Ruger PC Carbine

[Brian46]

...

 

[bush1]

Seems odd you completely overlook that the reason I called ruger in the first place was because they started building this rifle the op posted about........

I don't care for a take down, but that doesn't mean ruger isn't going to produce it as one, you must think I am rather special to believe ruger will put a rifle into production exactly the way I want based on a phone call rather than what they were already planning to do.

I’ve got a novel idea that many here have hinted you should do but you haven’t taken the hint. Please start a new thread about your new Ruger 44 carbine and leave this thread to focus on the “RUGER PC CARBINE”

 

[Brian46]

I’ve got a novel idea that many here have hinted you should do but you haven’t taken the hint. Please start a new thread about your new Ruger 44 carbine and leave this thread to focus on the “RUGER PC CARBINE”

I understand now, if ruger makes a PC carbine in 44 magnum, it does not qualify as a "RUGER PC CARBINE" your yelling has finally convinced me that 44 magnum is not a pistol caliber..........

 

[bush1]

I understand now, if ruger makes a PC carbine in 44 magnum, it does not qualify as a "RUGER PC CARBINE" your yelling has finally convinced me that 44 magnum is not a pistol caliber..........

Sorry, not yelling only copied and pasted the Op’s thread title. You don’t give up easily

 

[r34skyline]

I understand now, if ruger makes a PC carbine in 44 magnum, it does not qualify as a "RUGER PC CARBINE" your yelling has finally convinced me that 44 magnum is not a pistol caliber..........

Why don't we go there when said 44 mag carbine is released? What mags are they gonna use? Did they specify?

 

[2wheelshooter]

Why don't we go there when said 44 mag carbine is released? What mags are they gonna use? Did they specify?

What’s wrong with the rotary magazine from the 96/44 lever action ? Or the different rotary mags from the 77/44.

Ruger does have a history making reliable 44nag magazines

 

[Brian46]

Why don't we go there when said 44 mag carbine is released? What mags are they gonna use? Did they specify?

Desert eagle was discussed

 

[Brian46]

What’s wrong with the rotary magazine from the 96/44 lever action ? Or the different rotary mags from the 77/44.

Ruger dies have a history making reliable 44nag magazines

Ruger already made a 44 magnum semi auto carbine with the rotary magazines in the past.

 

[2wheelshooter]

Ruger already made a 44 magnum semi auto carbine with the rotary magazines in the past.

Actually the old .44 carbine was a tubular magazine

 

[Brian46]

Sorry, not yelling only copied and pasted the Op’s thread title. You don’t give up easily

Sorry for discussing a caliber not yet/currently available in a ruger pc carbine

 

[Brian46]

Actually the old .44 carbine was a tubular magazine

Deerfield was rotary

 

[2wheelshooter]

Deerfield was rotary

But that was built on the mini14/30 platform.... not the 10/22 “style” as the original 44 carbine and the new PC Carbine are loosely based.

 

[Brian46]

But that was built on the mini14/30 platform.... not the 10/22 “style” as the original 44 carbine and the new PC Carbine are loosely based.

Ok, my point was it has already been done by ruger on a semi auto 44 carbine, you post suggesting a rotary mag like the lever guns made it sound like it never was.

There is a capacity advantage to using a regular pistol magazine.

 

[2wheelshooter]

There is a capacity advantage to using a regular pistol magazine.

Not going to argue but ruger built the pc carbine to take ruger magazines first and foremost, yes they make an adapter for glock magazines, and yes 3D printers have been used to create beretta and M&P magazines. But IMHO ruger will never use IMI magazines..... expensive, not commonly available in a big enough supply to support releasing it. IF ruger did it they would do it with one of their own magazines. End of story.

 

[tbrwlf]

After I went 5 for 5 on a 4" gong at 50 meters, with one friends gun. I watched a different friend hit the bullseye repeatedly at 100 m. I bought one. Haven't been longer than 25 m. It chews one ragged hole. Both irons and a leupold 1-4 work perfect on it.

It will replace my Kriss.

 

[Brian46]

Not going to argue but ruger built the pc carbine to take ruger magazines first and foremost, yes they make an adapter for glock magazines, and yes 3D printers have been used to create beretta and M&P magazines. But IMHO ruger will never use IMI magazines..... expensive, not commonly available in a big enough supply to support releasing it. IF ruger did it they would do it with one of their own magazines. End of story.

Then they would need to produce a pistol in 44mag to be a "pistol caliber carbine" not sure why desert eagle would have been brought up if that was not the design they intended to use

 

[golddust]

There was already a 45 out so a 44 should be nice. Oh Ruger put out a 44 back in the late 60's.

 

[sheep100]

Took all my Non-Restricted PCCs for spin to compare them side-by-side. Shooting at steel plates freehand at 20 yards, so no accuracy test.

I tried all guns with the same ammo:
1st Round: Barnaul
2nd Round: Reloads
3nd Round: Blazer Brass
4th Round: Blazer Aluminum

Loaded 5 magazines of each:
Ruger PC Carbine: SR9 Magazines
JRC: ETS Glock 17 Magazines
Beretta CX4: Beretta 92 Magazines
FX9: Glock Brand G17 Magazines

Optics:
Ruger PC Carbine: Bushnell Trophy
JRC: Bushnell AR TRS-25
Beretta CX4: Tasco ProPoint
FX9: Vortex Crossfire

None of guns gave my any issues with the magazines I ran them with. No failure to feed, dropped freely. I even tried my ETS G17 in the FX9 and they work perfectly.

The FX9 doesn't like the Blazer Aluminum rounds I feed it. The extractor is very aggressive and the gun would deformed the case and so preventing it from extracting properly. I believe the maker warns about using these anyway. A guy got to try. All the other guns took the 4 kinds of ammo without issues.

The Ruger/FX9 need to be well oiled to run properly. I try to clean them after each shoot and keep them lubricated. I’ve owned the CX4/JRC for at least 5 years and cleaned them once a year.

I have fired all these guns from a bench at 50 yards at one point over the last 6 months and the JRC/Ruger are the most accurate.

Although I really like the ergonomics of the CX4, the PC9/FX9 are my favorites and if I had to choose one I would keep the Ruger.

 

[spyderchop]

Just got my PC carbine. Fit and finish is good and looking forward to shooting it.

 

[buckbrush]

Took all my Non-Restricted PCCs for spin to compare them side-by-side. Shooting at steel plates freehand at 20 yards, so no accuracy test.

I tried all guns with the same ammo:
1st Round: Barnaul
2nd Round: Reloads
3nd Round: Blazer Brass
4th Round: Blazer Aluminum

Loaded 5 magazines of each:
Ruger PC Carbine: SR9 Magazines
JRC: ETS Glock 17 Magazines
Beretta CX4: Beretta 92 Magazines
FX9: Glock Brand G17 Magazines

Optics:
Ruger PC Carbine: Bushnell Trophy
JRC: Bushnell AR TRS-25
Beretta CX4: Tasco ProPoint
FX9: Vortex Crossfire

None of guns gave my any issues with the magazines I ran them with. No failure to feed, dropped freely. I even tried my ETS G17 in the FX9 and they work perfectly.

The FX9 doesn't like the Blazer Aluminum rounds I feed it. The extractor is very aggressive and the gun would deformed the case and so preventing it from extracting properly. I believe the maker warns about using these anyway. A guy got to try. All the other guns took the 4 kinds of ammo without issues.

The Ruger/FX9 need to be well oiled to run properly. I try to clean them after each shoot and keep them lubricated. I’ve owned the CX4/JRC for at least 5 years and cleaned them once a year.

I have fired all these guns from a bench at 50 yards at one point over the last 6 months and the JRC/Ruger are the most accurate.

Although I really like the ergonomics of the CX4, the PC9/FX9 are my favorites and if I had to choose one I would keep the Ruger.

thank you this is a very usefull posting.