[Robert9620]

So what does everyone here think about the Ruger LC9? I've looked at it, it might cost a bit more than the Kel-Tec PF-9, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[RobzKT]

Here's a few threads with opinions and Side-by-Side comparisons:

http://www.thektog.org/forum/showthread.php?t=206108
http://www.thektog.org/forum/showthread.php?t=206090
http://www.thektog.org/forum/showthread.php?t=206011
http://www.thektog.org/forum/showthread.php?t=235835
http://www.thektog.org/forum/showthread.php?t=235941

If someone's dead set against the PF-9 and looking at the heavier LC9...
For the little bit price difference between the LC9 and the Shield, I'd pick the Shield over the LC9.

 

[P250UA5]

My father-in-law has an LC9, I didn't care for the trigger, it was pretty gritty feeling.
I haven't shot a PF9, but I like my P11 better than the LC9 as well.

Though about getting a PF9 for the wife, but will probably go with the Shield for her, if she likes it.

 

[Robert9620]

I'm not against the PF-9 at all, I think it's a great gun. But in case some people can't find a PF-9 anywhere, I'm sure the LC9 would probably be a good secondary option.

 

[Robert9620]

Heres the Shootoff video of the Ruger LC9 and the Kel-Tec PF-9 by Nutnfancy
[ame="http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzhapH0CaUE"]http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzhapH0CaUE[/ame]

 

[RobzKT]

There are more just like that from Hickock45 and others.
Looks like you're answering your own question.

 

[Robert9620]

I think the LC9 will be great, once any problems that it has are rectified. Ruger does make some pretty good guns, so I wouldn't count them out.

 

[CJP32]

I think the LC9 will be great, once any problems that it has are rectified. Ruger does make some pretty good copies, so I wouldn't count them out.

Not a jab at you it's directed at Ruger and their "clean sheet of paper designs" I know they make some good guns but I will never but another new one due to their business practices. Ya maybe it's silly but that's how I feel.

 

[dustyvarmint]

I shot the LC9 when trying to make up my mind for a compact 9. Went with the PF9. Wish I had gone with the LC9. I would take the Shield over either.

happy shooting, dv

 

[jonnin]

I will put in a plug for the beretta nano. If you have not, at least give it a look once before picking. At the very least, its no copy of anything. While it says striker fired, its a DAO that has a striker instead of a hammer, and nothing like a glockish striker build.

 

[Mikelecka]

ditto; CJP32 he said it rite.

 

[ole442]

My PF9 is more accurate over my LC9. I think it is the trigger because the more i shoot the LC9, the better the accuracy gets. I have had one jam with the PF9 so it's only 98 % trustworthy...IMO. I would carry either...they're about even steven to me except the fit & finnish right out of the box is better with the LC9. JMHO

 

[mkamer]

I was totally set to get an LC9 until I held it at the LGS. Fit and finish were nice and it felt good in the hand. But the trigger seemed like a long reach for me. Trigger also felt very gritty. But I wouldn't put the LC9 down other than that trigger reach. If it fits your hand I think it would make a good purchase. Ruger makes fine products.

I ended up getting the Kahr CW9. Fit me perfectly and trigger is very smooth. And just a few dollars more than the LC9 but not as expensive as the Shield.

 

[KeltecFreak]

. . . the more i shoot the LC9, the better the accuracy gets. I have had one jam with the PF9 so it's only 98 % trustworthy...IMO. I would carry either...they're about even steven to me except the fit & finnish right out of the box is better with the LC9. JMHO

Ditto about the LC9: I sold my pf9's because of too many issues that caused me confidence problems. Got the LC9 and liked it because the learning curve with the Ruger trigger was no more difficult than the learning curve with the pf9 - just my opinion. But I was able to swap the LC9 for the Shield and the trigger on the MP is outstanding. There is no "getting used to it" on the trigger. If you have some experience shooting, you will learn to shoot any of these, but the Shield shoots more like the Glock because of the striker-fired trigger. But I definitely preferred the LC9 over the pf9.

 

[Capp]

Now that I've owned both, there's no question (as far as "I'm" concerned) the LC9 is a better pistol in EVERY way except weight .

I donno about the P3AT compared to the LCP, but the LC9 and PF9 certainly aren't the same pistol .
No more than a Glock, M&P or XD are

My trigger isn't "gritty" , it does stack just before the hammer breaks at 7.5 pounds .
Not unlike Glock's trigger stack just before the striker releases
(though Glock's trigger is LIGHT YEARS better than Ruger's or KelTec's)

But the LC9's trigger is no better or worse than the PF9
they BOTH stink ...

The LC9 is more accurate and easier to shoot .
Not the least bit fussy about ammo
The trigger doesn't pinch the chit out of my finger
and after 500 rnds (75 of which have been +P) I'm not concerned that it's SO "light duty" something is going to break or fail on any given shot ...like i did with the PF9

I really didn't intend to buy the LC9, it just kind of dropped into the lap at the gun show Saturday .
it was simply one of those deals I couldn't pass on
(private sale, NIB unfired for $275)


i may or may not keep it when my Shield gets here .
But for now it has a home


..l.T.A.

 

[PATRIOT TWO]

I'm not against the PF-9 at all, I think it's a great gun. But in case some people can't find a PF-9 anywhere, I'm sure the LC9 would probably be a good secondary option.

Your last sentence,Dont Do IT ! the LC-9 has had sooo many issues and send backs,check Rugerforum.net for all you need to know,I dumped two lc-9s for the Shield and love it,I do miss my KT PF9 and will get one back again,mostly becasue its lighter than the Shield,both are awesome guns.

 

[TxCajun]

The whole idea of a DAO pistol is simplicity - point and shoot. There's nothing more stupid or useless than a DAO pistol with a safety, unless it is a DAO pistol with 3 safeties.

The loaded chamber indicator is fine by me. IMHO, the rest of this crap is lawyer designed for the California market mentality...

SAFETY FEATURES include internal lock, manual safety, magazine safety and loaded chamber indicator which provides visual and tactile indication that chamber is loaded.

 

[doublebarrel2]

I prefer my PF-9,wife prefers her LC9.But the mag saftey has been removed,internal saftey will not be used and she leaves the other saftey off.She doe's like the loaded indicator though.

 

[tyler2you]

The over abundance of safety features were the deal breaker for me on the LC9. I'm a responsible gun owner and don't need a magazine disconnect, huge chamber loaded flag, or a manual safety on my carry gun to get in the way. Now that I've got a reliable PF-9 with the Northwood Trigger, I'm set. I also own a Nano, CM9, G27, EMP, and a M&P9c, but the PF-9 just works for me.

 

[darkwriter77]

I don't mind a loaded chamber indicator, so long as it's unobtrusive and doesn't interfere with anything. The LC9's LCI is a bit much, as is the similar one on the SR9(c). Smith & Wesson has the right idea with theirs on the M&P and Sigma pistols - just a half-circle of a peep hole in the top of the barrel hood so you can see the brass. Nothing to jam, malfunction, break, fall off, get in the way, or whatever.

Then again, even though my SW9VE has this feature, I'll still do a press-check or lock the slide back and peek inside to verify it's empty before making any assumptions either way.