What went wrong with the Red Label?

3

30-30remchester

New member
I study firearm design for a hobby and am a devoted Winchester man. I dislike cast and MIM construction. That being said I have to admit that Ruger has a firm grasp on bulding reliable firearms from these processes. I own a few though I dont shoot them much and dont relly upon them. I have always admired the red labels though. The design was novel to say the least. No screws are visable in its construction. I had one of the very first 20 guage models from the 1970's and waited till I could find a blued reciever 12 guage, which I finally found and purchased. Again I seldom shoot it. An early 12 guage I had would automatically re-engage the safety after each shot. This was the only problem I had ever had. I am NOT trying to get good feedback simply because I own one. I want to know what all the problems were with these. Apparently Ruger has discontinued these? Apparently because of design and construction problems? I would appreciate any feedback, especially if you have firsthand experences with their faults.
 
Here's my observations... Please keep in mind I shoot every week and shoot with many other people... Plus I have a relation that makes his living as a gunsmith...

1. Wood to metal fit is beyond horrible..
2. Durability... Fine for a once in a while shooter, but for a regular shooter they will wear out far quicker than they should..
3. Compared to other guns they don't have the balance of say a Browning Citori or 686 Beretta..
4. Crappy (heavy and gritty) triggers.. Again compared to Brownings and Berettas in the same price range..
5. Resale value is pathetic should you want to sell it..
6. They are ugly...

I know I missed some... Before some of you say I hate rugers.. I actually like and shoot their rifles and wheel guns....
 
Last edited:
It was too expensively priced to be a cheap gun. It was too cheaply made to be an expensive gun.

Like many Rugers it is an interesting concept and design that was poorly executed.
 
They're too expensive to produce and they just aren't selling, but they ARE built very well. The actions are extremely durable, there is a guy at the range with an all stainless one with the black polymer furnature (I believe this was a hunting varient) with over 100,000rnds through his. I almost bought one off of a buddy who just got a GC, his had 28,000rnds through still looked good. The rugers, unlike Citories, are designed to be loose, which is why you rarely see them tight. As to the wood fit, I have seen a few that are just a tad off, but the majority is excellent.

Pretty much the same applies for the Gold label.
 
It was too expensively priced to be a cheap gun. It was too cheaply made to be an expensive gun.

Like many Rugers it is an interesting concept and design that was poorly executed.
Click to expand...

Nice and succinctly put! The same fate awaited their ballyhooed Gold Label SxS

They were trying to sell a Spartan at an AyA price point
 
I've always loved them but not their price, which is why I don't have one. Had they been $500 NIB, I'd have one in a heartbeat.
 
A brand new Red Label feels like a Beretta that's had a couple of hundred thousand rounds through it, only looser.

Aside from that they were pretty good shotguns. Good looking (if you can't fit good engraving in the budget, don't do it), decent swing characteristics, reasonably priced.

But they always felt loose.
 
I bought a Red Label in 1998 and have a mixed review. On the plus side, it fits me well, I prefer the easy opening action and it is a great shooter. On the minus side, it is heavy, the metal/wood fit is awful, the safety became loose and would move from 'safe' to 'fire' as I carried it in the field, and the spacer between the barrels that has also come loose. Note that I have put very few rounds through this shotgun so the safety and spacer issues were disappointing. To Ruger's credit, when I sent the gun back to correct the safety their customer service was very good.
 
The term furniture on a double shotgun does not refer to the stock
Click to expand...

I wondered about that as it seems to me that furniture on my converted flintlock meant the metal fittings; ramrod thimble, patch box, trigger guard, butt plate and etcetera which are all brass.
 
I wondered about that as it seems to me that furniture on my converted flintlock meant the metal fittings; ramrod thimble, patch box, trigger guard, butt plate and etcetera which are all brass.
Click to expand...
Strictly speaking it is the same with a shotgun. It's like the clip/magazine discussion when talking about semi-auto rifles or handguns.
 
I have two red labels and really like them both. No complaints at all. Having said that, note that I'm just a recreational shooter and probably fire each maybe 750 rounds per year. The new price on these guns was somewhat inflated IMO but used I was able to acquire them for around 750$. I'm sure the berettas and brownings are somewhat better but also more money. I definitely put them above a eaa or spartan that requires knee involvement to break down.

Just my .02
 
business

Got a buddy who runs a stock (as in skeet shooting) fitting business. They work on a lot of shotguns, adding butt pads, adjustable combs, adjustable butt padds. His shop caters to the high volume skeet shooters, and he travles all over the country attending the big shoots and working on guns.

I asked him about the Ruger Red. He said hardly anybody on the circuit shoots them, they just don't hold up. I was surprised, given the reputation of many Rugers, especially revolvers, and their reputation for durability.

Always thought the Red had pretty lines and I liked the no screw receiver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top