New Ruger LC9s

[mhl6493]

Got an email from Ruger today about this.  The one major drawback I've heard about the LC9 is it's long double-action trigger pull.  This new striker-fired version could be very, very interesting...

 

https://ruger-hosted.s3.amazonaws.com/email/3235-SellSheet-Hf8E3P74Sa.pdf

[hipower]

I hope to see one Wednesday or Thursday. According to a buddy running his own shop locally.

I agree, it could be very interesting. Possibly give the Shield a little competition.

[three5seven]

This pistol looks promising (then again, I said that about the Remington R51!). I'll be interested to see some real reviews from people who weren't sent test and evaluation guns. 

[JWC]

A little bit bigger LC9 with a better trigger. Why didn't they just put a better trigger in an LC9? Edited July 30, 2014 by JWC

[mhl6493]

A little bit bigger LC9 with a better trigger. Why didn't they just put a better trigger in an LC9?

 

Yeah, if it's a little bigger than the LC9, it's probably out for me as far as pocket carry is concerned.  A little bigger than an LC9 is up in my XDs 45 territory...

[JWC]

I own an LC9 and an SR9c. I just don't see the point of this LC9s. Maybe they should call the new one an LC9 and renamed the current LC9 to the LC9st (sh!tty trigger)? A development that would make sense would be an SR45c or sc (subcompact) or LC45 but what ever.

[BigK]

Ruger rarely guesses wrong about the pistol market. I bet it sells decently

[xjsnake]

A little bit bigger LC9 with a better trigger. Why didn't they just put a better trigger in an LC9?

 

Yeah, if it's a little bigger than the LC9, it's probably out for me as far as pocket carry is concerned.  A little bigger than an LC9 is up in my XDs 45 territory...

 

 

Where are you seeing that it's bigger? All of the sizes listed in the table are identical.

 

The picture at the bottom compares it to an LCP not an LC9.

[JWC]

I am wrong it does cite the LCP. I misread

[mhl6493]

I am wrong it does cite the LCP. I misread

 

That's good to know.  It wouldn't make any sense for the 9s to be any bigger than the 9.  But stranger things have happened...

[JWC]

That's what I thought

[Patton]

Possibly give the Shield a little competition.

It would have to be cheaper than a Shield for me to even consider it and come with an extra magazine.

[Will Carry]

I have an LC9. It is 100% reliable and the accuracy, for what it is, is good. The trigger is so bad that it may be the worst I have ever pulled on a semi-auto. Shame on you Ruger!  You made the trigger long to make it safer? WTF! I will not sell my LC9 to get the striker fired version.....at least not right away.

[hipower]

It would have to be cheaper than a Shield for me to even consider it and come with an extra magazine.

 

I agree. As the owner of 2 Shield pistols, it would have to be spectacular for me to change over. But if it is any good at all, it will draw some interest from the S&W sales simply because it's another Ruger product.

[contendershooter]

I seen some online reviews and it looks good, has a long travel and reset to trigger, but better than the original LC. They did git rid of the fugly LCI on the top of the slide. They did also with the SR9e, the less expensive version of the SR9 and replacement of the P95. Hope they get rid of it on all of the SR series also. No more P series on their site now. I have shot several and the P90 and P345 to me would shoot against any P220 sig you could possibly find.

[Guest tngw1500se]

This post just cost me money.

[Troutburger]

My lc9s will be here Monday.

[TNWNGR]

As I understand it we're talking about a striker fired variant of the LC9 with the inherent short return of striker fired pistols. From past experience &  with a KT PF9 & Ruger LC9 you'll have a slimmer pistol more akin to the S&W Shield or like. I guess its interesting to read about but not something I'm likely to want to buy.

[Erik88]

Apparently they didn't listen to their customers enough to remove that stupid manual safety.

 

I'll pass on this one.

[Steelharp]

Fondled one today... omg... there is ZERO reason for the old LC9 to exist anymore. WOW, what a difference!!!!!!!!!! Excellent!!

[hipower]

Fondled one today... omg... there is ZERO reason for the old LC9 to exist anymore. WOW, what a difference!!!!!!!!!! Excellent!!

 

Ok. It is impressive. I compared it to a Shield. Almost identical in size, except for the curved pinky rest on the  mag of the Ruger.

 

The trigger...well, I won't say it's better than the Shield. But it is smoother and breaks easier. 

 

A little longer pull, but really smooth. And the reset is nice as well.

 

If I didn't have a Shield, I think I'd buy one.

 

And yes....Mikey is right. (For Once. lol) It is immeasurably better than the first LC9.

[Duck]

I found out about the Ruger LC9S a few weeks after buying my Shield. My first thought was just my luck. I have had some issues with guns over the last few years not really working right but the Shield has been great. After shooting a LC9S that my friend bought I realized I made the right choice. The Shield is more durable feeling, has more magazine options, has a better finish, better trigger, recoils less, and is a whole lot more accurate. The Shield is also cheaper and comes with an extra magazine. I found that my Shield is a better shooter than the G19 I sold to buy the Shield. You would be a fool to pick the LC9s over the Shield.

[Patton]

Normally I would say the lighter gun will recoil more but somehow Shields recoil less than fullsize guns. The LC9's have had finish issues for sure. Carter's shooting supply had a used one about a year after they came out that looked like it sank with the Titanic. Edited August 19, 2014 by Patton

[kieefer]

Now, now. You wouldn't be a fool to choose one gun over another if you had the opportunity to try them both out. An informed buyer is what you would be but not a fool. Com'on, Al Sharpton is a fool but a gun enthusiast? No way.

[Troutburger]

Got my lc9s today. Only complaint prior to shooting is the long, very long trigger reset.