|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 26, 2017, 10:00 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,402
|
You're asking for Freedom Arms quality from a budget-class Ruger.
Lower your standards, or give up. The only way you'll win is if you just happen to get lucky with the combination of parts that Ruger swaps in to try to appease you (unless they give up first).
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
April 27, 2017, 06:49 AM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
I wouldn't have bought either one of the replacement LCR's at a LGS after looking at it in person. |
|
April 27, 2017, 07:31 AM | #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 8, 2013
Posts: 211
|
Sorry to tell you, but these are the new Ruger standards. I've sent several back to the mother ship and not even been able to get the same model as a replacement.
I have an LCR 22 WMR that I sent back and it came back with the same problems. it's a safe queen what good is a defense weapon that cant be reloaded in a normal manner. you have to beat the spent cartridges out, and it doesnt matter what brand of ammo you use. I'll probably get flamed for saying this, But the newer charter products are maintaining better quality control than Ruger. |
April 27, 2017, 11:02 AM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,402
|
You claim that this all started as an end-shake issue, then changed your mind and said it was a timing issue. Now you're back on end-shake.
Which is it? If the timing issue has been solved, end-shake was reduced, and it met Ruger's standards, then there's nothing left to complain about. (Other than, perhaps, the manufacturing industry as a whole, and the overwhelming transition of firearms into consumer goods. ...But that's another subject.) You're still pushing for perfection ... from a product that isn't intended to be perfect. Ruger doesn't build 'match-grade' LCRs. And even with your latest round of complaints, you admit that you haven't even measured it. You approached the revolver with the preconception that Ruger sucks and they screwed you again, so you just shook the cylinder a bit, called it bad, and came back here to rant.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
April 27, 2017, 11:29 AM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
April 27, 2017, 12:32 PM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
#1 had a cylinder that wouldn't rotate because the FP bushing crept forward enough to snag the cartridge rims and prevent the cylinder from advancing. I sent it to Ruger for repair. They couldn't repair it, so they sent me a new replacement, LCR... #2 which had the timing issue, the holes wouldn't line up. I sent it back to Ruger for repair and they couldn't repair it, so they sent me a new replacement, LCR... #3 which had the .005" end-shake. At this point I was getting fed up. Does anybody bother to look these guns over before they ship them out? I called them up to see about getting it fixed. Right here I'm leaving out part of the story. I sent it back, and Tuesday received LCR #3 with a new ejector and tighter clearances. My measurements were within .001". I didn't see any need to get into half thousandths. It's a huge improvement over the first time they sent me LCR #3. Ruger did not earn it's reputation by putting out stuff like this. |
|
April 27, 2017, 01:42 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,292
|
Well agree or disagree I'm glad you posted your results so that we found out what happened.
It's irritating when some folk start a thread and then don't tell us how it came out. Thanks for posting this information. |
April 27, 2017, 01:53 PM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2004
Location: Nevada
Posts: 517
|
The summary in Post#31 was needed. I still don't understand if LCR#3"B" is being kept at this point or is it being sent back, yet, again.
I do thank this thread for, probably, stopping me from buying one of these revolvers. I'd heard how nice the triggers were and this model was recently been added to my LE agency's approved backup gun (BUG) list. For now, I'll stay with my S&W 642-1 (no lock), among other handguns I can also use for a BUG.
__________________
(former) Glock Armorer 1911 Armorer LEO (retired) |
April 27, 2017, 03:34 PM | #34 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But buying online? I'm done with that, too much monkey business. |
|||
May 8, 2017, 10:05 AM | #35 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
|
|
May 18, 2017, 04:53 PM | #36 |
Member
Join Date: October 17, 2014
Posts: 94
|
A quick survey of some of my Ruger "Six" revolvers shows close to zero end-shake. None had anywhere close to .005. The thing about end-shake is that the powerful.357 round pushes the cylinder back rather forcibly. If there's much play to begin with, the magnum rounds will use that space to gain momentum and thus increase, or hammer, the cylinder back and actually increase that space over time.
In modern Ruger revolvers, I don't know if engineers have designed a "stop" into the guns that will keep that space from increasing as you shoot them. If they do, no worry. If they don't, shooting magnum loads will exasperate the situation. (I'd think your hand would give out before that, though.) Why not simply call Ruger and ask them what the current tolerances are? I think they'd be pretty up front about it. And when you find out, let us know. But you'd need to speak to an engineer, though, not the customer service people. I'm sure the tolerances are published in their guides. Those smaller guns are bound to be pretty tough. Last edited by Stargater53; May 18, 2017 at 05:02 PM. |
May 19, 2017, 08:30 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 10,442
|
Judging from performance rather than from measurements is a truer test of if it's a keeper.
If it shoots great, or even real good, then it's a keeper, regardless of anything else. Did you ever say how it actually did at the range? I have an old revolver that, going by anything other than how it shoots, it would rightly go into the trash. But it shoots great and it's not going anywhere.
__________________
Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez: “Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.” |
May 19, 2017, 04:08 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 11, 2012
Location: Mountains of Appalachia
Posts: 1,598
|
I have 3 revolvers and have no idea of what the measurements and clearances of anything are. All I know is that they feel and shoot fine. I figure if they shoot well with no issues, they work as they should and I don't worry about it.
|
May 19, 2017, 06:43 PM | #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
It was the post-range performance where it failed. Leading of the barrel, big time, the worst leading I've ever encountered. Had to use Chore Boy or bronze wool a few times to get the lead out after each range session. That stuff worked, but it was a huge mess, and I doubt if I'd go shooting if I had to deal with that crap every time. That was with LCR #2, with the bad timing (I was unaware of the timing at this point, because I had no reason to doubt a new Ruger and never really inspected the gun). I studied/searched a lot on the causes of leading. Fast Forward to an article which states, "If the haze is more than just a fine-grained, light gray haze, and amounts to more serious leading over the entire bore, it is most likely due to the cast bullets being undersized relative to groove diameter." It was the part in bold (my bold and underline) that got me to scrutinize the guns as well as the ammo (reloads with 158gr LSWC bullets), and to return LCR #2. I returned LCR #3-A, unfired, due to the end-shake. Fast Forward some more. Enter LCR #3-B with the tightened cylinder, fired 75 rounds on two occasions (150 rounds in all), and required the Chore Boy routine both times. By this time I had learned about the bold/underlined part above, and decided to sell LCR #3-B, apply for reimbursement for the two extra FFL transfers, and be done with it. Earlier this week I shot 95 of the 158gr LSWC reloads through a different revolver, and it was a breeze to clean. Almost enjoyable. I think the LCR would be a fine CCW. I know the LCR's I shot just plain suck as range toys with lead bullets. Last edited by Carmady; May 19, 2017 at 06:51 PM. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|