Ruger LC9

Airic · Jan 27, 2011

So I've been in the market for a small(er) carry pistol. Been doing a lot of research and had narrowed it down to the Ruger LCP or Kel-Tec PF9. Wanted the size of the LCP but the power of a 9mm, so I've been torn. The first time I saw the slick looking LCP I thought: "man I'd love to have that in 9mm"

Then I heard about the LC9 and was super excited until I read the features....

manual safety
internal lock
mag safety
freekin huge loaded chamber indicator

really? is every gun from now on going to try to be Kali compliant?

nikatkimber · Jan 27, 2011

Not only that, but it's actually noticeably larger than the Kel-Tec PF-9.

Airic · Jan 28, 2011

NikatKimber said:
Not only that, but it's actually noticeably larger than the Kel-Tec PF-9.

I noticed that also. Oh well, back to trying to decide between the first two....

Deacon · Jan 28, 2011

I could be wrong, but I think you gentlemen are thinking about Ruger's SR9. That one is considerably larger than the Kel-Tec PF9. Ruger's NEW joint the LC9 is almost identical in size to the KT PF9.

I've been eyeballing a smaller carry piece myself.

Airic · Jan 28, 2011

Well thats what I get for being half asleep this morning, I was looking at the pic of it compared to the LCP and was thinking PF9, too many letters and numbers for a friday morning.....

:blink:

Rolando · Jan 28, 2011

How would it compare to pocket carry of a J-frame in terms of size and weight? Anyone have the picture comparison?

nikatkimber · Jan 28, 2011

Deacon said:
I could be wrong, but I think you gentlemen are thinking about Ruger's SR9. That one is considerably larger than the Kel-Tec PF9. Ruger's NEW joint the LC9 is almost identical in size to the KT PF9.

I've been eyeballing a smaller carry piece myself.

It's not massively bigger, but:

.......PF-9..LC9
Length__5.85__6.00 in
Height__4.3___4.5 in
Width __ .88___.9 in
Weight 14.7__17.1 oz

For what I'm sure will be a gun that cost more, and has more Kommiefornia concessions, I wouldn't consider it unless it was smaller and lighter than the Kel-Tec, which has also been on the market longer.

Deacon · Jan 28, 2011

Shamelessly stolen from the internet...

S&W J-Frame 342PD
Kel-Tec PF9
Kel-Tec P3AT

S&W M&P 9mm
Kel-Tec PF9
S&W J-Frame 342PD

Airic · Jan 28, 2011

my main concern is warm weather carry. Anyone can carry a 5" gun concealed during winter, but in the spring/summer I'm a t-shirt and khaki shorts/athletic shorts kinda guy. I was thinking pocket carry would be the way to go for me

nikatkimber · Jan 28, 2011

With a Tshirt that isn't skin tight, you could easily carry a PF-9 IWB. Actually, I can carry a G19 under a loose Tshirt in the summer.

Now athletic shorts would be a trick with just about any gun, as the weight will want to take them down.

TKR Reptiles · Jan 28, 2011

I was thinking of getting one, but then saw the new Kimber solo and am going that route...

Michael1 · Jan 28, 2011

that was my question

How does the Kimber Solo stack up to the KelTec and the Ruger?

TKR Reptiles · Jan 28, 2011

Stack up? I am sure it far surpasses them to be honest... They aren't out for sale right now tho to accurately compare them all, but I handled a floor demo last weekend and it was NICE!

stroker-c10 · Jan 28, 2011

The LC9 looks ok but if I was set on a ruger, I would prefer the sr9c. I am just having a hard time coming around to these pocket pistols. Although that Kimber does look pretty cool.

nikatkimber · Jan 29, 2011

The Kimber would by my choice over the Ruger, but if cost is a critical factor, I'll bet you could get 3 KT's for what you could get the Kimber for. However, I am very interested in trying out the Kimber. It will no doubt be FAR better than the KT as far as fit finish feel and accuracy go.

ldp4570 · Feb 14, 2011

As I look at all these ultra small 9MM pistols, I see nothing that would sway me from my choice of the S&W3913. I do have the full size SR9, and she is a really thin pistol for holding 17+1. Fully loaded she's still heavier than my 3913 loaded. The SR9c at 10+1rds is just to short. I ran into the issue of to short a grip on the baby Glocks, and some of the other smaller 9MM pistols while doing reloads pinching the lower portion of my palm, and I don't have big hands. With exception to the hammer drop levers my 3913 is thinner than most of these, heigth isn't that much difference, and still have a 3.5" barrel. The 3913 is about the same size as a J-frame revolver, its not a pocket gun, but niether is the new one from Ruger. Besides I've had my 3913 for over 20yrs, and I've yet to see anything new I'd want to replace her with.
3913 and P225

640 J-frame sitting on top of 3913

3913 above 640

3913 next to my son's Beretta 92FS Centurion

CharlieWH2O · Feb 15, 2011

I carry a Kimber Ultra Carry II in .45 acp in a Tucker Silent Thunder tuckable holster. I wear it with shorts and a tee and no one is the wiser. Tucker no longer makes this holster but I have also worn the coverup model of his tuckables. http://rlcompanyusa.stores.yahoo.net/index.html

chazroh · Feb 18, 2011

I debated on the solo carry. Just decided to let it come out and get some use first. Bought an stainless ultra carry II in 9mm. One of the best shooting guns I own