As of recently, I started carrying the Ruger LC9s Pro as my primary CCW. Its been working out very well for me. But when I saw that Walther was having a rebate, and I could pick up a PPS M2 for $300 (post-rebate), I jumped at the opportunity, thinking maybe this might be another good, cheap option. Well, here is a quick comparison:
Size: The LC9s is smaller, lighter and equivalent in width. LC9s wins.
Capacity: Standard LC9s mag is 7 rounds, and you can fit all fingers on the mag. Backup mags are 9 round capacity. The Walther has a 6 round magazine that you cant get all fingers on, and backup mags are 7 or 8 rounds. LC9s wins.
Trigger: Walther trigger is short and heavy, LC9s is long and light. I prefer the lighter trigger, and the LC9s is smoother as well. LC9s wins.
Sights: My Walther is the LE edition, so it came with phosphorescent sights, and 3 nice big dots. The LC9s has VERY tiny 3 dots. Walther wins.
Disassembly: The Walther easily wins this one. The Ruger requires a pin or something to take down. The Walther is the easiest disassembly I have ever seen on a pistol: dry fire the pistol, pull the slide to the rear, pull down on the takedown control, and the slide pops off. Very easy. Walther wins.
Controls: Both pistols suffer from very tiny slide releases that are nearly impossible to release with just thumb pressure. I HATE the mag release on the LC9s though. Its too small and "squishy". You have to push it in very far to get the mag to eject. The Walther has a very standard mag release that works well. The Walther wins this one.
Cost: The Ruger was $290 with 1 7 round mag in a cardboard box. The Walther was $295 (after the $100 rebate) with 3 magazines and phosphorescent sights and in a nice plastic case. Walther wins.
Final score: Ruger 3, Walther 4. However, this doesnt tell the tale. I feel that the Ruger, with its smaller size, greater capacity, and superior trigger are better for CCW. The Walther, when you insert the largest capacity magazine (8 rounds) turns into essentially a compact gun, but with single stack capacity. This makes it more enjoyable to shoot at the range, but the reality is, for a CCW pistol, the LC9s is the way to go. For me, the Walther will become a truck gun due to how inexpensive it was.
Thanks for that comparison. My carry gun is the Ruger LC9s for all the reasons you stated. I have a Walther PPS and I know it is not the same model you have, but I always considered it to be the Glock 19 single stack that Glock never produced' until the Model 42 came along. Its a great gun but only works for me IWB The Ruger on the other hand lends itself to pocket carry very nicely; which is my preferred method of carry, and thats why its always with me.
I would be interested if anything would change if you shoot them side by side in different drills. I've found my PPS M2 shoots much better than a small gun should. 2 weeks ago I shot a 1.5 inch group at 25 yards with my PPS. This is better than I usually do with my larger guns. It may have been an anomaly, but it left me feeling pretty confident in the little guy. It is too big for pocket carry, but great for IWB or AIWB.
Sigs, HKs, 1911s, Glocks and SW revolvers
|We gonna get some |
oojima in this house!
I have an old model lc9 that is a fantastic pocket gun. My wife may take it over to take the place of her bg380. My wife and I actually like the long light trigger on the hammer gun. I think we are the only ones who do.
I carry an XDS or maybe a G26, d pending on how tight my pants are that day...
I had a LC9s Pro and on paper it looked like it was going to be a great carry gun, nice size and a great trigger. Unfortunately, it was one of the most unpleasant guns I've shot. Its recoil was extremely unpleasant and I'm not recoil sensitive. There was just something about it that felt even worse than the Kel Tec PF9 I used to have. It was also inaccurate. At 7yrds I could consistently get much better groups with an LCP.
Its a shame, I really wanted to like it. So far, the best single stack 9mm I've shot and that's about all of them, has been the Springfield XDS.
No one's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session.- Mark Twain
I don't know why but the LC9's look super feminine to me.
Use thumb-size bullets to create fist-size holes.
|His diet consists of black|
coffee, and sarcasm.
Is that some kind of overlay on the grip, or has it been re-stippled?
"My wife is dragging me to this stupid play. Somebody please kill me."
-- Abraham Lincoln
I consider the LC9s to be more of a pocket-sized gun and the PPS M2 a belt gun. I definitely think the PPS M2 is a better shooter, but it's a few ounces heavier than the LC9s.
|Go ahead punk, make my day|
I would probably be a LC9 owner if Ruger hand come out with the current version first.
As such, the original PPS won and sill works for me (IWB, no pocket carry) when I want a slim IWB pistol (summer, more formal events, etc).
I think the quality between the original PPS and M2 has changed from what I've read. But that's just an opinion from observation.
Thanks for the comparison!
I'm Rick James.
|addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer|
Interesting to read your take on the two. On physical analysis alone I prefer the Walther over the Ruger; the grip of the Walther fills my hand better, and there's a heft and solidity to the persona of the PPS M2 that I find is lacking with the LC9 series. I normally don't use my pinkie when I shoot, but with my Ruger I found that at the range I ended up with a full grip purchase anyways, if only because it seemed at times like I needed to as if I was hanging on for dear life.
Full disclosure: I chose to buy my Walther; Ruger gave me the LC9S. The LC9 in any guise are not guns that I would've sought out if left to my own resources. I never cared for how the original hammer LC9 operated and shot. Piling on, the one I received is not a version that I would've preferred if I had the option. The inclusion of a mag disconnect and thumb safety isn't a place I would go on my own, but you know what's said about the mouths of gift horses. The Pro that you have would've been my preference, but oh well...
Put to the acid test I shoot my M2 with better effectiveness than I do my LC9S. The unaltered Ruger has a fair amount of disconcerting muzzle flip for me, more than even my old, early production Taurus 709 and its meager-sized grip or current alternate carry/ankle BUG Glock G43. A lot of that I believe comes down to the LC9S's oh-so skinny grip; without a sleeve it moves around a lot more than I like or am comfortable with. Similar to the Taurus and even to a degree a 9mm Shield. My G43 has recoil but its grip works with me, and is nowhere close to the almost apathetic nature that the Ruger exudes. Putting a Pachmayr grip glove on it helps quite a lot but against my PPS M2 it's still not much of a contest when it comes to rapid followups and overall accuracy, especially as the Walther's trigger has begun to smooth out. I do agree that the smoothness of the Ruger's trigger is nice when taken on its own, but the length of the pull doesn't help with my speed and more importantly, my accuracy at speed. The crisp, short nature of the Walther's trigger is just superior given my past striker experiences even with the gritty, stuttering creep and mush that my PPS M2 initially came with.
Clear winner for me is the Walther. Maybe someday it'll even unseat my G43 as my alternate carry. A bit too large for my ankle BUG though, even with just the 6 rounder in the magwell.
I think what a lot of people might miss is that the LC9s is an ideal concealed carry gun if you favor capacity and concealment, but for comfort st the range it leaves much to be desired. The PPS M2 does feel better in hand and more controllable so is a better range gun, but for me, I would prefer the additional rounds and deep concealment
|addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer|
Perhaps, but I have no problem carrying my G23 (or a G19 for that matter) for about 99% of the time, so in my case my vision of what's "ideal" is not necessarily in alignment with anyone else's. And if I don't feel confident that I can get rounds off quickly AND accurately, no amount of 'ease of carry' will make me want to actually carry that particular gun, whatever it is.
I carry a lc9s daily and really like it, heavier than the rcr and cm9 I have pocket carried recently but it's been problem free, unlike the cm9 and shoots a more powerful round and is easier to reload than the rcr.
It has a light trigger and has been very accurate, good pocket 9!
I need to install night sites, seeing the XS sites above I will be going with them.
PPS-M2 LE has been as reliable as a Glock. I have fired rounds that did not pass the gauge, and every sort of odds-and-ends rounds. Fires than all. It is the only pistol I found that needs a Talon treatment, but then it fits hand almost as well as an M&P M2.0 4.25" On the other hand, I pocket carry a LC9s Pro with CT! Not so much fun to shoot, but right size.
I figure someone will have an LE version of PPS-M2 below $400 before the end of the sale to keep in reserve.
I find the trigger to be smooth with good snap and reasonably short/audible reset. The M1 version's triggers were not nice.
Mac in Michigan
I don't know if the original PPS is the same size exactly as the PPS-M2, but I pocket carry the original all of the time without difficulty in various pants. I do like the way it shoots MUCH better than the Ruger
|Powered by Social Strata|