The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 13, 2009, 06:59 AM   #76
FALPhil
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2007
Location: Racoon City
Posts: 933
Quote:
Any thing Ruger make is gods gift to man.
Roger,

I own the Brooklyn Bridge. I put a toll booth on it several years ago, and I am making more money than I need. How would you like to invest in my bridge for a share of the profits? It'll make you rich!
FALPhil is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 07:53 AM   #77
Leucoandro
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 12, 2009
Posts: 3
tulsamal, Laz, bigghoss, and others

I have attached a Picture of the Ruger LCR with CLC grips on it...The picture is at an angle, so you can see that it is not a loading gate, but an area where Ruger shaved off extra material....When I first saw the side profile I thought the same thing ya'll did....




Bill DeShivs,

I think that H&K was supposed to be the first to use the new Polymer Frames....Glock followed shortly after....I also believe that Colt had some plastic framed 22LR semi-auto's a very long time ago (That might predate H&K, but they were straight plastic)....

All three of these companies had there polymer and plastic products out before Kel-Tec was ever a twinkle in the eye of its founder....

I am not sure, but it would seem that Ruger might be the first to make a Polymer framed Revolver....

Yeah I am pretty sure that some reverse engineering occured with the production of the LCP. I suspect that Ruger made changes to the P3ATR that they thought would make a better product....Notibly it seems that they went for a Fiberglass polymer frame vs what appears to be a plastic/polymer frame W/O Fiberglass on the P3AT....They also went for an improved extractor....etc.....But the fact remains that it is a P3AT at heart....You really must admit that the LCR is something totally different from anything Kel-Tec produces though....

BTW, if Colt, Glock and H&K all produced polymer framed pistols before Kel-Tec, does that mean that Kel-Tec copied them? I did notice that many of the action parts on the P3AT looks like those in the Buckmark, just scaled down a little, and moved around slightly.....



Charlie
Leucoandro is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 08:13 AM   #78
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Why is everyone calling this handgun ugly??




The SP101 has always been an excellent design, other than the fact that it is so very heavy.

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 08:18 AM   #79
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Quote:

Wow, it is is being introduced with Crimson Trace Lasergrips already available for it?? Ruger must have shelled out some bucks to make that happen. And it shows you how popular the Crimson Trace grips have become.

That is really pretty cool. And it shows that Ruger is definitely serious about marketing this handgun big time.

I wonder if this gun will be made available in the new .327 Federal Magnum???

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 08:30 AM   #80
Magnum Wheel Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2006
Location: Southern Minnesota
Posts: 8,264
I'm watchin... I've always been a Ruger fan... & more of a revolver guy than an auto guy... butt... since I got my permit to carry, my 2 most carried guns are both S&W revolvers... an Air Weight 32 H&R Magnum J Frame, & an Air Lite 44 special L frame... the SP-101 is a fine revolver, but weight for weight, I could be carrying my 15 round CZ 9mm Compact, or maybe even my Witness full size 10mm... for me the weight of the package is very important for daily use...

to me, for everyday carry, I want something that excells in these areas... reliability, lack of weight, sufficient power, durable / corrosion resistant... my S&W Air Lite is carried 98% of the time, because it excells in these areas... if Ruger made something as easy to carry, I'd consider adding one to my carry battery... right now the only Ruger in that group is an Alaskan in 454 Casull ( for woods carry ), & way... way... way over on the other end of the weight spectrum...
__________________
In life you either make dust or eat dust...
Magnum Wheel Man is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 09:14 AM   #81
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Magnum Wheel Man:

You truly are a He Man to carry a Ruger Alaskan in 454 Casull. All photos that I have seen of people shooting that revolver make it appear to be a most painful experience.

Here is an example of of one:

LanceOregon is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 09:26 AM   #82
Magnum Wheel Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2006
Location: Southern Minnesota
Posts: 8,264
awesome pic... "Gunblast guy" must be shooting a pretty hot loads... I've only shot ( 3 different factory loadings ), & a few sane handloads in my gun...

... in fact, I had bullet creep on my 1st cylinder full of factory cartridges, because I "stiff armed" the gun, for fear of whacking myself in the head ( I am a big guy though )... but I was pleasantly suprised at how easy the factory loadings were to shoot
__________________
In life you either make dust or eat dust...
Magnum Wheel Man is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 10:20 AM   #83
Technosavant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 3,892
You can also see where they really shaved down the cylinder; it goes WAY beyond regular traditional fluting. I also notice that the non-CT grips also have a covered backstrap with what appears to be recoil reducing grips- something tells me that this will be a very light gun to carry (without needing the care of S&W's titanium cylinders) and will be quite unpleasant to shoot.

I eagerly await the official announcement, along with pricing and availability information.
Technosavant is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 11:14 AM   #84
Master Blaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 1999
Location: One of the original 13 Colonies
Posts: 2,027
Wow thats really ugly even for a ruger.

Will it pass the California frame melting point test???
Is there a childproof key lock on the other side?
Will it come in OD green and titanium purple???
__________________
The difference between Democrats and Republicans is like the difference between a poop sandwich, and a poop Sandwich with mustard.
Master Blaster is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 11:26 AM   #85
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
Thanks for interesting pictures and analysis!

My thought was that this totally breaks the past Ruger ban on CCW guns from the old man. I recall reading that he ditched a compact version of his 22 LR semi as it was too concealable.

It's a good marketing move if it has a good price point and weight. Lesser caliber models in the 327 or 22s might be a good move also.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 11:43 AM   #86
Sriracha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2005
Location: GA
Posts: 295
Why all the plastic?

I wonder how this can offer any improvement over the S&W 642.

Is the Ruger revolver lighter?
I don't know that there's any advantage in a gun lighter than 15 oz for .38 +P.

Is it smaller?
The boot grips on the 642 seem as small as one can go and still have adequate control. The 642's 1 7/8" barrel also seems short enough without sacrificing too much velocity.

Is it cheaper?
This may be their main selling point.

Does it have a lock?
Hmmm. Perhaps this could sway me. S&W, are you listening?

All this is mere speculation, of course.
-Sriracha
Sriracha is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 11:47 AM   #87
bigghoss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2006
Location: Pueblo, Colorado
Posts: 2,659
Quote:
Is there a childproof key lock on the other side?
lets hope not
__________________
I don't collect guns, I accumulate them.
bigghoss is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:03 PM   #88
azredhawk44
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,465
I yield, PBP. You're right. I can't "quite" read it, but I think I see " + P " at the end of the caliber stamp on the barrel in one pic, and I see what appears to maybe be a " 38 " in the other pic.

Not clear by any stretch, but I don't think there is a .327 or .32H&R +p rating at this point.

Those cylinder walls are tiny, though! Very un-rugerish.
azredhawk44 is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:21 PM   #89
12GaugeShuggoth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 534
Hopefully it'll have a better release than their last two showings (recall-omania), and hopefully they'll offer it in the .327 Fed. loading, as it'll actually be a useful package unlike the current offerings (just my opinion, nothing else). I'd love to see this new cartridge succeed, .32's are just plain fun to shoot and supposedly this time 'round performance is excellent.

I don't know what everyone is complaining about though, to me it's not any uglier than a comparable S&W or similar revolver....sure it's a little different...maybe a bit funky, but what's so wrong with that?

And dear holy mother of crap, please don't put any stupid locks on it. There are some of us still here that don't need a lock to prevent us from winning Darwin awards.
__________________
---Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.---

---Enlightenment is the ability to take infinite pains---
MOLON LABE
12GaugeShuggoth is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:30 PM   #90
barryhud
Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2007
Location: Southeast Oklahoma
Posts: 85
There were a lot of naysayers about the Ruger 101 in 327 and the LCP. I bought both of them. The LCP is always in my pocket and I shoot the 101 at least once a week. I have learned a lot about DA shooting from the 101. The 101 is too heavy for me for a practical concealed carry, so bring on the new lite rev and I hope it is a 327. The new rev isn't any ugler than my S/W Bodyguard with Hogue grips.
barryhud is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:35 PM   #91
CraigC
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2001
Location: West Tennessee
Posts: 4,300
I hope they sell a truckload of them and horn in on S&W's snubby market but that thing is utterly hideous! I do like the cylinder design though, looks like a throwback to pre-Colt and european designs. That part, is cool. Might make a good pocket gun with different grips.
CraigC is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:36 PM   #92
Dave Chuppa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Posts: 312
I'm thinking I may need one of these.
Dave Chuppa is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:43 PM   #93
2ndamd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2005
Posts: 618
+1!
Me too.
__________________
Molon Labe
2ndamd is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:50 PM   #94
Ranger325
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 23, 2005
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 428
Interesting.................especially with the CT grips. I sure would like to see one in person.

Regards,
__________________
Ranger325
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. "
George Orwell
Ranger325 is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 12:54 PM   #95
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Quote:
I yield, PBP. You're right. I can't "quite" read it, but I think I see " + P " at the end of the caliber stamp on the barrel in one pic, and I see what appears to maybe be a " 38 " in the other pic.
This is one case where I wish I had been wrong. A .32H&R would have been so much cooler. I still do not think I would have wanted one though. Too much plastic on that gun for my tastes.
Quote:
Those cylinder walls are tiny, though! Very un-rugerish.
I do not think this gun will share the Ruger reputation for toughness. It will be a standard revolver...which kind of negates the reason why I like Ruger. With this being a new design and no stronger than a Smith why would I not just buy the time proven Smith?
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 01:27 PM   #96
2ndamd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2005
Posts: 618
PBP said :
Quote:
With this being a new design and no stronger than a Smith why would I not just buy the time proven Smith?
Two words: Hitlery Hole

Maybe the "O" in Obama is suppose to remind us of the S&W internal lock? I stay away from these "holes" or "O's" like the plague!
__________________
Molon Labe
2ndamd is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 01:34 PM   #97
Wuchak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2007
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 1,093
It's so homely it's cute! I'd buy one in a heartbeat. If you search online you'll find a polymer break top revolver made by the Russians a few years back that didn't go anywhere.

The advantage over the 642? It says Ruger instead of S&W on the side. (I have and love both btw)

Besides, aluminum for a frame is so yesterday.

How long before Hollywood puts it in a movie as the plastic revolver used to go through a metal detector?
Wuchak is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 01:40 PM   #98
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Quote:
Two words: Hitlery Hole
Sorry, but when it comes to my personal safety I do not base my choices on politics. I will take the reliable, but cosmetically blemished, Smith over an unproven new design from a company that has had major issues and recalls with their last two products...and this is from a Ruger lover.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 01:43 PM   #99
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,810
Quote:
it is just a .38spl+p design.
Just a 38spl+p? blaspheme!!!
I am pretty excited about this. I almost bought a sp101 a week back and I am glad they were out of stock. I would worry about it being plastic if it was not ruger making it. I have faith they would use only the strongest most ridiculously tough polymers for heir firearms.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old January 13, 2009, 03:04 PM   #100
dipper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2008
Posts: 895
Quote:
Sorry, but when it comes to my personal safety I do not base my choices on politics.
I am sure that 2ndamd was not thinking about anything political when he mentioned the "Hillary Hole."
Many people ( myself included ) have shunned S&W because of the internal lock and concerns that it may disable the revolver at the worst time... it's the main reason that I have purchased SP 101s instead of a S&W offering.

I like the idea of this new offering from Ruger and if it is durable and dependable, I see one in my future.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------
"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees"
EMILIANO ZAPATA SALAZAR
dipper is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14515 seconds with 8 queries