Ruger Revolvers Quality Control Issues?
- Thread starter Radny97
- Start date
LOL, I had to send my last Redhawk back in for other problems so I also asked if they could do something about the really heavy/crappy single action trigger pull. It was returned with two issues fixed and the end shake and trigger listed as "it's within factory specs" .
To be fair, the last three new S&W's I bought had some issues also.
I think quality has taken a back seat to quantity these last few years.
Jim
Not meaning to be too critical, but I've had to return/repair more Ruger products over the years than all others combined. By a wide margin, and this isn't just recently. This goes back at least 30 years. They have always been easy to work with and made it right. But they do have issues with mass producing guns and getting it right the 1st time.
I still own several and would buy more. Ruger is almost never my 1st choice in any particular style of gun, but they are usually close if not in 2nd place.
I still own several and would buy more. Ruger is almost never my 1st choice in any particular style of gun, but they are usually close if not in 2nd place.
1911_Hardball
New member
The first Redhawk .45 Colt/.45 ACP I ever handled I passed on because the lockup was late. The cylinder failed to lock on three of the six stations.
Last month I found one that seemed perfect so I bought it.
The first trip to the range was with .45 ACP. Very accurate, very pleasant to shoot.
The next trip was with .45 Colt. The hammer would not cock. I unloaded it and everything worked fine. Tried some more .45 ACP and everything ran fine. Reloaded with .45 Colt and the hammer wouldn't cock.
I ended up stoning .0025 off of the hand.
Ruger, like just about any manufacturer of anything anymore, uses the end consumer as their QC department.
Last month I found one that seemed perfect so I bought it.
The first trip to the range was with .45 ACP. Very accurate, very pleasant to shoot.
The next trip was with .45 Colt. The hammer would not cock. I unloaded it and everything worked fine. Tried some more .45 ACP and everything ran fine. Reloaded with .45 Colt and the hammer wouldn't cock.
I ended up stoning .0025 off of the hand.
Ruger, like just about any manufacturer of anything anymore, uses the end consumer as their QC department.
turkeestalker
New member
I own several Ruger revolvers, some purchased new and some used and have never had an issue with any of them.
I just recently received one of their GP100s that I purchased from an online retailer that does not seem to have any mechanical issues, but does have one cosmetic one that I'm debating on how to deal with.
It's not a huge one, but since I purchased this as a gift for my youngest son's 21st birthday it really bothers me. Mind you he'll just be 17 this September so I have a plenty of time to address it. With the current political climate I'm liable to give him his 21st birthday present on his 18th birthday since in Missouri I legally can, but that's neither here nor there.
It is one of the Talo versions with the unfluted cylinder, and the cylinder has a blemish that is really noticeable to me though difficult to photograph. My son fixated on the look of that non-fluted cylinder when he first saw one of these and that is why I purchased one for him. It's not in my opinion something that could be polished out.
Guess I'll try calling Ruger to see what they may be willing to, or are able to do about it without sacrificing the non-fluted cylinder.
I just recently received one of their GP100s that I purchased from an online retailer that does not seem to have any mechanical issues, but does have one cosmetic one that I'm debating on how to deal with.
It's not a huge one, but since I purchased this as a gift for my youngest son's 21st birthday it really bothers me. Mind you he'll just be 17 this September so I have a plenty of time to address it. With the current political climate I'm liable to give him his 21st birthday present on his 18th birthday since in Missouri I legally can, but that's neither here nor there.
It is one of the Talo versions with the unfluted cylinder, and the cylinder has a blemish that is really noticeable to me though difficult to photograph. My son fixated on the look of that non-fluted cylinder when he first saw one of these and that is why I purchased one for him. It's not in my opinion something that could be polished out.
Guess I'll try calling Ruger to see what they may be willing to, or are able to do about it without sacrificing the non-fluted cylinder.
Attachments
I'm a revolver guy and I used to like Rugers.
Ruger has solidly engineered products but I find they have too many
sharp corner, the flutes, the frames, the hammers.
With Smith, out of the box they feel smooth to the touch without the "cutting"
edges.
Even the Match Champion seems a bit crude compared to any Smith,
i.e. 686 vs. GP100.
What I will say about Ruger revolvers is that the DA seems much better than
even a few years ago. While not up to an out of the box Smith DA, it's
a lot closer than it used to be.
With a Smith, I never use an aftermarket spring kit; with Ruger, however,
I do. It's what I might call "Smithing" a Ruger.
Ruger has solidly engineered products but I find they have too many
sharp corner, the flutes, the frames, the hammers.
With Smith, out of the box they feel smooth to the touch without the "cutting"
edges.
Even the Match Champion seems a bit crude compared to any Smith,
i.e. 686 vs. GP100.
What I will say about Ruger revolvers is that the DA seems much better than
even a few years ago. While not up to an out of the box Smith DA, it's
a lot closer than it used to be.
With a Smith, I never use an aftermarket spring kit; with Ruger, however,
I do. It's what I might call "Smithing" a Ruger.
I tend to agree. My first double action revolvers were Rugers. Security Six and Service Six. Both revolvers were made back in the late seventies and early eighties. The finish and triggers were better than my later GP100 and SP101 revolvers. Bill Ruger discontinued the Six line. Reason "Ruger did not make money on the Six line" Rugers now a days sells more guns period. They are a mass producer. Smith is the same. In the last five to six years I have bought seven new double action revolvers. Two S&W and five Rugers. The S&W revolvers out of the box have good triggers and finished well. The Rugers are a different. Three Rugers went back to Ruger for finish and trigger/action problems. One had a good finish and fair trigger and one was ok but still the finish and trigger were no where close to S&W.
Bottom line: I wish would concentrate on a better out of box. They have definitely slipped in that area.
Howard
turkeestalker
New member
Not meaning to hi-jack but wanted to give an update.
I phoned Ruger and explained the situation, the CS representative on the other end emailed me a mailing label.
I mailed it in and it took about a week to receive an email response.
They were not inclined to fix the revolver but chose to issue a new one. In the email it actually stated that the original would be "scrapped".
Seems crazy to me, when all that could have been done was replace the cylinder. Mind you I'm not complaining, it just seems a little extreme.
Extremely good CS in my opinion. A cosmetic blemish like that should never have been shipped out of the factory, but I do understand the 'volume' thing so it happens. I don't think that they could have done me any better for it.
My favorite LGS owner told me "good luck" when I showed it to him and asked for his opinion. He said he had no experience with Ruger on a cosmetic issue, but more than once in the past he has had S&W decline to do anything because the issue was only cosmetic and did not effect the function of the firearm.
I phoned Ruger and explained the situation, the CS representative on the other end emailed me a mailing label.
I mailed it in and it took about a week to receive an email response.
They were not inclined to fix the revolver but chose to issue a new one. In the email it actually stated that the original would be "scrapped".
Seems crazy to me, when all that could have been done was replace the cylinder. Mind you I'm not complaining, it just seems a little extreme.
Extremely good CS in my opinion. A cosmetic blemish like that should never have been shipped out of the factory, but I do understand the 'volume' thing so it happens. I don't think that they could have done me any better for it.
My favorite LGS owner told me "good luck" when I showed it to him and asked for his opinion. He said he had no experience with Ruger on a cosmetic issue, but more than once in the past he has had S&W decline to do anything because the issue was only cosmetic and did not effect the function of the firearm.
moseley123
Moderator
To Radny 97. wow ive never heard of that many problems with any Ruger products.
I build custom guns and i have done lots of action work on Ruger double action revolvers
I personly dont like Ruger but thats my view, but they have always been very reliable. I would call Ruger and ask to speak with quality control dept, sounds like there having serious issues.
I do know that good gunsmiths are very hard to find these days. That may be there problem
I build custom guns and i have done lots of action work on Ruger double action revolvers
I personly dont like Ruger but thats my view, but they have always been very reliable. I would call Ruger and ask to speak with quality control dept, sounds like there having serious issues.
I do know that good gunsmiths are very hard to find these days. That may be there problem
Stargater53
New member
I bought a .357 LCR that had some cosmetic issues, plus it had a crack. I sent it back because of the crack and Ruger informed me that the gun was not being produced. They could not repair it, nor could they replace it. I'd have to wait five or six months. So they sent me an SP-101 2.5-incher. Great. I already had a Speed-Six 3-inch, but I had no other viable choice. The SP-101 has grown on me, and I came away negatively impressed with Ruger's lack of professionalism.
Ruger's SP-101 (top) and the larger
Speed-Six.
Ruger's SP-101 (top) and the larger
Speed-Six.
Stargater53
New member
Turkeestalker said:
Your problem, Turkeestalker, is that your revolver is possessed. Yes, I zoomed in on the defect and here, look at this. You see? There's a face. You may have to look at it for a moment or two, but it's there.
Yep, clearest case of a possessed revolver I've ever seen! Send me the gun and I can remove that evil face. It may take a few years, but I'll do it!
turkeestalker
New member
Well now it can haunt Ruger's NH service department.
I just received it's replacement today and could not be happier.
Kudos to Ruger for their handling of the situation.
I'll second UncleEd's comments on Ruger's current production double action triggers, at least based on these two revolvers.
I just received it's replacement today and could not be happier.
Kudos to Ruger for their handling of the situation.
I'll second UncleEd's comments on Ruger's current production double action triggers, at least based on these two revolvers.