Gun Manufacturers you love to hate (Ruger?) or . . .


PDA






Golden_006
November 14, 2010, 12:25 PM
. . . list ones that you love and are devoted to by buying their products almost exclusively.

Also, why does everyone hate Ruger?

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun Manufacturers you love to hate (Ruger?) or . . ." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
papa_bear
November 14, 2010, 12:30 PM
i think the ruger hate comes from the mini 14 mag cap imposed by mr ruger. he stated something along the lines of "civilians should not have high cap weapons."

Robert Wilson
November 14, 2010, 01:15 PM
Additionally, Ruger used to outsource rifle barrel manufacturing. Some were very good, some were truly awful. It's been decades since they switched to in-house barrel production, and their barrels are now uniformly very good, but some of us still haven't gotten the word.

Also, Ruger began using investment casting at a time when the process was associated with cheapness. Again, time and experience have demonstrated that investment casting is an excellent process for making firearms, but shooters can be a vindictive lot...

Dookie
November 14, 2010, 01:52 PM
Also, Ruger began using investment casting at a time when the process was associated with cheapness. Again, time and experience have demonstrated that investment casting is an excellent process for making firearms, but shooters can be a vindictive lot...By vindictive do you mean ignorant? Because these are the same people who say that polymer blows up in your hand. And think that computers on cars were a bad thing.

Marlin. For some reason I absolutely hate marlin. Totally unfounded as I know they make quality firearms. I just have zero desire to own one, and it annoys me to think about buying one.

CraigC
November 14, 2010, 01:55 PM
The stuff about magazine capacity has been taken so far out of context and blown so out of proportion it is laughable. As usual, Chicken Little panics because the sky is falling, taking the rumor and running with it. Bill Ruger was trying to compromise with Congress before the coming of the Brady Bill. Obviously, that backfired in his face because the quote was clipped from an interview and twisted to mean something he did not intend. For whatever reason, gun owners are FAAAAR too willing to turn on each other, painfully obvious in this case.

Then there are the folks who still hate S&W because of their agreement. Despite the fact that the company changed hands and the agreement was quashed by the Bush administration. In this case, gun owners should be pissed at their fellow voters, who created the environment in which the government could wage war on a legal industry that produces a lawful product, that THEY regulate. THAT is what we should be up in arms about.

BamAlmighty
November 14, 2010, 01:56 PM
I don't hate Ruger... but for whatever reason I don't and will not own a Glock. I own pretty much everything else.

sherman123
November 14, 2010, 01:57 PM
Jiminez and Bryco Jennings

hirundo82
November 14, 2010, 01:59 PM
Shooters have a long memory for companies that have done them wrong.

The vindictiveness against Ruger is mainly due to Bill Ruger pushing for the "high-capacity" magazine ban. He's been dead since 2002, but some shooters still refuse to buy Ruger firearms.

Similarly, some still hold a grudge against Smith and Wesson for capitulating to the Clinton administration and adding the internal locks, despite the fact the company has changed hands a couple of times since then.

aka108
November 14, 2010, 02:01 PM
I've owned 6 Ruger products. They were all nicely built and decent to look at but so far as being anywhere near what might be loosely labeled accurate they were not. Sold evey one of them off and will never buy one of Rugers products ever again.

kayak-man
November 14, 2010, 02:12 PM
I don't hate Ruger. I'm a little displeased that they stopped making the GP100 with a blued finish and wood grip panels, but other than that I like them. (OK, I'd be lying if I said I would be a much happier man if the SR-556 wasn't so expensive.)

I have issues with GLOCKS. I think they are great guns, its just that the only one they make that fits my hand is a the GLOCK26, the others don't point or shoot very well for me. If they did, I'd probably own a lot of GLOCKs. I also don't understand why they can't throw in at least a grip safety, or give some of their guns a single stack magazine.

Other than a few little pet peeves, I don't really hate too many gun manufactures... at least not for anything that could be construed as a good reason. (Hi-Point, if your reading this, would it be possible to make your .45 magazine base plates flat and metal instead of bulky and plasticy? thanks)

Chris "the Kayak-Man" Johnson

Mike Donnigan
November 14, 2010, 02:12 PM
Had a Taurus 9mm once, you know the one that resembles the Beretta 92. I was out shooting one day, just plinking at different things and the damn thing started to come apart. I traded it in on my Glock 19 and haven't looked back.

One-Time
November 14, 2010, 02:16 PM
COLT

After the ban expired and many bought LE marked rifles, colt had issue w/ it, so much in fact a guy I know called for service on a non running COLT and they ran him through the ringer as to why he had an LE marked rifle to begin with, and COLT only quietly rescinded their stance on not selling their LE marked toys to non LE dealers etc, or how they still produce pinned stocks for their 'civilian' line and compensators etc but no 'evil' features

m500'92
November 14, 2010, 02:19 PM
Ruger of course:
his quotes
"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."
"I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock."
"I see nothing wrong with waiting periods."

Along with that I don't see anything that he built was in any way "great" and I've had many QC issues with Ruger guns.

I see it as different for Ruger than S&W as it was Bill Ruger himself speaking in favor of the gun grabbers rather than someone at S&W simply adding a safety feature to prevent being sued (Which many Rugers and other brands have too).

One-Time
November 14, 2010, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by: m500'92

rather than someone at S&W simply adding a safety feature to prevent being sued (Which many Rugers and other brands have too).

The issue was that SW signed an agreement, a pact if you will, w/ the Clinton Administration to do so, it wasnt so much the feature(though still reviled by most serious gun users to this day)so much as it was signing a deal w/ the 'devil'

Cosmoline
November 14, 2010, 02:40 PM
The Ruger haters are haters of WILLIAM RUGER, who passed away some years back. I disagreed with his political views, but they were not the views of the company and they died with him. What remains are his firearms and his company, which are both assets we should laud not attack.

It should also be remembered that when he took those positions they were VERY WIDELY HELD among gun owners and conservatives in general. Few owned high-caps stateside and many in the domestic industry viewed them as competition. Heck, S&W did an actual corporate deal with the Clinton administration. It wasn't just the head of S&W saying something stupid, it was the company ITSELF binding itself to Clinton's edicts. That's going much farther than Ruger the company was ever prepared to go.

Anyway, those days are gone now, as is Bill Ruger. So get over it.

Along with that I don't see anything that he built was in any way "great"

Ruger No. 1
Single handedly revived the art of the single shot rifle with a very strong design based on a simplified Farquharson. The No. 1 and No. 3 were the platforms for the revival of many cartridges and allowed new life to be breathed into the old .45-70.

Ruger Single Six
Still one of the nicest handling plinkers, it combines incredible strength with good balance and accuracy. It also helped revive interest in the old SAA style and paved the way for CAS.

Ruger Mark One
Ruger actually turned one of the worst designs in gun history--the Baby Nambu--into a light, accurate and very fun plinker at far less than the Colt Woodsman.

Ruger Security Six
I've owned and used a great many revolvers, and the Security Six line keeps rising in my estimation. It has the lightness and balance of K-frame magnums with increased strength for sustained magnum use. My carry guns are all from this line. I would only be tempted to switch if someone offered me a Python.

Ruger SP-101
This is a smaller, more compact five gun that still stands as one of the nicest .357 carry pieces ever made. It's the smallest revolver that still permits sustained practice and firing with .357 loads. As was recently pointed out to me, it's actually stronger than the Six line.

Ruger M-77
This is a rifle that GETS USED. Used and used and used and abused. I've seen M77's with auto sealant and duct tape holding them together, but they still keep on trucking. It gets little glory, but a whole lot of game.

Ruger Blackhawk
This is a strengthened, improved version of the SAA that has been used as the basis for thousands of custom revolvers. In .44 Special it's one of the world's most perfect revolvers. Skeeter thought so.

Ruger Super Blackhawk
Though S&W's high-end 29 is the image of the .44 Magnum, it was really Ruger's SBH that made the cartridge popular. It was about half the price of the M29 and with a stronger frame to boot.

The new model BH and Vaquero also have their good points, including incredible strength and being the best platform of all for custom jobs. But they also have down sides. Still, this short list should be enough to explode the ridiculous idea that Ruger never made a great firearm.

I won't speak to the 10-22 because I have no direct experience with it or the Mini-14, but I know those are also guns that get used and used hard--A LOT. The Mini-14 is practically the signature rifle of the Alaska subsistence hunt, just as the M-77 .338 is the signature rifle of the Alaska big game hunt.

CraigC
November 14, 2010, 02:42 PM
I'm a little displeased that they stopped making the GP100 with a blued finish and wood grip panels...
A little information goes a long way. They stopped doing the wood panel inserts because Ruger's long-time grip manufacturer went out of business. They still make blued GP's. They're starting to get wood single action grips from Altamont but the only source for DA grips that folks would be willing to pay for is Hogue.

Ruger has also turned a profit every year since its inception in 1949. They must be doing something right.

Bottom line is that folks have their prejudices, some based in reality, some not, and are VERY unwilling to let them go.

therewolf
November 14, 2010, 03:01 PM
Hi Everybody.

I just hate Glocks. The only reason is they just look like chunky pieces of crap.

I KNOW they're dependable, popular, and fairly well made. IMO they are just deplorable in appearance. I'm especially careful around LEOs because I particularly dread being shot with one.

I personally have an ascetic sense which influences my opinion. And IMO, the 1911A1, like the Colt Model 70, or Springfield GI with the beavertail on the handle is simplistic elegance. The newer 1911s with the shorter barrels, and straight handles just aren't attractive.

The Beretta 92FS or 92A1 (Once again ONLY IMO) are sexy Italian designs. The 90-two looks too much like a submarine hull.

This probably seems stupid to many, but when I target shoot, I just prefer to hold something which has attractive lines...

Offfhand
November 14, 2010, 03:09 PM
Quoted from above;
"Additionally, Ruger used to outsource rifle barrel manufacturing. Some were very good, some were truly awful. It's been decades since they switched to in-house barrel production, and their barrels are now uniformly very good, but some of us still haven't gotten the word."

Uniformly very good? That's a pretty sweeping statement, wouldn't you say?

jimmyraythomason
November 14, 2010, 04:54 PM
Bottom line is that folks have their prejudices, some based in reality, some not, and are VERY unwilling to let them go. Well put. Of the two dozen or so Rugers I have owned over the last 35 years,none had any issues that amounted to anything and all had very acceptable accuracy.

EddieNFL
November 14, 2010, 05:09 PM
It should also be remembered that when he took those positions they were VERY WIDELY HELD among gun owners and conservatives in general.

So...most gun owners and conservatives think gun owners with hi-cap mags are dishonest? I don't think that's what you meant, but it certainly implies it.

oldfool
November 14, 2010, 06:08 PM
list ones that you love and are devoted to by buying their products almost exclusively

hmmm... in no particular order
Colt, S&W, Ruger, Savage, Marlin, Browning, Taurus, High Standard, Sig, FN, Berretta, CZ, Remington, Mossberg, Dan Wesson, Freedom Arms, Walther, Springfield, Rock Island, NEF, Rossi, Winchester, Henry... and a few dozen others

I ain't easy, but I can be had ;)
probably why I don't post a lot on those "if you could choose only one.. or three.. or five" threads

I really don't get the 'hate" thing
true, blocky black plastic don't really ring my wind chimes, but I don't lose any sleep over it

redneck2
November 14, 2010, 06:14 PM
I'm trying to force myself to like newer Savage center fire rifles. I've had two, and they were absolutely awful. Triggers were 10#+, the .223 wouldn't chamber factory rounds.

My son-in-law has a target model .22 and a Model 12 in 6BR and both are excellent.

On Rugers, I had a 10-22 and it was super. My Ruger Bisley in .45 Colt is exceptional in every way.

therewolf
November 14, 2010, 06:25 PM
Hey, I don't hate Ruger...


...yet.

Robert Wilson
November 14, 2010, 07:35 PM
Uniformly very good? That's a pretty sweeping statement, wouldn't you say?

Yes. That's why I made it.

7thCavScout
November 14, 2010, 07:46 PM
The only "Hate" I have for Ruger is from the absolute meltdown I had trying to reassemble my MK I. Once I finally got it put back together I jumped in the car and traded it for a Beretta Neos, post haste.

Bluehawk
November 14, 2010, 07:53 PM
I truly like Ruger products...own three of them at the moment..10/22...Mark I (bull barrel)... and a Bisley-Vaquero (old style). All are excellent quality and never had any problems with them. I met Bill Ruger in his office back around 1971-72 or so...didn't like him... but then again it wasn't Bill I was bringing home when I bought one of his guns ...so it really didn't matter what I thought of him personally!

ConstitutionCowboy
November 14, 2010, 07:59 PM
I had a problem with the owners of Smith and Wesson when they capitulated to the Clinton Administration. About a month before the British owners capitulated, I bought an Airweight in .32 H&R Mag. I didn't buy another S&W until after the Brits sold S&W and the new owners showed themselves to have a pair. We bought another Airweight in .32 H&R Mag and now the wife and I have guns we can carry that take the same ammo.

I owned a couple Rugers before the AWB went into effect and didn't buy another until after Bill Ruger passed away and the company got with the program.

I'd have to say the bones I pick with the different manufacturers are political. That said, if Kimber ever goes nuts, I'll have to do some real soul searching....

Woody

lima_w
November 14, 2010, 08:03 PM
I like Ruger; I carry a SP-101 every day and love it.

I respect the reliability and simplicity of Glocks, but dislike their aesthetics and ergonomics and the fact that rappers LOVE them.

bhp9mm
November 14, 2010, 08:05 PM
Smith and Wesson ,Ruger ,sig,glock, Remington

gulogulo1970
November 14, 2010, 08:16 PM
Colt, I wish they would sell their double action revolvers again.

I also wish they would have kept up with the times and made a modern 9mm/40S&W polymer pistol.

Innovation was really never their strong suit in my lifetime, anyway. I don't know why I ever expected anything else from them.

MrWesson
November 14, 2010, 08:20 PM
I don't hate any firearm manufacturer and if dirt cheap I wouldn't pass on most firearms. I guess I don't get it but I hate plenty of firearm owners :neener:

The glutton in me wants to try everything

Zebraranger
November 14, 2010, 08:29 PM
I'm with CraigC & Cosmoline on this one. What someone did decades ago just dont matter since they are long gone and their views went with them. I think both companies learned a lesson with the decisions they made decades ago. I know one thing, Bill Rugers views went with Bill Ruger. They certainly are not Ruger Manufacturing views and haven't been in years. I've had more issues with my S&W's in the past 5 years than I've ever had from my Rugers, but I still own, shoot & like both. As far as quality control, most major manufacturers who produce the quanity these two companies produce, will kick out a lemon every now & then. Over the years I've just tried to buy what I like, and what I think will perform well and fit my needs.

sig220mw
November 14, 2010, 08:36 PM
CraigC has it right. Bill Ruger's magazine idea was only about throwing the politicians a bone in order to head off the Brady Bill. He like many others knew how the politicians thought.

His idea didn't come to fruition and the Brady Bill passed and it had a magazine cap in it anyway along with back ground checks. Then when it went into effect we found out that the back ground checks were also for long gun sales. Something we were not told.

If we had given them a mag cap we might have been able to shut them down.

As it was we didn't and a few former pro gun policitians, Lloyd Bentsen of Texas was one, sold us out.

1 vote in our favor and it would have been a tie.

I can't remember the guys name that was the final deciding vote but he said the magazine provision was the deciding factor for him.

He got voted out next election.

jhallrv4
November 14, 2010, 08:45 PM
"This probably seems stupid to many, but when I target shoot, I just prefer to hold something which has attractive lines..."

Yep. You said "target shoot". So, if you're serious about "target shooting", the only line that matters is the line surrounding the group. And the line from the center of the X ring to the outside of the group.

Don't get me wrong, I know what you mean, and I'm all about lines too, but when I "target shoot", the holes in the aforementioned target are all that matter.

Plinking is another matter.

jhallrv4
November 14, 2010, 08:52 PM
Another thing, I never shot a Glock before yesterday. I know, weird. Still, now that I have, and I've seen a new student shoot her best groups to date with a wrung-out rental G19, I have a new respect for them. She ended up buying one before leaving the gunshop. Now, after shooting the rental, and dry-firing her outa-the-box one, then the gunshop guy's "breathed-on" one, I would say I'd do some upgrading on the trigger. BIG difference. After the student has done some firing of the new one, I may do the upgrade for her.

Jeff

Oh, and for the record, I hated the Springfield XD-40. Traded it for a Beretta and never looked back. Love my Dan Wesson Commander Bobtail 1911.
And Smith 686+. And Smith 3913NL. That's just me, YMMV. Variety is the spice, and all that...

jhallrv4
November 14, 2010, 08:57 PM
One more thing, (I just re-read the thread title). I have found the customer lack-of-service at Rock River Arms to be the pinnacle of abysmal. Seriously. I have finally achieved reliability from my LAR-15, but with absolutely NO HELP from them. Really, not so much as a return phone call, return e-mail, nada, zilch, squat. Period. Pathetic.

Yes, I'm PI$$ED.

Never again. They blew it, I'm done.

Topcat
November 14, 2010, 09:00 PM
I don't like Colt because as has been mentioned they just don't make many gun models. The wood in the rubber & wood GP100 grips broke on mine. I switched to Hogue monogrips. I still like Ruger though.

m500'92
November 14, 2010, 10:07 PM
It should also be remembered that when he took those positions they were VERY WIDELY HELD among gun owners and conservatives in general. Few owned high-caps stateside and many in the domestic industry viewed them as competition. Heck, S&W did an actual corporate deal with the Clinton administration. It wasn't just the head of S&W saying something stupid, it was the company ITSELF binding itself to Clinton's edicts. That's going much farther than Ruger the company was ever prepared to go.

Anyway, those days are gone now, as is Bill Ruger. So get over it.

Quote:
Along with that I don't see anything that he built was in any way "great"
Ruger No. 1
Single handedly revived the art of the single shot rifle with a very strong design based on a simplified Farquharson. The No. 1 and No. 3 were the platforms for the revival of many cartridges and allowed new life to be breathed into the old .45-70.

Ruger Single Six
Still one of the nicest handling plinkers, it combines incredible strength with good balance and accuracy. It also helped revive interest in the old SAA style and paved the way for CAS.

Ruger Mark One
Ruger actually turned one of the worst designs in gun history--the Baby Nambu--into a light, accurate and very fun plinker at far less than the Colt Woodsman.

Ruger Security Six
I've owned and used a great many revolvers, and the Security Six line keeps rising in my estimation. It has the lightness and balance of K-frame magnums with increased strength for sustained magnum use. My carry guns are all from this line. I would only be tempted to switch if someone offered me a Python.

Ruger SP-101
This is a smaller, more compact five gun that still stands as one of the nicest .357 carry pieces ever made. It's the smallest revolver that still permits sustained practice and firing with .357 loads. As was recently pointed out to me, it's actually stronger than the Six line.

Ruger M-77
This is a rifle that GETS USED. Used and used and used and abused. I've seen M77's with auto sealant and duct tape holding them together, but they still keep on trucking. It gets little glory, but a whole lot of game.

Ruger Blackhawk
This is a strengthened, improved version of the SAA that has been used as the basis for thousands of custom revolvers. In .44 Special it's one of the world's most perfect revolvers. Skeeter thought so.

Ruger Super Blackhawk
Though S&W's high-end 29 is the image of the .44 Magnum, it was really Ruger's SBH that made the cartridge popular. It was about half the price of the M29 and with a stronger frame to boot.

The new model BH and Vaquero also have their good points, including incredible strength and being the best platform of all for custom jobs. But they also have down sides. Still, this short list should be enough to explode the ridiculous idea that Ruger never made a great firearm.

I won't speak to the 10-22 because I have no direct experience with it or the Mini-14, but I know those are also guns that get used and used hard--A LOT. The Mini-14 is practically the signature rifle of the Alaska subsistence hunt, just as the M-77 .338 is the signature rifle of the Alaska big game hunt.

Company Officials pass, neither Horrace Smith or Daniel Wesson, who created the company and built the image of the company, did anything stupid such as Ruger did. S&W also has changed ownership and management since that date. And yes Ruger did a great job of copying other people's designs, I don't see that as a great accomplishment. Also I doubt the Super Blackhawk ever passed the S&W in sales. And I think it was truly the Colt SAA and it's replicas that "paved the way to CAS". The vaquero never came out till recently and there wasn't too large a gap between the SAA being discontinued and Uberti's being introduced. The 10/22, it just gets stripped and used as a receiver most of the time. Also it was a time after Bill Rugers' death that the company started selling high cap mags again so that parts not completely true either. And speaking of internal locks and crap on S&W's, just look at any ruger made now with all the warnings, safetys and as far as I know, almost all with internal locks.

m500'92
November 14, 2010, 10:19 PM
list ones that you love and are devoted to by buying their products almost exclusive

Mossberg, Savage, Smith & Wesson (Mostly Old), Sig and Old Stevens guns.

Justin Holder
November 14, 2010, 10:21 PM
I hate Remington.

CraigC
November 14, 2010, 10:43 PM
Some folks are so frothy over this stuff, it overrides all logic and reason.


...as far as I know, almost all with internal locks.
Only a handful of Rugers have internal locks. At this point, only single actions and only a few of them. Like it or not, there they are and they actually work, unlike S&W. Also unlike S&W, they are easily ignored.


And I think it was truly the Colt SAA and it's replicas that "paved the way to CAS".
The Colt SAA was dropped at the onset of WWII with no plans to bring it back afterwards. Then Bill Ruger designed and introduced the Single Six in 1953 with broad acceptance. It stirred so much interest that Ruger introduced a centerfire single action in the Blackhawk in .357 in 1955 with the .44Mag the following year. In light of this, Colt did bring back the SAA in 1956. If you think that Ruger's guns did not play a huge, vital role in the proliferation of Cowboy Action Shooting, you've got it worse than I thought.


The 10/22, it just gets stripped and used as a receiver most of the time.
Out of the millions and millions of 10/22's in circulation, how many do you really think have been stripped down and rebuilt??? Probably less than 5%.


The vaquero never came out till recently
If you call 18yrs ago "recently".


Also I doubt the Super Blackhawk ever passed the S&W in sales.
I seriously doubt S&W has ever sold as many .44Mag's as Ruger. Although the rest of your info is "so" accurate. :rolleyes:


Get a grip.

FROGO207
November 15, 2010, 12:17 AM
I was once told by a gun store "employee" that Rugers were poor man's firearms that were just OK. I guess that I am a "poor man" 35 times over and will not trade any one of them away at this point.:neener: Both Ruger and Savage are really great firearms that are quality built as well as accurate at an affordable cost to the common man. Not everyone can afford a Blaser or the like. Those that say the don't like the manufacturers ideas from past experiences is the same as saying they don't like Mercedes or Volkswagen because we were at war with Germany once. :confused:

m500'92
November 15, 2010, 12:23 AM
If you call 18yrs ago "recently".

More recent than the Uberti, you know that company that made some of the first SAA replicas actually suited for CAS? (Uberti started making Colt replicas in 1959)


Only a handful of Rugers have internal locks. At this point, only single actions and only a few of them. Like it or not, there they are and they actually work, unlike S&W. Also unlike S&W, they are easily ignored.

Okay, how about the ones made since Ruger died? -MkIII, SR9, P345, etc. (Okay, my bad, I meant to put designed recently, rather than made now) And it's quite simple to ignore ones on S&W's - don't touch them, or is that somehow complicated to you?

I seriously doubt S&W has ever sold as many .44Mag's as Ruger. Although the rest of your info is "so" accurate.

Good job being wrong again, just look at these ATF stats as of the most recent year, 2008 - S&W outselling Ruger in 44's - 14,610 to 12,738 (close but no cigar)



http://www.atf.gov/statistics/download/afmer/2008-firearms-manufacturers-export-report.pdf

http://www.atf.gov/statistics/

12131
November 15, 2010, 12:30 AM
Also, why does everyone hate Ruger?
Who is "everyone"?

Bubbles
November 15, 2010, 12:41 AM
Benelli and Beretta are on my deleted list right now due to CS issues. OTOH both Remington and Mossberg have been absolutely wonderful.

m500'92
November 15, 2010, 01:06 AM
Also wouldn't buy another Marlin or Remington since Cerberus bought them and especially since finding they closed down the Marlin plant.

Tachardiapsyche
November 15, 2010, 01:13 AM
Only a handful of Rugers have internal locks. At this point, only single actions and only a few of them. Like it or not, there they are and they actually work, unlike S&W. Also unlike S&W, they are easily ignored.

The latest garbage has the lock too, LCP and LCR's

I'll never touch a ruger, or a S&W or Taurus or Rossi - anything with an internal lock :barf:

Nothing made by a company that produces internal locks.

ljblock
November 15, 2010, 08:31 AM
I agree with wb_carpenter. Don't hate the gun hate the stupid gun owners.:banghead:

Caliper_RWVA
November 15, 2010, 09:33 AM
I hate most Remington rimfire ammo. At the moment, their rimfire rifle (597) is giving me accuracy problems also.

I never got the Ruger hate either. My first firearm was a P95. It has eaten everything I've fed it, even Pakistani surplus (big muzzle flash!). I think it says something when the manufacturer states on their website that the pistol is good for any +P or +P+ loading. Only complaint is the design is a bit chunky so CCW with it is mainly fall/winter only.

My g/f has three of their pistols and a 10/22. All work great. Two days ago, I fully stripped her Mk1 down to a bare frame and bolt. I can say that the rumors of it being hard to work on are much overblown. As long as one follows the directions on removing the mainspring (.pdf manual free on their website) it is easy. Getting the extractor off took me longer.

Only thing I really hate about any manufacturer is that I can't afford more of their offerings! :neener:

merlinfire
November 15, 2010, 09:41 AM
Only thing I really hate about any manufacturer is that I can't afford more of their offerings!

I'm with you. I'm not prejudiced. Now there are guns that I don't much like the aesthetics of, but otherwise I'm an equal opportunity shooter.

UltraMag1981
November 15, 2010, 10:12 AM
I don't have any "hate" for any gun manufacturer but before I bought my Benelli R1 I did alot of research online about it and from what I can recall, all the magazine and unbiased creditable people reviews were all good....but then when I would go on the forums and read what forum members were all saying, it was mostly all bad! It seemed like more of a political thing because it is made in Italy...not USA. I know Americans are very patriotic and that's how I took the bad talk about Benelli, like if it wasn't made in the states then it's sh*t. Thats how it seemed anyways. Im actually suprised not to see any bad talk about Benelli in this thread accept for one bad customer service claim! By the way..... I Love my Benelli R1 !!!!:D

SpaceFrank
November 15, 2010, 10:48 AM
I work part-time at a sporting goods store, and the thing I love most about the job is BSing with customers about guns. It's also a good way to make the time pass!

One of the things that will turn me off to a person right away is if they start saying that any one brand is total garbage. They're junk, they're completely unreliable, not accurate, etc. Every company will have a lemon. Most of the hate is just brand loyalty BS. Ford vs. Chevy, enough said.

That being said, I've got my own prejudices. I personally doubt I would buy a Taurus unless the price was right. For the most part they are great guns, especially for the price; however, I think they have a higher lemon frequency than other similarly-sized manufacturers. I've also heard too many horror stories about their CS, which makes for a bad combination. I'm not a fan of integrated locks, either. Now if it was used, and I got a chance to shoot it first, that's a different story. I've got an old M431 that shoots great.

I also probably will never buy a Glock, but like some others said, that's mainly an issue of aesthetics and bulk. For example, an SR9 will do everything a G17 will do, in a slimmer, rounded package. On the other hand, Glocks are so popular that accessories are far more abundant. If it was a duty weapon instead of a CC weapon, that would push me over the edge. Everything's a trade-off...

SpaceFrank
November 15, 2010, 10:53 AM
Double-post alert.

I also wouldn't buy a S&W Sigma. It sounds like a good gun for the money, but something about it just turns me off. Maybe I'm just falling victim to all the bad press it got. I should probably go shoot one.

I was looking into Kel-Tec for a long time, based on their low prices and almost cult-like following. The thing that I don't like, however, is that the company advises against +P ammunition, and also against sustained rapid fire. I'm sure they are solid guns for the purpose, but advertisable durability is always nice. On the other hand, I've heard they have great CS, as a small company.

AirForceShooter
November 15, 2010, 11:00 AM
I don't like Rugers.
I admit they're tanks and somewhat over built. Their customer service is great.

I just don't like them

AFS

ConstitutionCowboy
November 15, 2010, 11:51 AM
I like the Rugers I have. Though the KP90 I own can be described as a handful of gun parts in loose configuration, it is rugged and sufficiently accurate. I'm waiting for Ruger to come out with a 1911 this coming year to mark the anniversary of the 1911. If Ruger doesn't come out with one, I'll be disappointed. Ruger is about the only major US handgun manufacturer who doesn't make one.

Woody

CraigC
November 15, 2010, 12:08 PM
More recent than the Uberti, you know that company that made some of the first SAA replicas actually suited for CAS? (Uberti started making Colt replicas in 1959)
You do realize that Ruger Blackhawks are not only "suited for CAS" but have been used extensively? They have always been more popular than cheap Colt replicas because they are more reliable. Their participation in CAS did not begin with the Vaquero.


And it's quite simple to ignore ones on S&W's - don't touch them, or is that somehow complicated to you?
Yes, until it engages itself. I also find it very "complicated" to ignore the big hole in the side of the frame. :rolleyes:


Okay, how about the ones made since Ruger died?
No, only the .38Spl LCR and certain single actions.


Good job being wrong again, just look at these ATF stats as of the most recent year, 2008 - S&W outselling Ruger in 44's - 14,610 to 12,738 (close but no cigar)
Sorry buddy but those numbers include everything between .357 and .44. Which includes everything S&W has produced in .40S&W, 10mm, .41Mag and .44Spl. The only thing Ruger produced in that range would be .41Mag Blackhawks.


The latest garbage has the lock too, LCP and LCR's
The LCR has an internal lock and only the .38 models, not the new .357 version. The LCP does not. Like I said, they work. There have been zero reports of them engaging themselves. They are hidden under the grips and are easily ignored. If you so wish, they are also easily rendered inoperable.

JR47
November 15, 2010, 12:10 PM
Ruger of course:
his quotes
"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."
"I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock."
"I see nothing wrong with waiting periods."

Along with that I don't see anything that he built was in any way "great" and I've had many QC issues with Ruger guns.

I see it as different for Ruger than S&W as it was Bill Ruger himself speaking in favor of the gun grabbers rather than someone at S&W simply adding a safety feature to prevent being sued (Which many Rugers and other brands have too).
__________________

Total BS. Taking quotes out of context never truly supports an argument, as you aren't providing facts, just words from a sentence.

S&W made an agreement with the Clinton Administration that went far, far, beyond gun locks. It also initiated sales requirements, and a host of other restrictions on sales of their products.

I currently own over a dozen Rugers, some from the early 1970's. They have been uniformly accurate, reliable, and none of them has ever mentioned anything like Bill Ruger's purported ideas to me.

As for selling a Mk.II because one cannot read the instructions for assembly, that's one for the books. I have a friend who calls me at least every year to help him re-assemble his. He never reads the instruction manual, either.

As for hate, I don't. Glocks to me balance like a 2x4 that someone put a handle on, but I don't hate them. ;)

HOWARD J
November 15, 2010, 12:18 PM
I don't hate any gun mfr.
I have had bad Colts, Remington 700//////////////
I sold them----later I wish I had just had them repaired.
What would I do in my retirement without guns/////////////////

sansone
November 15, 2010, 12:18 PM
I never could get a ruger rifle to shoot sub moa.. still buy ruger handguns, but I avoid their rifles

FROGO207
November 15, 2010, 01:05 PM
Yesterday I took my Ruger Ranch Rifle out to a local pit to see if dropping it off the roof of my jeep changed the POI. At 100 YDS I shot 10 rds from a front rest across my hood. Went to look at target and had a thumb sized hole 3" to left of point of aim. Small windage adjustment of scope later and I was shooting the centers out of 2" stick on targets. If I had a rifle that shot any better what would I use for an excuse when I miss the intended target??:D One of my friends asked me once why on earth I got that POS Ranch Rifle when I could afford a fine AR. My reply was I got two of them for your AR price and I can shoot better with either of them than you can with your AR so what was your point again??:rolleyes:

sansone
November 15, 2010, 01:13 PM
you got a good one frog, keep it.. minis are great but rarely moa

Spec ops Grunt
November 15, 2010, 01:16 PM
I don't like Hi-points.



But doesn't everyone.


How about irrational love? I love the Makarov and other Soviet designs.

jimmyraythomason
November 15, 2010, 01:22 PM
minis are great but rarely moa
Both my Mini-14 and Mini-30 were(or were very close to it). I let a guy talk me out of my 14 by trading me a brand new Weatherby Vanguard in .270 with Eotec PLUS a new FEG BHP clone in .45acp for it. My Mini-30 was given to my daughter (she LOVED it) and was later sold by her ex out of spite.

walt501
November 15, 2010, 01:31 PM
I've loved Smith & Wesson revolvers since I purchased my first one in 1979 and continued to purchase newer models as the years went by until one day they drilled a hole in the side for no good reason. Since the hole, I've only bought used Smith & Wesson revolvers.

oneounceload
November 15, 2010, 01:38 PM
Quote:
The 10/22, it just gets stripped and used as a receiver most of the time.
Out of the millions and millions of 10/22's in circulation, how many do you really think have been stripped down and rebuilt??? Probably less than 5%.


More like 50% - it's the Jeep of the gun world with tons of aftermarket stuff - those folks wouldn't be making those things if they weren't selling.

"Hate" is too strong for Ruger - more like "greatly disappointed", especially with their stuff form the last decade or two. QA/QC is NOT what it used to be - or at least on the things of theirs I have owned over the years, especially with their rifles and shotguns.

Mags
November 15, 2010, 01:49 PM
I absolutely hate HK if for nothing else their absurd prices on a polymer pistol. I also hate the availability of their products to civilians. (that may not be their fault) But if you someone were to give me an HK or sell me one at what I think they should be worth (5-600 dollars for a pistol) I would jump on it in a heart beat.

I have mixed feelings about Sig, I would like to have one but their mag capacity absolutely stinks compared to other modern pistols. The one mag per new gun and 35 dollar mags don't help.

m500'92
November 15, 2010, 03:03 PM
You do realize that Ruger Blackhawks are not only "suited for CAS" but have been used extensively? They have always been more popular than cheap Colt replicas because they are more reliable. Their participation in CAS did not begin with the Vaquero.
Thats a matter of opinion, I used to shoot 4 vaquero's, all shot about 5 inches from where you aim, all at different points. I consider it shooting where you aim at least somewhat related to reliability. The Uberti has been trouble free and just like a colt, shoots at 6 o clock aim. The only problems I've heard with Uberti's besides overpressure loads, is weak springs, which can be replaced for $20 with a set from wolff. And yes they are technically suited for CAS, but not the traditional division, which most people shoot in.


Sorry buddy but those numbers include everything between .357 and .44. Which includes everything S&W has produced in .40S&W, 10mm, .41Mag and .44Spl. The only thing Ruger produced in that range would be .41Mag Blackhawks.

Yes but it also includes Ruger's double action revolvers and I don't think S&W makes too many revolvers in 41 magnum, let alone 40S&W or 10mm that they don't make at all in revolvers. From my 2009 S&W catalog they don't make any of these calibers, so even if they did in 2008, they obviously weren't selling too good. So Ruger actually has the advantage there.


The LCR has an internal lock and only the .38 models, not the new .357 version. The LCP does not. Like I said, they work. There have been zero reports of them engaging themselves. They are hidden under the grips and are easily ignored. If you so wish, they are also easily rendered inoperable.

Yes well with anything mechanical, there can be failures, wait 10 years and see if that's still true about Ruger Internal Locks, they haven't been bought or used as much at this point, if not, then good for Ruger, they know how to make a lock. And as far as I know, I don't think S&W installs many Internal Locks on their semi-auto's? Do they?

No, only the .38Spl LCR and certain single actions.

The P345, Mk III also do. That's what, 3 out of 5 guns designed after his death that have them and adding it to many single actions once they were redesigned slightly.


Total BS. Taking quotes out of context never truly supports an argument, as you aren't providing facts, just words from a sentence.

And I don't know how those can be put into a good context. Especially adding he refused to sell guns with those restrictions after that point.

HoosierQ
November 15, 2010, 04:39 PM
I totally don't hate Ruger. The only makers I can bring myself to hate are Reck and Rohm. I suppose the whole Bry-Jim-Jen thing too.

robertbartsc
November 15, 2010, 04:44 PM
S&W - because of the pact with the devils.

I thought there was a long running ban that hurt sales after this happened.

CraigC
November 15, 2010, 06:08 PM
Thats a matter of opinion...
Not really. Although I don't expect you to lend any credit to Ruger for modernizing the single action with coil springs and an improved hand design. However, this is not about Uberti's being bad, it's about the heavy use of Rugers in CAS long before the introduction of the Vaquero.


Yes but it also includes Ruger's double action revolvers and I don't think S&W makes too many revolvers in 41 magnum, let alone 40S&W or 10mm that they don't make at all in revolvers. From my 2009 S&W catalog they don't make any of these calibers, so even if they did in 2008, they obviously weren't selling too good. So Ruger actually has the advantage there.
I can do this all day long but it's getting old. At present, S&W has no less than eight different .41's as well as revolvers in 10mm and there was recent production of a model in .40S&W. Doesn't really matter, we don't have "real" numbers in hand so your bringing up of these number is completely meanginless.


Yes well with anything mechanical, there can be failures, wait 10 years and see if that's still true about Ruger Internal Locks
So you're holding it against them because their locks have not yet failed but because they 'may' in the future??? Yes, that's logical.

SuperNaut
November 15, 2010, 06:35 PM
There are manufacturers that possess a certain completeness of thought and their products attest to that vision with innovation, superior look & feel, and solid reliability. Their service and customer support also demonstrate their commitment and belief in their company and product. I try to only buy from manufacturers that have this "completeness." I am rewarded with an outstanding product and their vision is rewarded with loyalty.

While all manufacturers have the "capability, viability, desirability" pyramid skewed in one direction or another, some are more balanced than others. These companies are not hard to spot.

m500'92
November 15, 2010, 07:55 PM
So you're holding it against them because their locks have not yet failed but because they 'may' in the future??? Yes, that's logical.

No I'm just saying that Ruger models with internal locks have been made in far less numbers as well as for less years, so the chances of people seeing a noticeable amount of problems is far less likely, or is that somehow illogical to you?

Also the internal lock issue involves the lightweight scandium and titanium models only and shooting full power loads, as shown here.
http://www.handgunforum.net/general-revolver-area/12159-ruger-s-w-lock-thread.html
Massad Ayoob penned an article discussing some of these equipment failures in the Jan-Feb 2005 issue of American Handgunner. It should be noted that all documented instances of the internal lock causing the gun to malfunction involved a light alloy frame (scandium or titanium) shooting full-power magnum loads.

I can do this all day long but it's getting old. At present, S&W has no less than eight different .41's as well as revolvers in 10mm and there was recent production of a model in .40S&W. Doesn't really matter, we don't have "real" numbers in hand so your bringing up of these number is completely meanginless.

Well if those numbers are irrelevant I guess it would make sense not to make claims that the Super Blackhawk is more popular than the Smith, as nothing points to that. And 44s are always going to be far more dominant in sales than any .41. (And the only models made in 41 are recent models and only 2 aren't part of the classic line - the 357 and 657) But I'm getting tired of this so I'm done.

ljnowell
November 15, 2010, 08:03 PM
So you're holding it against them because their locks have not yet failed but because they 'may' in the future??? Yes, that's logical.

Not many of the ruger bashing posts here have been logical. They are mostly based on blind hatred or lack of experience with the product.

CraigC
November 15, 2010, 08:32 PM
Not many of the ruger bashing posts here have been logical. They are mostly based on blind hatred or lack of experience with the product.
I agree 100%.

CraigC
November 15, 2010, 08:38 PM
Don't know how that happened.

9mmforMe
November 15, 2010, 11:18 PM
"I used to shoot 4 vaquero's, all shot about 5 inches from where you aim"

4 guns of the same model huh? If this was the case then I would say there was an incompatability issue with you and the handguns in question. You obviously don't shoot the Ruger Vaquero well, and probably due to no fault of your own, nor that of the manufacturer...incompatability, it happens.

I have owned the SP101 and P95. I thought the SP101 was a fine revolver, but I just couldn't hit where I wanted with the two I owned at the time. Now the P95 feels better in my hand than ANY other handgun, it fits, its compatible, I make my hits exactly where I want them.

Nothing but love for Ruger here.

I don't hate any other manufacturers, but do stay away from Taurus' products due to many problems with several of their revolvers. Interestingly, their CS was very good, though this was 15 years ago.

rozziboy18
November 15, 2010, 11:45 PM
i love rugers. i hate there qc,mainly on the mk2 pre-hawkeye. there is something about the way they look and feel that i just love! being said, i hate there stocks and there triggers suck! my m77 came from the factory with a 6 pound+ trigger!!!!

i have a love hate relationship with GLOCK. i love the way they carry, i forget im wearing my 23c half the time, when i carry it. i hate the "GLOVERS" that insist that it is the greatest gun ever made and rundown anything else put in front of them. with that kind of following it makes it hard for me to drop the cash on one. much the same as the porsche drivers stigma

Big Bill
November 16, 2010, 12:29 AM
It's not Ruger! Isn't it Jim Zumbo we're supposed to dislike? I thought we were all agreed, and that it's now ZUNBO! :D

9mmforMe
November 16, 2010, 12:46 AM
Big Bill..try that one by me again? What?

Marshall
November 16, 2010, 12:48 AM
I'll consider any good quality gun.

There aren't any I absolutely won't buy based on the company. I'm not a Moon fan but still look at their offerings for consideration.

As far as Ruger goes, I've never had anything but good quality and accurate guns from them. Two Redhawks and a GP-100.

Cosmoline
November 16, 2010, 01:11 PM
Company Officials pass, neither Horrace Smith or Daniel Wesson, who created the company and built the image of the company, did anything stupid such as Ruger did.

So? Smith and Wesson THE COMPANY executed a VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT with the worst gun-grabbers in the Clinton administration. That's the COMPANY you are BUYING FROM working with the ENEMY. As bad as Ruger shooting his mouth of was, he was speaking for himself and Ruger the company never executed an agreement with Clinton. Plus, Ruger was taking his positions in the late 80's, while S&W took its corporate position in 2000 when it should have known better.

http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000317_2.html

In other words, you are willing to condemn Ruger the company for something it literally never did, but give S&W a pass for something it actually did do.

Gun makers are in it to make money, they're not always the nicest or best people. Ruger saw a chance to both mollify the gun grabbers while protecting his company's bottom line against the wondernines.

Personally I expect companies to act in their self interest, and I don't get hung up on S&W's position with Clinton. That's the decision they thought best at the time, and they've since tried to distance themselves from it. I prefer Ruger revolvers because they're stronger and more practical for my purposes than S&W. But boycotting S&W makes little sense at this date. Boycotting Ruger for something its founder did a generation ago makes even less sense.

Omaha-BeenGlockin
November 16, 2010, 02:31 PM
Never say never---but companies I'll most likely never buy anything from:

Remington
Springfield Armory
CZ
Taurus
Rossi
Kimber

Broken Anvil
November 16, 2010, 02:54 PM
My Ruger experience is the following,

1. Ruger Security Six - wouldn't empty a complete cylinder on double action without hanging up, fixed by gunsmith.
2. Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt - wouldn't even turn the extra 45 ACP cylinder, fixed by gunsmith.
3. Ruger M77V in .308 - Factory recall for safety, fired a hole through my truck door........guess they weren't kidding.
4. Ruger Mark 1 - numerous problems, fixed by factory.
All firearms bought new from dealer.

Do I hate them....no. But a lesson earned is a lesson learned.

m500'92
November 16, 2010, 07:47 PM
4 guns of the same model huh? If this was the case then I would say there was an incompatability issue with you and the handguns in question. You obviously don't shoot the Ruger Vaquero well, and probably due to no fault of your own, nor that of the manufacturer...incompatability, it happens.

No, several people shot these guns, 2 were sent to a gunsmith to have them fixed. The barrels just weren't screwed on straight.

So? Smith and Wesson THE COMPANY executed a VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT with the worst gun-grabbers in the Clinton administration. That's the COMPANY you are BUYING FROM working with the ENEMY. As bad as Ruger shooting his mouth of was, he was speaking for himself and Ruger the company never executed an agreement with Clinton. Plus, Ruger was taking his positions in the late 80's, while S&W took its corporate position in 2000 when it should have known better.

That wouldn't be the entire company, that would be the company officials or owners that made that deal, which as I said both have changed hands since that time. And yes Ruger didn't make an agreement, but he made a policy not to sell anything that went against the same restrictions that clinton made, I certainly don't think that's any better.

Cosmoline
November 16, 2010, 07:53 PM
That wouldn't be the entire company, that would be the company officials or owners that made that deal

They were acting for the company. So yes, the entire Smith & Wesson company made the deal. That's how corporations operate. Bill Ruger's political views did not bind Ruger the company. He was not signing a contract on behalf of the company, but was speaking for himself. Ruger the company was not bound by his views.

That leaves you with the very thin reed of Ruger's failure to sell high caps for the few firearms they made that operated with magazines. This just means that the aftermarket companies making them already took up the slack. So if Ruger's grand plan was to keep people from using high caps with Mini-14's, that plan didn't get far.

Guns and more
November 16, 2010, 09:41 PM
Also, why does everyone hate Ruger?
I don't. I have a P-345 which started my love of semi-auto's.

One's I like:

Springfield
H&K
Kahr
Sig
Mossberg
CZ
Seecamp
Colt
Ruger
Bond

and there might be more in the future.

So far, no Glocks. I just can't get excited.

FruitCake
November 16, 2010, 10:27 PM
The only Ruger I've ever owned was the LCP and I really never grew fond of it because the finish started wearing off in about 3 weeks of holstering it. And I do mean wearing off as the bluing was worn off the front complete off the gun about 3/4 of an inch from the barrel end. Not impressed especially when my Keltec 32 still has the bluing on it and I split their holster time 50/50. I ended up selling it before the rest of the bluing was gone.I won't be repurchasing another one. I really want to get a Kahr 380 or a kahr PM9. Besides the LCP I still havent seen a Ruger that has caught my eye.

lonegunman
November 16, 2010, 10:44 PM
I think Ruger's MKI and MKII 22 autos are one of the most accurate 22 pistols ever made. The ergonomics and the trigger both suck but can be fixed, once fixed they are very competitive bullseye guns.

They are not friendly to modified guns and some of their comments are not helpful to gun owners in general. BUT, they customer service has always been good to me and they are made in America and a public company.

I hate most of what has become the "Freedom group" of companies. They are sliding in quality and rising in price a bit to fast for my taste.

gunaholic2
November 17, 2010, 09:28 PM
I absolutely love Ruger products. I have had the SP101, Blackhawk, New Single Six, 10/22's and finally the GP100 stainless. They make a rock solid piece of equipment with great looks to boot. I have never had a single problem with any of them. My friends like Ruger for the same reasons. Also, they give you a "Big Bang, for the Buck." When I look at the S&W's, the prices are soooo much higher. However, I know they are an excellent gun, but I just can't see the extra dollars. This is only my opinion. But all things considered, I just like the looks and the quality of ALL the Rugers. Keep up the good work, Mr.Ruger.

CZguy
November 17, 2010, 11:16 PM
Keep up the good work, Mr.Ruger.

He passed away awhile back.

TexasBill
November 18, 2010, 02:13 AM
I don't hate Ruger. I've owned a few and they have been good firearms. Would like to get a Mini-14 one of these days. The late Mr. Ruger's opinions are not a concern to me but he had every right to them.

I would like to see Ruger bring back their .44 Magnum carbine. I had one of those and really liked it.

I like Smith & Wessons. I personally believe the "deal with the devil(s)" was a matter of corporate survival. I would rather have Smith & Wesson handguns than watch the company get litigated into oblivion.

There are lots of companies whose leadership I find less than desirable but why should I deprive myself of a product that I like just because I don't agree with the CEO? More than that, why should I endanger the livelihoods of many people because of the actions of people over whom they have no control? The boycott of Smith & Wesson cost 125 workers their jobs but the president just switched to another Tompkins company where he was also president: he didn't even miss a paycheck. Nice going, NRA!

Furthermore, while we condemn Tompkins PLC for dealing with the Clinton Administration, we forget to thank them for bringing quality back to Smith & Wesson. It had become very poor during the years before Tompkins bought the company.

I also like Walther, Beretta and SIG Sauer and have a very high opinion of FN Herstal - the FNP pistols have to be some of the best values on the market today.

I don't hate Glocks but I will never own one. They don't feel right to me. I won't own a Kimber; I can't figure out why someone would pay $1,000 for a pistol and then shell out more so it will work. Also, I don't like beavertails. About the closest to political I get is Kahr: I won't buy a Kahr because I won't contribute to Reverend Moon.

Bryco, Jennings and their ilk could all disappear tomorrow and I wouldn't miss them.

So I don't really hate Ruger or any other gun company; it's all just a matter of preferences in the actual firearm that count in my book.

kaferhaus
November 18, 2010, 08:59 AM
I'm not a "hater" but I won't work on Ruger 77s (many other smiths won't work on them either) with the exception of doing trigger or stock work. This has caused some of my customers some chagrin... because many of them have crap barrels installed. That situation has gotten much better since they moved barrel production back in-house.

Ruger revolvers are some fine weapons though. They did screw up when they first released the Vaquero as many of them had poorly indexed front sights.... how QC let those get through is simply amazing... you could look down the barrel and see the sight was canted very easily... yet they released hundreds of them that way..

Remington's quality has taken a nose dive over the past 15yrs and they seem to care less. While on the other hand the quality over at Savage steadily increased without prices going through the roof.... proof that it can be done.

Glocks are very good utility pistols, reliable as can be wanted but not very accurate, the ergonomics are lousy and their just plain ugly. I don't own any.

Colt.... well not the Colt of yesterday... prices have gone through the roof with no real improvement in the product.

S&W seems to be getting back on track despite some forays into the plastic gun market like the Sigma.....yuck.

Kimber.... well overpriced for what you actually get from them, but they know how to make a pistol pretty.

Springfield Armory.... very hit or miss quality as they're always looking for cheaper ways to put guns together with farmed out parts. I have made a lot of money working on them though....

Browning, still some quality products even though they don't actually make anything much themselves.

Marlin, best lever gun ever mass produced but they've been sold to Remington so look for that to change for the worse. Everything else they make is only so-so.

CraigC
November 18, 2010, 11:16 AM
Colt.... well not the Colt of yesterday... prices have gone through the roof with no real improvement in the product.
Colt has made vast improvements in the SAA over the last couple years. I suspect USFA cut into their profits with a better gun at less money. Some would argue that the current SAA is the best it's been since the 2nd generation guns.

m500'92
November 18, 2010, 08:30 PM
Marlin, best lever gun ever mass produced but they've been sold to Remington so look for that to change for the worse.

Yeah that's almost a sure thing now that they'll be made by Remington. And I wonder how much of their line will be kept?

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun Manufacturers you love to hate (Ruger?) or . . ." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!