Out of Style?

People who buy guns based upon adequate functionality and looks, buy Smith & Wesson
Click to expand...

You need to re-read my original thread without your mistaken take on hostility from my part. I'm well read on the subject and meaning of those two words, and in your context in regards to the description of the S&W being purely adequate is indeed silly. In your now defense of your very own words, I'd like to second that meaning to it being dumb. To further drag this thread into a debauchery from its original intent I would like to point out; yes the S&W tiggers are better out of the box than a Ruger, and yes the finishing on S&W is better. You obviously neither own nor even handled any comparable S&W versus a Ruger, otherwise you know better than to go on your rant about the superiority of your Ruger. If you can't handle constructive critiscism nor even the opinions of other members based on insignificant details (such as the case of personal dislike or like of the aesthetic value), I'd suggest you visit hommie-gat.com where you can find other members of the same mindset such as yourself. Have yourself an Air Force day. :D

BB out
 
S&W vs Ruger

For the record. S&W stock is on a tear, Ruger stock is languishing in the cellar.

U.F.O. Disclosure. Don't own either stock, however am long a couple of primo S&W revolvers. :cool:

U.F.O.
 

Attachments

  • smith.gif
    smith.gif
    15.3 KB · Views: 27
  • ruger.gif
    ruger.gif
    18 KB · Views: 25
I'd suggest you visit hommie-gat.com where you can find other members of the same mindset such as yourself.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, who has an issue with criticism? In all my time postings I don't think I have ever suggested someone leave a thread or a forum because of their comments. Have a great day, I think you have made your personal issues obvious. Thank you. :)


.44mag
 
Last edited:
UFO what exactly are we looking at in those graphs besides some useless information without labels except Smith and Wesson and Ruger... ? And a lot of numbers....

I dunno doesn't mean a damn thing to me without labels, didn't you learn that in school? :p
 
We're looking at the price charts for both stocks in my first post which show that S&W has almost doubled in the past 6 months and Ruger is about a flush away from the storm drain. 44mag made the mistake of comparing both stock's prices in the absolute, infering that because Ruger was trading at a higher dollar price it was trading "better". Not the case at all. If you've got 6 months to spare, n3twrkm4n, I'll explain more to you about how to interpret this useless information without labels. If you think guns are interesting, you ought to check out stock technical analysis. Fascinating.

U.F.O.
 
U.F.O.

Since I can only understand the simple things regarding financial data, let's go with a statement that is completely provable and easy for us simple people to understand.

Ruger was founded in 1949, and since 1950 it has shown a profit every year. In the mind of most people this points to a strong financial history.

Now before you run off with comments about "cooking the books" and such, I would suggest it would be hard for any company to go 50+ years with shady financials and not get caught or go under. Whether you wish to agree or not, Ruger is a strong American company that has always thoroughly explored their decisions before making them. Ruger has not gone under, it has not bowed to political pressure, and it has never been owned by a foreign company. I would also point out that with your "numbers" you obviously did not factor in the fact that Ruger is paying millions in legal fees fighting lawsuits (and winning) that inevitably keeping your and my rights afloat, while Smith and Wesson is sitting on their collective rump too afraid to come out against the agreement that the last administration signed. Do you think S&W would be sitting where your "numbers" show them if they were dealing with the same lawsuits? In the end we apparently will not agree on this subject and that is o.k. We are both Americans which thankfully allows us to disagree. Good luck and have a great day.

.44mag
 
44mag

Thanks for the history lesson on what a great American company Ruger is and I don't disagree. Not sure where you get that I was about to say anything about someone's books getting cooked. The entire point of my stock comparison was in response to your point:
As of a few minutes ago when I checked the stock, Ruger was trading at $8.53 a share and Smith & Wesson was trading at $2.23 a share. Ruger must be doing something right.
Click to expand...
which has absolutely no meaning to anything relevant. The fact that one company's stock trades at a higher price than another's totally ignores useful information like shares outstanding and current price history. The bottom line is if you had bought Ruger stock 6 months ago you would have lost 22% on your investment. If you had bought S&W 6 months ago you would have made 85% on your investment. Since YOU chose to use the two company's equity prices incorrectly as a debate point in support of Ruger, I felt it necessary to help you with your error. I have no dog in this fight. I would be happy to own and shoot either company's guns without prejudice.

U.F.O.
 
Stick with .22lr., .32 acp, 38spl, .357 mag, .45 acp, 9mm and .44 mag, and you cant go wrong. The new super ubber handgun rounds are niche cartridges for hunting, or those who love blast and recoil, and really expensive ammo/ reloading.

The classic calibers I mentioned above have all stood the test of time, and are not going away any time soon.

If you really want to shoot effective hunting cartridges out of a handgun get a thompson center Contender or an Encore, and then you can shoot real rifle rounds out of a very accurate handgun platform with a trigger that is superb.
 
Thank you Master Blaster... finally what this thread was really about :p

"Runaway train never comin back, wrong way on a one way track, feels like we should be getting somewhere" :eek:
 
As far as hunting goes, I think Master Blaster is right on. As for grizzly and other dangerous game last-ditch, BACKUP defense gun, after your rifle is empty, or if you're on the ground struggling and cannot employ your rifle, I think a revolver in a cartridge bigger than a .44 mag has its place....not sure which one is best balance of controllability vs. power past .44 mag, but I like the idea of the 4" .500 S&W with some light-ish powder charge with heavyish bullets, for this task, with the 5 or 6 shot repeatability of a DA revolver.
 
I'm sorry, who has an issue with criticism? In all my time postings I don't think I have ever suggested someone leave a thread or a forum because of their comments. Have a great day, I think you have made your personal issues obvious. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Redirect huh? That is A-typical of those who initiate an argument and find that they are wrong on all accounts. My personal issue began with you taking my own preference of S&W's into account as a personal smite to yourself in regards to Ruger. You may or may not have ever suggested someone leaving a site, that means as much to me as a submarine with a screen door. I thought it would behoove you to read on with those who share your common interest, so in fact I was trying to do you a favor pal :D Just one thing, are you going to dispute the stock prices, the fit/finish, the trigger, or the value of S&W vs Ruger anymore? If so, its probably best instead of initiating a thread hijacking as you did; try and start a new thread. Now if you need any assistance in furthering your vocabulary literary meanings, I would be glad to assist you as well.
 
Last edited:
BodyBagger,

If you look back at the posts, this is the comment that caused the thread to go off course. I only followed the leader.

Life is to short to hunt with a gun as ugly as the super redhawk and that aint helping sales
Click to expand...

Have a good one and thank you for the stimulating conversation. :)

.44mag
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top