Ruger’s New 3″ LCRx in .22 LR

LCRx 22 revolver

Sturm, Ruger & Co. announced a further expansion of the LCRx line with a new .22 LR revolver that has a 3″ barrel. The original LCR, which stands for Light Compact Revolver, had an internal hammer. When Ruger received customer requests for an external hammer version, the company introduced the LCRx. Other than the ability to be cocked for single action shooting, the guns are functionally identical.

This new model, the #5435, is fitted with a Hogue Tamer Monogrip, a fixed ramp front sight and an adjustable rear sight. The front sight is pinned for easy replacement. With its polymer and aluminum body, the 3″ gun weighs only 17.3 ounces unloaded. The cylinder holds eight rounds.

LCRx 22

Currently, this is the only rimfire option in the LCRx line. Only two other calibers are available right now: .38 Special (+P rated) and .357 Magnum. Both of the centerfire cartridge guns can be had with a 1.87″ long barrel. The .38 Special can also be had with a 3″ barrel that looks very much like this new .22 LR wheelgun.

The original LCR has been available in .22 LR for a long time. The .22 WMR (aka .22 Magnum) is also an option in the LCR.

Ruger set the suggested retail price of the new LCRx at $579. The guns are shipping now and should be available through your local dealer.



Richard Johnson

An advocate of gun proliferation zones, Richard is a long time shooter, former cop and internet entrepreneur. Among the many places he calls home is http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/.


Advertisement

  • Red McCloud

    Now we just need a .327 FedMag version.

    • That’s really the gun the .327 was made for, and likely the best hope of reviving the caliber.

      • Sunshine_Shooter

        I know a lot of people say it, but if they made a .327 FedMag LCRx, I’d buy it on my next paycheck.

    • Paul White

      I’d like a 357 mag version with the 3″ barrel. Perfect console gun for long trips.

      • Art out West

        Agreed! A 3″ version in 357 would be awesome! I love a 2″ snub in .38 special, but want a little longer barrel for 357 (and the slightly bigger grip, and a hair more weight too).
        A 3″ LCRx in 357 would fill the gap between my 642 and 4″ Ruger Security Six.

      • Stuki Moi

        I’ve shot the .38 version with “Is this really within spec .38+p?” heavy, hardcast .28+ps. Let’s just say… I couldn’t care less about a .357 version….

        The .38 with the above mentioned type ammo, is (presumably, as I haven’t yet had to shoot a bear with it….) fantastic as a trail “running gun.” Very light for it’s surface area, means it bounces around less when running, than more concentrated mass weapons. And the full sized grip draws quickly from improvised chest holsters, while the length of barrel and height of grip, keeps it oriented correctly, unlike smaller guns.

  • Kovacs Jeno

    21st century Kit Gun!

    • Alan

      Also trail gun. Lightweight and loaded with some .22LR shotshells for Mr. No Shoulders. Basically a Single Six/Ten; lighter and easier to load.

      • Kyle

        Or, you know you could just walk around the snake since it isn’t bothering anyone in the woods…

      • Just Say’n

        At half again the price of a Mark IV? No thanks. Rather have 10 rounds and in a super accurate, reliable semi-auto.

        • Vizzini

          I own both a Mark II stainless 6″ bull barrel and a .38 3″ LCRx. The LCRx is much lighter and handier to carry.

          • Art out West

            SR22 is cheaper, is also very light, and easy to carry.
            Still, I think this revolver looks very cool, and it would be a lot of fun. Plus the revolver also gives you the option of firing rounds that wouldn’t cycle in an autoloader (like shorts, subsonics, shotshells). I’d love to have one of these pups.

          • Vizzini

            I’ve already got a lot of .22 revolvers so I’m not in the market, but I like my .38/.357 LCR/LCRxes very much and if the .22 models are anywhere near as good, I’d recommend them.

        • Paul White

          Most of the Mark IV’s I see are 400+ themselves…

    • Ken

      Yep, load it with .22 Shorts for checking your traps.

  • zellgato

    I wonder for what purpose? Though tons of fun at a range, outside of that I’m unsure.

    • Bigbigpoopi

      Tacklebox gun. Smittys are NOT cheap. I’ve been nagging for this for some time as a damn good alternative to the 617.

      • DrewN

        I live at the beach and I’ve had a .357 LCR banging around in my toolbox for a few years now. Still looks decent,and no rust issues.. This is the wheelgun version of a polymer wonder, you can beat it to hell and not give a darn. I always feel bad dinging up a nice revolver even if it’s well worn or brushed/beaded stainless already.

    • I held the .38 version and it weighs nothing. Would be an excellent pack gun for long hikes.

    • Paul White

      That’s exactly why I’m buying it. That and using it to teach my kids to shoot.

      Oh, and I suspect it’ll make a good rabbit hunting pistol.

    • Ken

      Good for trappers. Load it with .22 Shorts.

      • zellgato

        ooh yeah good point. I forgot entirely about varient bullet types.
        Weird…how I forgot about spread shots. Given how useful they are in my parents area.
        hum that’d be nifty. Though folks often carry deringers from Bond Arms with bird shots for the snacks and such.

  • 22winmag

    When it comes to expensive range toys, I prefer the ones with buttstocks.

  • Bigbigpoopi

    FINALLY!!!!

  • Ehtacs

    I dig the 9mm LCR and have enjoyed shooting mine. Great for rat shot!.. The LCRx form factor would be my preference over the two, though. Shield conceals better than the LCR and aims easier at the range for the moment.

    • Art out West

      Interesting! I don’t own an LCR, but find that my similarly sized 642 conceals better than my Shield. I love the Shield, but still tend to carry the 642 more frequently. FWIW, I pocket carry both. Maybe IWB is different.

    • LGonDISQUS

      I have a six shot 5″ 9mm revolver I’m looking to sell. Less than 50rd put through it. Was in a car wreck on Friday (me fine, volvo RIP) and some cash would be helpful! Debating on selling my HP995 with original and ATI stock.

  • Tom

    These Ruger revolvers are so Fugly. I would never buy one.

    • jamezb

      H&R’s Sportsman was no beauty queen, but she’s still a great piece of work!

  • Paul White

    Tried to order at my LGS, they aren’t sure when they’ll have it in hand 🙁

  • DrewN

    Now, give me this in .327, .41M or .44 Special Ruger. A 5 shot .41 would be awesome.

    • Paul White

      Not in something that lite it wouldn’t be!

      • DrewN

        Eh, a buddy gave me a couple thousand .41 wadcutters and I need something to use them in. I’ve been looking for a 57, but Davidson’s and the State of Ca. disagree about it’s inclusion on the roster. Don’t really want another Blackhawk, and the Redhawks aren’t available. I wouldn’t mind if Smith did a .41 version of the 69 either.

        • Stuki Moi

          I think there are smiths building 5 shot .41Ms on L frames and GP100s. The supposed “problem” for both Ruger and S&W, is the same that has plagued the “optimal” (hunt and service) caliber ever since it’s creation: It falls between the cracks between their frame and cylinder sizes, so they can’t add any capacity over what would be available in the infinitely more common and established .44Mag.

          If they were comfortable squeezing 6 into an L frame or GP100, 7 into an N or Redhawk, and perhaps even 8 into a Super Redhawk, they’d be available all over the place. Heck, if Smith had introduced the L frame with 6 .41Ms along with the cartridge, they may even have been adopted by some police departments back in the day.

          But as it is, it’s just a smaller, and much less available, .44Mag. Available, if at all, in the same guns, at the same capacity, as the .44. So unless someone specifically wants one, why not get the .44Mag? Doubly so since the latter can use .44specials when less power is desired, whereas the .41 doesn’t have a common “special” sibling either.

    • Edeco

      I think the GP100 would be needed for 41 RM. It’s at the top of my wish list. Be so sweet, right on the edge between duty gun and hunting gun. Not that I carry occupationally or hunt.

      • Stuki Moi

        Talking about “hunt and duty,” what I don’t get, is why no 10MM Ruger American. Nor 10MM any other of the “staggered” capacity .45s. (M&P, Sig 227, CZ, HK…..)

        In .45, all of those give up big capacity to the doublestacked Glock and FN. Yet, since their staggered .45 grips are wide enough to fully doublestack a .40, they can fully doublestack 10mms in their .45 frame. Giving up nothing to Glock in capacity for a change. While still retaining the slimmer grips that lets many more people get a proper grip on them.

  • Bob Barkertor

    Still amazed that a .327 and .357 are not offered in the 3in. Even a 9mm would be neat in a 3in. But no, they are focused on making 2.75in .357 Redhawks and 3 round mag capacity big bore Scout rifles. Some times I wonder if Ruger has Bipolar disorder??

    • JumpIf NotZero

      I’ll give Ruger this, while they don’t always hit it our of the park, they’re trying. That’s a LOT more than I can say for Kimber, Colt, Smith, and almost everyone else.

      Ruger does occasionally kill it (RPR).

      • Sunshine_Shooter

        Completely agree. Ruger is always trying new stuff, and I appreciate it.

      • Art out West

        True! Ruger is much more responsive than most other manufacturers. They are doing a great job overall. I love the three Rugers I own, and will probably purchase more down the road.

      • Bob Barkertor

        Very true good point, I certainly agree.

    • Paul White

      The big bore scout rifles are at least neat, even if totally impractical for most of us (states with wierd hunting laws excepted).

      And if they get that Redhawk in longer than a 3″ barrel I’d be interested…but not at 2.75″. Try 4 or 5 maybe…

      But yeah, at least they’re doing stuff besides the umpteenth AR version

  • FLdeepdiver

    Finally! This is a long time coming.

    This + Colibri’s + Pellet gun steel plates = Backyard Plinking that is hearing safe.

  • Disarmed in CA

    At what barrel length does .22LR go supersonic?

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      Right around 4″ +/-

  • gunsandrockets

    When the LCR lockwork is modified from DAO of the LCR to DA/SA of the LCRx, is the DA trigger pull compromised a little?

    I noticed a difference in the DA trigger pull between the .38 LCRx and the 9mm LCR. The LCR seemed lighter and smoother than the LCRx. Maybe it’s just me?

    • Vizzini

      I have an LCR .357 Magnum and an LCRx 3″ .38 and the DA trigger pull on the DAO is noticeably smoother. That’s not to say the LCRx is terrible, though.

      There are also more rounds through my LCR, so it may also be smoother from being better broken in. I can’t say for sure.

    • LGonDISQUS

      Yes, the camming action that LVRs are graced with had to be tweaked to lock back EVERY TIME under SA mode.

      First time I shot a .38 LCR, I was cleverly satisfied from such a puny gun.

  • Swarf

    Needs more than five rounds to pique my interest in a whole new caliber. I already have a 5 shot LCR in .38.

    I think .327 looks like a serious winner for a pistol cartridge, but if it’s guns only do .38 things, no one is going to jump in.

    A 7 or 8 shot the same size as a 5 shot .357? I’m in. Lever carbine with 14 in the tube? Great.

    All of that with the ballistics I’ve seen and I’m in, but…

    • Stuki Moi

      I’d seriously look at a 6 shot .327 if it had a 4″ barrel, and only added an ounce or so to the weight. Basically slightly thinner half weight K frame / GP100 servive revolver. Like the .357Sig, the high velocity should allow for hollow/soft-point hybrids that both penetrate consistently deep, yet still expands and doesn’t massively overpenetrate. Perfect for pissed of Pitbulls, Rotweilers and other critters of that ilk, while still remaining “responsible” for use against two leggers in built up areas.

      For bear, heavier .38cal hardcasts are better. Or, in the .357Sigs case, heavier .40 flatnoses. But for “town AND country” the Sig, and similar velocity .327, looks really promising if optimized bullets are used. .357Magnum as well, of course, but not out of an 18 ounce revolver optimal for protection when running.

  • LGonDISQUS

    I am unable to find a LCR(X) in 3-inch barrel length for .357, just 1.8″.

    • Stuki Moi

      All the guys on the team charged with test firing it with proper woods/trail ammo, broke their wrists. So the project is delayed indefinitely:)

  • Sean

    This seems to be a great gun for teaching a first time shooter.

  • Bob

    I know have a reason to buy a LCR.

    A three inch .22LR is the perfect plinker. I have a few S&W 617s but they’re getting to the ‘keep in the safe because they’re collector pieces’ status. I want something that I can use and abuse. This LCR seems to fit the bill perfectly.

    So at the present moment, my current wants for 2017 are this, the three inch .44 Special GP100, a Mossberg Shockwave, and a CZ full stock in 9.3x62mm.