View Full Version : S&W J-frame versus Ruger LCR?
For all you small revolver buffs, how's the new LCR compared to S&W J-frames? I have a model 36 that I like, but I'm wanting something that is lighter and more rust resistant.
Alpha Sierra
12-27-09, 18:42
I have a model 36 that I like, but I'm wanting something that is lighter and more rust resistant.
Get an Airweight: 637 if you don't care about an exposed hammer or 642 if you do. Their stainless steel and aluminum construction will take care of your weight and corrosion issues.
The LCR is definately lighter and has an easier way in my opinion to load/reload. On S&Ws, you have to push foward to eject the cylinder, while with the Ruger you push inwards. The biggest thing that turned me off was the immense rattling of the LCR. I was handling it in the store and could hear the internals whenever I shook the thing. Even on another LCR that I was shown. I can imagine the LCR making lots of noise while you were jogging. Also when you shake a S&W, no rattle what so ever.
ChicagoTex
12-27-09, 20:34
The LCR is quite a bit larger than the Smith J-frames, too big to pocket carry IMO.
It is marginally lighter, and the trigger IS considerably lighter and a bit smoother. The trigger reset is a bit longer as well.
If you intend to belt carry, and it MUST be a snubnose revolver, the LCR is a good choice. I myself turned to automatics when I realized the LCR was too big and the Smith was too brutal.
John_Wayne777
12-27-09, 21:38
S&W's non-locked offerings are the gold standard of the snub-nosed revolver world. My experience with the LCR is limited to handling a few samples...but I saw nothing compelling in the LCR to attract me to the revolver. It's considerably bulkier than the S&W options.
Personally speaking, I would rather buy a locked S&W and de-lock it than buy the LCR.
Well... I have ab LCR and really like itm. Can't comapre it to the j frames as I have only held them-not shot them. I will say I prefer the feel and certainly trigger of the lcr. I put a ct grip on it and placed 5 shots touching on the bull unsupported at 21'! Pretty good for my first couple of hundred rds thru a snubby. I really like it on my ankle for access while driving and have no issues in thw front pocket. I have pretty big thighs and don't wear pants that don't fit correctly. Seems very robust thus far, very low maint, and reliable. Great bug or super discreet primary pistol!
-drew
lethal dose
12-27-09, 22:51
i understand that the question was about the lcr and the j frames... but may i suggest a ruger sp101? honestly, it's not all that heavy especially when worn on a good quality leather belt. just a suggestion... i love mine! however, if i had to choose between the lcr and the j frame, i'd buy the lcr. it's a little less expensive and serves the exact same purpose... plus... it has the ruger name! (not that s and w is a bad name.) it all comes down to personal preference... neither gun should let you down. both are synonymous in quality manufacturing... buy what feels right to you.
I've carried a j-frame for almost ten years. Not sure what model, aluminum frame with shrouded hammer. It's not fun to shoot with +P's, but is very managable. I've also had the opportunity to shoot just about a dozen different Smith j-frames.
I've also had a brief opportunity to shoot a few LCR's. Only about 20 rounds or so each time. Honestly, I didn't want to shoot it anymore.
Keeping in mind that my opinion may be biased due to carrying my 2" for a decade, I'd deffinately recommend to Smith.
While I found the internal hammer Smith's to have very gritty triggers, the shrouded models felt great. I would avoid any exposed hammer revolver if you might be carrying in a pocket.
One thing that turned me off about the LCR, was the trigger reset. On the two models that I shot, I felt the triggers were horrible. On both models, while reseting the trigger, I felt what I believed was the trigger reset. However, upon pressing the trigger, the cylinder locked up. I was able to duplicate it at will. Upon further examination, I discovered that there were two reset points.
What felt like the trigger reset wasn't. I believe that the LCR trigger uses some sort of camming action. Without taking the guns apart, to visually verify, I believe that the first reset was the cam rolling over. The second reset was the true reset.
If you need to have the latest greatest wheel gun available, go with the LCR. If you want a snubbie with a proven track record that has been carried by thousands of Officers for several decades, Smith.
i understand that the question was about the lcr and the j frames... but may i suggest a ruger sp101? honestly, it's not all that heavy especially when worn on a good quality leather belt. just a suggestion... i love mine!
I'm a fan of the SP101s as well. Easy to carry, comfortable to shoot, good build quality. That being said, they are less preferable for pocket and deeper concealment than their lighter and smaller J-frame cousins. Fine on a belt, but if it's belt carry, it's an auto for me.
rubberneck
12-28-09, 13:06
I'll be the first to admit that I have never shot the LCR but I was troubled by the very thin barrel it uses. The outside sleeve is thick polymer while the inner part is wafer thin compared to the S&W. I suppose if you are one of those who will buy it and rarely shoot it than it shouldn't be an issue, but I have serious doubts that the LCR would stand up to any prolonged use. I have no such doubts about any J-frame.
lethal dose
12-31-09, 13:01
more about the sp-101. if you just look up some detailed pics, you will see the incredible build quality. in my opinion, it is superior to the lcr and any smith on the market... not saying that it is more desirable, it is just a tank of a gun!
John_Wayne777
12-31-09, 13:41
more about the sp-101. if you just look up some detailed pics, you will see the incredible build quality. in my opinion, it is superior to the lcr and any smith on the market... not saying that it is more desirable, it is just a tank of a gun!
It's bulkier than Smith revolvers because Ruger uses investment casting whereas Smith uses forgings that are CNC machined. Ruger's revolvers are certainly durable...but Smith's revolvers are legendarily durable as well.
lethal dose
12-31-09, 14:59
It's bulkier than Smith revolvers because Ruger uses investment casting whereas Smith uses forgings that are CNC machined. Ruger's revolvers are certainly durable...but Smith's revolvers are legendarily durable as well.
i could agree with you. i'm speaking simply from personal experience. regardless of which revolver you buy, it ALL comes down to personal preference and what feels best in your hand... i would expect each one to serve you without malfunction for years to come!
Jay Cunningham
12-31-09, 15:07
I am currently gaining experience with my LCR.
lethal dose
12-31-09, 15:13
I am currently gaining experience with my LCR.
how do you like it, personally? first impressions?
Jay Cunningham
12-31-09, 15:30
There is not much of a pedigree with this firearm, however Ruger has been known to make pretty good revolvers. I am experienced with Smith J-Frames but do not currently own one to directly compare. I am also familiar with the Taurus small frame revolvers.
Generally, the trigger is pretty nice for a double action, I would say appreciably lighter than a comparable out-of-the-box J-Frame. Accuracy is just fine and sights are nominal just like all others in this category. It has smooth edges and is snag-free. The trigger must be eased to the full-forward position for proper reset to occur. It can be "short-stroked" if you fail to do this - I cannot remember how susceptible the J-frames are to this but in my mind they seem less so. Also, the CT laser offering is a rather narrow grip and I'm sure is not as effective as the standard grip... but everything is a trade-off.
It's nice and light but probably slightly larger overall than a J-Frame. So far I like it but I am still getting used to it and still putting it through its paces.
operator81
01-02-10, 14:47
I've carried a 442 for 3 years now. I played with an LCR and hated the trigger. It was light at first but stacked terribly right at the end. It also seemed quite a bit larger than my 442. I'd say try to fire both and see which one you like better.
Plumber237
02-04-14, 17:10
I know this is an old thread, but I figured I'd share my experience with anyone interested. I rented a S&W 442 this last weekend for possibly replacing my LCR that is my current warm weather CCW, and for me personally the LCR is going nowhere. I have somewhat large hands, so the 442 with the stock grips was waaaaay to thin and small for my hands. I tend to cross my left thumb over my right hand onto the right side of the firearm to get that pinching motion for small revolvers, however with the 442 that made my left thumb cover the sights. I had 2 different speedloaders with (safariland & HKS) and neither worked with the 442 and the HKS works with the LCR (mostly, cannot put the rounds in all the way before releasing, but can go halfway which still works). I was way more accurate with the LCR, partially because of familiarity, even though I am fairly new to my LCR. I carry my LCR IWB, which a 442 would add the ability to pocket carry (as the LCR is too big), but I would rather sacrifice pocket carrying for accuracy and comfort while shooting. I'm glad that I rented a 442 before buying one, and now that I am set on keeping my LCR I will be getting the XS bit dot tritium sight & trying out a 5 star firearms J2-357/38 speedloader (as it is designed for the Ruger LCR). So I guess my input to this thread is that if you have large hands and are trying to pick between these firearms, give the LCR a shot as it fit my hands much better than the stock 442.
Same... ditto for the SP101, or at least a .357 LCR, which is a bit stronger (but also heavier).
I had difficulty deciding between the two when I made my purchase a few years back. I have owned/own both brands in larger revolvers (GP100 is my fave) and ultimately I went with Smith. There were a couple of factors which made me do so:
Pedigree - as mentioned, S&W is the gold standard in pocket revolvers, they've been making these for a while longer than Ruger which by itself doesn't mean squat but they have come close to perfecting these for my money.
Warranty - both companies have a stellar reputation in this department. I've had to use Ruger's on more than one occasion albeit with excellent results. I have never needed S&W's services.
Handling - while the Ruger is more comfortable, the grip is also bulkier and akin to trying to pull a warm gummy bear out of your pocket (there were no aftermarket Ruger LCR grips available when I was looking at these). No such troubles with the S&W and more aftermarket grips than one could shake a stick at - that said I still use the factory grips.
Personal - the S&W just seems more familiar and intuitive to me and I had difficulty getting my mind around a plastic revolver.
At the end of the day, I carry my G19 way more often.
High Altitude
02-04-14, 20:30
I have owned both and kept my 642.
I would never belt carry one of these small revolvers, I would carry my glock 26 instead.
Since I was only interested in pocket carry I kept the 642. The LCR was too bulky.
I've got an M&P 340 which is a .357 J frame. A good friend bought the .357 LCR. My S&W had to go back to Smith, because the cylinder bound up and wouldn't release. When I got it back from Smith there was gouges in the metal that were re-finished in black. If the trigger in my 340 was 15 pounds, a guess, the LCR felt like 7.5 pounds. The 340 with the factory grips feels like hitting an aluminum bat against a steel pole every time you pull the trigger. Having said all that I still prefer the J frame. It feels like a higher quality gun, and I added the Apex J frame trigger kit which makes a night and day difference. I EDC my 340 in a desantis pocket holster. I don't leave my house without it.
Shouldn't this post have been moved to the revolver forum years ago?
I'm new to revolvers but where does the S&W Model 49 fit in here? I have a chance to pick one up in excellent to good condition for >$300 Just wondering if you have "large mitts" if its an issue with these pistols?
I used to carry a Model 36 back in the day and it was a nice piece. Recently picked up a LCR for my wife and it also is a nice little gun. My nod would go to the LCR because I think the trigger pull is so much smoother than the S&W. Not that the Smith was bad, just that the Ruger, to me, was a lot smoother, making it easier to control for a small frame gun.
brushy bill
02-08-14, 10:44
I'm new to revolvers but where does the S&W Model 49 fit in here? I have a chance to pick one up in excellent to good condition for >$300 Just wondering if you have "large mitts" if its an issue with these pistols?
Model 49 is one of my two favorite J-frames or small revolvers period for that matter. Model 49 allows the option to cock the hammer (thought I find little use for this) while still presenting the option of firing from inside a pocket. Theoretically, there is more possibility of lint or other debris to enter the mechanism and interfere with operation than with a 442/642/etc. A lot of people seem to dislike the humpback appearance and claim it interferes with balance and does not permit as high a grip with the 442. Personally, I really like the 49. The "large mitts" can be rectified with aftermarket grips or a grip adapter.
Model 49 is one of my two favorite J-frames or small revolvers period for that matter. Model 49 allows the option to cock the hammer (thought I find little use for this) while still presenting the option of firing from inside a pocket. Theoretically, there is more possibility of lint or other debris to enter the mechanism and interfere with operation than with a 442/642/etc. A lot of people seem to dislike the humpback appearance and claim it interferes with balance and does not permit as high a grip with the 442. Personally, I really like the 49. The "large mitts" can be rectified with aftermarket grips or a grip adapter.
You have to see if it fits the hand. They are not made for fun shooting.
Smaller grips are part of the package on a small frame revolver. As soon as you add larger after-market grips, it starts to bulk up the gun to the point where you might just as well go to a K frame if you want more purchase for your paws.
SouthPaw970
02-09-14, 01:59
The LCR has a very smooth trigger pull. I bought one in 357 mag so it would handle 38+p a little better. It can be carried as pocket gun but as others have stated it is a bit bulky. Compared to S&W body guard 38 my pick would be the LCR.
LCR is better.
-Much better trigger
-.38 special model is lighter than the alluminum J-frame, yet handles recoil better
-Bigger trigger guard of the LCR not only makes it easier to fire while wearing gloves but also protects your fingers. (The trigger guard is less likely to smack your finger and if it does it's plastic instead of metal)
-The Ruger LCR357 with magnum ammo still kicks and rises, but it's tolerable for a few cylinder-fulls. The S&W Ti .357's are just downright painful and real hand damage is much more likely.
-The .357 mag LCR is less expensive than a S&W Ti .357.
(Keep in mind this is with Hogue-type grips, not the very painful Crimson Trace grips)
I get 5 head shots with .357 rounds in the double-action only LCR at 25 yds (taking my time) so it's certainly accurate enough.
I have one in .357 and had one in .38 that I sold and wish I had back..duh..
Not to put it down, but IMO the Ruger LCR > S&W J-frame in any caliber.
Never handled an LCR, but carried S&W for 10 yrs as a LEO and "J" frame off and on for 30 years. I have manipulated the S&W cylinder release so many times it is pure muscle memory.
I get 5 head shots with .357 rounds in the double-action only LCR at 25 yds (taking my time) so it's certainly accurate enough.
Wow Sir, you are a rock star.
I bought a .38 LCR expecting it to retire my 649 J frame. As much as I wanted to love it, I just couldn't get with it. Like many others have said, it is just bigger. Doesn't fit in the pocket like my boat anchor 649. Sold the LCR, now looking for a light weight J frame.
warpedcamshaft
02-16-14, 05:59
I've tried the LCR for pocket carry, and it is bulky and uncomfortable for me compared to the 642/442...
Pocket carry is the only reason I ever carry a revolver, so I went for the 442/642 series over the LCR. The availability of Apex trigger parts is a plus for the S&W series as well.
I have the 642 with a crimson trace, for me I prefer the fit and finish of the 642 over the LCR, which is a fine firearm but given the two I'll take the Smith
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wow Sir, you are a rock star.
? You must be a bigger rock star if you think 5 rounds of full-power .357 magnum into under four inches at 25 yds from a DA snubbie revolver unsupported isn't decent.
Sorry you didn't care for the LCR, the J-frame doesn't feel any smaller in a pocket to me. If anything is bigger it's the trigger guard but I think thats a good thing. Less likely to smack the trigger finger during recoil and if does, it's just rounded plastic.
I looked at both and went with the 642 no lock. I didn't like the rattle from the lcr. The Smith seems like a more solid gun in my hands. YMMV
Buy them both and see which one you like better! Shoot the snot out of them!
The Dumb Gun Collector
03-02-14, 19:15
If it was just for range use I might consider the LCR. But the only reason I fool with revolvers is so I can have gun in my pocket and the LCR is too chunky for this role. Like others said, if I am going through the trouble of threading on a holster I am carrying an autoloader.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.