Whats going on with the Rugers???

Two weeks ago I went to local gun shop. Was set on buying a Ruger 22/45. Dealer took one out of box (new) and it would not seat the magazine. Took out a second new one, mag would seat, but not very easily. Took out a third one and it was better. I did look in the chamber of all three and the machining looked like something I could do (fyi--I know nothing about machining). Did not like the fact that the slide would not release by pulling back with a loaded magazine. Need to press down on slide release (which is not very easy to do). Anyway, I walked over to the gun case and looked at the Buck Marks. Tried one-loved it- bought it-shoots great.
I own four Ruger revolvers, two Ruger rifles, and a Mark II pistol. They all work great, but are older. Not sure what the problem is with recent Rugers.
 
from my thread at http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=105769&highlight=gp100+pawl

Got my GP-100 back from Ruger service for excessive endplay. It's tight now.

But.... I noticed the trigger had some dragging of some sort internally when I pulled all the way back. Then when I put my Wolff springs back in, the trigger would not always return on it's own, depending which of the 6 cylinders it was on. When I sent them the gun, it was smooth as butter.

Well....

I did a careful inspection and noticed the pawl was also replaced (said so on the invoice). The pawl was somehow moving TOO FAR UP on the extractor ring grooves causing the trigger to be held back in the furthest position. WTF? So I worked the pawl over and smoothed out the extractor grooves (slightly!) and now they engage with no problem.
 
I find this all disturbing. I own a lot of Rugers and never had a problem with any of them. But, I haven't bought one for years. This topic has certainly made the rounds, so there is no question that some serious problems with Ruger have surfaced. Like someone else said, I always considered Rugers to be short on looks (in some cases) but always totally reliable and functional. This is a national tragedy. I am glad I bought mine while the getting was good. There are only two more that I would someday like to own. An Old Army and a .357 Maximum.
 
Ive owned 2 SP's. One currently and one years ago in college. Both were problem free and my current gun is an absolute sweet heart. Sorry to hear about your SP/GP misfortune...Shoot well
 
I just sent off this letter to Ruger, will post the reply when I get it.


To Whom It May Concern:

As a long time fan of Ruger firearms it bothers me to see how the quality control of your newly manufactured products seems to be lacking.
I purchased a new SP101 and had to take it back to the dealer four times and exchange it for a new one before I got one that was satisfactory.
Apparently I’m not the only person with these concerns. I’m an avid user of Internet firearms related message boards and chat rooms and the topic of poor quality and problems with new Rugers comes up quite often. If you would like to read an example for yourself, here is a link on one such discussion:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=130690
I’m awaiting your reply and will share it with others by posting it on the above forum.
 
^Thats a great idea. Maybe when they actually see discussions going on about how poor their quality is they will wake up. Its a shame that Ruger's quality has gone down the toilet. I can take any of my older Rugers and compare them to my newer Rugers, and the quality difference is easy to spot. Until a couple years ago, I rarely had problems with Rugers. The last two years, nearly every new Ruger I've bought has had some quality control issue (most minor, but still annoying). Ruger definitely needs to improve their quality control, or they risk loosing more customers!
 
I like your message to Ruger. Doubt you will hear a peep from them. Companies rarely respond publicly, especially when liability is involved (not speaking necessarily of safety liability here, but market-share liability; the potential to negatively impact sales).

Anyway, now that this thread is getting some serious visibility, I wanted to take this (self-serving) opportunity to again ask:

Had anyone else had a Ruger GP-100 or any other revolver that came with, or was 'repaired' with a PAWL that was TOO LONG? I have fine-tuned mine since it was getting jammed in the cylinder ratchet, and the trigger would not return to it's forward position. Ordered a new pawl from Ruger to have a backup (the part eventually wears with heavy use, so I am told) and it's also too long
:eek:
 
I purchesed two Ruger single actions in 32 mag. Both were made in late may 2002. I have had no problems. Functioning and accuracy is good.
 
I have owned and still own many rugers. I have not had a problem yet. I do inspect guns before I buy them and I have seen some rugers that I decided to pass on. Mosatly "cocked to one side" barrels.
 
My son, son in law and I own about 20 Rugers all of them shoot great no problems. They are stiff when they are new but we take em out and shoot the dickens out of them. The more you shoot them the better they get. I have been shooting Rugers for over 30 years and have not had a serious problem yet. We just purchased two 454s and a 480 they are awesome guns. The biggest problem is casting enough bullets to feed them. Rugers need a break in period so be patient with them its worth it.
 
Up until I bought the SP I had zero problems. My GP100 has a few thousand rounds through it and a trigger that's better than my S&W.
My 10/22, 22/45, P95 & P97 are flawless, digest any ammo I feed them and put holes where I want them.
 
Is it possible that Ruger is just making more guns today than they were several years ago? I'm sure every manfacturer puts a certain percentage of bad guns out the door. If Ruger is making 50% more firearms than they were ten years ago, they are also theoretically producing 50% more lemons.
Just a thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top