LCP-II: Inferior?

[Panzerschwein]

Guys so I am in the market for a small compact CCW pistol for hot Vegas weather. The Ruger LCP-II perks my ears up. Seems it has some benefits over the older LCP.

But is it inferior? I am hearing reports that the gun isn't safe to carry with a round chambered, and that Ruger recommends one not carry with one chambered.

Also, it is larger and heavier than the old LCP, and does not have the same track record as its a new firearm to market.

So is the new LCP-II really an improvement, or is it inferior to the classic and timeless original LCP? I'm seeing both for sale with the original model going for quite a bit less. Is the II a better gun and worth the extra coin?

This will be my primary carry. Sorry, I'm not a big guy and it's so damn hot in Vegas I can't wear and won't wear a cover garnment. I'd love to pack one of my Berettas with 18+1 9mm +Ps, but I have found a small gun like this is something I will realistically and consistently have with me at all times.

Thanks gang!

 

[fxstchewy]

Mine has been just fine with one in chamber I guess for a year now, carry it in pocket with holster that came with it, trigger ain't any lighter than a Glock and it won't go off by itself, keep it covered and it will be fine.

 

[Plan2Live]

I am hearing reports that the gun isn't safe to carry with a round chambered, and that Ruger recommends one not carry with one chambered.

It's your body, you can carry a striker fired pistol with a fairly light trigger pull in your pocket if you want but I won't. I prefer DA/SA hammer fired on my semi-auto carry guns. I've recently decided to try a Micro 9mm with a SA trigger but at least that one has a manual safety. It's your call. Oh and by the way, Palmetto State Armory still has the hammer fired LCP for $169.

 

[fxstchewy]

Lcp 2 is still hammer fired.

 

[<*(((><]

I bought the original LCP as I don’t want a 6lb trigger with a chambered round in my pocket even with the trigger covered.

I’m not going to speak for everyone else on this as it should be a personal decision on what each is comfortable with. And I’m glad that we have both options as that is what’s most important, I would hate for people to lose options.

But for me I’m happy with my LCP.

 

[zaitcev]

I am hearing reports that the gun isn't safe to carry with a round chambered, and that Ruger recommends one not carry with one chambered.

LCP II is perfectly safe to carry with a round chambered. It's drop-tested and everything. However, I'm not going to defend Ruger's idiocy on this. They created this PR fiasco themselves, by putting the weaselese into the manual.

As was mentioned at Glock Talk, Glock used to have the same or stronger language in their manuals, discouraging the carry with a round chambered until 2004. Well, that's not excusing Ruger putting it there in 2017.

The dumbest part on the part of Ruger... well, everything about it so dumb that I'm not sure if it is, but... they tried to address the problem by posting this (it's still on their website in the FAQ section):

The LCP® II hammer and sear geometry were designed with significant engagement for a positive lockup. The sear is neutrally balanced and under strong spring tension, which helps prevent disengagement during a drop scenario. In the unlikely event that a significant shock to the pistol results in disengagement of the hammer from the sear, the design includes a hammer catch to help prevent the hammer from contacting the firing pin unless the trigger is pulled. Our testing has revealed that this design passes all standard tests and is very safe from discharge due to a drop.

Fine, but the manuals still ship with the old warnings, and the FAQ does not say "it is safe to carry with the round in the chamber." They do it because they know that a gun is a mechanical device and absolutely amazing things can happen with it. Just look at the thread at "SCCY fires by itself". That gun can't fire by itself, it has the same mechanism as a DA-only revolver. And yet! So, Ruger want to defuse the problem they created, but they are absolutely unwilling to go on record and rescind the manual. And Glock did! That's why smart people buy Glock 42 for a pocket .380 Why support people who want to sit on two stools with one butt?

P.S.:

Is the II a better gun and worth the extra coin?

Of course it is a better gun than their original clone of Kel-Tec P-3AT. The last-round hold open alone is worth it. But really, G42 is just better all around. I'd get it even without the manual story.

 

[ritepath]

The LCP and II are both great carry guns. The II is a little larger but still a great pistol for pocket carry, though not as nice as the smaller more easily pocket carried first gen LCPs.

The II is almost too large for pocket carry, but just squeeks in by a nose.

 

[Mizar]

LCP fires with a partially cocked hammer - much like the original KelTek, or the SIG DAK firing mechanism (sort of). By all practical means you might say it's a DAO mechanism (again, sort of). LCP II on the other hand is a single action gun. That's how Ruger achieved the short & light trigger pull. Both pistols DO NOT have a firing pin safety. When you load an LCP II you carry it essentially in "condition 0".
I know that you asked about Ruger, but (I never thought I would say that) a Glock 42, in my opinion, is a much, much better gun then those two. It's more expensive, I know, but at least it has a firing pin safety.
P.S. And the barrel is cold forged and not an investment casting...

 

[Panzerschwein]

Thanks, gang.

I won't be pocket carrying this but IWB at the 3:00-3:30 position.

As far as the G42... sorry, that gun is huge for a .380. Not what I'm looking for.

 

[SteadyD]

I've been very impressed with the trigger on the LCP II. It's a surprisingly accurate gun thanks to the trigger. It's considerably better than the original model.

 

[zaitcev]

As far as the G42... sorry, that gun is huge for a .380. Not what I'm looking for.

It's true G42 is large for a pocket gun. In fact, I bumped against its limitations. Although I never had any issues drawing it from a pants pocket, I switched to a pack that had a pocket just a shade too small. I really didn't want to carry LCP II though. No night sights, and no way to add them. Eventually, I found a smaller holster that resolved the problem (went to Nemesis N38).

One other thing to look at is Kahr CW380. The biggest downside of that one is that quality is hit and miss. If you get one that works, it's going to be great. The size is comparable with LCP II, and maybe even thinner. But people get guns with reliability issues often.

 

[Jimster]

I love my LCP2 because it is light, accurate and reliable. It’s also pleasant to shoot. I also pocket carry a Kimber Micro .380 but it’s a bit heavier.
I usually carry a 1911 and prefer a thumb safety but I feel comfortable carrying the LCP2. I use Sticky Holsters. Great for pocket carry or IWB.

 

[Speedo66]

Cooldill said: "the classic and timeless original LCP"

Classic? Timeless? Really? The original LCP, according to Wiki, was shown at the 2008 Shotshow. 9 years is timeless?

The gun they copied, the Kel-tec P-3AT only came out in 2003, still not exactly a "timeless" design. People with SAA's, cap & ball, or flint lock firearms might argue what makes a design timeless. lol

If you're worried about the trigger, you might consider one of the 20 variants of the Sig 238 with a manual safety.

 

[Fiv3r]

I carry an LCP II most every day with a loaded chamber.

It's no lighter a trigger than your typical striker fire even if it is sporting a hammer. People stuff those down their waist bands all the time, and many will poo-poo carrying a gun sporting a heavier trigger or a manual safety. The LCP II behaves no differently. If you do not pull the trigger, it's not going to fire.

I carry mine either in my back pocket or appendix in a sticky holster. Accurate, lightweight, reliable. I love mine. The hold open and non-12lb trigger make it worth the upgrade in my opinion.

 

[Tirod]

I carry a Kahr CW380 loaded. It's highly similar in size and weight, which is a more common specification for a pocket .380. The original LCP and P3AT were the outliers being smaller than most.

Glock originally specified that a hard trigger cover was mandatory carrying one. I believe that still goes for any of the copies. That is the point - guns don't go off by themselves, it takes some way of manipulating the trigger and more people are shot by self inflicted handling errors than dropping it. So the lawyers all line up and state Only Carry Unloaded which then gets them off the legal hook.

The LCP II isn't a bad gun regardless of the warning - it's still up to the operator to conduct themselves in a safe manner. A growing number of owner's manuals are stating the same thing - Carry Unloaded - which is an ongoing legal trend completely disconnected from the reality of how they must be used.

Carry as you see fit.

 

[SteadyD]

I will be carrying mine loaded. If the trigger is well protected I don't see a problem, assuming Ruger is correct about the sear engagement and second notch on the hammer being sufficient to prevent a discharge if dropped. I don't see any reason to doubt them, given that they are fully aware of how litigious folks can be.

 

[Tirod]

Ruger incorporated the industry standard safety testing for drop safety. A handgun ready to fire is more safe than a hand grenade ready to detonate. I would drop guns all day rather than drop a grenade.

Add perspective like that and the issue becomes nearly unimportant. Further add that the gun handler has to be so inattentive that they lost control of the weapon and it's really a situation where Darwin is proved operationally valid. Don't earn that award. Guns should be treated with your full attention just like automobiles. Not cell phones.

 

[Fiv3r]

I think part of Ruger's overzealous "warning" is the lowest common denominator factor. Some dumb-dumb has had or reads posts on the internet or talks to a friend who has carried an original LCP "just tossed in my pocket" or "at the bottom of my wife's purse" without a holster and attempts to do the same with the LCP II. Thats an accident waiting to happen.

The fact of the matter is that if you want a super heavy trigger, then the LCP is a great carry gun. I carried one for years, and it was a great little companion.

However, I think a lot of people knee-jerk the LCP II as a striker-fired Glock clone with a hair trigger. Obviously this is erroneous. The LCP II has a light, sweet shooting trigger...for a pocket pistol. I think most people who picked up a duty gun with a similar pull would find it a tad heavy. However, it no longer feels like you have to devote the sum total of your hand strength to get the gun to fire.

A nice 6-6.5lb pull isn't something that you'll easily pop off without mishandling the gun. I keep mine in a nice soft pocket holster. However, if I wanted a bit more added security, I would probably make one out of Kydex to keep a harder cover over the trigger.

I think if the majority of gun carriers would handle the LCP II, I think they would see this is a non-issue. However, if you like heavy hammers on your gun (which is a very viable line of thinking), it's probably not the carry piece for you.

 

[Varminterror]

I am hearing reports that the gun isn't safe to carry with a round chambered, and that Ruger recommends one not carry with one chambered.

The Ruger owner's manual for the LCP - not just the LCP II - recommends carrying the OLD LCP with an empty chamber too. But nobody ever got their panties in a twist about that... The old P-series owner's manual said the same, so does the SR1911 manual... It's a boiler plate, CYA, "we told you how to be as safe as safe could be," safety bulletin in all of their semiauto pistol manuals.

Despite the SAO design, owning both, I can't say I believe the LCP was any safer to carry than the LCP II. If you hold both in your hand, the LCP II has a long and heavy "DAO-esque" trigger. In front of the break, the trigger travel of the two are about the same. The LCP Gen II triggers have a longer over-travel, and a heavier pre-travel, but they really travel about the same from rest to the break.

you can carry a striker fired pistol with a fairly light trigger pull in your pocket if you want but I won't.

The LCP II is not striker fired. It's a SAO hammer fired pistol, with a two stage trigger (effectively), an EXTREME positive sear angle and excessive sear engagement, plus a trigger block safety blade. The trigger block safety threw a lot of folks onto the notion it's striker fired, it's not. But it IS, alternatively, the worst single action trigger ever produced, and feels more like a really good DAO trigger.

Personally, I never felt the LCP deserved the popularity it received, but at the time, there really wasn't much competition on the market. At that time, you really had the 25 and 32cal pistols, and the pocket 22 rimfires, then the Kel-Tec P-3AT. Alternatively, when the Gen 2 LCP came along, the improved sights and improved trigger made the LCP deserving of its popularity. The Custom was an abomination - an aftermarket trigger which was NEEDED in the Gen 1, but only incrementally better than the Gen 2 trigger, coupled with big, obnoxious, "snag-factory" sights, but sure, it was nicer to shoot at the range... The unfortunate grip design of the LCP carried both of these generations, I've always joked it was collusion between Hogue and Ruger to sell Hogue Handall's to fix every LCP on the market - and the Hogue DID make the LCP much more manageable. Because that's what it was designed to do, right? Enter the LCP II, and we're talking about a completely reworked design. Better grip, better trigger still, LSHO, and basically the same sights... It's an overall better pistol.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

The safety factor of the LCP ll has nothing to do with the manual. I have owned 4 LCP's, and no way will I carry a loaded LCP ll. Crazy unsafe trigger in my opinion for a Pocket gun. If you want a LCP get the LCP gen 2. Actually a better trigger and much safer. The safety of the LCP ll has been a heated subject for a long time now. Many old timers that have carried the LCP are like myself and just will not carry or buy one. Do so at your own risk. Even one well known holster manufacturer sent a letter to Ruger and said he would NOT make a holster for the new Model, just too dangerous.
Personally I would bet that Ruger makes a change in the trigger later down the Road. They had a great trigger in the Gen 2, just do not understand why they made the change. I believe there is a reason why Ruger did not just discontinue the Gen 2. It is still sold and still manufactured. (Do not confuse Gen 2 with the New model LCP ll). And I found that the Gen 2 shoots much better than the new model. Plus you can get a Gen 2 now for around $169.00.
All this said, I have moved on to other pocket guns and no longer shoot the LCP's. Do some homework, there are better guns out there.

 

[Tirod]

First I've heard of the LCP II trigger being a heated subject for some time. Considering the gun itself hasn't been on the market that long. Blade safeties in and of themselves, maybe yes, but the same caveat follows that Glock wrote - put it in a holster. I'm pretty sure that has always been the concept - a pocket gun always needs a pocket holster.

I don't understand why a holster maker would then NOT make a holster for it, being as the gun would be even more dangerous without. However, like many others, I no longer own an LCP and don't plan to buy a LCP II. I did move to what I consider a better gun with a good trigger. One hopes the OP will read thru these posts and determine if there aren't other models similar in size which offers more. It's not just about price, as I discovered, when it's held to a reasonable comparison then most of these guns should run in the $250 - $300 range with extra mags, etc. You do get what you pay for - first gen LCP's weren't badly priced for the horrible trigger, sharp recoil, and almost non existent sights. But it did exactly what many thought they needed to do, "drop it in a pocket." The LCP II and the rest of the class of .380 offer more.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

The greatest attribute to the LCP was the massive amount of marketing. Ruger must have spent a billion dollars on ads. Here you have a gun that has lousy sights, No ability to add night sights if you desire, a aluminum frame, lousy recoil, no double strike capability, and for gosh sake Ruger, get on the band wagon and get with a modular grip frame. Make the gun all stainless steel, beef up the receiver. Make it a gun you can actually hand down to another generation, a gun that can go the course with thousands of rounds down range. Make the LCP a tank, like other Ruger Products, not a throw away gun.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Thanks all.

I will not be using it as a pocket gun, but for IWB, if that makes a difference.

I do not like pocket carry, do not like giving up one of my pockets and just prefer IWB.

 

[340PD]

I carry my LCPII fully loaded in a variety of leather, IWB, pocket, and wallet holsters. When I get wind of documented ND's on this gun I may or may not reconsider.

 

[zaitcev]

I don't understand why a holster maker would then NOT make a holster for it, being as the gun would be even more dangerous without.

Because he's an idiot.