Reduction in Ruger Quality

[Daggitt]

I love my Ruger revolvers. My Stainless Single Six is a thing of beauty and is of the finest quality. My circa 1980 Redhawk shoots as well as the day it came off the line. Zero repairs in over 30 years and tougher than Thor's mythical hammer. What else could you expect ? Miss America to spring out of the shipping crate?

[tahunua001]

stevenchunter,
many could take issue with most of the things you've said. I'll just compound upon a couple points.
1. the SR1911, though very well made and very high quality is not THE BEST 1911 around or probably even one of the top 5 but considering the relatively low price tag it is the best within it's price range.
2. the "best revolver" is quite arguable. however they are without a doubt the strongest actions, enabling Rugers to be loaded hotter than any other brand.

[steveNChunter]

tahunua- I did not claim the SR1911 to be the best, but one of the best, with value being a leading factor. I agree there are better 1911s if you have $1000+ to spend. But for $700 or so, they are hard to beat.

The strength of their revolvers is a well known fact and one of the reasons they are my personal favorite. But you should note that I did mention that they were arguably the best revolvers. I realize alot of people LOVE S&Ws or Colts or something else and thats OK. It leaves more Rugers for me

But for that matter, everything in that post was arguable, it was just my opinions. I was simply trying to prove a point to the OP that Ruger has alot more going for them than he gives them credit for.

[DATL]

I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised with the quality of my recent Gunsite Scout purchase.

[silvermane_1]

see sig line

[Water-Man]

I own a Mark II, GP-100, LCR and Mini 14.

With the exception of the LCR, I've owned the rest for quite awhile.

None of them are for sale.

[K1500]

I have Rugers of several different vintages, and my experience is the new ones are as good or better than anything they have put out in the past. Some of the engineering changes may be disagreeable to you (transfer bars, plastic trigger guards, 10/22 mag releases) but the quality is as good or better than it ever was.

[TX Hunter]

I think Ruger is just trying to survive in this poor economy. Consumers are strapped for cash and the price is the top priority in most purchases. I have alot of respect for Ruger, they have not sold out and are providing jobs for American Citizens.

[Rifleman1776]

When I shop for a gun my quest always brings me back to Ruger. This after a comparison of quality, price and my experience with their reliability and customer service. I am not Ruger loyal. I am loyal to what I want, expect and my pocketbook.
BTW, Ruger does not have liability insurance. They pay for and fight their own battles. The cost for that is built into the price of the product.

[anothernewb]

I'm a recent addition to the gun owners club, as such I can't comment on how Ruger has changed over the years.

However, what I can comment on is from a recent buyer standpoint. With no predilection towards brands, and no real product history to go on - I have indiscriminately purchased firearms based on what I have handled, and used. To my surprise, half of all the guns I have ended up being rugers of one form or another, most of them new models.

With regard to the 10/22 I will agree that out of the box it was not the most accurate or the best finished firearm I own, however; what it did do was work, all the time, every time. It ate whatever ammo i put in it - it remains today my most stable and predictable firearm with regards to ammo and weather conditions. The trigger is plastic, it's okay by me. I never used a metal one so I have no idea what to compare it to. But the one that's there is good enough, and comparable to the competition.
Granted, I have replaced the barrel with an aftermarket highly polished blued one, and the replacement sporter stock is a walnut one that's over 20 years old. and the trigger has been reworked to a lighter and smoother movement. I can say that IMO my final configuration is what the gun should be in a "loaded" configuration option. To that defense, why not? the 10/22 worked great when I got it, but yeah i agree - it could be so much more. I paid $200 for the gun, new, and I put about $200 extra into the gun over a year to make it that. Would I have paid $400 from the shop for it in my final configuration?- doubtful. $400 seems like too much when I look at it that way. But $200, and than another $200 in modifications - sure. Somehow I can swallow that. Simple marketing. I think Ruger is right on with this one.

With regard to the my other Ruger firearms - some I own because they are the only one in that niche (Charger) and others (SR1911) had what I felt to be the best balance between cost and features. While I would never compare the looks of my GP100 to the sleek sexy appeal of a 686 or a python - I found it more comfortable to shoot than my friends 686, and no discernible difference in trigger feel.

Has Ruger made cost cutting measures - undoubtedly. But so have so many other firearm makers. Look at a set of smith revolvers from 1960 to today - a 686 today is not a 686 from 1980, and either of them aren't a model 19 either. It happens

I agree with the others here who have posted that the firearms have been tweaked more towards the emphasis of accuracy over looks. Lawyering up triggers and actions -I feel has done far more though to destroy firearm feel and function than any changeover in manufacturing processes.

[dgludwig]

Your insights make a lot of good sense-even if you are a self-described "newb".

[03Shadowbob]

I have a number of Rugers, some better than others. They are responding to consumer spending like any business.
My new American is an awesome gun and IMO much better than the Entry level Savages, Remington's and others.
The 10/22s definitely have plastic trigger guards and the one I bought a number of years ago has it.
My single six, SBH and 22/45 are great well made guns.

[Axelwik]

I really like my Rugers. New and old... Even the plastic SR45 I just bought. And my new Rugers are more accurate.

[batmann]

While I have no Ruger rifles, I do have several Ruger pistols. The two Blackhawk Flattops I have have been flawless in operation and they are the fairly recent 50th editions, one in .357 and the other in .44 M. They are safe to carry with six rounds, go bang every time and I admit they are not as nicely finished as a Colt, they are half the money and with a Colt can you only carry five safely and the Ruger is more durable if you shoot a lot or shoot heavy loads.
I also purchased a new Ruger SR 22 pistol and it is as nice as any pistol in the same price range.
Every gun maker has has some quality slip in the past 5-6 months due to demand and Ruger is no exception, but this will pass as it did with Winchester (remember 1964), Colt (remember the late 70's and early 80's) and others.

[Hardcase]

I don't think that Ruger is different from any manufacturer that builds a product to a particular price point. If the cost of materials goes up, the choice is to either substitute a less expensive component or change the price point. I think that in Ruger's case, they've primarily maintained the price points of the 10/22, at least in comparison to similar rifles from other manufacturers. To do that, they've had to substitute equivalently functional aluminum, plastic and paint for more costly materials.

I've got an old 10/22, a 22/45 Mk III and an LCP. Functionally, the new 10/22s are comparable to the new one (although I do like the feel of the metal parts on mine). The 22/45 and the LCP work exactly as they're supposed to and have never given me a lick of trouble, so I can't complain about Ruger (other than the horrible billboard on the side of the 22/45.)

[johnwilliamson062]

Not many people want to pay for finish on a 22. Ruger does offer distributor specials that offer everything you mention. I have one. I have seriously considered selling it for an equally functional "Wal-Mart special."
I think Rugers market is people who own guns but aren't shooters. They offer great products for this market. They handle marketing, which is more than just promotion, much better than their competitors.

[danez71]

plastic trigger guards? I have no idea what you are talking about there, my 10/22 is fairly recent, about 4 years or so old and it's still got a metal trigger guard and I haven't noticed plastic on any of the 10/22s I've fondled in the stores

Seriously?

I think they went to the plastic towards the end of 2008 and introduced it in the 2009 Shot Show

[dgludwig]

Yep, as danez71 says, Ruger 10-22s have came with plastic trigger guards for several years now. I actually prefer the plastic material over the original alloy ones because they don't scratch or chip nearly as easy as the metal ones did. I do, however, generally prefer metal as opposed to plastic in most parts applications on most firearms.

[Bart B.]

I well remember those 20 Model 77 single shot rifles Ruger designed and put together by Ruger's finest craftsmen for the US Palma Team in 1991. Sorriest batch of so called "very accurate" rifles ever seen and shot by some of the best riflemen on this planet. Poor stock design, barrel quality, triggers, and they were called "wash tub" rifles. That's how big the groups they shot were. So the team used their own "tea cup" rifles. But the Rugers did have top quality sights on them.

[reynolds357]

Bart, the same group of fine gun smiths that you mention must be the ones that built my Ruger 6ppc. You have to work hard to make a ppc a poor shooter, but Ruger managed to accomplish poor accuracy out of a PPC and do it with flying colors.

[bamaranger]

I've got no beef with new Rugers, 'cause I don't really own any. That's because with the exception of the Ruger Scout, there is not a new Ruger that I want.
And that's the trick. A maker needs to produce guns that people want to own. Really, how many synthetic stocked, matte finished rifles do you really need? One price point .270 is about as desireable as the next. It's not about need, its about wanting to buy one 'cause you fancy it.

Old Bill Ruger was good at that. He saw gaps and niche's in the market, knew what shooters would want, what they would find desireable, interestng. He was a shooter and hunter himself. Lots of stuff got done at Ruger 'cause that's the way the old man said they'd do it. And he was right most times about it.

Now, Bill Ruger is gone and so are most of their interesting guns. I read an interview once where the old man said they'd make the "Old Army" as long as he was running the company. Its gone now. So too all the .44 carbines, gas and levers both. And the SXS shotgun too I think. Sec-6 as well. Likely others I'm not aware of.

The Ruger Scout is the current exception to their problem, but it's come along about 15-20 yrs to late.

[BigD_in_FL]

the "best revolver" is quite arguable. however they are without a doubt the strongest actions, enabling Rugers to be loaded hotter than any other brand

Sorry, but I will go with Freedom Arms in that regard with the older Dan Wessons, and the N frame Smiths all well above a Ruger's cast frame with MIM parts

[reynolds357]

Big D, I agree with the late 80's manufactured Dan Wessons.

[GeauxTide]

I think Ruger is just trying to survive in this poor economy

A dear friend works for a large distributor. Ruger told them not to place any orders for three months because of the backlog of orders. This is a great time to be in the gun business!

[steveNChunter]

This is a great time to be in the gun business!

Very true. The past few months have seen unprecedented demand for firearms and ammunition by the public. It may be a poor economy for the nation as a whole, but the gunmakers are thriving.

The huge backlog of orders kinda worries me though. I am afraid QC may slip a little in an effort to keep up with demand. That goes not just for Ruger but every company. At least with Ruger you know they will make it right if you send it back to them. They always have.