The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Bolt, Lever, and Pump Action

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 1, 2013, 09:34 PM   #51
Justice06RR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2010
Location: Central FL
Posts: 1,236
Quote:
I shot a Ruger SR9 last weekend I was very unimpressed by the cheap plastic feel of it. I wouldn't pay more then the cost of a Hi-point for it.


You are definitely clueless there.

There is no comparison with a Hipoint and a Ruger SR9. I wouldn't buy a Hipoint; you'd have to give it to me. I still won't use it to defend my life. I've shot one and know enough how they perform; crude and not always 100% reliable.

Now the SR series pistols have been tested and updated. They are great pistols for the value. Usually around $399 for the 9mm or 40. I would not hesitate to buy an SR9/40 and use it for CC and self-defense.

If you're saying you won't pay more than $150 for a Ruger pistol, well then get yourself a Hipoint...
Justice06RR is offline  
Old May 2, 2013, 12:37 AM   #52
rc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 609
I have a variety of ruger firearms from different years of manufacture. I know ruger quality and the changes they have made as well as anyone. I am very disappointed about the dramatic rising prices of their products and what I see as cost cutting. Companys across the board seem to do this as they gain reputation and sales. Corners are cut as long as sales stay strong. You are free to disagree and say I don't know What I'm talking about but Ruger today is a different company than it was in the early 70s. Ruger standard 10/22 carbine used to come with a Walnut stock and annodized finish up the mid to late 70s or early 80s. I bought one of these stocks off ebay and see complete rifles come up for auction regular enough. They sell at a premium. Older guns also had two bolt guide rails in the receiver. This feature was later deleated. Deluxe carbines have always had walnut. The annodized black finish lasted till around the mid 90s. Now even the Deluxe 10/22 has plastic parts on the trigger guard and cheaper painted finish. How is this keeping up standards of their products? They also deleted the hammer bushings when they adopted the plastic trigger group making it harder to drop in a hammer parts kit from power custom/volquartzen etc to improve pull without buying more parts. I'll agree ruger still makes very functional firearms, but I disagree that they have maintained quality standards or are as affordable as they ever were. I do know what I'm talking about but it is obvious that a lot of you who want to slam me for starting this topic haven't seen very many Ruger guns.
rc is offline  
Old May 2, 2013, 09:22 AM   #53
deepcreek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 30, 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 320
Quote:
You are definitely clueless there.

There is no comparison with a Hipoint and a Ruger SR9. I wouldn't buy a Hipoint; you'd have to give it to me. I still won't use it to defend my life. I've shot one and know enough how they perform; crude and not always 100% reliable.

Now the SR series pistols have been tested and updated. They are great pistols for the value. Usually around $399 for the 9mm or 40. I would not hesitate to buy an SR9/40 and use it for CC and self-defense.

If you're saying you won't pay more than $150 for a Ruger pistol, well then get yourself a Hipoint...
Sorry but I consider SR9 a POS plastic, low grade and cheaply made the same as I consider a Hi-piont.

I am in the market for a Mark III at $300. I think it is a nice gun and a good deal at $300. Other then the Mark III I am not impressed with Ruger these days.

Last edited by deepcreek; May 2, 2013 at 09:28 AM.
deepcreek is offline  
Old May 2, 2013, 11:02 AM   #54
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
It's pretty clear that some posting have no clue about guns while others have no clue about business. And both groups want the same dang thing, $700 guns for $300.

I'll be the first to admit that I prefer the older 10/22's over the newer ones, prefer the Security Six to the GP, don't like loaded chamber indicators and mag disconnects, etc, etc. But I realize what and why they do certain things and overall think they make good products at a price point to fill a niche. They are also doing some things better than before like producing quality high-cap mags, improving the Mini, improving the accuracy of the 77, introducing new and innovative guns, etc.

Sure there are better guns made in each of the categories Ruger ventures into but you have to pay for it. That improvement, sometimes a very small improvement, doesn't come for free like some here tend to think it should. Ruger was one of the best values in guns when they started in the 50's, was again in the 60's, the 70's, the 80's and the 90's. Hasn't changed much this century.
L_Killkenny is online now  
Old May 2, 2013, 11:04 AM   #55
dgludwig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Location: North central Ohio
Posts: 5,182
Quote:
I do know what I'm talking about but it is obvious that a lot of you who want to slam me for starting this topic haven't seen very many Ruger guns.
You started this thread expressing an opinion not shared by some. Did you want an open discussion re the topic or did you expect only posters who agree with your position to respond? To say that those who have disagreed with you "haven't seen very many Ruger guns" is a cheap and unwarranted shot. And I haven't seen where anyone has wanted to "slam" you for starting this topic-unless you consider anyone who disagrees with your position a slammer. If that's the case, consider yourself slammed-again.
__________________
ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED
...Aristotle
NRA Benefactor Life Member
dgludwig is offline  
Old May 2, 2013, 11:09 AM   #56
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,679
Quote:
I shot a Ruger SR9 last weekend I was very unimpressed by the cheap plastic feel of it. I wouldn't pay more then the cost of a Hi-point for it.


You are definitely clueless there.

There is no comparison with a Hipoint and a Ruger SR9. I wouldn't buy a Hipoint; you'd have to give it to me. I still won't use it to defend my life. I've shot one and know enough how they perform; crude and not always 100% reliable.

Now the SR series pistols have been tested and updated. They are great pistols for the value. Usually around $399 for the 9mm or 40. I would not hesitate to buy an SR9/40 and use it for CC and self-defense.

If you're saying you won't pay more than $150 for a Ruger pistol, well then get yourself a Hipoint...
+1, the fit, finish, and materials of the SR series handguns are pretty much superior in every way to just about every handgun in it's price range with maybe the exception of the beretta PX4, I'm sure that if you hate the quality of an SR series handgun you would also never buy a glock, M&P or XD as well.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is online now  
Old May 2, 2013, 11:23 AM   #57
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
Quote:
I do know what I'm talking about but it is obvious that a lot of you who want to slam me for starting this topic haven't seen very many Ruger guns.
Ya know, every so often I get a customer that swears up and down that they're good for it, the check is as good as in the mail, money's in the bank etc. Those are the ones that I have to ride up and down to even have a chance of getting paid. Your post(s) are the same dang way but about guns. The more you scream about what you know the more obvious it becomes about what you don't know.

I've had/have Rugers from the 70's, 80's, 90's and the 2000's. My most recent being bought last year. Good thinkin blowing smoke outta your butt about what I and others haven't seen.

(BTW, might help if you learned to use some punctuation, proper use of caps and maybe broke things up so I could get a breath while trying to sort out what the heck you're spouting.)
L_Killkenny is online now  
Old May 2, 2013, 11:49 AM   #58
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,679
all personal jabs aside.
the OP was completely wrong on the price point of Ruger 10/22s, estimating them to be double actual retail value. the talk about skyrocketing prices is also a little exaggerated considering that a 10/22 is the same price today that they were 5 years ago while gasoline is about $.80-1 a gallon more than it was then and that's with the price drop over the winter. 5 years ago your average ford F150 cost about $2,000-3,000 less than they do now yet I bet there is nothing more special about the way that they were manufactured.

you can still get wood stocks on 10/22 carbines that cost the same as a 10/22 carbine with a plastic one. no they are not the same quality that they were in the 70s but they are still serviceable and durable, I have yet to see anyone's 10/22s have the stock explode while in use. the paint is an admitted drop in quality yet my painted 10/22 doesn't have a spot of rust on it so it can't be much worse than anodized aside from less attractive use but guess what? I don't buy a 22LR for a safe queen, I buy it to go out and shoot stuff and to do that a lot and often. I defy you to list any problem with a modern 10/22 that was not a problem with a 90s era 10/22. there are none because the 10/22 with all it's cosmetic 'corner cutting' is still just as reliable as it has always been.

OP has been slammed with evidence to the contrary of his argument and he takes it as personal vindictive attacks, we are simply stated that as much as he whines about their quality Ruger is still superior to Remington, Winchester and a lot of the other big box brands of equal monetary value.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is online now  
Old May 2, 2013, 12:29 PM   #59
deepcreek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 30, 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 320
Quote:
It's pretty clear that some posting have no clue about guns while others have no clue about business. And both groups want the same dang thing, $700 guns for $300.
I understand business, people make what you think consumers will buy. But there is also other factors like reputation and quality when businesses start trying to market cheap goods they get known for cheap goods.

It's not just Ruger that I have seen quality go way down with, many other brands also I pick up a lot of guns now days and they are half plastic with cheap parts that look and feel like they will break if you are unlucky enough to drop it.

Same deal with cars and other consumer goods “Made in the USA” used to mean something. Some people don't care anymore we live in a throw away consumer society.
deepcreek is offline  
Old May 2, 2013, 01:28 PM   #60
lefteye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 661
FWIW, I have observed changes in Ruger design, features and quality for about 40 years. Other brands have undergone a similar evolution. I currently own ten Ruger firearms and my last four purchases were Rugers. I very much regret selling my first Ruger, a Single Six Convertible 22/22WMRF. It was the only Ruger I've ever sold. I would have at least a couple more Ruger bolt action rifles if the company made exactly what I wanted. I believe Ruger firearms are a good match for other brands in their price range.
__________________
NRA Life Member - RMEF Life Member - Vietnam Vet
lefteye is offline  
Old May 2, 2013, 09:28 PM   #61
Armybrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2009
Location: Round Rock, Texas
Posts: 208
I bought new 10/22s in 1968, 1976, & 1978 - they all have nice walnut stocks.

Bought a like new Blackhawk .357 from my brother in 1968 - great single action.

Bought a Service Six in the late '70s (IIRC) and a Mini-14 in the '80s - both fine, rugged weapons.

Bought an SP101 in the '90s, and that little thing is built like a tank.

More recently I have bought new an LCP, an SR9, and an SR45 - all of them are excellent quality and very reliable.

They stack up equally well to my S&W wheelguns, my Colts, and also my Springer 1911.

Wouldn't hesitate to buy another one.

The only Ruger I ever got rid of was my first one, a Mark I Standard traded in for a new Single Six in 1959. Still have the SS, but wish I had the Mk I too.

Last edited by Armybrat; May 2, 2013 at 09:34 PM.
Armybrat is offline  
Old May 6, 2013, 01:40 AM   #62
rc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 609
The debate goes on

I am all for Ruger making money. I am against some of the changes that cut coners. Some of you assert this is to compete, meet a price point, give people what they want, etc. You are entitled to your opinion. This is a free and open forum to discuss ideas. How did all the gun makers like S&W compete before MIM parts? Changes to improve profitability for multi million dollar CEOs to get a bonus does not translate into a better product for the consumer but it does help line pockets. A Remington 870 Express does not have the forged parts of an 870 Police. If the parts were all the same, why the difference in price? Remington charges a premium for quality parts that used to come standard. In applications where failure is more acceptable, a cheaper part is substituted. I never said Rugers are Junk, dangerous, etc. Nor am I saying an 870 express is total junk. What I have asserted, (and you are free to disagree), is that Ruger products today are not built to the same standards as they once were. To me, this means products like the 10/22 that have been produced for years are not of the same quality today as they were in the past in the same way an 870 express is not the same gun as a classic 1960s wingmaster or a currently produced 870 police. If you disagree and would prefer buying a current Ruger over a used one with prior production quality, be my guest. That's your right.
rc is offline  
Old May 6, 2013, 05:42 AM   #63
tuck2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 25, 2007
Posts: 197
I don't recall what the average salary was for workers was back in 1952 when I purchased a Win Mdl 70 270 for $ 127 . Now the average income is in the $ 50--60,000 range. Please correct me if I m wrong. A new Win 70 is in the $ 1,000 range. Over the years I have owned Anschutz , Browning, Cooper, Kimber, Howa , Parker Hale, Sako, Remington, Ruger, Winchester, and Weatherby firearms. The price paid somewhat reflected the workers salary and cost of materials at the time of the purchase. But the better quality walnut wood has increased at a faster rate than inflation. Copper was about 20 cents per pound when I started reloading in 1953 and now its over $ 3 per pound. Back when I purchased the 270 Win rifle workers had very few benifets and the value of the $ was much higher in world trade. Firearms price and quality simpley reflect what is going on in the world.
tuck2 is offline  
Old May 6, 2013, 08:51 AM   #64
JWT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,048
in the past year I have purchased both the SR1911 military length and the commander length .45 ACP. The quality on both is very good, especially considering the price. I looked at the Remington 1911 and although the price is similar the quality and fit is no where near that on the Ruger.
JWT is offline  
Old May 6, 2013, 09:25 AM   #65
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
Quote:
I am all for Ruger making money. I am against some of the changes that cut coners. Some of you assert this is to compete, meet a price point, give people what they want, etc. You are entitled to your opinion. This is a free and open forum to discuss ideas. How did all the gun makers like S&W compete before MIM parts? Changes to improve profitability for multi million dollar CEOs to get a bonus does not translate into a better product for the consumer but it does help line pockets. A Remington 870 Express does not have the forged parts of an 870 Police. If the parts were all the same, why the difference in price? Remington charges a premium for quality parts that used to come standard. In applications where failure is more acceptable, a cheaper part is substituted. I never said Rugers are Junk, dangerous, etc. Nor am I saying an 870 express is total junk. What I have asserted, (and you are free to disagree), is that Ruger products today are not built to the same standards as they once were. To me, this means products like the 10/22 that have been produced for years are not of the same quality today as they were in the past in the same way an 870 express is not the same gun as a classic 1960s wingmaster or a currently produced 870 police. If you disagree and would prefer buying a current Ruger over a used one with prior production quality, be my guest. That's your right.
I don't think anyone here is stating the current production 10/22 is on par with the older models and I for one am willing to give as much and maybe a touch more for a clean used model from the 70's, 80's or even 90's. But you are only looking at one or two facets of Ruger and not the whole picture. One facet is that ALL gun manufactures have gone to cost cutting measures and singling out Ruger is very one sided. Even you bring up Remington and the great and powerful Winchester was notorious for doing it. Hell, even Colt and S&W do it. Then you toss out all the good and sometimes innovative things Ruger has done in recent years. High caps mags, a rugged and affordable 1911, improvements to the M77, a decent AR, many new SD and service oriented handguns, etc etc. But perhaps the biggest statement comes from your own post....

Quote:
Remington charges a premium for quality parts that used to come standard.
You seem to think all of this is based merely on profits and head honcho bonus' which on the the surface is almost valid. But profits are good and if a CEO wants a couple million a year than so be it. Counter thinking against this is one of our country's biggest downfalls. Plus profits and bonus' are so far from the whole story as to make your argument complete bunk. You absolutely IGNORE all the other factors which many have pointed out. The facts are that if you want a top of the line 10/22 they are available. Magnum Research, Volquartsen and others make em and you pay dearly for em. Not because of profits and bonus' but because they cost more to make. If you want Ruger to make em like they used to you again will pay dearly for them. Then what happens? You and others like you will be crying about how much they cost and STILL about profits and bonus'.

Open your eyes, get off the profits and bonus' and realize that higher quality = higher price tags and it doesn't matter if you talkin donuts, cars, guns or women.

You don't like Ruger than don't buy one, I and everyone else is fine with that. And you won't see too many people argue that their overall manufacture of guns is light years better than the competition. But if your head is so far in the sand to just base your opinion off one or maybe 2 models and to think they are any different than ALL of manufactures out there you need to step back and take a far better look.

Last edited by L_Killkenny; May 6, 2013 at 09:32 AM.
L_Killkenny is online now  
Old May 6, 2013, 09:32 AM   #66
silvermane_1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2011
Location: Burien,WA
Posts: 383
L_Killkenny hit the nail squarely on the head, you pays for you get, if you want primo kit, you have to shell out the $$$.
__________________
Ruger:SR1911 CMD,MK 3 .22lr 6",Sec. Six '76 liberty .357 4",SRH .480 Ruger 7.5",Mini-14 188 5.56/.233 18.5", Marlin: 795 .22lr 16.5",30aw 30-30 20",Mossberg:Mav. 88 Tact. 12 ga, 18.5",ATR 100 .270 Win. 22",S&W:SW9VE
9mm 4",Springfeild:XD .357sig 4",CAI PSL-54C, WASR 10/63
silvermane_1 is online now  
Old May 6, 2013, 12:03 PM   #67
dgludwig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Location: North central Ohio
Posts: 5,182
[QUOTE] A Remington 870 Express does not have the forged parts of an 870 Police.[/QUOTE

Which parts are "forged" on the Police model that aren't on the Express model?
__________________
ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED
...Aristotle
NRA Benefactor Life Member
dgludwig is offline  
Old May 6, 2013, 08:09 PM   #68
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,759
I think the key thing to take from this thread is that Ruger isn't marketing towards us. When I started shooting Ruger made most of the guns that interested me. Price point was right, features were right, quality was right. As stated above, I now have my one bolt action gun. If I want another I will probably go for a higher quality one. Even my 10/22 is up for grabs as I would now prefer one of the aftermarket receivers with a few extra features. Ruger is trying to the one rifle to the hundreds of thousands of hunters who want just one rifle, not the dozens of rifles to the very few people who want that many firearms. They make great products for that market segment and they don't care if they sell the 20 people in this thread 8 guns a piece as long as they sell 160 people who have NEVER been on a firearm forum 1 gun.
__________________
$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 May 6, 2013, 08:32 PM   #69
rc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 609
John, I think you've made my point. Ruger no longer cares about attracting name recognition as they did in 1949. People buy Rugers because they are an industry leader, not always because they make the best product. They don't care about people who know the difference because so many people don't know or don't care.

dgludwig, the extractor on the 870 express is one part that is changed out by places like Vang Comp and others who customize the express models for reliability. I know there has been a move away from aluminum and towards plastic in the Remington Express trigger guards as well as Ruger 10/22 trigger guards. I am not sure of other parts that vary on the express, but it's generally recognized that the Express models are rougher and take more breaking in than the old wingmasters. We can argue economics vs. quality all day long. I would concede it's not just Ruger cutting corners as I have already indicated, but they are one of my favorite gun makers and I'm sad they have drifted from their traditional production standards. rc
rc is offline  
Old May 7, 2013, 12:43 PM   #70
dgludwig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Location: North central Ohio
Posts: 5,182
I asked the question, rc, because I don't think there's any evidence that Remington is making some Model 870 shotguns with "forged parts" and some not. The finish, even workmanship, might vary from a higher-end Model 870 (the Wingmaster for instance) to an entry-level Model 870 (the Express, for instance), but I doubt that there is any forged part substitute.
__________________
ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED
...Aristotle
NRA Benefactor Life Member
dgludwig is offline  
Old May 7, 2013, 01:21 PM   #71
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,679
Quote:
Ruger no longer cares about attracting name recognition as they did in 1949
you are absolutely correct. I mean no company that is attempting t attract customers would stoop so low as to completely revamp their service/duty/self defense pistol lines, making 22lr analogs to modern tactical weaponry for cheap training days, reproducing an american classic like the 1911, and introducing a piston driven AR15 lineup all in a 5 year period I might add.

who in their right mind would give the public what they want when they should just be building the stuff that gave them their good name?

PS;
in case you didn't notice... that was a 100% sarcastic post.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is online now  
Old May 7, 2013, 02:08 PM   #72
dgludwig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Location: North central Ohio
Posts: 5,182
Quote:
PS;
in case you didn't notice... that was a 100% sarcastic post.
I'm glad you clarified that. And your sarcasm is entirely apropos and illuminating.
__________________
ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED
...Aristotle
NRA Benefactor Life Member
dgludwig is offline  
Old May 7, 2013, 02:47 PM   #73
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,759
Quote:
People buy Rugers because they are an industry leader, not always because they make the best product. They don't care about people who know the difference because so many people don't know or don't care.
That wasn't my point. People buy Rugers because Rugers are EXACTLy what they want, they just aren't what you want.
Honda Pilot and Porsche Cayenne. I've ridden in both. The differences are obvious and I am aware of them. I'm still not buying a Porsche Cayenne because at the end of the day my Ruger 10/22 doesn't care which floor mat it rests on during the ride to the range. I'm not sure on when Ruger took market share, but I think it was relatively recently. It was because of the changes you are bemoaning.
I received a survey from them a week or two ago. It was the BEST marketing survey I have ever completed. Concise and I think they got great info with their questions. They market(to the patriotic masses) WAY WAY better than any of their competition.
__________________
$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  
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 10:48 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 0.13130 seconds with 7 queries