Reduction in Ruger Quality

Not many people want to pay for finish on a 22. Ruger does offer distributor specials that offer everything you mention. I have one. I have seriously considered selling it for an equally functional "Wal-Mart special."
I think Rugers market is people who own guns but aren't shooters. They offer great products for this market. They handle marketing, which is more than just promotion, much better than their competitors.
 
plastic trigger guards? I have no idea what you are talking about there, my 10/22 is fairly recent, about 4 years or so old and it's still got a metal trigger guard and I haven't noticed plastic on any of the 10/22s I've fondled in the stores
Click to expand...

Seriously?

I think they went to the plastic towards the end of 2008 and introduced it in the 2009 Shot Show
 
Yep, as danez71 says, Ruger 10-22s have came with plastic trigger guards for several years now. I actually prefer the plastic material over the original alloy ones because they don't scratch or chip nearly as easy as the metal ones did. I do, however, generally prefer metal as opposed to plastic in most parts applications on most firearms.
 
I well remember those 20 Model 77 single shot rifles Ruger designed and put together by Ruger's finest craftsmen for the US Palma Team in 1991. Sorriest batch of so called "very accurate" rifles ever seen and shot by some of the best riflemen on this planet. Poor stock design, barrel quality, triggers, and they were called "wash tub" rifles. That's how big the groups they shot were. So the team used their own "tea cup" rifles. But the Rugers did have top quality sights on them.
 
Bart, the same group of fine gun smiths that you mention must be the ones that built my Ruger 6ppc. You have to work hard to make a ppc a poor shooter, but Ruger managed to accomplish poor accuracy out of a PPC and do it with flying colors.
 
old Ruger v. new

I've got no beef with new Rugers, 'cause I don't really own any. That's because with the exception of the Ruger Scout, there is not a new Ruger that I want.
And that's the trick. A maker needs to produce guns that people want to own. Really, how many synthetic stocked, matte finished rifles do you really need? One price point .270 is about as desireable as the next. It's not about need, its about wanting to buy one 'cause you fancy it.

Old Bill Ruger was good at that. He saw gaps and niche's in the market, knew what shooters would want, what they would find desireable, interestng. He was a shooter and hunter himself. Lots of stuff got done at Ruger 'cause that's the way the old man said they'd do it. And he was right most times about it.

Now, Bill Ruger is gone and so are most of their interesting guns. I read an interview once where the old man said they'd make the "Old Army" as long as he was running the company. Its gone now. So too all the .44 carbines, gas and levers both. And the SXS shotgun too I think. Sec-6 as well. Likely others I'm not aware of.

The Ruger Scout is the current exception to their problem, but it's come along about 15-20 yrs to late.
 
the "best revolver" is quite arguable. however they are without a doubt the strongest actions, enabling Rugers to be loaded hotter than any other brand
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I will go with Freedom Arms in that regard with the older Dan Wessons, and the N frame Smiths all well above a Ruger's cast frame with MIM parts
 
I think Ruger is just trying to survive in this poor economy
Click to expand...

A dear friend works for a large distributor. Ruger told them not to place any orders for three months because of the backlog of orders. This is a great time to be in the gun business!
 
This is a great time to be in the gun business!
Click to expand...

Very true. The past few months have seen unprecedented demand for firearms and ammunition by the public. It may be a poor economy for the nation as a whole, but the gunmakers are thriving.

The huge backlog of orders kinda worries me though. I am afraid QC may slip a little in an effort to keep up with demand. That goes not just for Ruger but every company. At least with Ruger you know they will make it right if you send it back to them. They always have.
 
I shot a Ruger SR9 last weekend I was very unimpressed by the cheap plastic feel of it. I wouldn't pay more then the cost of a Hi-point for it.
Click to expand...

:confused:

You are definitely clueless there.

There is no comparison with a Hipoint and a Ruger SR9. I wouldn't buy a Hipoint; you'd have to give it to me. I still won't use it to defend my life. I've shot one and know enough how they perform; crude and not always 100% reliable.

Now the SR series pistols have been tested and updated. They are great pistols for the value. Usually around $399 for the 9mm or 40. I would not hesitate to buy an SR9/40 and use it for CC and self-defense.

If you're saying you won't pay more than $150 for a Ruger pistol, well then get yourself a Hipoint...
 
I have a variety of ruger firearms from different years of manufacture. I know ruger quality and the changes they have made as well as anyone. I am very disappointed about the dramatic rising prices of their products and what I see as cost cutting. Companys across the board seem to do this as they gain reputation and sales. Corners are cut as long as sales stay strong. You are free to disagree and say I don't know What I'm talking about but Ruger today is a different company than it was in the early 70s. Ruger standard 10/22 carbine used to come with a Walnut stock and annodized finish up the mid to late 70s or early 80s. I bought one of these stocks off ebay and see complete rifles come up for auction regular enough. They sell at a premium. Older guns also had two bolt guide rails in the receiver. This feature was later deleated. Deluxe carbines have always had walnut. The annodized black finish lasted till around the mid 90s. Now even the Deluxe 10/22 has plastic parts on the trigger guard and cheaper painted finish. How is this keeping up standards of their products? They also deleted the hammer bushings when they adopted the plastic trigger group making it harder to drop in a hammer parts kit from power custom/volquartzen etc to improve pull without buying more parts. I'll agree ruger still makes very functional firearms, but I disagree that they have maintained quality standards or are as affordable as they ever were. I do know what I'm talking about but it is obvious that a lot of you who want to slam me for starting this topic haven't seen very many Ruger guns.
 
You are definitely clueless there.

There is no comparison with a Hipoint and a Ruger SR9. I wouldn't buy a Hipoint; you'd have to give it to me. I still won't use it to defend my life. I've shot one and know enough how they perform; crude and not always 100% reliable.

Now the SR series pistols have been tested and updated. They are great pistols for the value. Usually around $399 for the 9mm or 40. I would not hesitate to buy an SR9/40 and use it for CC and self-defense.

If you're saying you won't pay more than $150 for a Ruger pistol, well then get yourself a Hipoint...
Click to expand...

Sorry but I consider SR9 a POS plastic, low grade and cheaply made the same as I consider a Hi-piont.

I am in the market for a Mark III at $300. I think it is a nice gun and a good deal at $300. Other then the Mark III I am not impressed with Ruger these days.
 
Last edited:
It's pretty clear that some posting have no clue about guns while others have no clue about business. And both groups want the same dang thing, $700 guns for $300.

I'll be the first to admit that I prefer the older 10/22's over the newer ones, prefer the Security Six to the GP, don't like loaded chamber indicators and mag disconnects, etc, etc. But I realize what and why they do certain things and overall think they make good products at a price point to fill a niche. They are also doing some things better than before like producing quality high-cap mags, improving the Mini, improving the accuracy of the 77, introducing new and innovative guns, etc.

Sure there are better guns made in each of the categories Ruger ventures into but you have to pay for it. That improvement, sometimes a very small improvement, doesn't come for free like some here tend to think it should. Ruger was one of the best values in guns when they started in the 50's, was again in the 60's, the 70's, the 80's and the 90's. Hasn't changed much this century.
 
I do know what I'm talking about but it is obvious that a lot of you who want to slam me for starting this topic haven't seen very many Ruger guns.
Click to expand...

You started this thread expressing an opinion not shared by some. Did you want an open discussion re the topic or did you expect only posters who agree with your position to respond? To say that those who have disagreed with you "haven't seen very many Ruger guns" is a cheap and unwarranted shot. And I haven't seen where anyone has wanted to "slam" you for starting this topic-unless you consider anyone who disagrees with your position a slammer. If that's the case, consider yourself slammed-again. :eek:
 
I shot a Ruger SR9 last weekend I was very unimpressed by the cheap plastic feel of it. I wouldn't pay more then the cost of a Hi-point for it.


You are definitely clueless there.

There is no comparison with a Hipoint and a Ruger SR9. I wouldn't buy a Hipoint; you'd have to give it to me. I still won't use it to defend my life. I've shot one and know enough how they perform; crude and not always 100% reliable.

Now the SR series pistols have been tested and updated. They are great pistols for the value. Usually around $399 for the 9mm or 40. I would not hesitate to buy an SR9/40 and use it for CC and self-defense.

If you're saying you won't pay more than $150 for a Ruger pistol, well then get yourself a Hipoint...
Click to expand...
+1, the fit, finish, and materials of the SR series handguns are pretty much superior in every way to just about every handgun in it's price range with maybe the exception of the beretta PX4, I'm sure that if you hate the quality of an SR series handgun you would also never buy a glock, M&P or XD as well.
 
I do know what I'm talking about but it is obvious that a lot of you who want to slam me for starting this topic haven't seen very many Ruger guns.
Click to expand...

Ya know, every so often I get a customer that swears up and down that they're good for it, the check is as good as in the mail, money's in the bank etc. Those are the ones that I have to ride up and down to even have a chance of getting paid. Your post(s) are the same dang way but about guns. The more you scream about what you know the more obvious it becomes about what you don't know.

I've had/have Rugers from the 70's, 80's, 90's and the 2000's. My most recent being bought last year. Good thinkin blowing smoke outta your butt about what I and others haven't seen.

(BTW, might help if you learned to use some punctuation, proper use of caps and maybe broke things up so I could get a breath while trying to sort out what the heck you're spouting.)
 
all personal jabs aside.
the OP was completely wrong on the price point of Ruger 10/22s, estimating them to be double actual retail value. the talk about skyrocketing prices is also a little exaggerated considering that a 10/22 is the same price today that they were 5 years ago while gasoline is about $.80-1 a gallon more than it was then and that's with the price drop over the winter. 5 years ago your average ford F150 cost about $2,000-3,000 less than they do now yet I bet there is nothing more special about the way that they were manufactured.

you can still get wood stocks on 10/22 carbines that cost the same as a 10/22 carbine with a plastic one. no they are not the same quality that they were in the 70s but they are still serviceable and durable, I have yet to see anyone's 10/22s have the stock explode while in use. the paint is an admitted drop in quality yet my painted 10/22 doesn't have a spot of rust on it so it can't be much worse than anodized aside from less attractive use but guess what? I don't buy a 22LR for a safe queen, I buy it to go out and shoot stuff and to do that a lot and often. I defy you to list any problem with a modern 10/22 that was not a problem with a 90s era 10/22. there are none because the 10/22 with all it's cosmetic 'corner cutting' is still just as reliable as it has always been.

OP has been slammed with evidence to the contrary of his argument and he takes it as personal vindictive attacks, we are simply stated that as much as he whines about their quality Ruger is still superior to Remington, Winchester and a lot of the other big box brands of equal monetary value.
 
It's pretty clear that some posting have no clue about guns while others have no clue about business. And both groups want the same dang thing, $700 guns for $300.
Click to expand...

I understand business, people make what you think consumers will buy. But there is also other factors like reputation and quality when businesses start trying to market cheap goods they get known for cheap goods.

It's not just Ruger that I have seen quality go way down with, many other brands also I pick up a lot of guns now days and they are half plastic with cheap parts that look and feel like they will break if you are unlucky enough to drop it.

Same deal with cars and other consumer goods “Made in the USA” used to mean something. Some people don't care anymore we live in a throw away consumer society.
 
FWIW, I have observed changes in Ruger design, features and quality for about 40 years. Other brands have undergone a similar evolution. I currently own ten Ruger firearms and my last four purchases were Rugers. I very much regret selling my first Ruger, a Single Six Convertible 22/22WMRF. It was the only Ruger I've ever sold. I would have at least a couple more Ruger bolt action rifles if the company made exactly what I wanted. I believe Ruger firearms are a good match for other brands in their price range. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top