Whats going on with the Rugers???

B

Blue Duck357

New member
Just got back from qualifications today and the same thing happened as last. Two new Rugers in the group (one Sp-101 one GP-100). Neither made it through the 120 shot course. One had excessive cylinder gap and was not allowed to shoot, the other one had too small a gap (.002) and kept choking on our dirty range ammo.

I've always been a fan of Ruger guns and considered my last few qualifications to be anamolies with so many of them going down, but my mind is swaying. When the trainers are joking that they only bought Rugers to show us what NOT to buy and Rugers only make up 20% of our guns but are now causing 80% of our stoppages on the line I'm really wondering about them.

I know our training ammo is filthy stuff but conventional wisdom says the Rugers are the "AK-47's" of the revolver world and would work with it while the Smiths and Colts choked, yet I'm seeing opposite results in the past 18 months.

Anybody else noticing this on newer guns or have an explanation???
 
I think Ruger's quality control has recently slipped. A few months ago I bought a Super Redhawk. It is very accurate, but the front sight is cocked slightly to the left of top dead center when viewed through the rear sight. I have looked at several new Super Redhawks and very few are actually at top dead center. This is not a problem if you are going to put a scope on the gun, but if you are going to be using the open sights, it might require a trip back to Ruger. I have also recently heard several stories of barrel-cylinder gaps that are too tight or way too loose.
 
Read my "barrel installation #101" thread....I hope to have my new GP this week, with a "gun barrel straight" barrel this time.......:)
 
barrels and such

Yup, I have an SP101 with the barrel clocked over past vertical to the left. While taking it in for some work I thought I would have this straightened out. The barrel was screwed in so tight that it could not be turned so the sight was vertical. On the other hand I had a 629 Mtn. Gun with the same problem - the only difference was the barrel could be clocked back. It is getting so buying a new gun is getting like buying a used one, that is, check everything out and take nothing for granted.

Tom
 
Have you noticed that the best Colts are the older Colts. The best S&Ws are the older S&Ws. Now it would appear the best Rugers are the older Rugers. And so it goes...
 
Perhaps the 'big names' are pinching pennies on quality control and going on reputation alone?

It's seems to be the opposite for Taurus (and possibly others), haven't heard much good about the older ones.. heard (and first had experience) a lot of good about the new manufactured..
 
Well, Bill Ruger is dead.
The present management is just, well, management.
No pride, just a bottom line and Statistical Process Control. (SPS = How many rejects and returns do we have to fix before it would pay to improve actual quality?)
 
Of the two guns mentioned at the start of this thread, the gun with the .002" gap was NOT broken. If anything, it was exceptionally good!

So what if you have to wipe down the cylinder face and rear of the barrel every 40 - 50 rounds? Velocity goes up with a gap that small and in a snubbie, you need all the oomph you can get.

If you get a gun like that and you don't want to deal with the modified cleaning regimen necessary, fine, take a knife sharpening stone to the back of the barrel and slowly and gently take the gap up a bit. DO NOT send it back, they'll just unscrew it one full turn and God only knows what gap you'll get.
 
I bought a 3" SP101, cylinder wouldn't close, sent it back.
Gun #2 had a cylinder that was poorly cast causing a restriction in one chamber, sent it back.
Gun #3 looked like a keeper though it had a stiff trigger. It got to the point where it would not cock for single action shooting, worked OK double action. Sent it back.
Gun #4 has a barrel that is cocked slightly to the right but shoots point-of-aim, trigger & cocking is smooth after adding a set of Wolff springs. Maybe this is the keeper.
Fortunately for me the dealer I bought from is a Davidsons distributior and the guns didn't have to go straight back to Ruger. I had a new one in my hands within a week each time.
 
the gun with the .002" gap was NOT broken. If anything, it was exceptionally good!
Click to expand...

Jim I'll bow to your superior knowledge on every revolver issue...except that one ;)

Barely 2 thousandths is just too small a gap for a defense revolver. It didn't even pass inspection (.003 minimum) but the instrutor let her try it anyway. It wasn't needing to be wiped every 40 or 50 rounds it was needing brushed with solvent every 3-5 rounds:eek: Like I said we use dirty nasty cheap ammo for practice but even with good quality rounds I'd be scared of some unburned powder or even the heat of 12 fast rounds (or less) on a hot day expanding the metal enough to tie it up with that little margin of error.

Best, Blueduck
 
Man, this is really discouraging. I was hoping to get an SP101. Guess I'm back to the drawing board looking for a good small .357 :(
 
Huh. That's odd. My old Charter Undercover lives just fine at .002. <scratches head> Maybe I should check those dang off-brand feeler gauges...? I guess the .002 piece might be off?

Well anyways. If it's too tight, fine, I still say you're better off gently filing the back of the barrel to get the .003" or whatever you want.
 
Jim,

Were getting way more into your area than mine. I've learned over time for the good of all involved to refrain from any gunsmithing activities of any sort myself ;)

I'm wondering if head space and endshake (even if in the general acceptable ranges) might combine with a really tight gap to determine how much it would take to lock up a gun up. Maybe why your Charter does ok for 50 shots while this one never got through a full cylinder without cleaning.

Still agree I'd rather find my new gun to be tight and need a few strokes of a stone than to find a .014 gap and be putting shims or stretching a brand new gun.

Best,

Blueduck
 
Not only the newer guns,,,,

I like Ruger's,,I like them a lot,,Liked em since I first set eyes on the ads for the Mark I in Field and Stream, Sports Afield, etc.,, I think that may be the problem right there. People (myself included) tend to overlook the "little warts" on something they like. After the ejector on my Mark II just plain broke in half for no good reason, I started thinking about all the Rugers I own or have owned. Granted, the total is only 6 and isn't much of a representation, but of the 6, 4 of them have had one sort of problem or another. Broken part here, won't feed this type of ammo there, cylinder binds up on the .45LC Blackhawk, .357 Blackhawk won't shoot straight for me( others have no problem with it though--weird:confused: ), 'nuther little broken part there on something,,,,seems like every time I take one out to the range,,with the exception of the .22/45, it lets me down in one way or another.

Maybe I'm just some kinda "junk Ruger magnet" or something that manages to get all the lemons. Don't get me wrong, I'm not slammin em. I still like em, despite the glitches. You Ruger fans can take some heart in knowing YOUR Ruger is bound to be good cause I got all the bad ones :D. Thing is I just don't trust em for anything other than fun and games. Even for that, I'm still pretty selective about introducing a newbie to shooting with one. Nothin puts a damper on something like non functional equipment ya know?
 
I have been looking for a small .357 snub, decided on a S&W 640, but in the process I naturally took a look at the SP101. I was looking at one at the shop I frequent and when I cocked the hammer back it broke. I mean the trigger would not operate allowiing the hammer to fall. The salesman at that time realized he didn't have a sale on a SP101. I do have an older Redhawk that I like very much and a Vaquero that is nice so I'm not bashing all Rugers.
 
Had to send a P95 back a couple years ago. The replacement has been a great gun. A Bisley Single Six I bought last year spits lead. I installed a Belt Mountain pin. I might still send it back to Ruger. The only complaint I have on my other Rugers is the trigger. When I first got my SP101 the trigger pull was unbelievably hard. Same with my Blackhawk.
 
More of the same...

My SP101 experience:
Trip 1: barrel not aligned with frame
Trip 2: barrel aligned, 12 mil cylinder gap
Trip 3: barrel aligned, 12 mil cylinder gap; "new" POS cylinder

After Trip 3 to Ruger, the service rep claimed the gap left the factory at 6 mills. I shipped it back with a feeler gauge inserted.

Trip 4: new barrel, 3 mil cylinder gap; same POS cylinder.

POS cylinder: The ejector star openings are considerably larger than the chamber mouths. It is obvious Ruger tried to get it flush by grinding out the chambers instead of replacing the much cheaper ejector part, but had to stop when the chambers got too big. The chambers are some of the loosest I've seen. The head space is on the high side of generous too. I'm still thinking of trying again, but so far I'm afraid of what else Ruger may break or replace with reworked or scrap parts.

It's not just Ruger. I too have noticed a steep quality decline in several makes of recent production firearms. But my Ruger experience wins the prize so far.
 
ditto

seems that when big names are selling alot of guns,they may skip a few here and there just to send em through.they all do it.they still make the sale but if it comes back well they fix it but it still is out there for the demand.id rather wait for a quality product that does what its supposed to do(an more) than have it rushed to get to me and it have problems(no matter how minor)cause then ill have to send it off to be fixed or settle with something im not going to enjoy shooting cause ill always think about this or that.its how they loose business.
 
I bought a stainless Bearcat 22 last month. Two weeks later I get a call from the dealer telling me that the gun was one of 270 recalled because an improperly machined cylinder was installed. I sent it back to Ruger. I'm surprised by the problem. It seems to me that Ruger's QC is slipping. I hope its not a beginning of a larger problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top