That’s my current question.

My saga of the snub-nose revolver continues.

LCR

On Sunday I stopped into Cabela’s and was able to fondle a Ruger LCR. I guess I got hit by a fever because for the next 36 hours I couldn’t stop thinking about it. Sunday evening I was sitting on the couch, Googling on my laptop trying to find out all I could about the LCR. I even called Cabela’s to see if they still had any LCR’s in stock (they did). I went to sleep on it, woke up Monday morning and continued reading on the LCR. Also exchanged some emails with friends of mine on the topic. Here’s what I came up with.

In terms of the LCR itself, here’s what I found:

• Most people’s biggest objection is “it’s ugly”. Eh. This is a tool, not a beauty pagent. Granted I like pretty guns, but I’m not buying this to fawn over. IMHO, the LCR’s look is “form follows function”, so if making it more functional might mean it’s not as aesthetically pleasing well, so be it.
• Another objection is that it has an internal lock. Well, again so be it. It’s unfortunately the way the gun world is moving. To me, it’s not a great idea because it’s added complexity, it’s one more thing to go wrong when you don’t need it to go wrong. It’s another moving part to have to maintain and/or replace. I can live with it, but it’s not an ideal.
• Those who have shot it have all had positive reports. 
  • Perceived recoil is pretty good. That is, compared to something like a S&W 642 (arguably the direct competition for the LCR), the recoil isn’t all that bad. Not sure if it comes from the polymer frame and/or the Hogue grips, but whatever it is, people are saying the recoil is manageable.
  • Accuracy is good. Reports I’ve read are that, for a snub, the accuracy is actually beyond what they expected. Sure it’s still snub-accuracy, but still good.
  • Muzzle-flip is apparently not as pronounced as with other guns in its class. That, along with reduced recoil, is good for follow-up shots.
  • Trigger. People are impressed with the trigger. Some reports were even saying that, compared to their Smith’s with trigger jobs, the LCR’s out of the box trigger was better. That’s food for thought.
• I liked the sights. I liked how it was set up. I think the S&W M&P 340 has a similar sight setup (that U-notch rear that just runs down the spine of the frame), but of course that gun is far more expensive.

I just didn’t see much in terms of meaningful flaws, and a whole lot of positive.

There’s really only one thing about the LCR that give me pause: how new it is. It only just hit the market a few months ago. Sure this means there’s not much aftermarket, but that’s not that big a deal. What’s a bigger issue is that there’s no real track record yet. If this is to be a gun you wish to bet your life on, you don’t need it to go *click* when you need it to go *bang*. And what with Ruger’s spate of recalls lately, it’s enough to give a little pause. Granted Ruger knows revolvers, but this is a ground-up new design, how proven is it?

But on the same token, at its price-point, it doesn’t seem that bad a thing to try out. Heck, I’d love to try torture testing one of them, if I could afford it (Hey Ruger, I’ll be your guinea pig!). If I did buy one, I’d certainly run a few hundred rounds through it before I felt confident enough about carrying it. Besides, I’d be a cool kid with a new toy that everyone would want to try out. 😉

So, the jury is still out. But I must admit, I’m very curious to try out the LCR.

Snubs in General

In my email exchanges, a buddy of mine asked if I want a snub or a need a snub. Thinking about it, it’s a little of both.

Certainly there’s want. To want just to have and for no other reason. I’ll admit that, and IMHO it’s a perfectly valid reason.

I do think there’s need as well. I’ve had some times when carrying a full-sized gun is just not possible. I’ve been able to get by with a Springfield XD-9 Subcompact, but it’s still kinda bulky. However, yesterday’s exchange prompted me to do something.

I did a side-by-side comparison of the XD-9 subcompact to a S&W snub that a friend lent me to try out. I was surprised to find that they’re almost the same size! If one fashioned a box, that is, just looking at the “outer perimeter” dimensions of the two guns, they’re about the same size. My mind was set that the snub was smaller, but it’s not. What makes it appear that way is the back-end of the guns: the semi-auto of course has all this slide back there, whereas the snub is all rounded off. This certainly is a dimension that matters when it comes to storage/carry: that “lack of hump” means something doesn’t jut out of a holster, poke through your pocket, and so on. Furthermore, the width of the snub is thinner apart from the cylinder (comparing that, the widths are about the same). So the snub isn’t smaller per se, but the overall profile of the snub is smaller and thus can fit in places a semi-auto may not.

When it comes to weight, the snub I’m borrowing is all-steel, so weights were about equal. Of course, that’s where the snub can take the advantage, because you can get lightweight ones like the LCR or the S&W 642 or 340. A bitch to shoot, but you carry more than you shoot thus the appeal of the lightweights.

Then snubs can do things a semi-auto can’t, like shooting in confined areas (e.g. from within a coat pocket) or contact shots.

Then, snubs don’t have much for capacity, but is this a primary gun or a back-up gun? Hopefully usually backup, but sometimes it may have to be a primary. But I guess something is better than nothing.

So do I need a snub? I’d sure like to have one so that I can have such a tool in my toolbox. It’s a tool that has advantages that no other tool can fulfill, but of course it comes with disadvantages. Can’t play golf with only one club in the bag, and the more clubs the more options you have when “that situation” comes up. So I’d like to have a snub, and hopefully I’ve rationalized this to myself pretty well. 😉