geometry of the internal parts. Judging from my shooting experience at the factory, they got it right. The trigger pull on the LCR is very smooth, and very light for a pocket revolver. Many pocket revolvers have dreadful trigger pulls, and I get a lot of email from readers who buy a gun for defense, and have a very hard time pulling the trigger. If the production LCRs are like the one that I shot, the trigger pull problem is solved. That gun had what could be called a perfect trigger pull for a pocket revolver; a smooth and light double action. I do not know the pull weight of the LCR, but will measure such things when a production gun arrives.
Accuracy was also very good. The sights are easy to see in good light, but in the Ruger indoor range, I had trouble seeing them against the target that we had. Many of you don’t know it, but I do not see nearly as well as I once did, and in certain conditions, I just cannot see black sights anymore. Thankfully, Ruger is also offering the LCR with a Crimson Trace Lasergrip, and CT was in on this early. The grip of the LCR was designed to take a Lasergrip from the start. Attaching a Lasergrip to the LCR, I was able to punch tight groups on the target, greatly improving my accuracy with the little gun. There were five of us there shooting the LCR, and the Lasergrip improved the practical accuracy of the gun for all of us, even the youngest shooter who still has good eyesight, Eric Poole of Harris Tactical Group. Recoil from the thirteen ounce revolver was easy to handle, maybe due in part to the polymer frame, or maybe just the design of the angles and such. I don’t know, and won’t know until I can get a test gun in here for a full evaluation.
Anyway, for now, this is enough information to pique your interest, if you are interested in pocket guns and revolver design at all. This is certainly something different, and should be the talk of SHOT this year. I am always interested in new firearms design, and so far, I really like this little gem. Whether or not it will replace the J-frame in my pocket remains to be seen, but I am anxious for some more trigger time behind this little LCR.
For more information on the LCR, go to www.ruger.com.
For the location of a Ruger dealer near you, click on the DEALER FINDER at www.lipseys.com.
Look for a full review of the new LCR soon right here on Gunblast.com.
Reading the descriptions of both guns it looks like there is very little polymer in them except in the grip. Plus the trigger guard for the REX
I didn't vote because I swing both ways on this one.
And one or the other at the night stand......
I have both and like both but since your asking for a vote put me down for plastic.
My 45 year old Browning service carry is steel. My 28 year old P225 is Al. My 20 year old P228 is also Al. However, my other 5 handguns, purchased within the last two years are all plastic, and I have no problem with that. They are all lighter than if made of metal, and that's the way I like it.
I perfer metal guns, but I do have a Beretta PX4.
Plastic for me.
Boy, that is a tough one. Certainly those that own both (and have shot them regularly) are more qualified to answer from a real world experience perspective.
I love my plastic Sig P226 9mm and all that it brings to the table.
But...I also love my Sig P220 Combat .45acp with the alloy frame. Sure it's a bit heavier but it feels real good in the hand.
I've been debating this in my mind which do I prefer and it's really impossible because it depends on the context of the question (recoil? rapid fire? CC?).
I can only recommend to everyone to own both and continue this personal debate and always feel free to purchase even more to help you make up your mind!
Metal....... with Plastic being a close second.
I like both polymer framed pistols and metal framed pistols.
For example, I love my Sig SP2022 but I would take a Sig 226 over it. The polymer framed pistols feel good in hand but for some reason its not the same as a good ole metal framed pistol.
For a conceal carry you won't ever see me using a metal framed gun, only a polymer framed pistol like a Kahr PM9 or a Keltec PF-9.
Each has their benefits and draw backs. I believe both will stay on the market as they each have their place.
I own 20+ guns. 1 of which is a plastic G 17. I don't want anymore plastic.
I like to say I outgrew and matured out of the polymer stage of my life a long time ago.
It's finely crafted steel and wood from now on.
Metal, steel preferably, and wood grips.
I have never understood the appeal of plastic guns.
This is most likely a generational issue. What I mean to say is that the more experienced hand gunners, old school, will more likely be attracted to all metal guns because they have history with them and trust them. Recent generations are more susceptible to marketing strategies, the newest & coolest technology ( if it doesn't have the word "technology" in it it ain't cool), what's popular with their peers. Right now they seem to be hypnotized by Rugers sub compact models, LCR & LCP, and it doesn't make sense because .380 ammo is the single most expensive hand gun ammo around IF you can find it. But I understand what attracts them to these guns, heck, you can put it in a wallet holster and shove it in your back pocket. I think these guns will fade in popularity as time goes on the owners decide they want a real gun.
I'm not bashing anyone here it's just the way I see it.
Revolvers?--- Metal. The LCR may be nice, but my SAAs (imitation unfortunately) and S&W and Taurus revolvers i love.
Semi-autos...like many here i would have said hands down metal.. until i bough and shot a few polymers. Now i have 2 M&P9s (one C one FS) my P-11, p3-AT. I also have 2 Feg,s (metal),2 Maks, (metal and simple) and a CZ (metal)... but it comes down to this for me.. I am selling my Officer's 1911, to get a M&P compact .45
So for semi-s... Polymer. age? well... that i won't reveal, but i have had that 1911 for over 21 years!
I' really don't care much for plastic, but that's my humble opinion. To me there is nothing like a finely crafted metal piece crafted from steel and wood.
I can't vote. I have both and like them for different reasons. On Monday I shot both side by side, a Beretta 92 and a P2000. I was drilling with Mrs. Highlander doing double and triple taps w/out sights at 10yds. I found that the 92 held a tighter group with a bit less effort once I got it to shoot consistantly (see Beretta thread), but the reality is the difference was not enough to really talk about. We threw 200 rnds between the 2 of us and had a total of 4 misses. Just for fun I ran the target out to 20yds and used the sights on the 92 for 6rnds and kept it all within 4". The 92 was a rental, P2000 new (just under 200rnds).
Someone mentioned temperature. I have a Beretta 950 Jetfire in .25acp. At the range it needs cool-down time by the start of the 3rd mag, or about 20rnds. I attribute this to the aluminum frame expanding due to the heat of successive rounds. I started out running all 9 and the only cool down was reloading the mag and barrel, pick it up and go again. Can't do it. Not designed for it either. No matter, I love that lil thing. I call it my "mob gun". I've been shooting a WWII 1911 also, a 1943-45 Remington Rand. If asked, I have to use an analogy. Metal? The 1911 is like my 41 Packard. I love it. The Beretta is like my older Bronco. I love it. Plastic? The P2000 is like my Hummer. I love it. Dammit all, I love too much stuff!!
Times change. In my youth, I was all about the Muscle Cars of the 60's. They were sexy, fast and had character. Would I love to be able to sill own one? Absolutely! However, those cars weighed 4000-5000 pounds, got maybe 6-10MPG and would last 100K miles if you were lucky. The cars of today are much better built, lighter, more fuel efficient and will last twice as long.
Guns are not that much different. We can all appreciate the beauty and craftsmanship of a well-made, all steel 1911, but in my opinion, an ugly Glock (no offense Glock lovers) is a positive evolution.
Back in the 60's the standard LEO issue was a six-shooter revolver. Today an LEO is armed with a polymer semi auto with from 14-17 rounds of more powerful ammo and a couple of back-up mags.
I own more than a few revolvers and I do intend to add some 1911 style pistols to my collection. Having said that, I will always choose a polymer for EDC.
I think there's something to that, but I wouldn't generalize. The Glock is a fine firearm, but some of the newer plastic guns are simply cheaper, and not necessarily better. Actually, I'd say most.