S&W Model 3913 vs. Ruger LC9

[sheriff54]

about a year and a half ago I bought a g26 for my small carry. great gun, small, easy to shoot well. just a bit too big (read wide). never could find a 3953 (really like that action!!). have a 4053 so we are covered in .40 but wanted a 9, not a 380 for pocket carry. so, friday, lc9 came home. it ain't a smith 3953 but it will work for what I need and it's thinner than the g26 by enough, I already like it. the trigger will need some practice as it's different. not bad, just different. one man’s trash and all... wish I had known about that 4040pd when it came about... I think I would have hunted one of them down... what I know now, but did NOT know then though... we learn, that's what is neat with these endeavors...

 

[Matt C.]

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.

Buy what ever you like.
If you can trust your life to it, by all means carry it.

 

[ldp4570]

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.

Well, I guess I'll jump on in here. I like 18DAI, am a firm beleiver in the 3913 being the finest small carry 9MM out there. You are the first person I've ever heard say that the 3913 was to heavy for concealed IWB carry. Now I'm not some giant of a guy, only top out at 5'9" and 180lbs, and during my time as an LEO I carried a 4506-1 as duty weapon with the 3913 on my vest.

 

[kbm6893]

Well, I guess I'll jump on in here. I like 18DAI, am a firm beleiver in the 3913 being the finest small carry 9MM out there. You are the first person I've ever heard say that the 3913 was to heavy for concealed IWB carry. Now I'm not some giant of a guy, only top out at 5'9" and 180lbs, and during my time as an LEO I carried a 4506-1 as duty weapon with the 3913 on my vest.

I'm 6'2, 225 pounds. I can carry the 3913, but would rather save the 6 ounces and be more comfortable. A carry gun is something that you want all the time. Something lighter and thinner is gonna get carried more. For a metal single stack 9MM, they're top notch. I wish I still had it, but even if I did, it would be a range gun or occasional belt carry. There was another post on here somewhere of a guy doing that exact thing to his 3913. he bought an LC9 and was so enamored with it's ease of carry that the 3913 went into the safe and the LC9 is his new carry piece. Not disparaging the 3913 at all, but I'd rather carry something smaller and lighter with the same firepower. The big reason i went to the LC9 is because it has the manual safety and mag disconnect that draws me to the S&W's. Others see them as being negatives, but I don't.

If S&W offered something like it, I'd go with that. But even the CS9 is 5 ounces heavier. That's considerable when talking about carrying it all day in your waistband.

 

[kcode]

I had posted these pics in an earlier thread. But a picture is worth 1000 words. As I had said in the other thread, the 3913 is my favorite and there is not much comparison to the LC9 as far as which is the better pistol. If you are looking for size only for concealment, the LC9 is a desireable pistol. Close range only.

 

[VTHokiesDuckHunter]

when you see those photos. there is only one thing any reasonable, sane, sober & thinking person can say:

"why the hell isn't S&W making this pistol TODAY?????"

 

[rz625-8]

I too have both the 3913,and LC9. I have been carrying both for ccw pistols as of late and the LC9 came in handy one night after coming home from a long trip moving a relative from Los Angeles to Nebraska[outside Omaha city limits]. One of those iileagles said that our stuff was his so,the 2 9s came out along with the .500 revolver. Never seen an iileagle run back home to Mexico so fast.

 

[GKC]

I had a 3913 TSW that I bought NIB and in one of the most stupid things I have ever done, traded it because I didn't like the rail. I later found out that S&W will remove the rail. Anyway, I haven't found another one. I have had my eye on a 908 (budget version of the 3913) in a local shop, and yesterday I decided that I just wasn't going to find another NIB 3913, so I got the 908. It too is NIB, and made in 2009, according to the test fired shell envelope.

I bought a LC9 a couple of months ago, but my wife decided the LC9 is hers...so now we don't have to fight over it.

 

[kbm6893]

A picture sure IS worth 1000 words. Look at the contrast between that LC9 and the 3913, especially the grip and height. The 3913 is a much NICER gun, but the LC9 is more comfy to carry all day long. I do still wish i had my 3913, but I'm sure the LC9 will get carried much more often.

 

[tmar04]

Nice comparison. I,too,have a 3913, and it shoots fine, just about 2-3
in low at 25 ft. any way to adjust either sight? mine has standard white dot novak sights, and I would like to raise rear (or lower front) just a tad. any ideas? tks to all

 

[PALADIN85020]

The front sight is dovetailed and easily replaceable. I've put Trijicon night sights on mine, and it shoots to point of aim at 21 feet. You could file down the front sight to get a higher point of impact.

John

 

[tmar04]

3913 sight adj

thanks, John. might try to file front down a hair.

 

[toocool]

I had a 3913 once that wouldn't feed hollow point ammo for anything. I sent it back to S&W, they replaced the barrel and something else (can't remember what, it's been a lot of years) and, while it was better, I still had enough issues with it that I finally sold it. I have an LC9 now that has been absolutely perfect for almost 1000 rounds. I like the DAO better than DA/SA and the trigger has gotten much better through use. I liked the 3913, but if it's not reliable, it's just a paperweight to me.

 

[igor455]

i havew klooked at the lc9 but i really couldnt find any really good reason th replace my glock 26 or my sw 3913. they work i have stuff for th3em ie holsters extra mags and spare parts. or my sig 232 also. i know they work and always work. its that simple

 

[kbm6893]

i havew klooked at the lc9 but i really couldnt find any really good reason th replace my glock 26 or my sw 3913. they work i have stuff for th3em ie holsters extra mags and spare parts. or my sig 232 also. i know they work and always work. its that simple

I've owned the Glock 26 and the 3913, the LC9 is MUCH easier to conceal and was much more comfortable. The Glock 26 was too chunky for me. I forget the LC9 is even there, and you can't pocket carry a Glock 26 like you can the LC9.

 

[franco45]

I own a 3913 that I carry OWB in the winter. It is one fine gun. I looked at the LC9 for summer carry but ended up with a Kahr CM9. The CM9 has been a pleasant surprise. Very accurate and low felt recoil for such a small gun. It is very easy to pocket carry and has been 100% reliable. Did I say that the 3913 is one fine gun?

 

[Riddler2]

Thanks for the invitation to post. I am looking for a good CCW and thought the site had some good info. I will continue to enjoy. Thanks!

 

[sop]

I have a Kahr CW9 and a S&W 3913 (and used to own a 3914 years ago). Some thoughts on these two compacts....

The CW9 is very reasonably priced, they can be found under $400 these days. It's a much lighter gun than the 3913, about 17 ozs. empty, and a bit thinner and smaller overall than the 3913, but not by much. A fully loaded 3913 can feel like a larger gun.

The Kahr CW9 shoots very well, it's accurate and the recoil is quite manageable for a compact 9mm, though the S&W 3913 is superior. The Kahr's trigger pull is very smooth, consistent and pretty light; it seems to improve the more I shoot it. In contrast, the 3913 has a pretty heavy DA and the SA pull could be better; I lightened both up by installing a lighter Wolff hammer mainspring.

The CW9 is a simple, straightforward pistol, it has no safeties, loaded chamber indicators, locks or other such devices. The CW9 is an excellent concealed carry 9mm, as is the PM9 (CM9). It's really too large to carry in a pocket, though it feels very good in an IWB holster, as does the 3913.

The 3913/14 holds 8+1 rounds, the CW9 7+1. The S&W has the safety lever and the mag disconnect; some folks might find these features useful. I think the S&W 3913 would be a better (safer?) gun for those folks who don't always follow proper gun-handling practices; you'd really have to screw up to experience an AD with a 3rd generation Smith.

The 3913(14) is a very finely made firearm, it feels like a real gun in the hand (at least to me), something built to last for generations. The CW9, on the other hand, feels like a quality pistol but, like all polymer-framed guns, it seems a bit disposable. I really don't see any "classic" polymer Kahrs showing up on auction sites in twenty years, though perhaps their steel-framed pistols will stand the test of time.

 

[csxman5115]

I have the 3913 and it carries very well in the crossbreed supertuck, it has been my everyday carry for awhile, I have a Kahr cw9 which is smaller but I always know that I can trust my 3913 I have had it for about 7 years and never had any problems.

 

[Tinygnat219]

Personally, I think these are two separate guns for different modes of carry. It's like comparing Grapefruit and Oranges. Both are citrus, but both are used for different reasons.

The 3913 / 3953 is a prime example of a great carry / shooting gun. However, I limit my carry of these two firearms to either OWB or IWB carry simply because they are on the heavy and bulky side for Pocket Carry. These guns are also MUCH MUCH nicer to shoot. My 3913 had 1200 rounds through it in a point shooting class over a weekend with no failures, jams, or anything like that. I also only had 3 magazines (THAT part SUCKED, I took care of that when I returned, I now have 8). It's a pleasant accurate gun to shoot. My 3913 is currently retired and I carry a 3953 as I wanted something easier to conceal and this gun with it's flat edges and DAO trigger fits the bill nicely.

The LC-9 / PF-9 though was designed to be carried in a pocket or IWB. It's small enough to fit this role, without being overly large. The LC-9 isn't bad to shoot, but I wouldn't want to spend all day, or even an hour at a range with it. 4 mags through it and I'm probably done. However, it's not meant to be a range gun, but something pulled as a last ditch effort from a pocket.