pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
NEW! Ruger SR45, LC380, and SR1911 Commander
#1
Ruger SR45, LC380, and SR1911 Commander.

Also no more P345

[Image: 91lc3c.jpg]


[Image: 15eb983.jpg]


[Image: wspv0z.jpg]
[Image: pa_zps59e4c512.png?t=1379682235]
Reply
#2
It's nice to offer .45acp as an option for their SR series, but I think the LC380 is pretty stupid. It's the same size as the LC9 and both pistols carry the same amount of ammo. I say keep the SR45, scrap the LC380 (the lcp and lc9 fit that role), keep the SR1911 Commander, and their next pistol should be chambered in 5.7x28mm.
[Image: pa_zps59e4c512.png?t=1379682235]
Reply
#3
Philadelphia Patriot;62927 Wrote:It's nice to offer .45acp as an option for their SR series, but I think the LC380 is pretty stupid. It's the same size as the LC9 and both pistols carry the same amount of ammo. I say keep the SR45, scrap the LC380 (the lcp and lc9 fit that role), keep the SR1911 Commander, and their next pistol should be chambered in 5.7x28mm.

There's no getting around the fact that the LCP is just too small for some people. I wanted one but it just gets lost in the palm of my hand and I don't feel I have control of it. It's the same reason I stayed away from the pocket Sigs. I'm sure that the size of it has also been a problem for some older customers with arthritis as well, so I can see why they made it.
However I would be more pleased with a couple more rounds in it, and a 5.7 would be awesome.
My guns have killed less people than Obama's ATF has.
Reply
#4
I've handled the LCP and the LC9. The LCP isn't anywhere near big enough for me to safely hang on to while firing. I can get my middle finger on the grip and part of my ring finger at the very bottom. The LC9 I can hold comfortably. Now if I was looking for a .380 but had bigger hands, I'd get an LC380.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Reply
#5
I love Ruger but this pisses me off. Right now Ruger has a line of current products that are in high demand but they cannot keep up with production. Why couldn't they put their capital and effort behind hiring more Americans and building more facilities to produce their products? I just bought a Mark III about a month ago and I had to let them know a month in advance when I was picking it up because they're only getting a trickle of firearms from Ruger.

Don't get me wrong I love this SR45 and this new 1911 variant but I would rather see Ruger put out a stead stream of Mark III's and the standard SR1911 for $650 before investing in new products. I mean shit, they had the SR1911 on the market for what? A year, maybe a year and a half? Yet you rarely see one and when you do they go for $800-$850.
[Image: 23lmtsn.jpg]
LifeInPa, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Sanity, yours if you can keep it. Confused
Reply
#6
Ruger may be having supply problems but they've got nothing on Kel Tec with the RFB, KSG and PMR30.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Reply
#7
Warpt762x39;63055 Wrote:Ruger may be having supply problems but they've got nothing on Kel Tec with the RFB, KSG and PMR30.

Well Kel-Tec is just a tease. I don't feel that Ruger is being a tease, just biting off more than they can chew. Tongue
[Image: 23lmtsn.jpg]
LifeInPa, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Sanity, yours if you can keep it. Confused
Reply
#8
To me, the only reason to have a .380 is conceal-ability. So....if the .380 is the same size as a 9mm, then I want the 9mm. I don't fully understand the reasoning behind having a .380 that is the same size as a 9mm.... unless it has less recoil than the 9mm? That would be the only reason I can think of. I have both the LC9 and the LCP and the LCP is a beast to shoot but I did get the aftermarket grip extender and it helps a LOT to hold onto it. It still doesn't help the thing eating up my trigger finger during range practice, but I figure emptying it into a bad guy won't affect my trigger finger.....

Might have to check out the SR45 ....although it might be good for us to buy something that doesn't resemble so much the SR22 for the sake of the kids. Not that they EVER get into the guns, and they only shoot at the range, but still.... (Oh I didn't notice they had the stainless....we could get the stainless...I love Ruger...)
Error 396: Signature cannot be found.
Reply
#9
silkworm;62986 Wrote:
Philadelphia Patriot;62927 Wrote:It's nice to offer .45acp as an option for their SR series, but I think the LC380 is pretty stupid. It's the same size as the LC9 and both pistols carry the same amount of ammo. I say keep the SR45, scrap the LC380 (the lcp and lc9 fit that role), keep the SR1911 Commander, and their next pistol should be chambered in 5.7x28mm.

There's no getting around the fact that the LCP is just too small for some people. I wanted one but it just gets lost in the palm of my hand and I don't feel I have control of it. It's the same reason I stayed away from the pocket Sigs. I'm sure that the size of it has also been a problem for some older customers with arthritis as well, so I can see why they made it.
However I would be more pleased with a couple more rounds in it, and a 5.7 would be awesome.

A .22 TCM is a lot more doable for a pocket pistol, and would have very similar ballistics to a 5.7mm pistol. The 5.7mm round has a 28mm long case that will require a purpose built handgun. A .22 TCM can be converted from any existing 9mm sized frame, as it uses trimmed .223 brass and has a similar OAL to 9mm Parabellum. Where 5.7mm still retains a large advantage is in projectile design/variety. A 5.7mm can be loaded with anything from the aluminum core .85" long 28gr OTM round to 55 gr M193 FMJ ball. The .22 TCM is currently restricted to a very short .22 mag like .40 gr soft point. If this caliber takes off, and someone factory loads the 30gr Hornady VMAX round.....this could REALLY be something special.

I think the LC380 is stupid too. If you're having problems gripping a LCP, use one of the curved mag bases, or a +1 mag kit from Impact Guns. I love my LCP, it is the one pistol that goes with me everywhere. It is my 24/7 gun, and loaded with Buffalo Barnes 80gr+P solid copper hollowpoints, it actually gives superior shot to shot terminal performance than many well proven 1980's era 9mm legacy loads. In gel tests it outperforms Federal 9BPLE +P+ 115gr JHP outright in both expansion and penetration, and the .380+P is a far superior barrier design as well. It's probably the one round in .380 that can actually be considered to be a barrier blind design.
Reply
#10
RugerGirl;63088 Wrote:To me, the only reason to have a .380 is conceal-ability. So....if the .380 is the same size as a 9mm, then I want the 9mm. I don't fully understand the reasoning behind having a .380 that is the same size as a 9mm....

^That is my opinion too about the LC380.
[Image: pa_zps59e4c512.png?t=1379682235]
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  5 Ruger Revolvers We’re Ready For das 3 1,038 05-02-2015, 06:25 AM
Last Post: halftrack
question Springfield RO Compact or Ruger SR1911 CMD Lightweight? Glock32 6 6,045 01-26-2015, 09:02 AM
Last Post: soberbyker
  New Ruger Lite 22/45 das 1 572 01-16-2015, 07:36 AM
Last Post: Philadelphia Patriot
  S&W Model 60 or Ruger SP101? Rik Bitter 10 6,677 01-05-2015, 11:16 AM
Last Post: Stinger
  Dear Ruger gascolator 5 1,148 09-06-2014, 02:49 PM
Last Post: Curmudgeon



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.