Ruger LCR---No Thanks!

[bedbugbilly]

I had a 357 LCR and my hands couldn't take the recoil. It shot well and I considered it a good handgun but my older hands just didn't like it that much - and it was "stock" grips. I ended up trading it in on my Smith 36 snub and one I changed the stock wood grips on that to the Pachmyer Combat grips, I found what worked for me. Everyone likes a different flavor of tea. The LCR was a light CCW. I ended up shooting 48s out of it but I really need cared for the looks of the LCR - I like my J frame 46 snub so much I added the 3" version as well. Different hand sizes, different ages, different hand problems - all add to finding what works best for you.

 

[NateKirk]

The LCR wasn't designed for comfort

 

[Old Stony]

Without the grip of a gorilla, I can't see how anyone could do a rapid fire double action string of shots effectively using .357's out of a small revolver. I practice double action on a regular basis, just for fun. Even using a 3" k-frame the .357's have enough blast and recoil to delay getting back to target where you should be....but with .38's I can empty the cylinder on target with ease.
I don't think it's about being to withstand recoil, as much as being competent with your firearm.
I can shoot hard recoiling firearms...but under conditions of rapid fire, they just don't lend themselves to accuracy as others do.

 

[OldMarksman]

Without the grip of a gorilla, I can't see how anyone could do a rapid fire double action string of shots effectively using .357's out of a small revolver. ... Even using a 3" k-frame the .357's have enough blast and recoil to delay getting back to target where you should be....but with .38's I can empty the cylinder on target with ease. I don't think it's about being to withstand recoil, as much as being competent with your firearm. I can shoot hard recoiling firearms...but under conditions of rapid fire, they just don't lend themselves to accuracy as others do.

That pretty much sums it up.

I would suggest that anyone contemplating using .357's in a small revolver and carrying it a a primary defensive weapon participate in a really good defensive pistol shooting class and see how you do in the tougher drills.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That's the truth. I also have shot a 642 in several IDPA matches with standard loads and +p. Not to start the 'is 5 enough debate' again but it gives you a handle on 'rapid use' and targeting of these guns.

I also recommend a small pistol class as OldM. suggested. These are more of a test than anecdotes on how you can handle it on the square range.

 

[Lohman446]

If you are carrying a "high power" revolver in the .357 magnum class (or above) I would be curious as to what threat you are identifying and defending against. To me there are too many compromises made when discussing a .357 to really justify it as an appropriate CCW for most people in most situations.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I fail to understand this. In 'most' situations if you actually fire the weapon, your goal is to stop the adversary such that the threat to you ceases. That is the case in 'most' situations.

The discussion is whether a person can effectively use a 357 or any other gun to accomplish that.

The threat is simple - someone is attempting to generate grievous bodily harm to you or to someone you protect.

I agree that the gun may not work for some, but I don't get your differentiation of threat. I would like us to avoid going back to multiple opponents and how some folks think they are helpless before them.

The issue of follow up shots is clear. If you do have to fire more than one - yes, you may be behind the clock with significant recoil. So is that a way to say that you can't handle multiple opponents with such?

 

[Lohman446]

I fail to understand this. In 'most' situations if you actually fire the weapon, your goal is to stop the adversary such that the threat to you ceases. That is the case in 'most' situations.

Not all adversaries are going to be two legged. If I am forced to carry a 9MM or .357 in an area where I might run into medium sized bear or cougar I would rather have .357 even if the follow up shots are a bit slower. Some people will opt for .357 over 9MM in these cases and it will have everything to do with ammo selection over follow-up shots.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Well, most of us aren't concerned with our split times vs. a bear or mountain lion. YMMV - but a snubby for critters seems silly.

 

[Lohman446]

There are areas where concealed carry where on is likely to meet critters ore people is a concern. Is the snub 357 ideal? Not necessarily but it is a valid compromise for some

 

[Nanuk]

Congrats to HighValleyRanch. Shooting a snub .357 works for you, it doesn't work for everyone. And you chose one premium load out of all the .357 loads to make an argument that 600 fps from a 2 inch barrel. That's one load out of many .357 loads and I don't base my opinion of a firearm because of one available premium factory load.

Its not just 1 load, it is consistent with my experience as well. 145 Grain WW silvertips did 1250 from a 1 7/8" 640, WW 125 grain JHPs, did the same 1250 from the same gun. Where people are getting 600 fps is with 38 special loads in short barrels.

 

[Nanuk]

If you are carrying a "high power" revolver in the .357 magnum class (or above) I would be curious as to what threat you are identifying and defending against. To me there are too many compromises made when discussing a .357 to really justify it as an appropriate CCW for most people in most situations.

Not that long ago it was the gold standard in police handguns.

 

[Nanuk]

Funny you say you hate the trigger on the LCR, most say it has one of the best double action triggers out there.

It is not so much the trigger I dislike, it is the reset. I have talked with a few people and they say the same thing.

 

[thibaultfelix40]

Winchester makes 110 grain white box ammo in both 38 and 357. I find it much nicer in my wheel guns.

 

[Lohman446]

Not that long ago it was the gold standard in police handguns.

I did not have enough caveats in there. There is a major difference in the use of .357 in a full size revolver vs a sub-compact like the LCR. While I have no doubt some agencies and officers gravitated towards the .357 did it ever actually replace the .38 as the standard in police revolvers? (honest question I don't know)

 

[Cosmodragoon]

... I have no desire to own a light weight, small frame 357 Mag or 38 Special. I have three S&W J frame 38 Specials, two Model 36s and a Model 60, the Stainless version of the Model 36. Firing these small, steel framed 38s is all the recoil I want to handle. I can't imagine shooting a 357 Mag version.

I was at the range yesterday and a pal had a Ruger LCR... I was shooting one handed. First shot, ouch! ... Maybe if I had tried it two hands I would have liked it a bit better.

So is this really an LCR issue or is it an issue with small, light, snub-nosed revolvers in general? I suspect it's the latter and that makes the topic and its title a little unfair.

The LCR should really be compared to other alloy/composite snubs like the S&W 637 or 442. I don't imagine that those guns will be any more fun for the OP but they might be less. That's the point. I think the LCR shines in its respective class. I think it handles well and handles recoil a bit better than some of its classmates. I also think the double-action trigger of the LCR is at least as good as the J-frames'.

It's also worth noting that there are two frame sizes for the standard LCR. The lower-pressure rimfire and .38 special models use a lighter and slightly smaller frame. The .357, .327, and 9mm versions use the heavier frame (which is still relatively light).

Running .38 special through the LCR 357 should add a modicum of relief but in my personal experience, the LCR 38 is fine for where it lands in the spectrum of compromise that is concealed carry. I feel like the LCR 327 hits an ideal part of that spectrum with lighter loads. I don't care for the LCR 357 but that's only because I don't care for .357 magnum in any of this class of firearm. (I prefer my .357 magnum in heavier guns with longer barrels.) Sure, the LCR 357 might offer the same kind of relative advantages I appreciate in other models but I'm not in a position to appreciate them personally. Since I already know that, I don't think it would be right for me to go pick one up, shoot it one-handed, and post a thread about it being icky.

.

 

[Rob228]

I traded my 642 for a no-lock model 40, which still hurt to shoot. I gave it to a friend for watching a bunch of my firearms while I was going through a six month training course. Lightweight snubbies may be for some people, but I think I am done with them.

 

[Nanuk]

I did not have enough caveats in there. There is a major difference in the use of .357 in a full size revolver vs a sub-compact like the LCR. While I have no doubt some agencies and officers gravitated towards the .357 did it ever actually replace the .38 as the standard in police revolvers? (honest question I don't know)

There were still holdouts with the 38's but the only cops i knew of that carried 38's instead of 357's were A: dictated to by dept policy or B:Those who could not handle the 357. In my experience about 95% of the cops I worked around carried 357's, but I was a cop in Ft Worth, TX and with the US Border Patrol. I carried a 357 mag in some form up to about 2005. If I carry a revolver these days it is my S&W Model 69 44 mag loaded with 180 grn JHP's.

 

[SAWBONES]

A lighweight J-frame size gun, whether made by S&W (e.g., 340PD, 642, etc.) or Ruger (LCR), handles .38 Special+P loads easily.

Felt recoil is not punishing.

Yes, capacity is small, reloads are slow, and shot-to-shot time is prolonged, but there is no lighter weight, more comfortably carried sidearm out there.

OTOH, shooting .357 Magnum loads in these little guns is not only not enjoyable, but little or nothing is gained over .38 Special loads in terms of terminal ballistics, while blast, flash and felt recoil are considerably increased, with no corresponding worthwhile gain in either accuracy or precision, IME.

These little guns really shine for CCW in .38 Special (or in .22WRM and .327 Magnum too?), but people who buy them in .357 Magnum versions, "just in case they want to shoot more powerful loads", yet who actually shoot only .38 Special loads, are fooling themselves, especially given the issues about the increased effective freebore of .38 Special loads from .357 Magnum cylinders causing loss of gas pressure and sometimes also degraded accuracy.

 

[HighValleyRanch]

Oh No, the myth keeps going forward......again!LOL
I've tried to keep out of this thread, but........

Read this thread!
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=589317
Tell me 617 foot pounds out of a .357 magnum is nothing more than a .38 +P.
And the main reason I carry this load is for walking in the woods against big cats, hogs and little black bears! 3000 pounds of energy in my right front pocket feels pretty comforting. Nay sayers can claim what them want, but I know what how this LCR shoots and how I can handle it.