Sounds like enough trouble to choose another line altogether. After browsing the thread I am curious if there might be any similar issues with the LC9's since one is my edc.
Are The Ruger LCP Models Durable?
- Thread starter OkieStubble
- Start date
YMMV, and my sample size is 1, but I'm happy with the specimen I have. I picked up the .380 conversion, 9x18 Mak conversion barrel and a .22lr upper. All together, well over 1k rounds on the frame & trigger pack with no issues.
They(the original LC9/380) are essentially rebranded KelTeks, internally. So much so that I have to wonder if Ruger bought production rights, or just did a Gillette-style market share move.
My last two 10/22’s have had major feeding issues and the breakdown stainless model has been sent back 3 times. No exaggeration here, it took 3 new upper receivers to finally fix the issue. I was never given any info, just had the joy of paying a FFL $50 thrice to get my new inexpensive rifle to work. I love my old Rugers and won’t be buying anymore.
I was told later that Ruger will reimburse the FFL costs. Their CS never mentioned this but something to research perhaps for anyone still interested in this brand.
I was told later that Ruger will reimburse the FFL costs. Their CS never mentioned this but something to research perhaps for anyone still interested in this brand.
- Thread starter
- #84
My buddy Colin Nior really likes his LC9 and there isn’t the negative track record on the Ruger forums about it like there is on the LCP Max.
- Thread starter
- #85
I think alot of companies today, when making their newer firearms, instead of doing their own quality control and extensive testing, are just quickly putting their new stuff out to market in the spirit of being highly competitive; and then just allowing customer reviews & complaints to be their avenue of doing QC for them after the fact instead of before the fact?
That’s what it seems like anyway?
- Thread starter
- #86
So John, @nortac I have been doing a bunch more in-depth research concerning our LCP Max's. Other than the terrible trigger we experienced when we first got them, I have been doing a lot of reading on several different Ruger forums. From the info I have gathered, it appears the 6" low shooting from LCP Max's is the front sight post is too tall?
From what I have been reading, when a combat sight hold is used, other Max owners have observed that when the top of the front blade post is held level with the top of the rear U-notch blade post during bench rest shooting at 7-10 yards, while this is how it should be done, they notate that it will consistently shoot 6 inches low and 3 inches left, which I can verify was the same experience I was having and also you?
But when they adjusted their bench rest sighting, to hold the top of the blades of the rear U-notch sight to only the center of the white tritium dot of the front sight post? Their shots were all, POA/POI? Interesting no? Come to find out, many Max owners, are purchasing a set of front and rear TruGlo's that are made for the S&W Bodyguard .380? Apparently, the S&W Bodyguard shares the same similar sight notches as the Ruger LCP Max.
I verified this to be true, because I went to Ruger's online sales shop, and they also sell the exact same aftermarket sights for their LCP Max on their own website.
Also, while I never had any trigger bite with the Max, I found many Max owners have. I saw lots of pics of blood blisters on pointy trigger fingers on the Ruger forums. While some changed them out for Galloway's trigger like you have, Many others were raving about MCarbo's new trigger for the Max. I was reading an old post of yours in this thread where you said, while you may not carry the Max, you probably will keep it, because you are 'a tinkerer' and like to see if you can make an unreliable pistol reliable.
I have given what you said a lot of thought and it got me thinking; Since it seems like there are definitely aftermarket fixes for the LCP Max when reading the Ruger forums; I realize, now that the accuracy can be fixed and the trigger issues can be fixed, my only problem left; and probably my biggest issue left is, that the tip of the front bottom portion of the steel slide broke which made the small hole in front of the slide where the guide rod and recoil spring sets in, chipped away and made that small hole bigger, allowing for the recoil spring to slip thru the now, bigger broken hole and exit out the front of the pistol.
So I have spent sometime researching this; and while I have found most of the other issues with the Max like the trigger and sights to have been a common problem with other Max owners, which there are solutions for. I haven't found another single issue about the slide steel chipping away from the recoil spring hole in order to duplicate and confirm my own experiences?
This at least shows me, if I can't find anyone else with this problem? Then maybe there is an issue with the quality of steel in the slide? So it got me thinking again, If it's not the steel in the slide, then why did the steel chip away around that small hole in the front of my slide allowing the recoil spring to escape?
I started doing some more research and came across something very interesting. And I actually came across it on MCarbo's website of all places. I was looking on MCarbo's website considering their trigger and springs kit upgrade and started watching several videos that MCarbo has showing how to install their products. I came across their installation video of them switching out Ruger's LCP Max OEM carbon steel guide rod, for their stainless steel guide rod and 15% power spring.
The guy in the video, was saying that their stainless steel guide rod fixes the issue of the Ruger Carbon steel guide rod which has been reported to flex a bit under recoil, because the Ruger OEM rod wasn't heat treated to harden the rod? So again, I researched Ruger forums and found some posting about the OEM rod flexing and throwing shots 3" to the left?
It sounded to me like, if the front sight is too tall and dropping shots 6" low and the untreated OEM rod is flexing and causing shots to throw 3" inches left? This would explain why SOooo many Max owners are reporting 6" low and 3"inch left shots from bench rest? It also could explain why the steel from the front bottom recoil spring hole in the slide chipped away on mine in the first place? I'm thinking, if the OEM rod was flexing during shooting, maybe the front of the rod was shot peening the steel around the rim of that guide rod hole because as it returned to battery after every shot, it wasn't returning in the middle of the hole but was hitting the edge rim of the hole which would possibly peen that rim and thin chip away at that hole after so many rounds?
I had decided to keep the LCP II because it had showed no other problems in over a decade until the magazine started dropping. But I am confident the now much stronger magazine release spring which is now installed, will effectlivly solve this problem for the future. I have never seen any other issues with reliability or accuracy or quality of trigger or anything from the LCP II. And while I seriously have been considered selling the Max? I now know that the trigger and sighting and accuracy troubles can be fixed with MCarbo aftermarket parts, Maybe the steel breaking on the slide can be fixed with a stainless steel heat treated guide rod, which won't flex under fire and keep the slide reciprocating straight and on the narrow?
The wife really likes her G42 and her G43. I have confidence now that she will carry her G43 OWB unger heavier clothes in colder temperatures and carry her G42 AIWB in warmer temps under lighter clothing. And while 6 rounds is better than nothing in either pistol, she does carry a spare magazine with each.
With all the trouble I have had with the LCP Max? If it was any other small pistol I would have got rid of it immediately. But at the same time, I feel like slowing my roll on getting rid of it, because you just don't see another small micro pistol .380 of it's size and weight which effectively can hold and carry an incredible, 12 rounds in it's magazine. Because of this fact, I might just go the MCarbo way and upgrade it's trigger, springs, guide rod; and then get ride of the horrible, too tall front OEM sight and put the better TruGlo front and rear sights on to get it to shoot POA/POI.
If it all works out and can prove itself reliable and accurate again? I might not let the wife ever carry it again over her Glocks, but other then the two Ruger LCP's? The smallest thing I have to carry is my G43X. If the upgrades work on the Max, at least if I am ever in need of something really small; in an extreme pinch, a 12 round pocket pistol would still be pretty neat & handy.
From what I have been reading, when a combat sight hold is used, other Max owners have observed that when the top of the front blade post is held level with the top of the rear U-notch blade post during bench rest shooting at 7-10 yards, while this is how it should be done, they notate that it will consistently shoot 6 inches low and 3 inches left, which I can verify was the same experience I was having and also you?
But when they adjusted their bench rest sighting, to hold the top of the blades of the rear U-notch sight to only the center of the white tritium dot of the front sight post? Their shots were all, POA/POI? Interesting no? Come to find out, many Max owners, are purchasing a set of front and rear TruGlo's that are made for the S&W Bodyguard .380? Apparently, the S&W Bodyguard shares the same similar sight notches as the Ruger LCP Max.
I verified this to be true, because I went to Ruger's online sales shop, and they also sell the exact same aftermarket sights for their LCP Max on their own website.
Also, while I never had any trigger bite with the Max, I found many Max owners have. I saw lots of pics of blood blisters on pointy trigger fingers on the Ruger forums. While some changed them out for Galloway's trigger like you have, Many others were raving about MCarbo's new trigger for the Max. I was reading an old post of yours in this thread where you said, while you may not carry the Max, you probably will keep it, because you are 'a tinkerer' and like to see if you can make an unreliable pistol reliable.
I have given what you said a lot of thought and it got me thinking; Since it seems like there are definitely aftermarket fixes for the LCP Max when reading the Ruger forums; I realize, now that the accuracy can be fixed and the trigger issues can be fixed, my only problem left; and probably my biggest issue left is, that the tip of the front bottom portion of the steel slide broke which made the small hole in front of the slide where the guide rod and recoil spring sets in, chipped away and made that small hole bigger, allowing for the recoil spring to slip thru the now, bigger broken hole and exit out the front of the pistol.
So I have spent sometime researching this; and while I have found most of the other issues with the Max like the trigger and sights to have been a common problem with other Max owners, which there are solutions for. I haven't found another single issue about the slide steel chipping away from the recoil spring hole in order to duplicate and confirm my own experiences?
This at least shows me, if I can't find anyone else with this problem? Then maybe there is an issue with the quality of steel in the slide? So it got me thinking again, If it's not the steel in the slide, then why did the steel chip away around that small hole in the front of my slide allowing the recoil spring to escape?
I started doing some more research and came across something very interesting. And I actually came across it on MCarbo's website of all places.
I was looking on MCarbo's website considering their trigger and springs kit upgrade and started watching several videos that MCarbo has showing how to install their products. I came across their installation video of them switching out Ruger's LCP Max OEM carbon steel guide rod, for their stainless steel guide rod and 15% power spring.The guy in the video, was saying that their stainless steel guide rod fixes the issue of the Ruger Carbon steel guide rod which has been reported to flex a bit under recoil, because the Ruger OEM rod wasn't heat treated to harden the rod? So again, I researched Ruger forums and found some posting about the OEM rod flexing and throwing shots 3" to the left?
It sounded to me like, if the front sight is too tall and dropping shots 6" low and the untreated OEM rod is flexing and causing shots to throw 3" inches left? This would explain why SOooo many Max owners are reporting 6" low and 3"inch left shots from bench rest? It also could explain why the steel from the front bottom recoil spring hole in the slide chipped away on mine in the first place? I'm thinking, if the OEM rod was flexing during shooting, maybe the front of the rod was shot peening the steel around the rim of that guide rod hole because as it returned to battery after every shot, it wasn't returning in the middle of the hole but was hitting the edge rim of the hole which would possibly peen that rim and thin chip away at that hole after so many rounds?
I had decided to keep the LCP II because it had showed no other problems in over a decade until the magazine started dropping. But I am confident the now much stronger magazine release spring which is now installed, will effectlivly solve this problem for the future. I have never seen any other issues with reliability or accuracy or quality of trigger or anything from the LCP II. And while I seriously have been considered selling the Max? I now know that the trigger and sighting and accuracy troubles can be fixed with MCarbo aftermarket parts, Maybe the steel breaking on the slide can be fixed with a stainless steel heat treated guide rod, which won't flex under fire and keep the slide reciprocating straight and on the narrow?
The wife really likes her G42 and her G43. I have confidence now that she will carry her G43 OWB unger heavier clothes in colder temperatures and carry her G42 AIWB in warmer temps under lighter clothing. And while 6 rounds is better than nothing in either pistol, she does carry a spare magazine with each.
With all the trouble I have had with the LCP Max? If it was any other small pistol I would have got rid of it immediately. But at the same time, I feel like slowing my roll on getting rid of it, because you just don't see another small micro pistol .380 of it's size and weight which effectively can hold and carry an incredible, 12 rounds in it's magazine. Because of this fact, I might just go the MCarbo way and upgrade it's trigger, springs, guide rod; and then get ride of the horrible, too tall front OEM sight and put the better TruGlo front and rear sights on to get it to shoot POA/POI.
If it all works out and can prove itself reliable and accurate again? I might not let the wife ever carry it again over her Glocks, but other then the two Ruger LCP's? The smallest thing I have to carry is my G43X. If the upgrades work on the Max, at least if I am ever in need of something really small; in an extreme pinch, a 12 round pocket pistol would still be pretty neat & handy.
That is probably the longest post in here I have ever seen.So John, @nortac I have been doing a bunch more in-depth research concerning our LCP Max's. Other than the terrible trigger we experienced when we first got them, I have been doing a lot of reading on several different Ruger forums. From the info I have gathered, it appears the 6" low shooting from LCP Max's is the front sight post is too tall?
From what I have been reading, when a combat sight hold is used, other Max owners have observed that when the top of the front blade post is held level with the top of the rear U-notch blade post during bench rest shooting at 7-10 yards, while this is how it should be done, they notate that it will consistently shoot 6 inches low and 3 inches left, which I can verify was the same experience I was having and also you?
But when they adjusted their bench rest sighting, to hold the top of the blades of the rear U-notch sight to only the center of the white tritium dot of the front sight post? Their shots were all, POA/POI? Interesting no? Come to find out, many Max owners, are purchasing a set of front and rear TruGlo's that are made for the S&W Bodyguard .380? Apparently, the S&W Bodyguard shares the same similar sight notches as the Ruger LCP Max.
I verified this to be true, because I went to Ruger's online sales shop, and they also sell the exact same aftermarket sights for their LCP Max on their own website.
Also, while I never had any trigger bite with the Max, I found many Max owners have. I saw lots of pics of blood blisters on pointy trigger fingers on the Ruger forums. While some changed them out for Galloway's trigger like you have, Many others were raving about MCarbo's new trigger for the Max. I was reading an old post of yours in this thread where you said, while you may not carry the Max, you probably will keep it, because you are 'a tinkerer' and like to see if you can make an unreliable pistol reliable.
I have given what you said a lot of thought and it got me thinking; Since it seems like there are definitely aftermarket fixes for the LCP Max when reading the Ruger forums; I realize, now that the accuracy can be fixed and the trigger issues can be fixed, my only problem left; and probably my biggest issue left is, that the tip of the front bottom portion of the steel slide broke which made the small hole in front of the slide where the guide rod and recoil spring sets in, chipped away and made that small hole bigger, allowing for the recoil spring to slip thru the now, bigger broken hole and exit out the front of the pistol.
So I have spent sometime researching this; and while I have found most of the other issues with the Max like the trigger and sights to have been a common problem with other Max owners, which there are solutions for. I haven't found another single issue about the slide steel chipping away from the recoil spring hole in order to duplicate and confirm my own experiences?
This at least shows me, if I can't find anyone else with this problem? Then maybe there is an issue with the quality of steel in the slide? So it got me thinking again, If it's not the steel in the slide, then why did the steel chip away around that small hole in the front of my slide allowing the recoil spring to escape?
I started doing some more research and came across something very interesting. And I actually came across it on MCarbo's website of all places.
The guy in the video, was saying that their stainless steel guide rod fixes the issue of the Ruger Carbon steel guide rod which has been reported to flex a bit under recoil, because the Ruger OEM rod wasn't heat treated to harden the rod? So again, I researched Ruger forums and found some posting about the OEM rod flexing and throwing shots 3" to the left?
It sounded to me like, if the front sight is too tall and dropping shots 6" low and the untreated OEM rod is flexing and causing shots to throw 3" inches left? This would explain why SOooo many Max owners are reporting 6" low and 3"inch left shots from bench rest? It also could explain why the steel from the front bottom recoil spring hole in the slide chipped away on mine in the first place? I'm thinking, if the OEM rod was flexing during shooting, maybe the front of the rod was shot peening the steel around the rim of that guide rod hole because as it returned to battery after every shot, it wasn't returning in the middle of the hole but was hitting the edge rim of the hole which would possibly peen that rim and thin chip away at that hole after so many rounds?
I had decided to keep the LCP II because it had showed no other problems in over a decade until the magazine started dropping. But I am confident the now much stronger magazine release spring which is now installed, will effectlivly solve this problem for the future. I have never seen any other issues with reliability or accuracy or quality of trigger or anything from the LCP II. And while I seriously have been considered selling the Max? I now know that the trigger and sighting and accuracy troubles can be fixed with MCarbo aftermarket parts, Maybe the steel breaking on the slide can be fixed with a stainless steel heat treated guide rod, which won't flex under fire and keep the slide reciprocating straight and on the narrow?
The wife really likes her G42 and her G43. I have confidence now that she will carry her G43 OWB unger heavier clothes in colder temperatures and carry her G42 AIWB in warmer temps under lighter clothing. And while 6 rounds is better than nothing in either pistol, she does carry a spare magazine with each.
With all the trouble I have had with the LCP Max? If it was any other small pistol I would have got rid of it immediately. But at the same time, I feel like slowing my roll on getting rid of it, because you just don't see another small micro pistol .380 of it's size and weight which effectively can hold and carry an incredible, 12 rounds in it's magazine. Because of this fact, I might just go the MCarbo way and upgrade it's trigger, springs, guide rod; and then get ride of the horrible, too tall front OEM sight and put the better TruGlo front and rear sights on to get it to shoot POA/POI.
If it all works out and can prove itself reliable and accurate again? I might not let the wife ever carry it again over her Glocks, but other then the two Ruger LCP's? The smallest thing I have to carry is my G43X. If the upgrades work on the Max, at least if I am ever in need of something really small; in an extreme pinch, a 12 round pocket pistol would still be pretty neat & handy.
- Thread starter
- #89
That is probably the longest post in here I have ever seen.
Lots of information. But it's actually, just a bunch of small paragraphs which are only a couple of sentences long? could of closed the gaps in those paragraph indentions and made it half as long; but it would look like a single wall of text? Would that be easier to read?
Better?
So John, @nortac I have been doing a bunch more in-depth research concerning our LCP Max's. Other than the terrible trigger we experienced when we first got them, I have been doing a lot of reading on several different Ruger forums. From the info I have gathered, it appears the 6" low shooting from LCP Max's is the front sight post is too tall? From what I have been reading, when a combat sight hold is used, other Max owners have observed that when the top of the front blade post is held level with the top of the rear U-notch blade post during bench rest shooting at 7-10 yards, while this is how it should be done, they notate that it will consistently shoot 6 inches low and 3 inches left, which I can verify was the same experience I was having and also you? But when they adjusted their bench rest sighting, to hold the top of the blades of the rear U-notch sight to only the center of the white tritium dot of the front sight post? Their shots were all, POA/POI? Interesting no? Come to find out, many Max owners, are purchasing a set of front and rear TruGlo's that are made for the S&W Bodyguard .380? Apparently, the S&W Bodyguard shares the same similar sight notches as the Ruger LCP Max. I verified this to be true, because I went to Ruger's online sales shop, and they also sell the exact same aftermarket sights for their LCP Max on their own website.
Also, while I never had any trigger bite with the Max, I found many Max owners have. I saw lots of pics of blood blisters on pointy trigger fingers on the Ruger forums. While some changed them out for Galloway's trigger like you have, Many others were raving about MCarbo's new trigger for the Max. I was reading an old post of yours in this thread where you said, while you may not carry the Max, you probably will keep it, because you are 'a tinkerer' and like to see if you can make an unreliable pistol reliable. I have given what you said a lot of thought and it got me thinking; Since it seems like there are definitely aftermarket fixes for the LCP Max when reading the Ruger forums; I realize, now that the accuracy can be fixed and the trigger issues can be fixed, my only problem left; and probably my biggest issue left is, that the tip of the front bottom portion of the steel slide broke which made the small hole in front of the slide where the guide rod and recoil spring sets in, chipped away and made that small hole bigger, allowing for the recoil spring to slip thru the now, bigger broken hole and exit out the front of the pistol. So I have spent sometime researching this; and while I have found most of the other issues with the Max like the trigger and sights to have been a common problem with other Max owners, which there are solutions for. I haven't found another single issue about the slide steel chipping away from the recoil spring hole in order to duplicate and confirm my own experiences? This at least shows me, if I can't find anyone else with this problem? Then maybe there is an issue with the quality of steel in the slide? So it got me thinking again, If it's not the steel in the slide, then why did the steel chip away around that small hole in the front of my slide allowing the recoil spring to escape? I started doing some more research and came across something very interesting. And I actually came across it on MCarbo's website of all places. I was looking on MCarbo's website considering their trigger and springs kit upgrade and started watching several videos that MCarbo has showing how to install their products. I came across their installation video of them switching out Ruger's LCP Max OEM carbon steel guide rod, for their stainless steel guide rod and 15% power spring. The guy in the video, was saying that their stainless steel guide rod fixes the issue of the Ruger Carbon steel guide rod which has been reported to flex a bit under recoil, because the Ruger OEM rod wasn't heat treated to harden the rod? So again, I researched Ruger forums and found some posting about the OEM rod flexing and throwing shots 3" to the left? It sounded to me like, if the front sight is too tall and dropping shots 6" low and the untreated OEM rod is flexing and causing shots to throw 3" inches left? This would explain why SOooo many Max owners are reporting 6" low and 3"inch left shots from bench rest? It also could explain why the steel from the front bottom recoil spring hole in the slide chipped away on mine in the first place? I'm thinking, if the OEM rod was flexing during shooting, maybe the front of the rod was shot peening the steel around the rim of that guide rod hole because as it returned to battery after every shot, it wasn't returning in the middle of the hole but was hitting the edge rim of the hole which would possibly peen that rim and thin chip away at that hole after so many rounds? I had decided to keep the LCP II because it had showed no other problems in over a decade until the magazine started dropping. But I am confident the now much stronger magazine release spring which is now installed, will effectlivly solve this problem for the future. I have never seen any other issues with reliability or accuracy or quality of trigger or anything from the LCP II. And while I seriously have been considered selling the Max? I now know that the trigger and sighting and accuracy troubles can be fixed with MCarbo aftermarket parts, Maybe the steel breaking on the slide can be fixed with a stainless steel heat treated guide rod, which won't flex under fire and keep the slide reciprocating straight and on the narrow? The wife really likes her G42 and her G43. I have confidence now that she will carry her G43 OWB unger heavier clothes in colder temperatures and carry her G42 AIWB in warmer temps under lighter clothing. And while 6 rounds is better than nothing in either pistol, she does carry a spare magazine with each. With all the trouble I have had with the LCP Max? If it was any other small pistol I would have got rid of it immediately. But at the same time, I feel like slowing my roll on getting rid of it, because you just don't see another small micro pistol .380 of it's size and weight which effectively can hold and carry an incredible, 12 rounds in it's magazine. Because of this fact, I might just go the MCarbo way and upgrade it's trigger, springs, guide rod; and then get ride of the horrible, too tall front OEM sight and put the better TruGlo front and rear sights on to get it to shoot POA/POI. If it all works out and can prove itself reliable and accurate again? I might not let the wife ever carry it again over her Glocks, but other then the two Ruger LCP's? The smallest thing I have to carry is my G43X. If the upgrades work on the Max, at least if I am ever in need of something really small; in an extreme pinch, a 12 round pocket pistol would still be pretty neat & handy.That is much more readable.Lots of information. But it's actually, just a bunch of small paragraphs which are only a couple of sentences long? could of closed the gaps in those paragraph indentions and made it half as long; but it would look like a single wall of text? Would that be easier to read?
Better?
So John, @nortac I have been doing a bunch more in-depth research concerning our LCP Max's. Other than the terrible trigger we experienced when we first got them, I have been doing a lot of reading on several different Ruger forums. From the info I have gathered, it appears the 6" low shooting from LCP Max's is the front sight post is too tall? From what I have been reading, when a combat sight hold is used, other Max owners have observed that when the top of the front blade post is held level with the top of the rear U-notch blade post during bench rest shooting at 7-10 yards, while this is how it should be done, they notate that it will consistently shoot 6 inches low and 3 inches left, which I can verify was the same experience I was having and also you? But when they adjusted their bench rest sighting, to hold the top of the blades of the rear U-notch sight to only the center of the white tritium dot of the front sight post? Their shots were all, POA/POI? Interesting no? Come to find out, many Max owners, are purchasing a set of front and rear TruGlo's that are made for the S&W Bodyguard .380? Apparently, the S&W Bodyguard shares the same similar sight notches as the Ruger LCP Max. I verified this to be true, because I went to Ruger's online sales shop, and they also sell the exact same aftermarket sights for their LCP Max on their own website.
You could go one more and take out all punctuation. Commas and periods are just a waste of space anyway. 
- Thread starter
- #91
That is much more readable.
Really? Makes me dizzy just lookin' at it...
- Thread starter
- #92
Please don't encourage him!That is much more readable.
@OkieStubble , I have put my LCP Max improvement program on hold for the time being but will return to it eventually. I think you have the right idea. IIRC, when I went with the Galloway trigger, I also used their SS guide rod to replace the OEM guide rod, so I'll probably stick with that. I have not noticed any chipping or abnormal wear on the slide in that area so far. Luckily, I have an extra complete upper. If I do see any abnormal wear or chipping, I'll change to the MCarbo G-rod. I intend to change out the Galloway trigger for the MCarbo eventually. I'll wait to see the shooting results after installing the MCarbo trigger before I address the front sight issues, thanks for the research information! It's a damn shame that Ruger makes the public beta test their product line instead of building them right the first time. I'd rather pay a hundred dollars more for a better OEM product than have to shell out an extra $200 or more in aftermarket parts! They need to offer an LCP "Ultra" Max with improved parts!! Then discontinue the current version and offer to install an upgrade kit for current models, but I won't hold my breath for that to happen!
TLDR (again) LOL! That looks more worser!Lots of information. But it's actually, just a bunch of small paragraphs which are only a couple of sentences long? could of closed the gaps in those paragraph indentions and made it half as long; but it would look like a single wall of text? Would that be easier to read?
Better?
So John, @nortac I have been doing a bunch more in-depth research concerning our LCP Max's. Other than the terrible trigger we experienced when we first got them, I have been doing a lot of reading on several different Ruger forums. From the info I have gathered, it appears the 6" low shooting from LCP Max's is the front sight post is too tall? From what I have been reading, when a combat sight hold is used, other Max owners have observed that when the top of the front blade post is held level with the top of the rear U-notch blade post during bench rest shooting at 7-10 yards, while this is how it should be done, they notate that it will consistently shoot 6 inches low and 3 inches left, which I can verify was the same experience I was having and also you? But when they adjusted their bench rest sighting, to hold the top of the blades of the rear U-notch sight to only the center of the white tritium dot of the front sight post? Their shots were all, POA/POI? Interesting no? Come to find out, many Max owners, are purchasing a set of front and rear TruGlo's that are made for the S&W Bodyguard .380? Apparently, the S&W Bodyguard shares the same similar sight notches as the Ruger LCP Max. I verified this to be true, because I went to Ruger's online sales shop, and they also sell the exact same aftermarket sights for their LCP Max on their own website.
It’s a problematic line of guns. My Gen2 has been back to Ruger twice for feeding / ejecting problems. Wouldn’t go through a mag without a couple of FTF or FTE. The second trip, plus possibly the more powerful springs I installed, seem to have cured the problem- I went through about a hundred rounds since without a hiccup. Still, I am very unlikely to get another Ruger. Yes their customer service is great, but I’d rather not have to deal with them in the first place.
As far as accuracy or sturdiness, I have no complaints. Given that it’s a pocket gun and not really a range star. I don’t expect it to be very accurate past 20 ft, and I don’t expect to put thousands of rounds through it. It’s accurate enough to stay within the target at 15 ft, and it went through probably 300-400 rounds so far without cracking or breaking. It’s also extremely pocketable and cheap. If it wasn’t for the feeding problems and especially the fact that it took Ruger two trips to fix it, I’d be a fan.
As far as accuracy or sturdiness, I have no complaints. Given that it’s a pocket gun and not really a range star. I don’t expect it to be very accurate past 20 ft, and I don’t expect to put thousands of rounds through it. It’s accurate enough to stay within the target at 15 ft, and it went through probably 300-400 rounds so far without cracking or breaking. It’s also extremely pocketable and cheap. If it wasn’t for the feeding problems and especially the fact that it took Ruger two trips to fix it, I’d be a fan.
- Thread starter
- #97
This post of yours could be divided up in a couple of paragraphs also? That wall of text made me feel a bit queasy reading it, cuz I ain’t had no breakfast yet!
I think you will be fine sticking with Galloway’s SS guide rod? Surely, MCarbo’s is just as good, but I can’t seeing it being any better? They’re probably both pretty comparable to each other.
And I wouldn’t think you would see any peening of the slide since you already have changed out the rod. Did you notice any better accuracy after changing the guide rod?
Still might be low because of the taller front sight, but has the 3” inches left improved?
My next giant wall of text will be spamming your inbox!
- Thread starter
- #98
If you have put a stronger spring in it already, I betcha that’s what fixed the FTF/FTE’s and not the second trip back to Ruger. Ruger’s replacement spring would probably be just as flimsy and weak as the original one. The aftermarket springs I have been reading about that come from Galloway and MCarbo are about 15% stronger than Ruger’s OEM. I bet I read hundreds of reviews from LCP owners on the different Ruger forums complaining about Ruger’s OEM springs and praising the aftermarket’s fixing their problems.
Most of Ruger’s other firearms products seem good to go. Most of their troubles I’m reading about seem to be only their LCP line of defensive pistol’s.
Sounds like Ruger cares about a hunter in the woods having a reliable revolver against an animal attack, but caring about people who want their LCP line to be reliable for self defense against attack from another?
Not so much?
Last edited:
That’s possible.
Honestly I’d go with a pocket revolver if I could hit the wide side of a barn from the inside with one…
Honestly I’d go with a pocket revolver if I could hit the wide side of a barn from the inside with one…
- Thread starter
- #100
I have been considering finding me a small .38 snubbie also.
Similar threads
