Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. (NYSE-RGR) announces the introduction of the LCRx™ with a 3-inch barrel, the newest variation of the revolutionary Lightweight Compact Revolver (LCR®). Chambered in .38 Special +P, this LCRx features an exposed hammer that allows it to be fired in either double-action or single-action mode.
“The newest LCRx is the perfect revolver for backpacking, concealed carry, home defense, or just plinking,” said Chris Killoy, Ruger President and Chief Operating Officer. “The 3-inch barrel, adjustable sight and modest weight create a great all-around gun.”
This latest addition to the LCR line maintains all the features of the original LCR, including a uniquely engineered double-action trigger pull and patented Ruger friction-reducing cam fire control system. The double-action trigger pull force on the LCR builds gradually and peaks later in the trigger stroke, resulting in better control and a trigger pull that feels much lighter than it actually is. The LCRx also incorporates crisp single-action functionality for precise shooting.
The LCRx rear sight is fully adjustable for both windage and elevation, and the full-length Hogue® Tamer™ Grip without finger grooves makes for comfortable shooting. The LCR chambered in .38 Special +P has three main components: a polymer fire control housing, an aerospace grade aluminum monolithic frame, and an extensively fluted stainless steel cylinder. When it was originally introduced, the Ruger LCR revolver was one of the most significant new revolver designs in over a century, and it has since been awarded three patents.
In addition to the recently introduced 9mm model, the Ruger LCR is available in .38 Spl +P, .357 Mag., .22 WMR and .22 LR double-action-only models. The exposed hammer LCRx is available in .38 Spl +P. All LCR models feature replaceable ramp front sights with white bar and some models feature a laser-sighting system from Crimson Trace®.
Nice. I want one in .22.
I’m all for expanding a product line to add options, but this almost seems like a departure from the small, compact revolvers that the LCR line started as. The plastic frame will still keep it nice and light for concealed carry IWB but it’s no longer pocked sized. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing though. Seems like a pretty good option for IWB, although for a strictly carry revolver I don’t want a target style rear sight. A lot of people deride adjustable rear sights in general for not being tough enough for heavy use, and although I’m not sure I’d go that far, this rear doesn’t look as solid as I’d like for carry
I think the idea is for this to serve more as a “kit gun” – something you wear IWB but that’s so light and easy to carry you don’t worry about it.
Kit gun is exactly how it should be marketed.
I like it!!
One Variation I would like to see is the Fixed Sights Model!! Call me crazy, I like and prefer Fixed Sights!!
But… I LIKE IT!! I love 3″ models!!
i just wish they had spent a little money trying to clean up the aesthetics of the piece. It looks like something out of Eastern Europe or Central Asia.
I want one in .327 with a six-round cylinder. I know, I’m crazy.
That…would actually be a pretty dope set-up for a kit gun.
A .327 LCR has been something I have wanted Ruger to make for a while. Odd that they never have since they pushing it hard when It came out, and it actually makes sense in the LCR(as opposed to the GP100 & Blackhawk).
They make one in the single six sized frame.
It might be that the pressure of the 327 is too high for the design to handle. A 357 packs about 35,000 psi the 327 comes in at 45,000, the 38+p is only about 20,000. I have an S&W 632 (327) and it packs a heck of a wallop and percussion wave as well. I have a 357 LCR, it’s pretty nasty compared to shooting 38+p rounds or shooting my 3″ barrel 686+ with full power 357 rounds. I’d rather shoot my 3″ barrel 629 44mag than my LCR 357. The only advantage, it’s easier to conceal and carry the LCR, but I don’t practice with it near enough.
I agree, but Ruger had one with the admittedly heavier SP-101 with a 3.25 inch barrel. They dropped it from their product line a couple of years ago.
I don’t think that it’s crazy; I want one chambered for .327 Federal, too.
Send me one and I will go test it at the range an let you know an honest opinion about the weapon.
Ruger should offer this model in .22LR in an eight-round cylinder, .327 in a six-rounder, and a .357 in five. This is obviously a kit gun, and those are proper kit gun calibers. Nothing wrong with .38+P, but .357 offers more versatility.
now we just need it in 357 or in 9mm i just bought the 9mm lcr and it shoots like a dream i agree that a 327 mag 6 shot lcr would sell like ice cubes in hell
Personally, I’d love this in 22lr with 8 shot cylinder, & with extra stainless steel built in just like they did with the original LCR 357 magnum 1.875″ barrel model. While the extra ss might not technically be “needed”, I’d still prefer it even with the extra 3 or so ounces it would entail. And let’s face it, the original LCR’s in 1.875″ barrel have the “lightweight pocket carry” market segment covered. Now that we’re out to 3″ barrels – why not have the LCRx a bit more substantive ?
Hey i just bought a SP101 with a 3 inch barrel. Are they trying to replace the SP101? I wonder if they will make a .357 capable version?
SP101: 27 ounces. LCRx: 13.5 ounces. It’s like they went out of their weigh to make it weigh exactly half as much as an SP101.
I’m sure .357, 9mm, and hammerless versions are in the pipe. They already have all the parts for it.
Just when you think the gun industry can’t get any stupider, i.e., Taurus puts out it’s Curve/Turd, Ruger goes and puts this out, and…..totally redeems the gun industry with this beauty of a wheel gun!
I see what you did there.
I was never a fan of snubby revolvers. They’re harsh, nasty to shoot (especially the LCR) and the barrel is really the part you’re LEAST worried about when concealing a revolver.
Overall, a 3″ 5 shot gun has me saying “meh,” However, if they did it in .22lr, I’d be interested.
But whyyyyy the hammerrrrr?
Ugh. It would have been so much cooler if the LCRx had never been born, and this were just an outgrowth of the LCR line
JOHN: I’m just guessing here on the hammer, but maybe this helps. 1.875″ barrel is for “up close & personal”, maybe out to 7 yards max…..& defensively-realistically we’re talking point & shoot. When you get to 3″ barrel & beyond – you’ve got longer range ability & SOME wanting to take a somewhat “targeted” shot sometimes ( simple hunting, plinking, etc – although still usable defensively for sure ). I’m a newbie & just guessing here.
Well Smoke, my reply was mostly bemoaning the fact that people think they need hammers on their revolvers. The untrained impulse is to reach back, and thumb back that hammer, which gives you a nice crisp single action trigger.
But there are a few things wrong with that. A double action trigger does not kill accuracy in the way some people seem to believe. Look back on a few of Caleb’s posts and you’ll see that some very impressive accuracy can be achieved with a DA trigger. I personally dislike the hammer because in my opinion, it isn’t necessary. It takes more time for me to ear the hammer back on the gun and then realign my sights and take the shot than it does to simply press the trigger smoothly to the rear, all in one motion, and not disturb the sights. I don’t shoot as well as Caleb, but I can fairly regularly hit the headbox of a USPSA target at 25 yards using my model 64. I can keep every shot on target at 25 with my model 36. It’s not difficult.
The trick is not “staging the trigger” as a lot of newbies do. You have to pull the trigger in one smooth motion without the sights being disturbed. Do that, and the bullet will hit the target.
Also, don’t point shoot. You can use the sights just as quickly. Point shooting is silly and a concession to mediocrity.
Ok, but I imagine that in SOME quick & immediate close up defensive situations you just won’t have time to “sight” the shot(s)……hence “point & shoot”. Then again I’m a newbie – so I’ll concede your point. On another note – I personally would really like this LCRx 3″ model in 22lr, but also have my eye on the S&W 63 with 3″ barrel ( all stainless, about 25 ozs….that weight does not bother me ). I’d imagine the LCRx will have the superior DA trigger pull. If you were me, which one would you prefer ? And assume the price is NOT an issue in either case……& assume I have other revolvers in other calibers. This would be more of a “want” than a “need” for me.
I like the LCR’s DA pull more than most revolver DA triggers. One of them in .22 would make for a fun little plinker for sure.
The 3 inch LCrx doesn’t appeal to me for ankle carry, I’ll take the standard 38+P.
However.///I do like those non finger grove grips.
Fixed sight no hammer please …
Add my vote for a .22lr model too.
Great job ruger.I think this gun will be a good seller. Personally I would love it in 9mm.
Comments are closed.