Ruger is expanding the LCR family

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think in .22 LR or .22 magnum would make a great kit gun. I like the .38 version here but I'd rather have it in .357 if going larger bore. Still, I like it and think it has a place.
 
I think it's great that Ruger appears to be both interested in customer feedback and willing to sometimes implement it.


I know when the LCR first came out, a number of people suggested a 3" barrel, full hammer kit gun as an idea. I remember seeing suggestions in the past for a GP100 in .22LR, too. So seems like they are listening.
 
If it had a fixed rear sight, or at least something that looks a bit more durable... maybe. Still, the aesthetics are horrid. I don't think this will be anybody's entry into the world of revolvers.
 
bobson,

don't worry. if ruger isn't smart enough to offer the three inch barrel with fixed sights, davidsons, or talo will!

murf
 
I like it. I just picked up an LCRx and was pleasantly surprised at what a sweet shooter it is. I could see carrying the little LCRx and using the 3 inch for home defense. As I settle in to a groove, after being back into hanguns for several years, I find myself owning many similar guns.
 
I sent Ruger a suggestion awhile back that they make the LCR in a longer barrel (I suggested 4") and chambered in .22WMR. Figured it would make a great home defense gun for people with hand strength and recoil sensitivity issues.
 
guyfromohio said:
I like the size and looks. That sight won't last though. Get to know your local shipper.
Click to expand...
Looks like the standard Ruger rear sight to me...I have put some of those through hell and back and they have never let me down.
 
I'm not worried at all about the rear sight. It will probably hold up just fine, and since I would buy it for CCW if the rear sight just plain fell off it wouldn't hinder the usefulness of the weapon in a gunfight. And while I can certainly appreciate a beautiful gun, for CCW beauty is a pretty low priority to me.
 
I think it is a travesty to they eyes and it makes me want to drip acid into them every time I look at it.............but I would buy one in 22lr.
 
urbaneruralite said:
I don't see the want for a hammer on these for anything other than a .22. Lose the hammer and make it a .327 so we'll have a reason to look past the ugly.
Click to expand...

Some guns I buy to look at and admire, some I buy because the feel so damn good to handle. The LCR is in the second category.

When the .327 was introduced by Ruger, the SP101's had 3" barrels. S&W followed suit with 3" barrels. Taurus and Charter Arms of course produced with 2" barrels.

The classic pocket pistol from 1880 until the 1930's was a 3" 5 or 6 shot revolver the majority in a .32 caliber, be it rimfire, .32S&W, .32S&W long, .32 Colt or .32 Long Colt.

.32's need an additional inch to get them moving to their potential, and .327 is no different. The inch of barrel is probably worth 100ft/lbs of energy. And to live up to the .32's small package with good performance potential - the LCR should be able to hold a 6 round cylinder.

So 3" and 6 shots? I will be owning my second LCR.
 
My daughter loves her S&W Model 63 (I do too), the only thing is that it is a heavy gun. If they chambered this in .22LR, I'd buy it immediately.

It would make for longer, less tiring, and more enjoyable shooting trips for my daughter.
 
Jeff Quinn has a short review of it: http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-LCRx.htm.
The rear sight looks a ton better on those pictures; seems enought sturdy for serious carry.
The more I see this revolver, the more I think it will sell like hot cakes when chambered for the .22L.R. cartridge.
 
It's ugly as hell but still awfully interesting and it does look better than its fixed sight counterpart. It would make a great trail or carry gun. Especially for those who use a holster for their snubs, rather than pocket carrying.

Apparently the naysayers haven't noticed t hat S&W has been selling the piss out of adjustable sight 3" J-frames for years. :rolleyes:


That sight won't last though.
Click to expand...
And you ascertain that from a marketing photo???


I think they just like complaining.
Click to expand...
Methinks that is true of most. Ruger is one of the most prolific and innovative gunmakers in the US and still, every time they introduce something new, complainers line up to have their voices heard.
 
Last edited:
I like it! I think the 3in. barrel makes it a more useful gun. The light weight would also make it unnoticeable too carry. A great overall package. A gun like this for me is more of a tool, so looks mean little.
 
I'll get one when they make it a .327mag.
I've got .357's, .38's, .22's, .44, and .45.
But, not .32 and have moulds (78grRN, 98grRN, 115grFNGC, 122grRNGC) , dies (.32acp), and a few pieces of brass.
I've "almost" bought a Single "7", but can't pull the trigger at the price....
"market" price on a .327 3" adj. sight LCR might "induce" me to spend...
 
Yea, I'm in the market for a 3+ inch 327 mag. I've enough 22's and 38's. And 9mm's for that matter.

BRING BACK THE 327 MAG!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

weblance
  • Locked
IT IS OFFICIAL Ruger LCR in 22 MAGNUM!
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
JERRY
JERRY
Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
Ruger LCR in 327 Fed Mag just announced
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
133
Views
8K
C0untZer0
C0untZer0
T
  • Locked
Anyone seen the LCR 357 yet?
Replies
1
Views
451
TwoNiner
T
M
  • Locked
Ruger vs. Charter Arms
Replies
22
Views
7K
gmh1013
G
VoodooMountain
  • Locked
Ruger just released LCR-X in 22
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
camper
C
Back
Top