Raging Bull life expectancy
- Thread starter IM_Lugger
- Start date
Chock it up to inexperience(at the time) and going out any buying the first thing i saw that had a big hole in the end and went bang. Now that i know a thing or two about buying a revolver, i ALWAYS bring a good flashlight, a set of feeler gauges and a little know-how when buying a revolver!!
I dont think ruger feels threatened enough by the 500 mag to make it a big issue when it comes to bigbore revolvers...their sales havent been dented by the 500 mag, so why start making one? As for the raging bull chambered in it, ive yet to see one, hear of anyone shooting one or even handling one, so god only knows what the reliablity is going to be like...
And considering Taurus's less FAR than perfect track record when it comes to bigbore handguns, you couldnt pay me enough to shoot that grenade!
I got the Ragging B in 44mag because I never shot a Ruger that had a good trigger or a comfortable grip (who wants to shoot an extra few thousand more rounds through an uncomfortable gun with a nasty trigger?).
It has a bit over a thousand rounds through it. Seems to hold up to the 300 grain JSP in front of a large charge of H110 just fine. The only thing it doesn't like is unjacketed bullets: Cakes lead all over the inside of the brake and out the ports.
-tINY
Rugers Overbuilt?
I read at least two posts above that said Rugers were "overbuilt." I don't think they are overbuilt, I think a cast product has to be thicker to take the same stresses as a forged and machined product. Judging from the rough machining on most examples of Rugers I've examined, I would say they built them as cheaply as possible, within the limitations of the chosen technology, like everybody else.
With the "overbuilt" reputation, they also have a reputation for p!s$poor triggers. Do they charge extra for that?
There is also the aesthetic aspect of firearms, which apparently matters little to some but I get a kick out of the way a firearm handles, and looks, as well as accuracy and other shooting attributes. Call it pride of ownership. No Ruger or Taurus has been able to generate this within my breast.
I read at least two posts above that said Rugers were "overbuilt." I don't think they are overbuilt, I think a cast product has to be thicker to take the same stresses as a forged and machined product. Judging from the rough machining on most examples of Rugers I've examined, I would say they built them as cheaply as possible, within the limitations of the chosen technology, like everybody else.
With the "overbuilt" reputation, they also have a reputation for p!s$poor triggers. Do they charge extra for that?
There is also the aesthetic aspect of firearms, which apparently matters little to some but I get a kick out of the way a firearm handles, and looks, as well as accuracy and other shooting attributes. Call it pride of ownership. No Ruger or Taurus has been able to generate this within my breast.
I had my trusty caliper out the other day and decided to measure the various areas of my Raging Bull in 45 Colt ( 6 shot cylinder ) against my Ruger Redhawk in 45 Colt. The walls of the cylinder of the RB was about .005" thicker than the Redhawk but the red has offset notches so I'd say thats a wash. The Red has quite a bit more material around the barrel threads and the top strap is wider but the area of the frame under the barrel is quite a bit thinner than the area under the RB. Both the Redhawk and the Raging Bull lock up and the front and rear of the cylinder. Frankly I think both are quite sturdy enough for 44 Mag. I must add that my Ruger's trigger in DA and SA is worse than all 8 of my Tauri but it is quite accurate so I keep it anyway. 