Home Main Category Personal Defense

Ruger LCR in 22LR?

JayJay Senior MemberPosts: 3,862 Senior Member
http://gunblast.com/Ruger-LCR22.htm

What are your thoughts?

Here are mine. I don’t care one way or the other if someone wants to carry a 22 rimfire for protection. I will not. I don’t care if it holds 8 shots. So does my 1911. As far as this particular gun, the LCR in 22lr, I cannot see the point. There are much better options available already. It’s not really small enough to be a true pocket gun. Sure, someone could carry it in their pocket, but it’s just a little bulky for that, IMO. Why not an LCP in 380 if light recoil, small package is what you’re looking for. I won’t carry one of those either, but that’s my choice.

I guess what it boils down to for me is; I don’t see where Ruger is trying to go with this line of revolvers. I personally think they could cover the same bases far more effectively with a better selection of chamberings. I like the LCR platform for a SD revolver, but what they’ve chosen to chamber it in baffles me, taking into account what they could chamber it in. They started off with a 38 special LCR. Next came the 357, which made the 38 pretty much obsolete, but they still sell both. Now they are offering it as an 8 shot 22, clearly intended for defense, as it’s short and has fixed sights, which doesn’t tend to be useful for much more than close up work. Whether or not someone agrees or disagrees with using a 22 for defense, there are better options available, even for those wanting less recoil.

Chamber the LCR in 9mm or 40 S&W set up for moon clips. Chamber it in 327 mag so those that are recoil sensitive can have a selection of milder 32 loads to choose from but at least have the option of running it with 327 mag, which is far better than a 22. Do away with the 38 spcl chambered revolvers if you’re gonna sell it in 357 also. I don’t see the need to be redundant, but that’s just me. I guess it’s a marketing thing. Maybe that’s why I’m not a marketing guy and don’t work for Ruger..............

22 is a great plinker and small game round. Cheap and fun to play with. Carry it for SD if you want. I simply choose not to, but that doesn’t amount to much. I also believe there are far better options available, regardless of the circumstances. I’ll continue to use it for fun and high volume, cheap shooting. Of course, I have not had the opportunity to shoot the 22 LCR. But I don’t think I’ll need it to fight off angry rabbits and squirrels. Your mileage may vary

Replies

  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,973 Senior Member
    in .22 WMR it would be close to a .380 in power and 8 shots... I would consider it.

    D
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • JayJay Senior Member Posts: 3,862 Senior Member
    BigDanS wrote: »
    in .22 WMR it would be close to a .380 in power and 8 shots... I would consider it.

    D

    I could stomach that, for sure. That would make a little sense at least.......

    Ammo is a little expensive (for a rimfire), but it's supposed to be for defense, right. Not really designed to be a plinker or target gun.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    Dunno, the way I see it,
    It seems they want almost as much money for guns like that as what you pay for a Glock 19, I also don't want a PD handgun in .22 LR unless it is a BUG such as a NAA mini revolver that fits in a change pocket.

    Right now I have a super reliable compact pistol in .45 acp, and that is good enough for now, the Khars are also pretty small and chambered for real PD calibers.

    And for the record, .22 magnum is pretty expensive, and not a great choice for shorter barrel PD handguns, it is good chambering for rifles and varmints, but I would not consider it for PD / handgun use.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,262 Senior Member
    I dunno, I'd probably trust a solid, copper-plated Mini Mag to penetrate better than a .380. Neither's my first choice, but being more of an advocate of penetration over foot-pounds, I don't think there's much to choose between the two. The .22 would certainly give you less recoil and more practice.

    If they hung a longer barrel on it (3-4 inches) and installed better sights, they've have the lightweight trail gun market covered.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • rallykidrallykid Senior Member Posts: 657 Senior Member
    I don't see it as abad thing, more options are always better. It might be a handy snake gun but I already have a gun for that. Think of it as a training tool as it is cheap to shoot. Or better yet, add one to the collection so you can have one in .38, one in .357 and one in .22. When have any of us ever needed an excuse to buy a gun? I am shopping for a 3rd gen OD green Glock 19 to go with my OD green 26 and want a black 26 to go with my black 19 just so I can have matched pairs. Also trying to collect an AK from each country of manufacture but that is getting expensive.
    No, I do not have a pink fuzzy bunny fetish but apparently my Facebook hacking wife does.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    rallykid wrote: »
    Think of it as a training tool as it is cheap to shoot.
    That would make sense.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • sakodudesakodude Senior Member Posts: 3,893 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    I dunno, I'd probably trust a solid, copper-plated Mini Mag to penetrate better than a .380. Neither's my first choice, but being more of an advocate of penetration over foot-pounds, I don't think there's much to choose between the two. The .22 would certainly give you less recoil and more practice.

    If they hung a longer barrel on it (3-4 inches) and installed better sights, they've have the lightweight trail gun market covered.

    I think they would sell a boat load of these. When I lived in Colorado I would frequently carry my Walther p-22 while hiking or fishing or just out in the woods doing whatever. Most times I did not feel the need for something larger and a light weight .22 was just the ticket. The LCR would serve nicely in this role as well.

    Sako
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,798 Senior Member
    Depending on their selling price, I like the idea of it as a training gun, or even a short range pest control gun. I have occasional up-close encounters with coons, skunks, possums in my yard, and under certain circumstances I have wished for a short .22 with subsonic ammo.

    I have a Walther P-22 that I use to sharpen my skills with short barreled guns. But it is finicky about ammo, so I end up shooting Mini Mags or some other more expensive .22 high powered ammo - still far cheaper than center fire practice ammo, but not ideal.

    With a small revolver, I could shoot CB caps into a simple trap and practice up close, inside my garage, and have the approximate equivalent of a CO2 pellet gun. Yet, I would still have the capability to load with more serious ammo.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,715 Senior Member
    I'm not sure a .22lr LCR fits any nitch I need. I see the possibility of it as a training gun for cheaper ammo, but,----

    The trigger pull is hard and would the trigger between a .22 version remain the same with use as the other ones that probably would now not see much shooting, probably not.

    And the sights are not much since they were intended for a SD center of mass gun.

    I would not want one.
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • farm boyfarm boy Senior Member Posts: 1,001 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    I dunno, I'd probably trust a solid, copper-plated Mini Mag to penetrate better than a .380. Neither's my first choice, but being more of an advocate of penetration over foot-pounds, I don't think there's much to choose between the two. The .22 would certainly give you less recoil and more practice.

    If they hung a longer barrel on it (3-4 inches) and installed better sights, they've have the lightweight trail gun market covered.

    With adjustable fiber optic sights or something similar I would be all over one like white on rice.
    I am afraid we forget sometime that the basic and simple things brings us the most pleasure.
    Dad 5-31-13
  • JayJay Senior Member Posts: 3,862 Senior Member
    I guess I can see it as a training gun. If somebody had one in 357, I guess they could practice with the 22 and spend less on ammo. Being a reloader and having access to as much training ammo as I need, I guess I don't consider that for my needs. As far as a trail gun, I think there are better options out there. This particular gun seems to be designed to be a self defense carry gun. I still think there are a lot of better options they could go with for a SD revolver. I can cover training and pest control with guns better suited for the job.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 11,156 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »

    If they hung a longer barrel on it (3-4 inches) and installed better sights, they've have the lightweight trail gun market covered.

    My thoughts as well.
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 21,096 Senior Member
    Jay wrote: »
    http://gunblast.com/Ruger-LCR22.htm

    What are your thoughts?
    It wouldn't be in MY first 5 choices for a SD or plinking weapon. However, others might like it, and it's another option for them. Options are good IMO irregardless if I like a particular one or not :beer:
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,742 Senior Member
    Back when the LCR first came out, Dan Johnson envisioned it as the perfect platform for a "multiple upper" revolver design, where the polymer lower grip frame was the serial numbered item, and you switch out the other parts with multiple calibers.

    This reminds me of that, sort of.

    Honestly, I would not rely on a rimfire for SD if I had another option, but I do like the idea of this with a 4" barrel and fullsize grip as a trail gun. Make mine a 6 shooter, please.
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast, and speed is the economy of motion" - Scott Jedlinski
  • JayJay Senior Member Posts: 3,862 Senior Member
    Ruger already sells the SP101 in 22LR with a 4.2 inch barrel and adjustable fiber optic sights. Seems like a much better design to cover the trail gun market and would be a darn good one at that. The LCR is a defense gun design. To each his own. I just don't see the point. I guess I'm just trying to make sense of it because I generally like Ruger guns and I like the LCR design. I'd just like to see something with more of a point to it that the design is very capable of providing.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,715 Senior Member
    Jay wrote: »
    Ruger already sells the SP101 in 22LR with a 4.2 inch barrel and adjustable fiber optic sights. Seems like a much better design to cover the trail gun market and would be a darn good one at that. The LCR is a defense gun design. To each his own. I just don't see the point. I guess I'm just trying to make sense of it because I generally like Ruger guns and I like the LCR design. I'd just like to see something with more of a point to it that the design is very capable of providing.
    Yes, I usually do not say it is an answer to a question not asked, but, maybe this one is.

    The LCR, IMO, has it's place as a light carry gun, BUG, or in my case an inclement weather gun.
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • 41magnut41magnut Senior Member Posts: 1,206 Senior Member
    Really wonder why they haven't chambered it in 32 yet? Seems to me like a perfect rig.
    "The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,715 Senior Member
    41magnut wrote: »
    Really wonder why they haven't chambered it in 32 yet? Seems to me like a perfect rig.
    Maybe .32H&R mag since the .327 can have gruesome recoil in a light gun, but, then the .32H&R is about the same pwr as a standard .38spl..
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,928 Senior Member
    I'm NOT an advocate of the .22 rimfire in any configuration for SD...however this is no different than a S&W K-Frame .22...darn useful revolver...not just for training but for other chores that don't require a centerfire...
    I'd toss a LCR22 in my truck without a second thought...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    I had a S&W K frame .22 LR that I was given, it was only the frame, barrel and cylinder, everything else was missing, even the side plate.
    It was some revolver when I was done, 6 inch barrel, target sights, very accurate.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement