Ruger QC or lack thereof

In 1873 a dozen eggs cost $.30 which was about 6.6% of the $20 price of a colt.

Today, a dozen eggs costs about $2.00. 6.6% of a $700 Ruger or S&W is about $46. Doesn't seem like we are getting much for our revolver dollars.

(if you can use GOLD, I can use EGGS)

:):)
 
StinkyPete, I am on the same page ... I expect good 'function' and a reasonable good finish on my Rugers. I know it won't be perfect. After all it isn't a Freedom Arms class revolver. Rugers are relatively cheap. As one writer put it, Rugers are working class guns. Considering the mass production, they do pretty well. For all the people that complain on forums, there are many more that are just using their revolvers and like them. Yes, most all my Rugers that I normally use have custom grips (pay for that 'perfect' fit) and I've paid to have had a good action job done on each. Were they serviceable before? Yep. But now I have a better tool across the board that meets my 'expectations'.... That said, I didn't accept one Ruger .327 from the store because the front sight was loose and couldn't be tightened. They had to send it back and get me another one. How that got through QC I don't know.
 
I bought a new Ruger Super Redhawk in .454 Casull, stainless steel back in 2009, it had lack of machining issues that I had to draw file on to remove, and then use polishing compound to clean up scratches. This is not a cheap gun, and I was disappointed that I should have shopped around more for a better example.

I did a trigger job on it, and hand loaded .45 LC as the .454 Casull was too harsh in recoil. This gun was very accurate with all my loads, different bullets and powders. What really bothered me was that it was so large and heavy, also I kept getting struck in the left cheek by something when the gun was fired, not all the time but every 6-7 shots, the gun did not seem to be out of timing. But this grew annoying, glad I wear safety glasses, although the debris never came close to my eyes. The cost of the bullets and supplies was too much for me in .45 so I sold it a few weeks ago.

My Ruger GP-100 I bought new in 2002 and the space between the cylinder face and the forcing cone would bind up after 35 shots as it was too tight and the soot would jam it, had to clean the cylinder face frequently at the range, took a fine file and draw filed it to add some distance, works great after that. My two Single Six's have never had any issues, but they were purchased years ago.

I guess we have to closely inspect all new guns now like a used one, sad.
 
arquebus357 said:
My experience with Ruger's revolver frames is that they have always been warped in some manner .

I recently bought their .357 Match Champion and It's the first Ruger revolver that I have owned with a nice flat frame like a S&W. The only problems I have with it are the god awful Hogue grips and the brushed finish. Please Ruger, I can do a brushed finish better than you can. At least my brush marks all go in the same direction. Much cheaper Taurus revolvers from BRAZIL (!) are looking pretty darn good.



Click to expand...
They may look better, but that doesn't mean they'll last as long. With Ruger you get better customer service, but you shouldn't be made to use it right out of the box.

I'm with TxFlyFish tho, I'm not buying anymore new revolvers without visually inspecting the one I end up buying, which for my area means that I'm stuck with LCR's and J Frames because the gun stores near me only carry those. Used ones, so long as they're older Smiths, Ruger single actions, they'll be fine.

I can't wait to see what my Heritage and Taurus Public Defender look like when I get them. At least with those I can't complain much given their price.
 
"In 1873 the Colt was a cowboy's gun. You can't get anymore "working class" than a stinking cowboy. "

The Colt cost about a month's pay for a Cowboy. Many could not afford that.

As for the Heritage... it should be good for some chuckles and reporting here!
 
I'm expecting great things from the Heritage. It's a 6 inch with the adjustable sights, which I think are in large part an issue when people complain about accuracy and being unable to hit anything with them.

I have similar issues with those traditional fixed sights, have a Heritage with them that doesn't shoot to POA and I don't expect any new made SAA with those sights to no matter who makes it.

If all works out, I'll be sure to mention my Heritage every time someone brings up a Single Six that costs $350 more.
 
I too have noticed revolvers especially have declined in quality over the years. I have an early security six, circa the mid 70s or so, that has wonderful blue. The finish has slight swirl marks in bright light but barely noticeable. Much better than any modern blue finish on a new sub-600 dollar gun I’ve witnessed. The grips fit well and weren’t blocky. Admittedly the frame on the inside, especially around the ejection rod, was very rough. It’s a passable firearm compared to the last rugers I fondled at a gun show. I was getting ready to buy a SA roger, either a vaquero or Blackhawk. My mind changed quickly. I’ll get an Uberti cattleman for less, if slightly more fragile, that will be finished better. I’m not planning on shooting gates of hell loads anyway.
 
TruthTellers said:
They may look better, but that doesn't mean they'll last as long. With Ruger you get better customer service, but you shouldn't be made to use it right out of the box.

I'm with TxFlyFish tho, I'm not buying anymore new revolvers without visually inspecting the one I end up buying, which for my area means that I'm stuck with LCR's and J Frames because the gun stores near me only carry those. Used ones, so long as they're older Smiths, Ruger single actions, they'll be fine.

I can't wait to see what my Heritage and Taurus Public Defender look like when I get them. At least with those I can't complain much given their price.
Click to expand...
Well... it pains me to have to say it as I've been a big Ruger fan for years, but it's how I'm feeling after I picked up and shot my Heritage and Taurus PD today: they are more worth the money than a factory new $500+ Ruger revolver. Tho that's not unlimited as once you get into the Redhawk/Super Redhawks given their price, their quality is much better, but they're much larger guns too, so that doesn't mean they're the solution.

I'll keep my eyes peeled for well made and kept used Ruger wheelguns, but I'm sticking by what I said a week ago: I'm done with their new revolvers, the 9mm LCR being the only exception.

I encourage others to do the same. Don't buy their guns and be their beta testers, you just end up feeding the beast.
 
Another “let’s all get together and bash Ruger” post. Freedom Arms is still out there and they will be perfect. Might need to float a loan to get it though. All of the new Rugers I own have cosmetic flaws but I didn’t pay $2500 for them and they will wear out my great grandkids. My revolvers are tools to be used not show pieces. I have several wrenches that had tooling marks and scratches when new but done the task they were bought to do just like my Rugers
 
Last edited:
If I want a quality DA revolver I buy one from the 1950s or 1960s. Nothing from S&W now a days fits that definition. I used to have a nice collection of Ruger Old-Model Flat-tops. They weren't up to the standards of the pre-27 S&Ws I've owned but they were polished uniformly and everything worked.

Now in my retirement years I've have gone back to my favorite style of gun, the Single Action Army, but found the 3rd Generation Colt I bought was over polished, over sprung, and didn't fit my hand like the 1st Gen Colts I once owned. I did find a replacement, which like all good things are not being made any more. The late production USFA single actions, made with all USA sourced parts, are fitted and finished like the 1st Gen Colts were. Absolutely beautiful, and despite the fixed sights all of mine shoot to point of aim at ~25 yards.

If I wanted another Ruger I'd look for an old model Blackhawk or a Secutiry-Six.

Dave
 
TruthTellers said:
Well... it pains me to have to say it as I've been a big Ruger fan for years, but it's how I'm feeling after I picked up and shot my Heritage and Taurus PD today: they are more worth the money than a factory new $500+ Ruger revolver. Tho that's not unlimited as once you get into the Redhawk/Super Redhawks given their price, their quality is much better, but they're much larger guns too, so that doesn't mean they're the solution.



I'll keep my eyes peeled for well made and kept used Ruger wheelguns, but I'm sticking by what I said a week ago: I'm done with their new revolvers, the 9mm LCR being the only exception.



I encourage others to do the same. Don't buy their guns and be their beta testers, you just end up feeding the beast.
Click to expand...



Funny how that works...I on the other hand have had terrible luck with Taurus, with something like 4 of 7 Taurus handguns (all but one, revolvers) needing at least one or more trips back to the factory with function issues (not cosmetics). I no longer buy Taurus based on these experiences. I’ve only had one Heritage revolver, a 22lr. Didn’t keep it long enough to comment on reliability, durability. It worked fine the little I shot it, but it really seemed a low quality piece all things considered, and I sold it off to someone who’d appreciate it more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
dmattaponi said:
Funny how that works...I on the other hand have had terrible luck with Taurus, with something like 4 of 7 Taurus handguns (all but one, revolvers) needing at least one or more trips back to the factory with function issues (not cosmetics). I no longer buy Taurus based on these experiences. I’ve only had one Heritage revolver, a 22lr. Didn’t keep it long enough to comment on reliability, durability. It worked fine the little I shot it, but it really seemed a low quality piece all things considered, and I sold it off to someone who’d appreciate it more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I'm not saying Taurus is better than Ruger, they're not, but in the case of the Judge revolvers, they are worth their price, the Model 85 is worth its price.

Ruger's today cost more than they should.
 
Bill Ruger died in 2002 at 86. He was CEO of Ruger and it is said he kept working on new things until his death at 86. It would seem to me that he probably was not as active as a CEO as the story that is put forth says he was. More than likely his son. Bill jr. had operational control well before his father died.

Bill jr was then CEO until he died last year at 79. I have to question how active a CEO he was in those last years of his life. It does seem that QC has gone down, especially on revolvers, in these last 5-6 years. Of course revolvers are not the money makers. Slap together polymer frame guns are, and AR-15's.

I really believe the stories of these men in their later years is rather heavily embellished.
 
Of course revolvers are not the money makers. Slap together polymer frame guns are, and AR-15's.
Click to expand...
That's true, they're not what pulls in the money unless they're the only revolvers a company makes (i.e. Charter Arms).

All I can say is with how current made revolvers are being churned out, I'm just going to buy used ones made before the 90s when I can. Exception with Charter tho, their 7 shot .32 Mag definitely interests me, but I hope they make one with a longer barrel and adj. sights.

That's usually the issue with Charter, they make decent guns for a fair price, but there's always a feature missing that I want, either a barrel that's too short, sights that I don't like, or not enough rounds in the cylinder.

S&W, Ruger, and Taurus can make revolvers all they want, but it's clear they don't put as much effort into them as they do mass producing polymer pistols.
 
In the past two years I have purchased four new Ruger revolvers: New Vaquero stainless .357, SP101 .327 Federal, Single Seven Birdshead .327 Federal, Bearcat Shopkeeper (blue).

The fit & finish on all of them is excellent and they all function just fine except the SP trigger is the ubiquitous hard pull in double action. They all stack up equal with my old model Blackhawk(1968), Single Six(1959), Service Six(1975), and early SP(1993).

Guess I must be one of the lucky few.... so far.
 
A small anecdote from my observations. I bought a pietta 1851 navy last year on sale for 150 at cabelas brand new. The fit and finish on that cheap Italian C&B revolver repro is much better than any Ruger revolver I’ve held post-2010. Got my hands on a new vaquero and a SBH (was toying around with buying one or the other) during the last gun show. They reminded me more of the heritage revolvers F&F than any older Ruger I’ve owned or come to know.
 
Not sure whether I'm on target here, but it sounds as if you are demanding an awful lot of perfection on a machine made item.

Does it fire and function properly, shoot with normal accuracy for the type, and are there no flaws that you could see without holding it up to the light and doing a close examination? If it meets those criteria that's kind of what you could ask for an american made utility type firearm.

Forty years ago there were flawed units put out by everyone. Sixty years ago. Twenty. Still happening. In that time there have been a heck of a lot of very good guns that looked wondrous.

Tom turpin once wrote in an article that they heym drilling he was examining had crappy QC because some of the checkering was a bit rough, he didn't like the finish, the engraving wasn't artistic enough. He liked his "shootin' irons" to be more perfect than that.

Can you get a $500 diamond that is eye clean and has good color? sure. Are you going to find one that will stand up to scrutiny with a loupe? Who cares, it's not an investment, it's something that your wife will be wearing when she washes the dishes.

Something to remember is that there are no factory seconds for guns. A scratch or pit doesn't mean that it can't be sold, maybe it may be released through non retail channels, but no company is going to burn a mark in the thing that says 'rejected' if there is an poorly polished section. There are always going to be parts that have been cut at the very end of a cutter's useful life that have less than flawless finish.

For another example, I was looking at a very expensive piece of circassian walnut once. Thousand dollars plus. it had a "repairable split" and a few worm holes. A lot of things now are "if you want it buy it and if you don't somebody else will."
 
For another example, I was looking at a very expensive piece of circassian walnut once. Thousand dollars plus. it had a "repairable split" and a few worm holes. A lot of things now are "if you want it buy it and if you don't somebody else will."
Click to expand...

:eek:

I actually like repairing splits with a contrasting colored resin and highlighting it in the work. One of the prettiest things I've ever made was repaired in such fashion. But apples to oranges. I wouldn't seek out a thousand dollar blank to do that too. That's more of a "make an interesting piece on the cheap" kind of thing. That 1k piece of wood should already have beautiful figure and not have structured flaws if we are talking about a piece sized appropriately for a stock blank.

But to the bold, you are on to something there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top