Ruger LCR vs. S&W snubbies

[cjwils]

I am sure plenty of people have compared the Ruger LCR to S&W .38 or .357 snubbies, but I searched the forum for that topic, and found no meaningful results. So, what do you think about that comparison? I have one of the super light S&W snubbies, it's 11 point something ounces, which is a bit less than an LCR. I just want to know if I am missing something good by not also having an LCR. Thanks very much for your comments.

 

[waffles]

First, understand you're asking this on the S&W forums, so results may be a bit skewed.

I've owned a handful of LCRs and way more J frames. I found the LCR to have a superior trigger, less felt recoil, and be more durable. I've now had 3 alumuminum/scandium J frames break (2 frame cracks, 1 cylinder retaining lug worn off, and I will not be purchasing another one). If I needed another snubby revolver for practical purposes, the LCR would be my choice, followed by a steel J frame.

All that said, the LCR will never be as popular or iconic as the J frame, and nostalgia/tradition/"damned plastic guns, back in my day..." sells a hell of a lot of the revolvers in this day and age of reliable micro 9s.

 

[Paul105]

I have a 1 7/8" .357 LCR, a S&W 340 Ti/Sc and a 360 Ti Sc. The 357 LCR weighs 17 oz, the S&Ws 11 or 12 oz depending on grips. As mentioned above, double action trigger and recoil mitigation favor the LCR - single action on my S&W 360 is superb. The trigger guard of the S&Ws hammer my trigger finger with heavier loads -- not so with the LCR.

Both Ruger & S&Ws shoot very high with 357 ammo. I developed a load that shoots pretty much to POA at 25 yds with both - 125gr Horn XTP with 7.0gr BE86 in 357 cases - target pictured below (laser zeroed after shooting this target. The S&W 360 is my foul weather, drop in pocket of rain coat gun loaded with 3 of the 125s and 2 Buff Bore 180gr.

Can't speak to durability as I don't shoot these a lot

Ruger offers a 38 special plus P LCR that weighs 13 oz w/1 7/8" bbl. With the Buf Bore 158gr at 1,040 fps from 2" bbl, you would have more power than you would probably ever need from a snubby.

FWIW,

Paul

 

[twodog max]

I have had numerous J frame 38's over the years and they were all good. I only had steel frame versions so I cannot speak of the aluminum or scandium versions.
I have a LCRx38 3 inch that I got about 5 years ago. It has two redeeming qualities its light weight, and the durable finish. I do not find its trigger any better than a S&W. If it recoils any less or any more I certainly cannot detect it. It points terribly for me but when using the sights it shoots OK for what it is. It is not an heirloom quality firearm as J steel frame revolvers are. IMO they are a disposable revolver. If they break throw them away and get another. I will not get another in my case.

 

[diyj98]

I found the LCR a little easier to conceal in some pants pockets, so it was my primary pocket gun for several years. I've been trying to cutback on a few excess guns and calibers though so finally sold my old LCR and just learned to live with the slight hump in my pocket area.

 

[walnutred]

I'll muddy the waters and probably get me suspended for a few days. I've owned many J and I frames over the years and still own a few. I still own one LCR357 that was my wife's CCW pistol. The small revolver I find myself carrying and shooting most is a Taurus Ultralite 38 special.

 

[Lobster Picnic]

The LCR is a good design for a modern pocket revolver. I still prefer J-frames.

 

[Babysitr]

I own both a 637 and an LCR..2" .38 spl's....I like an exposed hammer, I like shooting the 637 more....that said, I use the LCR as my carry, why? the entire gun is very durable, easy to conceal, and light weight ( I had the Ruger first!)...if I could keep only one, I'd keep the Smith over the Ruger

 

[hittman77]

I have a S&W 60, 36 and a Ruger LCR in 38 Special. My first LCR was a 357 and it was (to me) BRUTAL to shoot more than about 10 rounds of 357 plus it weighed quite a bit more than the 38 LCR.

I've carried the 38 LCR about 90% of the time for the past 6 years. It still looks virtually new so, their finish is tough as nails. And no worries about the blueing getting dinged up on the 36.

I find the LCR more convenient with the shrouded hammer. Mine wears the Ruger boot grips to reduce size. It came with a red fiber optic front site which to me is a huge advantage over the Smiths. Wonderful trigger, very accurate and has been 100% reliable.

Depending on the style and brand of holster, your LCR may not fit a J frame holster. The trigger guard is more pronounced on the front side so; an LCR specific holster may be needed.

 

[jjmIII_Ruger]

Snub 38 LCR was my first gun. Hard too shoot accurately. You can't stage the DA trigger the same way and the trigger is heavy. The trigger can't be worked as easily either. I'm liking the Centennial J Frames with Apex kits.

And as already posted, the love affair with the S&W J is real.

I will never sell my LCR though and also have a 3" LCRx.

 

[Mister X]

I've read numerous complaints over the years about the tendency to short-stroke the trigger on the LCR in rapid fire. I believe Claude Werner even wrote about it on his blog. My limited experience with the LCR proved to me the concerns were real, so I'll stick with S&W's.

 

[VictorLouis]

1+ My first LCR was a 357 and it was (to me) BRUTAL to shoot more than about 10 rounds of 357 plus it weighed quite a bit more than the 38 LCR.

2+ carried the 38 LCR about 90% of the time for the past 6 years. It still looks virtually new so, their finish is tough as nails. And no worries about the blueing getting dinged up...

3+ I find the LCR more convenient with the shrouded hammer.

4+ Mine wears the Ruger boot grips to reduce size.

5+ The market has several choices for it, easily swapped out, thanks to their easy, pinned-on mounting. Smith could learn from them, LOL.

5+ It came with a red fiber optic front site which to me is a huge advantage over the Smiths. .

1+ Congrats, you put THREE times the amount of .357 through your's as I did mine. Sold it, and just stuck with the lighter .38 version at the time.

2+ Absolutely concur.

3+ Also agree,

4+ A bit homely to look at, but superbly functional

I've read numerous complaints over the years about the tendency to short-stroke the trigger on the LCR in rapid fire. I believe Claude Werner even wrote about it on his blog. My limited experience with the LCR proved to me the concerns were real, so I'll stick with S&W's.

True, all true. It's either something that you can learn to overcome, or you switch to the automatic transmission, for easier driving...

 

[Radny97]

For me the LCR is slightly bigger in the non-measured dimensions making it harder to pocket carry. I've owned three.
I currently carry a S&W 442 with a trigger job. LCR still has a better trigger. But I carry the S&W more because it's easier to conceal (for me).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[eb07]

I own both. I have about 6,000 rounds through my LCR 357. I would say about 60%, 357 and the other 40% plus p38



The trigger on the LCR is not better than the Smith & Wesson. It has a very long reset and is prone to short stroking under pressure. Whilt it seems like it's better when you first start shooting it, when you start working it in draw present and fire, and in high stress time situations, And on the move one handed, you start to see it's shortcomings.



I much prefer the Smith & Wesson trigger that has been properly broken in by just shooting it for a thousand or so rounds or a nice trigger job by a master like Nelson Ford or Frank Glenn.



That being said, what the Ruger LCR has going for it is recoil is a lot better with plus p and 357 rounds, and the ability to change the front sight is also a plus.



Not all speed loaders work with the LCR that work with the j frame, The LCR has a limited grip choice, And the LCR is a little bit bigger when it comes to pocket carry even with the boot grip.

 

[Frailer]

I have a deep affection for J-frames. I own a bunch of them, from a Baby Chief on up. I shoot them often, enjoy them greatly, and have no plan to get rid of them.

With that said, my primary carry gun for the past few years has been an LCR. I wasn't looking for one, but I found one at a price too good to pass up, and after shooting it for a while it replaced my 642.

The .38 LCR weighs a bit less than an Airweight, and for me it has much better sights and a slightly better trigger. Yes, it is possible to "short-stroke" it, but this only happened to me exactly one time, during our "getting acquainted" period, and now that I'm familiar with its trigger it is no longer an issue.

Not too long ago I picked up a .22LR version which has proven not only to be an excellent training tool, but also the source of a tremendous amount of fun.

I will say an LCR will never beat an AirLite when it comes to pocket carry, but I'm on the skinny side, so that doesn't work for me anyway.

To be honest, I view this as a "Ford v Chevy" question. I'm just pleased that in this age of the micro nine that we have options to choose from.

 

[kaaskop49]

Odd (but enjoyable) thread. Interesting how many posters say they love, adore, respect, hold dear to their hearts, can't live without the one mfgr's gun(s),.......but they carry the other one!

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[NCBeagle]

Odd (but enjoyable) thread. Interesting how many posters say they love, adore, respect, hold dear to their hearts, can't live without the one mfgr's gun(s),.......but they carry the other one!

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

Not me. J Frame all the way. All others are inferior.

Except, when I feel like carrying the P365 or Kimber K6 or the occasional Colt D Frame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Frailer]

Odd (but enjoyable) thread. Interesting how many posters say they love, adore, respect, hold dear to their hearts, can't live without the one mfgr's gun(s),.......but they carry the other one!

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

It has been said, "There are guns you show your friends, and there are guns you show to your enemies."

 

[ladder13]

J frames except when, oh the plastic horror , my P365 or LCP MAX.

 

[jimmyj]

I am currently testing a Ruger SP-101 .357 with 2 3/4" inch barrel.
So far I am impressed.

 

[Erich]

Leaving the SP-101 out of it (I have a couple, but they're not in the call of the OP's Q), I have a couple LCRs and several J-frames. Here are my thoughts.



The J-frames have better trigger reset. Ruger DA revolvers have that longer reset that makes it easy to bollix it up and miss a chamber (and I've been shooting them since the Eighties, and still have issues with this). (Sometimes I'll go 100 rounds between problems - I really know these triggers - but then I'll mess it up. Bad design, IMHO. I find the reset on the LCRs to be more problematic than those on my Speed Six or SPs, by the way - probably due to the LCRs' light weights.) The Js are tough as anything, too - my 640-1 will gobble up full-bore .357s with no issue.



The LCRs have a marginally better trigger pull. Smoother. No one has tried to put a lock on an LCR (and I've had a lock fail on a J-frame and don't want one on my gun - please don't make this about the locks; I mention it only because it's a consideration of mine and it's why I bought the LCRs instead of the Js I could find at the time). Equivalent gun for gun, the LCRs are marginally lighter than the Js. The LCR's stub frame allows for a variety of stocks to be installed - but it's not nearly as versatile as the J-frame in this regard (fewer designs are available).



I use the LCRs with factory boot grips for pocket guns, which works great - but I do it with great hesitation due to the DA trigger reset issue. A 1% failure rate (admittedly due to user error, since the Ruger DA reset is unlike any other design's).


My J-frames strike me as better guns overall, primarily due to the DA reset issue. If I were doing it over, I'd buy a lockless 43c instead of my LCR-22 and a lockless 442 instead of my LCR-38. If I were recommending one to my brother, that's what I'd recommend.

 

[Rammer Jammer]

I prefer the LCR. Better trigger, very durable finish.

K Frame size and up I prefer S&W over Rugers. But for me the LCR is the pinnacle of pocket snubbies.

 

[kaaskop49]

It has been said, "There are guns you show your friends, and there are guns you show to your enemies."

Never heard that one. Mind if I use it?

As to Erich's fine post, that trigger return/reset issue goes back to the late 80s when SP101s in .38 were approved by NYPD. Two officers told me of this problem with their SPs; don't know how they resolved it. Perhaps Ruger strengthened the trigger return spring. My SP sits forlornly in the safe...

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[Frailer]

Never heard that one. Mind if I use it?

I didn't write it (and I don't know who did), so feel free!

This would be a boring place if we only bought guns we intended to use as tools.

 

[Mister X]

A blog entry from Claude Werner comparing the LCR to a few J-frames.

Comparing the LCR | tacticalprofessor

 

[diyj98]

The trigger on the LCR is not better than the Smith & Wesson. It has a very long reset and is prone to short stroking under pressure.

That was the primary reason I sold the two LCR's I had. The fact I could get the to do it while dry firing bothered me that it might happen when I really needed it not to.

 

[snubbyfan]

Since my right hand went all gimpy, I modified my favorite carry snubby with a spring replacement, smoothed the guts some with an extra fine Arkansas stone and replaced the grips (or is it stocks?) with something a bit more hand filling.

At that time I had heard about the trigger pull on the Ruger LCR and decided to see for myself.
I went to the local gun shop and tried one out. It was nearly as nice and my modified trigger and nicer than an unmodified J frame trigger.

 

[garddogg56]

Thanks for the review guys good thread.I like them both I agree with the LCR reset but got over it after getting use to it.The trigger is smoother on the LCR,I shoot them both just fine

 

[Bill Lear]

I am sure plenty of people have compared the Ruger LCR to S&W .38 or .357 snubbies, but I searched the forum for that topic, and found no meaningful results. So, what do you think about that comparison? I have one of the super light S&W snubbies, it's 11 point something ounces, which is a bit less than an LCR. I just want to know if I am missing something good by not also having an LCR. Thanks very much for your comments.

The only model listed by Ruger even remotely close to "11 point something ounces" is the .38 Special that tips the scales at 13.5 - respectable for sure, but not 11.
The .22LR model is portly 14.9 ounces (because nobody would seriously carry a .22LR for defense so who cares it it's 4 ounces heavier than a M43C)
The .357 mag and 9mm are both monsters at 17.1 ounces.

I point this out to show that my personal issue is that I - and probably most others, choose to carry a J-frame because they want the lightest revolver possible for 99.99% CARRY, and MAYBE, one-day, IF...actual shooting - 0.01%!

I don't carry a measured 12.6 ounce M360 with Titanium cylinder to go down to the range and bust out 20,000 rounds just to "stay in shape," I carry it for that 100th of a percent chance I might have to actually shoot someone! Anyone who genuinely buys into the idiocy that one must shoot their J-frame to pieces because some self-appointed "expert" says so should probably choose another form of self-defense.

So, for the SAME money, why would I buy the LCR over the J-frame all things being equal? To most eyes, the LCR is about as unsightly as Ruger could figure out how to make it! I have to wonder if they're sitting over there in AriDzona laughing like hyenas every time the cash register cha-chings, "We got another one" referring to how many have actually paid money for what is probably the ugliest revolver in the world. It could be the BEST revolver in the world - kind of like we keep getting told by various self-proclaimed "experts" that KORTH makes the best revolvers in the world, but they are still butt ugly - "Steampunk" comes to mind!

Certainly the LCR is a "good" revolver, but other than having some plastic exterior components it's not very exciting. Since MOST who buy and carry alloy frame J-frames seldom shoot more than a few boxes through them in a LIFETIME, the whole "durability" thing is ridiculously overblown. If I want to shoot a revolver millions of times I've got an ample supply of much more durable models, I simply don't NEED to attempt to destroy any J-frame. I realize the internet is rife with those who DO want to shoot donated J-frames to destruction, but that's what the world recognizes as "Agenda driven" and has nothing to do with real people in the real world.

So, having said all that, for me, the choice of any J-frame over any LCR model is that if I'm going to pay basically the same money...I'm going with the gun that LOOKS much nicer and is in fact much LIGHTER with it's aluminum or scandium frame and titanium cylinder over the one with plastic bits and a funky-steampunk cylinder design!

Now, should Ruger choose to introduce a .22LR with plastic frame and plastic cylinder with steel chamber liners, plastic barrel with steel insert, and really focus on making a 9 ounce or less, 9-shot .22LR revolver priced competitively with the M43C at a 11 ounces, I might look at it.

It's not exactly like S&W just showed up to the table and doesn't know how to build revolvers!

[I just paid a small fortune for a new model Colt Python that has a better, more reliable, smoother action than ever did the original batch. Just easing through the maybe 8 pound DA pull is astounding, but what REALLY made me willing to pay the asking price is that the Python is truly one of the most beautiful, most symmetrical revolvers ever made, and the new model is even more so! You can only go so far trading on "what's inside", whereas beauty will take you ALL THE WAY (Airborne!)]

 

[Frailer]

I point this out to show that my personal issue is that I - and probably most others, choose to carry a J-frame because they want the lightest revolver possible for 99.99% CARRY, and MAYBE, one-day, IF...actual shooting - 0.01%!

I don't carry a measured 12.6 ounce M360 with Titanium cylinder to go down to the range and bust out 20,000 rounds just to "stay in shape," I carry it for that 100th of a percent chance I might have to actually shoot someone! Anyone who genuinely buys into the idiocy that one must shoot their J-frame to pieces because some self-appointed "expert" says so should probably choose another form of self-defense.

So, for the SAME money, why would I buy the LCR over the J-frame all things being equal? To most eyes, the LCR is about as unsightly as Ruger could figure out how to make it! I have to wonder if they're sitting over there in AriDzona laughing like hyenas every time the cash register cha-chings, "We got another one" referring to how many have actually paid money for what is probably the ugliest revolver in the world. It could be the BEST revolver in the world - kind of like we keep getting told by various self-proclaimed "experts" that KORTH makes the best revolvers in the world, but they are still butt ugly - "Steampunk" comes to mind!…

I respect your opinion, and I appreciate you laying it out so clearly. As I stated myself, there are circumstances in which the AirLite revolvers are without peer. And I wholeheartedly agree that the LCR is butt-ugly.

But, to be fair, there are those of us who like to shoot our carry revolvers with some frequency, not because some "self-appointed expert" told us to, nor because we want to "shoot them to destruction," but rather because we want to maintain a reasonable level of proficiency with these challenging-to-shoot guns…and we actually enjoy shooting.

Much of this discussion hinges on opinion and individual preference, and in these arenas one person's views are as valid as any other's. The only objective, quantifiable point I'd quibble with is the contention that an LCR and a 360 cost about the same. If you can tell me where I can find a Sc/Ti J-frame for within 20% or so of an LCR's cost, please let me know. I might buy two, so I can shoot one and carry the other.