Having had a poor experience with Kel-Tec’s Pf-9, I bought the LC9 to evaluate. My specimen shows precise machining on the slide casting with few tool marks. Bore is smooth with sharp, clean rifling. Feed ramp and chamber present no roughness or visible tool marks.
So far the pistol has a perfect function record with 500 rds of various brands–ball and hollow point. Win bonded +P 124 gr jhp and 147 gr bonded jhp are two loads that also function without any hitch.
Accuracy appears to be good. Firing from 7 and 15 yards, the pistol hits point of aim. Rolling tin cans at 25 yards is easy. I shot some Federal Classic 115 gr jhp from an old stash and found the LC9 to be eeriely accurate with this load–based on some 90 yard stunt shooting, which is not relevant to its role.
I’m a double action revolver shooter from the old days and soon adapted to the long trigger pull and undesirable reset. The trigger smoothed up nicely. Sights are functional. I need not comment on the excess of safety gadgets.
Though I like the LC9, I readily see that it will not replace my Glock 19 or 26 or my S&W J frame. Later, I’ll comment on its niche for me.
I am a big fan of the LC9. My uncle has one and it is like shooting a fine tuned 1911 race gun compared to my PF-9! The PF-9 is hard to shoot and is rough around the edges. The LC9 is easier to shoot and is much cleaner around the edges. Fit and Finish is top notch which makes for much easier shooting sessions.
I have only had one FTExtract with my PF-9 and my Uncle had a few FTFires in his LC9 but we pretty much chalked it up as a dirty striker channel.
I got to run a mag through one today and was impressed…
i don’t like the thumb safety or the mag safety, but that’s just my opinion…
pretty smooth usable DA trigger. accurate. a bit snappy on recoil, but not overly unpleasant.
I have a question for the OP williejc. How is your LC9 doing and have you had the issue of primer pocket metal getting in the way of the firing pin and having soft firing pin hits on the primers. Plus do you feel the trigger has to long of a travel and is not crisp enough for a small handgun. Plus if you haven’t had these problems are there any concerns for this handgun to be used as a CH in a CH purpose purse.
Sorry for reviving this post but I am thinking of getting this for my wife as she has problems holding onto double stack pistols.
My LC9 has worked flawlessly for 800 rds of mixed ammo–some +p but no +p+. No reloads. The front sight shot loose and was repaired with loctite. I cleaned and lubed it before shooting and then have always cleaned it after every session. Some observations:
Increasing grip bulk by adding a slip-on rubber appliance from Hogue or other vendor sets the pistol farther forward in the hand. I used 3 large, thick, and strong rubber bands to accomplish this. The result was that I was less aware of the long trigger pull required to release the hammer. Yes, I agree that the trigger pull is too long, but for me it doesn’t make me reject the pistol. I suggest that you try using a straight through type of trigger pull without any attempt at staging the trigger for a more precise shot. Adjust your grip as needed.
Google Galloway Precision–they’re offerring hammer/trigger parts to correct the long pull as well as heavier recoil springs.
No mechanical issues or function complaints.
My opinion is that the factory recoil spring is too light and that Ruger chose its weight to allow women shooters to operate the slide. My brass lands 15 feet away. A heavier spring would lessen the felt recoil.
It’s much easier to shoot the Glock 26 well. I have both. The Ruger may be more safe if carried or kept fully loaded but not in a holster. For me a fully loaded Glock requires a covered trigger guard holster.
The thumb safety is ok and not in the way and is easy to take off but much harder to put on safe–thus it’s less likely be cause problems if used at all.
Yes, I say go with the LC9 for your purpose. Don’t overlook a S&W J frame or similar revolver, though.
I appreciate you mentioning Galloway Precision. I Googled them right away and bookmarked them for future use. I won’t be picking it up till next week as the shop was on back order for them for the past week. But I get the first one in the door on Thursday when they are supposed to be in. My wife has been wanting a handgun for sometime now and she really likes the Ruger LC9 as it fits in her hand the best. I will let the wife decide on what ammo works for her as it will be her CH. I will help her find the ammo that she and the firearm shoots best.
Again thank you for your help I know my wife will love her new firearm.
I do have one more question for you what holster would you recommend IWBC and ankle carry.
About holsters, I have never ankle carried and can’t advise. For IWB I use an unusual design by Remora. Texture of material provides enough friction to keep holster in place. There are no loops or clips. For a medium price IWB from an old-maker, check out Tex Shoemaker leather. For a wide range of ammo choice, see the ammotogo website. Your wife may like shooting The GoldDot standard pressue jhp round. Look at the Federal Classic Hi-Shok ammo, which has been outclassed by newer technology,…,but it shoots great and is still respected by many. My LC9 and BHP excel with it. Good price, too.
One mistake I’ve made is wasting money on holsters by not buying the very best to start with. My two recommendations above are OK, but in no way fall into the Roll Royce group.
I’m an old dude who’s in the hunter-shooter-collector category. I don’t shoot competition and have never carried a gun professionally. There are others here who are much better qualified than I. If I were to say more about what you need, I’d just be beating my gums–like they do on other forums. :lol:
I love my LCP and so I was really excited for the LC9 but when I found out it had all the BS lawyer “safety” features I was disappointed. I won’t be buying one.
I prefer these safety features as this Ruger is for my wife and so far they haven’t bothered her in way but we still have to fire one and we will be next weekend. I am unsure why you dont like the safety features. Whats not to like about a safe handgun.
Because personally speaking I don’t want some of those “safety” features on a weapon that’s primary duty is saving my life either as a primary or secondary.
Can those features be positives? For some, yes. But for me, I want to pull the thing out and fire it, not do the hokey poky.
So your saying that a thumb safety is a bad thing for you to have on your handgun. From what I have seen and handled on the LC9 that’s the only thing that would prevent you from pulling it out and shooting it. For such a small hand gun I appreciate that it has one. An internal lock isn’t that bad. Then there’s the round indicator on the top of the slide and then the magazine safety. Well did you know you can remove the thumb safety. As far as the other ones go well I kinda like them. But as there is no absolute hand gun for everyone. Here’s is a video that a rep talks about it kinda hard to hear form all the other gun fire. As this is for my wife I want the thumb safety. As she hasn’t been shooting much and was afraid of guns when I first met her. 10 years later and she is wanting her to get hr CHL and a concealed handgun. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z8ZUiNBMhs
On the appropriate firearm, no a thumb safety is not a bad thing to have. On a 1911 or an M&P they serve a purpose and I completely understand why they’re there and don’t mind them.
But on a gun that’s primary purpose is to be a backup or a primary “deeper cover” style firearm? Abso-freakin-lutley it’s a bad thing - FOR ME.
I understand where you’re coming from and I’m not saying you’re wrong for thinking that way. You and your wife are the ones who have to justify what’s right/wrong for y’all. I’m just saying for me, I tend to view features like that on a weapon as negatives because when I absolutely need to use it Murphy’s Law will strike and it’d be one of those features to say “ACCESS DENIED!” and I’m left with a $450+ brick.
what issues did you have with pf9 I have one thats 2 mnths old no issues up to 500 rounds about 300 FMJ and 200 147 HP Rangers no issues at all if you dont mind me asking
I agree with the gripes about the thumb safety, magazine disconnect, loaded chamber indicator. Unnecessary items on this type of (backup) firearm. This is the reason I prefer to carry a PF9(I do understand some of these have issues) or a J frame revolver.
I dislike ‘lawyer’ guns. I don’t understand why they didn’t make the LC9 just a larger version of the LCP. I thought they had a good thing going there.
My PF9 had failures to extract and failures to feed. KT never got it running. Otherwise, I’d be singing its praise.
The LC9 would be a safe gun without the manual safety because of the long trigger pull. The mag disconnect irks the purist or highly trained professional. It can be removed in some pistols, but I don’t know about the LC9. For the person carrying only the mag in the pistol the issue may not exist. Lose the mag, and you got a paperweight.
The untrained and the lame and afflicted buy handguns and often demonstrate unsafe handling and storage practices…
I like my LC9 because its reliable and reasonably accurate, and I’ve decided to accept it as it comes from the factory. It is a safe choice for the casual shooter. It should be a good choice for a purse gun.
The mag safety can be easily removed on the LC9. In fact, the trigger is a tad better without the safety as this piece drags against the trigger slightly.
Pic of mag safety. The front of this (right side) is what drags against the trigger.
The thumb safety can be removed as well, but that will leave a small gap in the slide where it was machined to fit.
I’ve installed the Galloway hammer and am awaiting the short break trigger bar. Will report once I install and test.
