Ruger LC9 vs S&W 3RD Gen S&W

blujax01

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
6,335
Reaction score
4,918
Location
C-Bus
Congratulations Sturm, Ruger & Co. You've reinvented the 20 year-old 3rd Generation S&W Compact 9!


LC9 vs my 3954. Exact same numbers apply to the 3913/3914/3953.

Ruger 6" long. My 3954 7" long. The extra inch is for the longer barrel and the beavertail that keeps my hand from being bit.

Ruger 4-1/2" high. My 3954 4-1/2" high.

Ruger .90" wide. My 3954 .925" at the slide, 1" including the grips.

Ruger 3.12" barrel length. My 3954 3-1/2" barrel.

Ruger 7 + 1 capacity. My 3954 8 + 1 capacity.

Ruger 17.1 oz. My 3954 25.0 oz. Okay it is 1/3rd lighter, meh...
 
Register to hide this ad
I'm interested in the LC9. I haven't gotten to see one in person yet.

I agree that the 3913/14/3953/54 were the finest compact single stack 9mm's to be made by anyone.

Shame the 3913's maker can't make a better gun than the 3913.

At least Ruger is trying! ;) Regards 18DAI.
 
Congratulations Sturm, Ruger & Co. You've reinvented the 20 year-old 3rd Generation S&W Compact 9!


LC9 vs my 3954. Exact same numbers apply to the 3913/3914/3953.

Ruger 6" long. My 3954 7" long. The extra inch is for the longer barrel and the beavertail that keeps my hand from being bit.

Ruger 4-1/2" high. My 3954 4-1/2" high.

Ruger .90" wide. My 3954 .925" at the slide, 1" including the grips.

Ruger 3.12" barrel length. My 3954 3-1/2" barrel.

Ruger 7 + 1 capacity. My 3954 8 + 1 capacity.

Ruger 17.1 oz. My 3954 25.0 oz. Okay it is 1/3rd lighter, meh...

Great comparison! Now what about BG380? I'm looking @ the Ruger & S&W ! :)
 
Don't forget the 908 :)

908-1.jpg


How could I?:D
 
I saw the Ruger about 2 weeks ago, was interested before I saw it, not now. And the reports from buyers are less than stellar.
 
Well the LC9 isn't a 3900 series compact for sure, but then again it's almost half the price of one. It's nice, smooth, well rounded and inexpensive, pretty much what most CCW holders are looking for, now S&W needs to get on the ball and make something inbetween the Bodyguard and the M&Pc.
 
The only improvements to the 3913 I can see are a melonite finish, a scandium frame and squeeze one more round in the mag. Then it would be PERFECT!! :) Regards 18DAI.
 
For quite a few dollars more, I want to handle and look at a Kimber Solo. Anyone have any experience with one?
 
The new unproven LC9 vs the veteran 3913? While I have nothing against Ruger (they make some very nice revolvers and their P series of autos are well proven as being tanks) this is a no-brainer to me, give me the little Smith!
As for a pocket .380, Colt please. Dale
 
I like the feel of the LC9 and seems to be a good gun. But I like my 3913 and Kel-Tec PF9 better.
 
Seeing that I have a 3953 already, reckon the LC9 would be worth buying? I've kicked the idea around, then I heard last week that Kahr has introduced the CM9, an economy version of the PM9. That Ruger definitely has my interest though. I just think it may be a little big for a nice, flat pocket carry. The Kahr may end up fitting the bill.
 
I have two Ruger LC9's sitting on my desk right now. I can assure you it is noticeably smaller than my former 3953 regardless of the numbers. It's more like a S&W CS9 with Big Dog's grips and more rounded slide, even then is still feels a little smaller and lighter to me. Don't get me wrong, if Smith & Wesson would have come out with a Bodyguard 9mm without the laser or a M&P9C SLIM I would been all over it. But they didn't so I went with the LC9. So far I have 100 rounds down the pipe without a single issue and am growing pretty fond of this little gun. Of course for now it is still in the T&E phase of it's life cycle.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top