bamaranger
New member
changed
I too likely own more Rugers, combined, than any other make. They are all older guns, from the "old Ruger" era, or at least were initially sold at that time.
I've bought most of them used.
I can't speak to the quality issue, as I've not bought any new Rugers in near 20 yrs. But what I see (maybe sense) is that Ruger does not make the same kind of "interesting" guns. Now that is subjective, for what one shooter likes, another may not, but those guns I bought for a reason, and others did too. Ruger offered designs that were not offered, or not affordable, from the other makers. Consider:
-Rugers first long gun was a .44 SA carbine. NObody has offered anything like either model of the SA .44 since
-Ruger produced, and still produces, a very practical and popular SA revolver line, but when the B-hawk first came out, Colt was turning its back on the design
-back when white line spacers, funky Monte Carlo stock, and all manner of eye popping stock features were popular, Ruger went head to head with the big two makers with a simple, conservative, traditional stock on the M77, and they sold well
-repeaters were the rage, but Ruger introduced a high quality single shot in the No1 series, and a nifty carbine in the No3
-long before the AR craze landed, Ruger introduced the Mini14, there was nothing else like'em (nopbody had an AR) and they were very popular. Some guys still like'em. The Mini 30 followed.
-nearly certain that Ruger was the first firm to offer a domestically made bolt rifle in 7.62x39
-nearly certain the Ruger had the Super B available before the M29 in .44
-nobody (well excluding some special production from Colt) made a high quality BP/percussion revolver....except Ruger and the Old Army, for a number of years.
-like'em or not, Ruger tried to enter the high quality double shotgun line with the Red Label and others.
I don't see that Ruger has had that type of outside the box, forward thinking in its designs for some time. That said, the Ruger chassis rifle, and the belated support of the scout rifle (nice if they would have introduced that one when Cooper was touting it initially, 25 yrs ago) are interesting looks. And I bet they are selling.....but gun sales are up across the board I read. The American sells, and its a shooter, but pretty much another vanilla poly rifle. They are offering some different calibers, I wish they'd make it in .260 for general release.
I suspect Rugers labor costs are very high. I'm suspect of administrators who appear to be consumed with maximizing profit, by producing guns like everybody else makes, cheaper.
When I get on these rants, I usually get flamed.but the OP started it down this path, so here ya go.
I too likely own more Rugers, combined, than any other make. They are all older guns, from the "old Ruger" era, or at least were initially sold at that time.
I've bought most of them used.
I can't speak to the quality issue, as I've not bought any new Rugers in near 20 yrs. But what I see (maybe sense) is that Ruger does not make the same kind of "interesting" guns. Now that is subjective, for what one shooter likes, another may not, but those guns I bought for a reason, and others did too. Ruger offered designs that were not offered, or not affordable, from the other makers. Consider:
-Rugers first long gun was a .44 SA carbine. NObody has offered anything like either model of the SA .44 since
-Ruger produced, and still produces, a very practical and popular SA revolver line, but when the B-hawk first came out, Colt was turning its back on the design
-back when white line spacers, funky Monte Carlo stock, and all manner of eye popping stock features were popular, Ruger went head to head with the big two makers with a simple, conservative, traditional stock on the M77, and they sold well
-repeaters were the rage, but Ruger introduced a high quality single shot in the No1 series, and a nifty carbine in the No3
-long before the AR craze landed, Ruger introduced the Mini14, there was nothing else like'em (nopbody had an AR) and they were very popular. Some guys still like'em. The Mini 30 followed.
-nearly certain that Ruger was the first firm to offer a domestically made bolt rifle in 7.62x39
-nearly certain the Ruger had the Super B available before the M29 in .44
-nobody (well excluding some special production from Colt) made a high quality BP/percussion revolver....except Ruger and the Old Army, for a number of years.
-like'em or not, Ruger tried to enter the high quality double shotgun line with the Red Label and others.
I don't see that Ruger has had that type of outside the box, forward thinking in its designs for some time. That said, the Ruger chassis rifle, and the belated support of the scout rifle (nice if they would have introduced that one when Cooper was touting it initially, 25 yrs ago) are interesting looks. And I bet they are selling.....but gun sales are up across the board I read. The American sells, and its a shooter, but pretty much another vanilla poly rifle. They are offering some different calibers, I wish they'd make it in .260 for general release.
I suspect Rugers labor costs are very high. I'm suspect of administrators who appear to be consumed with maximizing profit, by producing guns like everybody else makes, cheaper.
When I get on these rants, I usually get flamed.but the OP started it down this path, so here ya go.
