Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: Smith & Wesson 43C vs Ruger LCR .22

  1. #1
    Hammertime
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Desert Southwest

    Smith & Wesson 43C vs Ruger LCR .22

    Name:  IMG_6032.jpg
Views: 8337
Size:  101.5 KB

    There has been a lot of discussion on these revolvers lately and this is just a short post with my observations. I have one example of both and have ~2500ish rounds through both. Plus a lot of "unprotected" dry fire in that I didn't put anything in the chamber. Ruger says this is okay, Smith I think advises snap caps.

    They area both concealable .22 8 shot revolvers.

    Name:  IMG_0155.jpg
Views: 7539
Size:  101.2 KB

    On first impressions the Ruger is built more robustly and has a better trigger. Over time and a lot of trigger pulls, however the Smith trigger improves quite a bit in both smoothness and weight to become the Ruger's equal. The 43C's pull is shorter with minimal over travel and the reset spring is more robust, which along with a shorter reset makes the 43C near impossible to short stroke. More on that later. Total weight not measurable on either with my equipment, but estimated 10-12lbs

    Name:  IMG_0156.jpg
Views: 7827
Size:  102.1 KB

    With time and rounds, the LCR has become a little looser feeling than the 43C, but they both work quite well.

    The LCR sight is well regulated and very intuitive to use. It is a classic rectangular post inside a rectangular groove: equal height, equal light.

    The 43C uses a round big dot post that goes into a half circle groove with a portion of the dot above the groove and generally hits behind the dot. It isn't intuitive and it doesn't feel fast, and precision is difficult with this sight.

    43C is 12.4oz loaded with 8X40 grain
    LCR is 15.7oz loaded with 8X40 grain.

    The 43c is marginally smaller.

    Both are ammo sensitive and you have to find ammo they like. Both revolvers, for me, do not like Minimags and the 43C also won't work well with CCI SV ammo although Velocitors are fine. Ammo sensitivity is demonstrated by: The cylinder locking up halfway through a firing session, rounds sticking in the cylinder, hammer strikes that do not ignite primers. I can not emphasize enough that you have to test a bunch of ammo in these and find something that is reliable for the revolver. The LCR is decidedly less finicky than the 43C which kind of drove me nuts trying to figure out how to get minimags to run in it. Ultimately I gave up and it happily chews up craptastic golden bullets.

    Both will start to have problems extracting as the cylinder gets hot after maybe 3-5 cylinders rapid fire. The 43C more so.

    I shoot the both about the same: 0.21-0.23 splits to a B8 black at 5 yards, and can pretty easily keep them all on a B8 at 15 yards with controlled sighted fire. 25 yard groups are extremely challenging and I am lucky to keep them all on a B8

    The groups below are all 80 round groups, the 5 yard groups fired as fast as I could pull the trigger at 5 and the 15 yard at about a 1/second pace snatching the trigger as soon as I saw a sight picture.

    Name:  IMG_6047.jpg
Views: 7306
Size:  59.9 KB

    I split the 43C marginally, like 0.01-0.02 faster.

    Most importantly, I never short stroke the 43C, and I can and will short stroke the LCR when chasing splits about once a cylinder until I really adapt to the thing.

    The 43C in general is jewel like, except the barrel, which spits lead to the top of the frame. Also the crown is pretty much non existent and difficult to get to with how the barrel is located in the frame. This spitting started early and has stayed stable and I am told by other 43C owners that it is "normal"

    Name:  IMG_2578.jpg
Views: 7259
Size:  46.9 KB
    Name:  IMG_2579.jpg
Views: 7282
Size:  40.9 KB

    Those photos are from early ownership and I would actually say the lead is less bad now, somehow and I never really chipped it off much.

    The 43C extractor star is a WTF example of terrible attention to detail, it works somehow but yuck.

    Name:  IMG_2622.jpg
Views: 7258
Size:  26.4 KB

    The LCR Barrel is beautiful from forcing cone to crown, but the rest of the revolver feels less tightly assembled than the 43C, and, I guess "cheaper" in feel and assembly. But it also doesn't have the 43C's glaring flaws in small parts. It is put together nicely and consistently, it just feels cheap.

    All in all if I had to keep one, it would be the 43C for the following reasons:

    1. It is way lighter.
    2. I don't short stroke it.
    3. It is marginally smaller.
    4. The overall package feels more quality over time.

    That is saying a lot for me because I have bitched and moaned about the 43C quite a bit in my training journal. It has been drama with the lead spitting and ammo sensitivity. I just had to give up wanting to run my abundant supply of minimags through it and just use other ammo. The 43C also seems to have a decided break in period. New, out of the box, the Ruger ran circles around it.

    Fact is I don't consider either of these serious self defense guns, not to say they won't work. I have sold all my small DA centerfire revolvers since I find them sucky to shoot and not any better to carry than a 9mm Glock. And I can shoot any 9mm Glock with a real round, at the same speed and better accuracy than either of these two .22 revolvers. However, these small .22s fun, great DA trainers, don't beat you up, and would be pretty safe for pocket carry.

  2. #2
    Member gato naranja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Between two major rivers that begin with the letter "M."
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc_Glock View Post
    All in all if I had to keep one, it would be the 43C for the following reasons:

    1. It is way lighter.
    2. I don't short stroke it.
    3. It is marginally smaller.
    4. The overall package feels more quality over time.

    That is saying a lot for me because I have bitched and moaned about the 43C quite a bit in my training journal. It has been drama with the lead spitting and ammo sensitivity. I just had to give up wanting to run my abundant supply of minimags through it and just use other ammo. The 43C also seems to have a decided break in period. New, out of the box, the Ruger ran circles around it.

    Fact is I don't consider either of these serious self defense guns, not to say they won't work. I have sold all my small DA centerfire revolvers since I find them sucky to shoot and not any better to carry than a 9mm Glock. And I can shoot any 9mm Glock with a real round, at the same speed and better accuracy than either of these two .22 revolvers. However, these small .22s fun, great DA trainers, don't beat you up, and would be pretty safe for pocket carry.
    Well done.

    The biggest problems I have historically had with pocket DA .22 revolvers are:

    1. the triggers are frequently too much for the operator
    2. the .22 rimfire cartridge - whether S, L, or LR - is maddeningly variable
    3. the better their quality, the faster they seem to befoul themselves to a halt.

    It's a little unfortunate that some of the older pocket calibers like .32 S&W Long and .38 S&W withered on the vine at around the same time genuinely local control of public school boards did; a fresh box of either necessitated at least a twenty mile drive to a genuine gun store by the time I was able to potter about with them. They were more reliable and - at least as far as I could determine for myself - more effective chamberings for a pocket carry revolver. That being said, the .22 rimfire ones were, as you say, far cheaper, more tractable, and just easier for the average family to justify keeping in use.
    gn

    "On the internet, nobody knows if you are a dog... or even a cat."

  3. #3
    Member Wheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Jawja
    I have around 2300 rounds documented through through my 43c and roughly that many more that I didn’t write down in my range log. Mine has the hammer spring from a 642 in it and runs quite well. I’ve not noticed any sensitivity to any particular brand of ammo other than accuracy. It’s also running steadily at a sub one percent failure rate with all ammo used, most of which was various bulk packs but a hefty mix of medium grade.

    I’ve had shooting sessions that went in the multiple hundreds of rounds and while the extraction did get a bit sticky, it was never an obstacle to a reload. I’ve never had any lead buildup on the forcing cone but that recessed crown is an entirely different story but it’s not affected accuracy.

    I’ve never seen anyone sing the praises of the XS Big Dot as a precision front sight however, I’ve managed to keep all eight shots in the head box of an IPSC target at fifteen yards.

    I do carry my 43c daily. I use CCI Stingers and have good accuracy and reliability with them.

    It’s prudent to note the Mini-Mags aren’t at the upper spectrum of quality .22LR ammo these days. It’s also prudent to note that Golden Bullets used to be considered an upper level ammo in terms of quality.
    Men freely believe that which they desire.
    Julius Caesar

  4. #4
    Just saying….

    Name:  837E3E3C-6DBF-4C5C-A0C1-58B5F8713787.jpg
Views: 7316
Size:  100.7 KB

    Name:  8B821229-4843-41EE-A45B-20B2525EAE77.jpg
Views: 7191
Size:  66.1 KB
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  5. #5
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc_Glock View Post
    Fact is I don't consider either of these serious self defense guns, not to say they won't work.
    I also got a 43c primarily for cheap training/fun purposes, but the more I shoot it, the more I wonder whether all else (especially accuracy) being equal, being able to shoot 8 smaller projectiles faster is better than shooting 5 bigger projectiles more slowly.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  6. #6
    This is an interesting read. Thank you for the post. I had been waiting on my LGS to get in a Ruger LCR .22 when I spied a 43c in the case. Although more expensive, it came home with me. I’ve yet to shoot it (no time), but thankfully have a decent supply of .22LR when the time comes. I’ve got holsters for both, so I wasn’t absolutely set on the LCR. The 43c is incredibly light weight. Fit and finish on mine is good, so it will be interesting to see how reliable it turns out to be.

  7. #7
    Earlier today, I shot my 43, LCR and 317.

    Name:  23072474-A05A-4B44-9162-CE15D0CBE482.jpg
Views: 7179
Size:  57.6 KB

    The 43 is smaller, the trigger is decent, but I have to work harder with the sights than with the others.

    The LCR has easier sights for me to use, especially with the front insert painted.

    The 317 is so easy for me to shoot by comparison to either. The 43 is comfortable on eight inch steel at 7-10 yards, the LCR out to 15-20, but the 317 is upper A zone capable at 25 yards. With a midget round it is very nice to be able to put the shots exactly where you want.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  8. #8
    The Nostomaniac 03RN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Earlier today, I shot my 43, LCR and 317.

    Name:  23072474-A05A-4B44-9162-CE15D0CBE482.jpg
Views: 7179
Size:  57.6 KB

    The 43 is smaller, the trigger is decent, but I have to work harder with the sights than with the others.

    The LCR has easier sights for me to use, especially with the front insert painted.

    The 317 is so easy for me to shoot by comparison to either. The 43 is comfortable on eight inch steel at 7-10 yards, the LCR out to 15-20, but the 317 is upper A zone capable at 25 yards. With a midget round it is very nice to be able to put the shots exactly where you want.
    Why is that? Is it just the sights/sight radius or is there another difference? Have you ever shot the 3" LCR X in 22? Where would you rate it?

  9. #9
    Site Supporter jandbj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    SNH
    Quote Originally Posted by nalesq View Post
    I also got a 43c primarily for cheap training/fun purposes, but the more I shoot it, the more I wonder whether all else (especially accuracy) being equal, being able to shoot 8 smaller projectiles faster is better than shooting 5 bigger projectiles more slowly.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    ^Same logic got me to a 351c (with a great trigger job) as an old man gun^
    Albeit with 7 even better mousegun rounds instead of 8

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by 03RN View Post
    Why is that? Is it just the sights/sight radius or is there another difference? Have you ever shot the 3" LCR X in 22? Where would you rate it?
    No experience with the LCRx.

    Probably a number of reasons for the 317 — I have shot it many thousands of rounds, it is an old quality made pre lock revolver with a very shot in trigger, and real sights that can be regulated to a precise POA/POI.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •