Checked out the Ruger LC9 today.

[WatchManUSA]

I've only found one dealer in Central Florida that has one for under a grand. I want one but no where near that bad.

I guess things are more competitive up here.

[Pecos Bill]

I haven't seen one yet but is it as close to the Kel-Tec PF-9 as it looks on paper? From the specs it seems Ruger has copied from Kel-Tec again just like they did with the LCP. Is that wht I see?

Pecos

[bafsu92]

I haven't seen one yet but is it as close to the Kel-Tec PF-9 as it looks on paper? From the specs it seems Ruger has copied from Kel-Tec again just like they did with the LCP. Is that wht I see?

Pecos

They look similar to the Kel-Tec just like the LCP. The only difference is my LCP actually functions 100% reliably and feeds any ammo. In the 4 Kel-Tecs I've owned in the past not one can make that claim. I pick up my LC9 tomorrow so I will be doing a range report and some comparison and overlay pictures soon.

[Badgersmilk]

A comparison


7 rounds of 9mm:


OR

10+1 rounds of .45ACP!  Glock 30:

Yeah, it's fatter.  But, come on!!!

[Ping]

Looking forward to the range report basfu92.

[Sponsor]

[bafsu92]

Looking forward to the range report basfu92.

I picked up my LC9's yesterday, I actually bought 2 because the price was right. I haven't had a chance to go to the range yet or even get any pictures but can say on initial impression it feels really good in the hand. It actually fells much slimmer and smaller than my Walther PSP. I don't like the finger hook base plate, my hand is so large I can't fit 3 fingers on the grip with it, my pinkie sort of rides uncomfortably right on the hook. I have no issue with a solid 2 finger grip on the flat base plate and it makes it even more compact. I actually find it to be the perfect size for pocket carry, my LCP gets lost in a lot of my pockets. I don't have a pocket holster for it yet but will be getting one asap.

My biggest complaint with it, almost a deal breaker, is besides the manual frame safety and internal lock (Taurus style) they also added a magazine disconnect safety. If I knew this upfront I doubt I would've even bought them since I personally hate this more than any other safety feature on a pistol. It totally contradicts all my training and makes a pistol totally useless if your magazine is lost or damaged in a stress situation. Why the LCP didn't need it but the LC9 does is beyond me. I'd much rather have a single shot pistol than a plastic club. The ergonomics are excellent and the sights are very good although if it makes it into my carry rotation it will get a set of XS big dots. All in all first impressions without shooting I'll give it a B-. If Ruger would've kept the balls they'd been displaying recently and not tried to see how many safeties they could fit on a otherwise very well designed pistol it would've been an A. I wish they (and S&W, Taurus and everyone else that has to put a thousand different locks and safeties on) would make two versions one for all the Communist northern states and The peoples republic of kalifornia and another for those of us that still live in some resemblance of America and don't want all that crap on our guns.

[Pecos Bill]

I haven't seen one yet but is it as close to the Kel-Tec PF-9 as it looks on paper? From the specs it seems Ruger has copied from Kel-Tec again just like they did with the LCP. Is that wht I see?

Pecos

Examined one yesterday and it looks like Ruger did it again: reinvented a Kel-Tec. This not only looks like the PF-9 on paper but looks and feels like it in the hand. I'm not saying that's bad or good just saying I think Ruger has the ability to design something original and perhaps an improvement. Personally I'll keep my M&P9c.

Pecos

[Ping]

They did Pecos Bill. Ruger has a 1911 now! 

[Pecos Bill]

They did Pecos Bill. Ruger has a 1911 now! 

Ain't that spacial? Ruger brings out another clone of the 1911! Now all that is needed is for Beretta to produce one. I guess all this shows is there is nothing new in the firearms world.

Pecos

P.S. I'm not putting any of these guns down, far from it, I just look for some of our manufacturers to come up with something new occasionally.

[bafsu92]

Having owned both the Kel-Tec PF9 and now 2 Ruger LC9's I can't see how they can even be compared. Outside of the basic size profile I don't even think they look alike. The Ruger is built so much better there's really no comparison. It feel so much more solid in the hand and absorbs recoil so much better. The grip feels much slimmer and without the big molded blocks on the Kel-Tec it conceals much better. My shirts always hung up on the big block pattern on the Kel-Tec grip where the Ruger is much smoother and cleaner but actually feels more secure in my hand. It just seems to absorb recoil so much better than the Kel-Tec.

I took the LC9 I've been carrying every day for a while now to the range yesterday and rather than my normal range ammo I put 6 magazines of 124gr +P gold dots through it to see how that felt. I really didn't notice much of a difference in recoil over the white box I had been shooting (I put 10 rds of the gold dot through a while back mixed randomly in a couple mags just to test function) but did find the hotter stuff was even more accurate. The LC9 is as good as anything I own out to about 15 yards. I haven't shot it much at all past that mark since I don't expect to need that type of shooting in real life. I'm so pleased with the LC9 I wouldn't think twice if I had paid another $100 or more for it. I look at the comparison to the Kel-Tec in the same way someone compares a Rock Island 1911 to a Gold Cup or a nice Kimber, sure they basically look the same, minor details difference in their appearance. If you try to tell me they're the same gun though I'm going to get a really good laugh at your expense.