S&W Model 3913 vs. Ruger LC9

PALADIN85020 · Jul 10, 2011

Ruger's newly released single-stack compact 9mm, the LC9, designed for concealed carry, has gotten a lot of press lately. Just for giggles, I thought it might be interesting to compare it to a Smith that's been around for a while, it's one that has gotten rave reviews ever since it was introduced. I got the specs on the LC9 and thought I'd compare them with the 3913. Here's the comparison.

Action type:
3913 - DA/SA
LC9 - DAO
Advantage: 3913. It has re-strike capability.

Caliber:
3913 - 9mm
LC9 - 9mm
This is a wash. Both use the same cartridge.

Capacity:
3913 - 8+1
LC9 - 7+1
Advantage: 3913. 12.5% more capacity/firepower.

Trigger pull:
3913 (SA) - 8 lbs.
LC9 (DA) - 7 lbs.
Advantage: LC9 by one pound.

Weight empty:
3913 - 24 oz.
LC9 - 17 oz.
Advantage: LC9 by 7 oz.

Weight fully loaded:
3913 - 28 oz.
LC9 - 21 oz.
Advantage: LC9 by 7 oz.

Barrel length:
3913 - 3.5"
LC9 - 3.125"
Advantage: 3913 (higher velocity with same loads)

Overall length:
3913 - 6.8"
LC9 - 6.0"
Advantage: LC9 by .8"

Height:
3913 - 5.3"
LC9 - 4.5"
Advantage: LC9 by .8"

Grip thickness:
3913 - 1.0"
LC9 - 1.0"
This is a wash.

Depth of grip (short mag extension):
3913: 2.0"
LC9: 2.0"
This is a wash.

Depth of grip (long mag extension):
3913 - 2.5"
LC9 - 3.0"
Advantage: 3913 by 1/2 inch.

Sight radius:
3913 - 5.5"
LC9 - 4.5"
Advantage: 3913 by one inch.

Trigger reach:
3913 - 3.1"
LC9 - 3.5"
Advantage: 3913 for smaller hands.

Integral lock:
3913 - none
LC9 - yes
Advantage: 3913!!!!

Magazine disconnect safety:
3913 - yes
LC9 - yes
This is a wash.

OK, let's tally:

Advantage points for 3913: 7
Advantage points for LC9: 5
"Wash" points: 4

Yes, I know the LC9 has a loaded cartridge indicator. That does not negate doing a press check to be sure there is one up the snout or not. To my mind, a complicating gadget that is just something more to go wrong.

So the good ol' 3913 stacks up pretty good when you look at the whole picture. Am I missing anything here? Open for discussion.

John

Grog · Jul 10, 2011

An LC9 will fit in my pocket while the 39xx won't fit nearly as well.

boatboy · Jul 10, 2011

I thank you for the comparison I am always looking to learn and compare

But it looks like you are a "Smith Guy" who was really hoping for the Smith to be the one. But I agree the old guy stands up well

but lets be honest 7oz is huge and may be worth a couple points at least
Hank

PHB · Jul 10, 2011

Even with the seven oz difference I will stick with smith I have been carrying long enough that 24Oz is light don't get me wrong the LC9 is a good gun I just like steel I carry a M37 or a 3914 and if I think SHTF I will carry a Commander 45 Don't mind me I am just a old fart

Jeb21 · Jul 11, 2011

Another advantage of the 3913 is that it has stood the test of time.

rayban · Jul 11, 2011

I had to make the decision on the same two guns...actually I went with the 908 which is the low-rent district brother to the 3913......mainly because of the old-school all steel thing....I must admit, the LC9 because it's lighter and shorter may make a more attractive piece from a concealability standpoint.

kbm6893 · Jul 11, 2011

I have an LC9 on the way to me as I type this. I'm a big S&W fan. I started with the 6906, then moved to the 3913, then moved to the CS9 in my quest for a light carry piece. I like the safety, mag disconnect, and loaded chamber indicator. Will probably never use the internal lock, so it's a wash. In this day and age, there is no reason to carry a 28 ounce gun when you can get the same firepower in a 21 ounce gun. Even my CS9 gets annoying when carried in the waistband. When the LC9 gets here and gets shot a bit, it's gonna replace my CS9 as carry gun. I may keep the CS9 to wear on the belt during cooler months, but it offers no extra firepower for a 5 ounce weight difference. I may sell the CS9 since I don't need 2 sub compact 9MM's, and i only shoot a few times a year now. For sure, the S&W third gens are nicer, but they launch 9MM bullets just like the LC9. I'll carry the gun more if it's lighter. My CS9 is no good to me in the safe while I'm at Walmart.

boatboy · Jul 11, 2011

May I ask why you went from the 6906 to the 3913?I like the single stack but isnt the gun slightly larger?

Thanks Hank

kbm6893 · Jul 11, 2011

boatboy said:
May I ask why you went from the 6906 to the 3913?I like the single stack but isnt the gun slightly larger?

Thanks Hank

The 6906 is double stack and the 3913 is single stack. Same slide and barrel on a fatter grip.The 3913 is slightly lighter and easier to carry.

Pointblank2U · Jul 11, 2011

The 3913 works, the LC9.. read the Ruger forum. I'll pass.

VTHokiesDuckHunter · Jul 11, 2011

I'd like to get a an LC9- for rainy days, canoe trips, etc.

At $300 not such a bad thing to have around as a "spare" or boat gun.

But for a primary, daily CCW gun I'll stick with my 4014 (note- LC9 does not come in a .40 S&W version......) or 3913.

And the main reason for that- I primarily shoot full sized 3rd gen S&W's with DA/SA action, That's what I like, am most familiar with, and most comfortable with. Therefore- I'd like my daily carry piece to be a smaller, lighter version of that.

I'll have to admit though- I really like Rugers. The company and the guns. I like their revolvers a lot and even their O/U shotguns.

I'd have no trouble, in fact would welcome, a Ruger into the rotation.

In my opinion a really overlooked gun in all of these comparisons to 3913's, CS9's, etc., is the Walther PPS.

My son has one and it's an awesome CCW piece. It comes in 9mm and .40 S&W. Very nice night sights are available.

The only downside, and perhaps why it is not compared as much as the Ruger- it cost half again as much as an LC9 or SR9c.

Still, I'd rank it (Walther PPS) as the best polymer framed CCW gun on the market bar none.

18DAI · Jul 11, 2011

+1. I'm always amused when I pass the magazine racks in the bookstore and see the "latest greatest conceal carry 9mm!!".

The 3913 has yet to be surpased......by any gunmaker....including S&W.

I recall going to the range with another officer to shoot his brand new Springfield EMP 9mm. He paid a fortune for it as I recall. It didn't group as well as my 3913 which was a fraction of the price.

The Kimber offering, M&P, EMP, Walthers ect do not do the job as well as the 3913, IMO of course. Regards 18DAI

Chuck Jones · Jul 11, 2011

I agree lighter is better for carrying, but there's something to be said for an extra 7 ounces when you're shooting.

In my experience the 3rd gen compact 39s have been tops in reliability with the whole spectrum of 9mm ammo, and that's from 90gn soft points, right through 147gn, sub-sonic and +P+ alike.

/c

Road Rat · Jul 11, 2011

No contest for me.........I'll take the 3913 every time!!

kbm6893 · Jul 11, 2011

18DAI said:
+1. I'm always amused when I pass the magazine racks in the bookstore and see the "latest greatest conceal carry 9mm!!".

The 3913 has yet to be surpased......by any gunmaker....including S&W.

I recall going to the range with another officer to shoot his brand new Springfield EMP 9mm. He paid a fortune for it as I recall. It didn't group as well as my 3913 which was a fraction of the price.

The Kimber offering, M&P, EMP, Walthers ect do not do the job as well as the 3913, IMO of course. Regards 18DAI

The Ruger LC9 is a self defense, up close gun. I am sure the 3913 gets tighter groupings, but I'll take the 5-7 ounce weight difference and slimmer design of the LC9 over a 2 inch grouping. 99% of us will never fire a weapon is self defense, but we all carry one. I want that experience to be as comfortable as possible. My choice of the LC9 was over a Bodyguard .380. I know the Bodyguard is lighter, but .380 ammo is expensive, and I would rather have a little power behind my shots. The LC9 gives an scceptable cartridge in a lighter gun. That Springfield EMP will kill a guy just like the 3913, or the LC9. If I ever have to use a gun, it will be up close, and I'm not gonna care if my groupings could have been 2 inches tighter. I love the 3rd gens, but I have gone from the 6906 to the 3913 to the CS9, and none of them felt comfortable in my waistband. On the belt with a jacket, they are great, but I have noticed I have been leaving the CS9 at home when I go out. The reason I want the LC9 is to lessen those times.

I imagine S&W will be offering their version of the LC9, just like they came out with the Bodyguard to counter the LCP. But I don't want to wait until that happens.

Matt C. · Jul 11, 2011

A handgun must be unquestionably reliable.
The 39xx is proven.
The LC9 is cute.

kbm6893 · Jul 11, 2011

Matt C. said:
A handgun must be unquestionably reliable.
The 39xx is proven.
The LC9 is cute.

So why buy any new handgun? Should we all wait 2 years after a gun comes out? Why does anyone carry a 1911, then? They're known to be picky. The reviews on the LC9 are very positive. When i get mine, I'll shoot 250 rounds of range ammo and a box of my carry ammo. if it performs, it's reliable. And the 3913 I had was very reliable, but it did fail to extract once. I remember being amazed by that. ANY machine can occasionally hiccup.

18DAI · Jul 11, 2011

While I personally prefer the 3913 to ALL other semi autos in that class, I would not.....and didn't....as far as I see, say anything negative about Ruger or the LC9.

I've examined an LC9 but have not shot it yet. I will say I'd take an LC9 over any handgun CURRENTLY produced by S&W.

If the LC9 shoots as well as its made Ruger has a winner on its hands.

BUT - owning a 3913 I have no need of another compact single stack 9mm.

Except for maybe a 3914......

Just wanted to clarify my position.

Regards 18DAI

kbm6893 · Jul 11, 2011

18DAI said:
While I personally prefer the 3913 to ALL other semi autos in that class, I would not.....and didn't....as far as I see, say anything negative about Ruger or the LC9.

I've examined an LC9 but have not shot it yet. I will say I'd take an LC9 over any handgun CURRENTLY produced by S&W.

If the LC9 shoots as well as its made Ruger has a winner on its hands.

BUT - owning a 3913 I have no need of another compact single stack 9mm. Except for maybe a 3914......

Just wanted to clarify my position. Regards 18DAI

I agree. I wish I had never sold my 3913 to purchase my CS9. I'm sure the 3913 is a more refined gun over the LC9. But for IWB carry, the 3913 was too heavy, at nearly 27 ounces loaded. The LC9 is lighter and more comfortable to carry.

handgunner356 · Jul 11, 2011

Well there is a 3913 in forty, the 4040PD. The Ruger has it's points, it's size and weight are of some advantage, but probably the main one would be the fact it's about half the price of LNIB 3913. I have one of the early pre-rail TSWs' with the short grip making it the smallest of the 3913s' and I don't believe I'd part with it anytime soon. I also don't care to spend all day pulling the trigger on the LC9, if they're going to make the trigger pull that long why bother with a safety on top of it all?

S&W Model 3913 vs. Ruger LC9

US Veteran

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

SWCA Member

Member

SWCA Member

US Veteran

Member

Absent Comrade

Member

US Veteran

SWCA Member

Member

SWCA Member

Absent Comrade

SWCA Member

Member

Similar threads