I always thought of myself as a "Colt" guy


PDA






gmh1013
March 17, 2012, 05:38 AM
With the snake guns thay I love so much and the 1911 ...whats not to like?
But with all the new revolvers and Autos Ruger is putting out and keeping the price down has turned me into a Ruger Guy.
The SP101 is what brought me down this path to guns I just cant say no to
In the past 2 months .....6 new Rugers.....I cant help myself!

If you enjoyed reading about "I always thought of myself as a "Colt" guy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ColtPythonElite
March 17, 2012, 10:05 AM
Ain't nothing wrong with a Ruger. I often carry a SP101.

Remllez
March 17, 2012, 11:07 AM
Ruger makes good stuff at a good price, always have always will. The only fly in the ointment is triggers, which is easy to take care of yourself with the modular design, which makes them easy to clean/work on.

The fit and finish has always been good to excellent, and the lockup is crazy good. The new designs are appealing to a wider demographic and sales seem to be strong. I've been shooting Rugers for 40+ years now and currently own 2. They will serve you well for years to come.....

Coyote3855
March 17, 2012, 11:46 AM
I have Ruger .22 Autos and like them. My only beef is they are heavy and hold 10 rounds. I carry a Speed Six stainless 2 3/4" in the woods. I shot a pair of old Vaqueros in SASS competition until they broke. So Rugers can wear out, but these were an easy fix.

Old Fuff
March 17, 2012, 11:59 AM
I too like Colt's, but they have to be older ones because the current selection isn't very good. The current corporate management (not that in the handgun part) have taken a major manufacturer and made it into a small semi-custom shop. A lack of new parts and qualified repair 'smiths doesn't help the situation, nor in some cases collector-level prices. Still once and awhile lightning strikes and the quality workmanship they are famous for is unlikely to ever be seen again.

bannockburn
March 17, 2012, 12:39 PM
As someone already posted there's nothing wrong with a Ruger. I'm particularly fond of my Single Six, my Vaquero, and my Blackhawks. Now if only they would bring back the Security Six series.

Guillermo
March 17, 2012, 01:06 PM
Ruger makes good stuff at a good price, always have always will. The only fly in the ointment is triggers, which is easy to take care of yourself with the modular design, which makes them easy to clean/work on.

could not agree more.

However, why doesn't Ruger do a better job on their trigger?

Sure, you can buy a Wolf kit and install it easily, but why should you have to?

Remllez
March 17, 2012, 02:24 PM
Guillmero,

Reliability......Lawyers.....my best guesses.

Guillermo
March 17, 2012, 02:27 PM
Remllez,

Being smoother should not raise liability.

And Wolf springs are not known for affecting reliability unless you get really light.

CraigC
March 17, 2012, 02:44 PM
Sure, you can buy a Wolf kit and install it easily, but why should you have to?
Most factory sixguns are oversprung to overcome the inherent roughness. I install lighter springs in all my guns but only after polishing the innards.

PabloJ
March 17, 2012, 02:46 PM
Ruger is smokin hot with many nice products to offer: LCP, LCR, LC9, 1911, .308 scout bolt carabine,...... quite honestly I didn't think Colt made guns to the public any more.

Remllez
March 17, 2012, 03:47 PM
Got me there Guillermo,

Ruger was late to the game and all the good action designs were used up by Colt and Smith. The modular design is the simplest of the three and if you gave my granny an Arkansaw stone or two and Iowegan's guide she could smooth one out.....LOL

Ruger single actions are usually very comparable and I've had double action Rugers that are as good as Smith's without any further work. I've got an SP that came from the factory buttery smooth. I rarely change springs in any gun. However on occasion I've opened and smoothed a Ruger or two and was amazed at the pull afterward even with factory springs.

It really doesn't bother me to do it and I know I have saved money over any comparable Smith. I own many Smith guns and overall they do have better triggers but a Ruger can be just as good.

oldfool
March 17, 2012, 03:49 PM
only thing better than one brand is 6 or 7 brands
everybody ought own a Ruger or two or more

gotta' 2nd that one 'weakness', the DA trigger, notably on the SPs
They could do it better, if they wanted to, and I don't buy the too oft cited "lawyer thing" excuse myself

I think Craig C nailed it

Guillermo
March 17, 2012, 05:08 PM
if you gave my granny an Arkansaw stone or two and Iowegan's guide she could smooth one out

Gunsmithin' granny

Sounds like a "reality" ("reality" = "poorly scripted and acted") show.

It would surely be better than Sons of Guns or American Guns.

I would give it a chance.

CraigC
March 17, 2012, 05:13 PM
It would surely be better than Sons of Guns or American Guns.
Ain't that the truth!!!

drunkensobriety
March 18, 2012, 05:02 AM
Ruger's -able- to "make good stuff at a good price" because they're not shy or even hesitant about dumping money into their R&D for the purpose of advancing production techniques.

Most companies have engineers who do little else than try to cut corners to lower costs by finding things they can skimp on. This can be made of mim, that can be subcontracted out, this piece or part can be made of substandard materials, this or that doesn't need polished, this way can have lots of chatter marks because it's rarely seen, etc. etc. -

Ruger has an entire engineering team which does nothing but think up ways to make production cheaper by continually updating or advancing production techniques so that they can make the gun or part a little faster and a little cheaper without skimping on fit / finish / part quality. Unless you're a gunsmith: you're probably unaware, but 90% of what Ruger produces is cast.

It just so happens that they've developed casting technology which is ridiculously superior to any other example of casting. You can drill and tap their receivers, blue them, case harden them, put a 2000 polish - whatever you want. You'll never find weak spots, cracks, voids, free floating carbon: no flaws of almost any kind. All the materials are almost always listed as "alloy" and that's because it's cast. Receivers, pistols, everything but barrels and stamped parts. It's cast.

It just so happens: their castings are so good - you can't tell.

When you invest time and money into continually updating and increasing your production capability: you can continually lower your cost of production without lowering your quality control measures. It's a short term loss and long term gain business model: and I wish the rest of the US based corporations would pay the &^%$ attention to it.

When all you do is cut corners in order to lower production cost: you create a short term gain in terms of production cost but you'll eventually have less and less customers buying from you. Which creates a downward spiral in which you're laying people off to lower production cost - while simultaneously lowering production capability. Chasing a short term gain with a long term loss will eventually bankrupt you: thus Winchester's current state. Started with the "post 64's" and continued a downward spiral, now it's not even an American company.

Ruger follows a -WORKING- business model which should theoretically ensure continued success in the market place, because they go out of their way to appease and appeal to both their customer base and their investors.

From the -old model- super blackhawks to the new model super blackhawks: there is no decline in quality. A hawkeye today is just as good as one from 40 years ago. Point of interest: on most of their inventory they've continued to develop newer designs of older product lines and they've only INCREASED the quality, capability or reliability. Hawkeye mark I v.s. Hawkeye mark II - case in point, a few definite advantages and improvements.

Ruger is an "American Success."

CraigC
March 18, 2012, 11:08 AM
Ruger is an "American Success."
Absolutely, great post! Ruger has turned a profit every year since its inception. They are debt-free and operate on cash. How many other American gunmakers can you say that about?

MMCSRET
March 18, 2012, 11:19 AM
Ruger has made some good ones but, I'm still on the back order list for a new XGI!!!!!!!!!!!
Been on that list about 30 years now. I call and verify that I'm still on the call list for when it comes in, make sure they have my current address and telephone number.

Old Fuff
March 18, 2012, 11:40 AM
It's obvious that Guillermo isn't in the gun manufacturing business. :neener:

He and others are lamenting that Ruger revolvers don't come with hand-polished lockwork and reduced tension springs. Well so far as polishing is concerned, "back when... " they used to do a lot of that - Colt in particular.

Today the only revolver they still make is the Single Action Army, with a MSRP well over one thousand bucks. For all practical purposes they are out of the business.

Ruger isn't.

Bill Ruger's goal from the beginning was to design and engineer firearms that were nearly (or actually) better then those of his competitors, but retailed for less. He knew full well that if his products sold for the same money as say, a Colt or Smith & Wesson that most buyers would buy the latter. To do this he used innovative manufacturing methods that allowed him to eliminate a lot of machining operations. Internal surfaces and inside the cylinder window of investment cast frames are left as they come out of the mold where Colt and S&W frames, that are made from forgings are machined. The difference is minor and makes no practical difference, but it is noticeable on the price tag.

You may want somebody's Granny to polish your lockwork, but I for one don't. Any gunmaker that has a service department can tell you horror stories about some of Granny's work that comes across they're work benches. If you really want a case of heart failure look inside a fine older Colt hand ejector (such as a Detective Special or Official Police) that someone who didn't have the slightest idea about what they were doing tried to "tune the action," or "adjust the timing."

The springs Ruger uses are intended to insure absolute reliability under any and all circumstances," If you want to lower the tension that's your business, and if you speak to "someone with authority" at the company in private they may tell you that non-factory springs and polishing jobs don't upset them too much because they provide an iron clad defense if the gun doesn't work and someone tries to sue them. It also relieves them of any responsibility to fix the gun on their dime.

Now since this thread was supposed to be about Colt’s, maybe we can return to the original subject, and possibly do some serious thinking about what caused they’re downfall as a major handgun manufacturer.

Guillermo
March 18, 2012, 11:56 AM
He and others are lamenting that Ruger revolvers don't come with hand-polished lockwork and reduced tension springs

It wouldn't take much to do a heck of a lot better than they do with regards to polishing. (since they do ZERO)

And I doubt a 13 lb trigger is required for reliable ignition.

since this thread was supposed to be about Colt’s

The OP WAS a Colt guy, now Ruger.

This is not a thread hijack

Guillermo
March 18, 2012, 12:06 PM
oops

22-rimfire
March 18, 2012, 12:08 PM
I'm a "Colt Guy" and have actually purchased some Rugers and S&W handguns. If you are a "Colt Guy" now, that typically means you're a collector or hoarder of fine Colt handguns. Guilty as charged!

In the last couple of years, Ruger has introduced new products that are taking the market by storm. Ruger listens to the public. Don't be surprised if you see a LCR-22M (Mag) in the future as mentioned in another thread.

I still prefer S&W products overall to Ruger. But my last two firearm purchases have been Rugers. But I still drool over Colts.

Guillermo
March 18, 2012, 12:35 PM
You may want somebody's Granny to polish your lockwork, but I for one don't.

I just said it might make a good show.

I can't find a decent gunsmith in Austin to save my life.

CraigC
March 18, 2012, 12:57 PM
I've never been able to find a decent local gunsmith. In FL or TN. Have had to be satisfied with the long wait times of the nationally recognized `smiths. In which case, I'd rather wait for something good than get my guns ruined by somebody closer.

Remllez
March 18, 2012, 01:26 PM
No worries Guillmero,

It is a Ruger thread, don't know how it could be interpreted as anything else. As far as Colts downfall, wasn't nothin but bad management. Colts management was the poster child for how not to run a business, from their problems dealing with their employees to antiquated machining/manufacturing methods to ignoring the very people that bought their guns, from Government contract M-16's to their double actions.

There's no mystery to their downfall, arrogance and an overt unwillingness to change with the times that's about it! Colts management fought change tooth and nail, and they bit off more than they could chew, happens all the time. In a word they caused their own demise. Some would say Colt got exactly what it deserved, now, their a small time player in a world economy.

oldfool
March 18, 2012, 02:26 PM
Still hated to see Colt essentially fold up their tent and leave the civilian market-at-large
"They" do still hang in with SAAs and Gold Cups, I guess, I don't pay much attention

Seems like they could have at least chosen to re-invest enough back into their own business to be the DA action revolver equivalent to Freedom Arms
But the top dogs had no interest, sort of a too big to fail syndrome thing; once a player in BIG civilian markets, their bean counters saw no value in niche markets, even at good profit margins. They see BIG "unit count" numbers in military contracts, and it blinds 'em to all else.

Happens in today-techie companies, too, those who suck up wildly successful small companies, and then next thing you know, the products they were buying into just disappear, even when selling out production capacity, the total dollar profit just looks small on the same page with the other, cannot see the trees for the forest.

Bill Ruger was a real-deal innovator on a lot of things, saw the demand waiting to be served, the gap in the market, and jumped in. Too many others think they can create demand, and rely on advertising alone, or on low low everyday pricing to carry the day, but that rarely works over the long run.

Was a time I really did think Taurus was going to fill that gap, but it seems to me, they backed away from that in pursuit of being the high volume seller instead. Ruger is the one revolver company, IMO, that best fulfills that promise; middle-of-the road pricing with better than middle-class quality. Somebody needed to do that when S&W shot their own foot off, and I greatly respect Ruger for picking up the slack.

drunkensobriety
March 18, 2012, 03:00 PM
I -still- like and want some of the classics from the other companies. By the way: Colt Anaconda, Python and a Smith 29 classic. I'd also love to have a couple of Dan Wessons - those were superb revolvers as well. Yet - I want those as collector's pieces, and then I'll customize a few Ruger's and use them as actual work horses (because you CAN).

These days, even Colt's 1911's are actually only "equal" in quality to the comparative model offered by Springfield Armory. I have this on pretty good authority, I don't like trolling but I don't think I have permission to speak on other's behalf's , or name dropping either. Someone I know who's been making custom 1911's for over 20 years told me in no uncertain terms: these days between a Colt and a Springfield it's the name on the slide which makes a difference in price when you re-sell it. That the quality was "six in one hand, half a dozen in the other."

Considering how much of Springfield's line up is imported from Brazil, that doesn't exactly reflect all that well on Colt's part. Now granted, it is Imbel we're talking about but still. A former Titan of American Industry, out done by a government contractor in a third world nation. It's really kind of disheartening, and symptomatic of American economics of the current day. Too bad Saint Patrick's day was yesterday: I suddenly feel like drinking. :(

788Ham
March 19, 2012, 01:05 AM
CraigC,

I guess I'm lucky in that regard pard, about 10 mi. north of me is two of the better smiths I've ever had work on my handguns. One of them used to work for Les Baer, this man knows the guts of a revolver/pistol ! This gent polished up the trigger and hammer on my new SP 101, gritty trigger, and put in a #12 hammer spring, this piece is now buttery smooth DA, I shoot it better that way than SA. Good smiths are very hard to find.

Fishslayer
March 19, 2012, 01:36 AM
Colts turn the wrong way anyway.:evil:

Armed012002
March 19, 2012, 03:11 AM
These days, even Colt's 1911's are actually only "equal" in quality to the comparative model offered by Springfield Armory. I have this on pretty good authority, I don't like trolling but I don't think I have permission to speak on other's behalf's , or name dropping either. Someone I know who's been making custom 1911's for over 20 years told me in no uncertain terms: these days between a Colt and a Springfield it's the name on the slide which makes a difference in price when you re-sell it. That the quality was "six in one hand, half a dozen in the other."

I agree and disagree.

For a custom gun, what parts of a Colt or Springfield will be left after the custom gun is finished? There's not a lot of difference between the frame, slide, and barrel of a Colt compared to a Springfield. All the other parts are replaced with "Hardcore", "Bulletproof", or some other parts made of unobtainium metal that's so strong, it's indestructible. For a custom gun, you could use just about anyone's frame, slide, and barrel and get the same finished custom gun...

However, for a off-the-shielf gun, a Colt offers better parts. The only MIM parts in a Colt 1911 are the sear, disconnector, and magazine catch. Everything else is forged, machined, or investment cast. Compare that to a Springfield where almost every small part is MIM.

Springfield makes a good gun, but Colt makes a better one.

Now good luck trying to find a Colt in stock :rolleyes: I bet they lose sales all the time thanks to their slow, almost non existent production.

cyclopsshooter
March 19, 2012, 04:02 AM
Ragsdale beat me to it. The Colts have better parts than the Springers and the Colt roll stampings look better. And there is not a whole lot of price difference between say a Springer Fully Loaded and a Colt XSE. And after upgrading all the MIM parts between the two guns, the Colt would be more affordable.

Im not sure if Old Fuff is talking about SAAs or both those and the 1911s... ?

Granted, current Colt 1911s don't compare to the fit and finish of the pre-war examples but they are still dead nuts reliable outa the box...

Now good luck trying to find a Colt in stock I bet they lose sales all the time thanks to their slow, almost non existent production. Aint that the truth!

Old Fuff
March 19, 2012, 09:50 AM
Im not sure if Old Fuff is talking about SAAs or both those and the 1911s... ?

In post #19 I was focused on Colt revolvers, double-action/hand ejectors in particular, and even more so on those made between 1908 when they introduced a positive hammer block safety (that S&W didn't have until 1945 when the copied what Colt used but adjusted it for their lockwork); and were mostly discontinued in the late 1960's and early '70s.

These were exceptionally fine revolvers, but they also required extensive hand fitting by experienced and skilled workman. They could only be economically viable so long as labor costs were modest, and by the late 1950's the manufacturing world was rapidly changing, and by the 1970's through 90's Colt was pushed out of the revolver business, excluding the Single Action Army.

The 1911 pistol, in its various versions is easier to adjust to current day manufacturing methods then the aforementioned revolvers, but while the materials used in some parts may (or may not) be better, the ones that they make today are not as finely finished as those made formally - so far as commercial guns are concerned.

In terms of production costs there is no way Colt can compete against the polymer frame/CNC machined slide & barrel pistols being made today, so there is a substantial difference between the profit margin offered by the two designs, other things being equal.

22-rimfire
March 19, 2012, 10:48 AM
We shall see what Colt is up to in the future. But they are growing and selling all the firearms they manufacture. They are opening up a new facility in FL.

Old Fuff
March 19, 2012, 11:11 AM
But they are growing and selling all the firearms they manufacture.

True, but the problem is that they produce relatively few guns, and competitors that make much, much more are also selling most if not all of what they make. Colt has been reduced from the status of being a major manufacturer to being a speciality custom shop.

They are opening up a new facility in FL.

Which is a step in the right direction, but to be what they were somebody is going to have to spend a awful lot of money to support the operation and rebuild a serious 21st century product line. Regaining market share will not be easy, nor will it be inexpensive. In and of itself, a new factory isn't the answer.

drunkensobriety
March 19, 2012, 05:27 PM
For a custom gun, what parts of a Colt or Springfield will be left after the custom gun is finished? There's not a lot of difference between the frame, slide, and barrel of a Colt compared to a Springfield. All the other parts are replaced with "Hardcore", "Bulletproof", or some other parts made of unobtainium metal that's so strong, it's indestructible. For a custom gun, you could use just about anyone's frame, slide, and barrel and get the same finished custom gun...

However, for a off-the-shielf gun, a Colt offers better parts. The only MIM parts in a Colt 1911 are the sear, disconnector, and magazine catch. Everything else is forged, machined, or investment cast. Compare that to a Springfield where almost every small part is MIM.

Yes and no. True - 90% of the internals are going to be replaced and hand fitted in order to get a tight fit that's also got -just- enough tolerance in order to allow proper function. You should be able to bop it on your hand with little or no jingling or rattling.

On the other hand: no, you can't use just anyone's slide and frame to make a custom piece: unless you want to go through the extra work of tightening the slide to frame fit, or re cutting the sight slots, not to mention all the machining inside the slide and frame. If you want a -really- good trigger job, you also need to polish inside the frame with a good high grit stone - you wouldn't believe the burs you can find in there on less than quality production guns.

And no - you're also going to replace the barrel so you can fit an over sized one. There shouldn't be any gap between the hood of the barrel and the top inside of the slide. Just enough room to allow it to go to full battery - but no daylight showing. There should also be around 30% contact between the barrel lugs and the recesses in the slide.

There's really a tremendous amount of work to do on just the frame and slide: if it's a low quality production piece you're starting with. If you buy an upgraded Springfield model or a standard colt you'll actually have fewer parts to replace and less work to do on the slide and frame. I -don't- like yagging on about what I do, but I am a gunsmith.

Also, the idea of a mim sear and disconnector makes my hair stand on end: I very much prefer my gun fire *once* when I pull the trigger. It doesn't matter -who- made it: I'd yank those out of there before I ever fired the gun. MIM brakes, wears unevenly and warps with use.

22-rimfire
March 19, 2012, 07:07 PM
I doubt Colt will EVER be like Colt prior to 1980. Smith & Wesson has pretty much grabbed the entire Colt revolver market and they manufacture a good product. There isn't a lot of room for Colt and I know they will have to be priced similar to the S&W product to sell many units. I'm not loosing sleep over what happens with Colt anymore.

Guillermo
March 19, 2012, 08:16 PM
Some would say Colt got exactly what it deserved

I would say they got better than they deserved.

They ignored their customers, they sided with the government vs liberty.

That they are in business is a gift.

Same with S&W.

Horrendous management

skidder
March 19, 2012, 08:59 PM
Ruger should be an example to the rest, but the bottom line to many has only one dimension. Until they apprehend the greater good, and understand that a pie chart is not just cherry and apple, they will continue fall through their glass floor.

Dr.Rob
March 19, 2012, 11:32 PM
I'm still a Colt guy, just I am stuck with a Ruger budget sometimes.

I don't own a single Smith and Wesson.

Armed012002
March 20, 2012, 04:43 AM
If Colt made a double action revolver that could at least match Smith & Wesson quality without a silly internal lock, I think my credit card would melt.

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 10:36 AM
If Colt made a double action revolver that could at least match Smith & Wesson quality without a silly internal lock, I think my credit card would melt.

That would be easy considering the pathetic garbage that S&W puts out these days.

Of course Colt would have to be able to raise capital. I am not sure that they have the ability to do so.

While the lack of competition for quality dbl action revolvers is a problem, is that the best area that Colt should expand as a company? They have become a maker of SAA, 1911 and AR's...the newest design being 60 years old.

Perhaps building LeMats and Kentucky Longrifles would more be their speed.

Old Fuff
March 20, 2012, 12:16 PM
If an American handgun manufacturer is looking to expand its product line, what they will most likely come out with is some polymer-framed pistols with a CNC machined or investment cast slide and barrel.

Why?

Because after the expensive tooling is paid for, or written off taxes, they are the least expensive to make, and require minimal human worker input. They are widely accepted in the marketplace, and offer higher profit margins then any other kind of current handgun construction. As almost always, making the most money possible is the name of the game.

With the exception of small, snubby revolvers the market share of revolvers is declining - and it's likely to continue in that direction because they are more labor intensive and cost more to make. While the price spread between revolvers and pistols may not seem so much (although it is increasing in a way that does not favor revolvers) the difference in manufacturer profit between the two systems is more substantial and favors pistols.

To remain competitive today's revolver manufacturers have to employ technologies that while acceptable in pistols don't satisfy customers that see the results in terms of reduced quality vs. what they were used to in the past. But any manufacturer that turns out a product that equals that of the past will have to price it at points that most buyers would find unacceptable.

Of the remaining revolver makers, Ruger is the most successful, but their success is dependent on investment casting and now MIM parts, and they are incorporating an internal lock into present and past-but-still-in-production models. As it is, some present owners or potential buyers fret over the weight and smoothness of double-action trigger pulls, and wonder why the company doesn’t polish the parts and use weaker springs to make them easier. These same individuals would likely hit the ceiling if retail prices were increased to reflect this kind of work.

While I treasure both Colt's and Smith & Wesson's earlier revolvers, I suspect that if Colt decides to expand it won't likely be in the direction of new double action/hand ejector revolvers, with the possibility of a small snubby. If they do they will have the problem of convincing the potential market that the new is equal or better then what they made in the past. Given the expectations, a pistol should look like a better way to go.

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 12:43 PM
what they will most likely come out with is some polymer-framed pistols with a CNC machined or investment cast slide and barrel.

Yes

But that is a VERY crowded market and Colt is a "retro arms" company.

That would fit as well as a crotch rocket fitting into the product line of Harley.

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 12:51 PM
These same individuals would likely hit the ceiling if retail prices were increased to reflect this kind of work.


Old Fuff?
How much does a trigger job cost on average?

$100

And that requires the gunsmith to disassemble a gun (not required when building new) and then assembling (which the manufacturer has to do anyway).

So removing the cost of disassembly and reassembly, a trigger job would cost 50 bucks or so? Add the economies of scale and it is obvious that it would not take a huge price increase to have a new revolver with a decent trigger.

22-rimfire
March 20, 2012, 01:46 PM
If S&W did not exist, you can bet that Ruger's prices would be a lot higher.

Old Fuff
March 20, 2012, 01:49 PM
So removing the cost of disassembly and reassembly, a trigger job would cost 50 bucks or so? Add the economies of scale and it is obvious that it would not take a huge price increase to have a new revolver with a decent trigger.

Lets say that Ruger (I'm just using them as an example) decides to hand-polish and hand fit the lockwork in all they're double action revolvers.

Given the total number of the revolvers they make, they are going to have to hire and train a large number of new employees. All of them will come under the big umbrella of government regulations, tax deduction paperwork etc. plus other benefits (health insurance, etc.) and will expect wages commensurate to their skills and experience. All of this will require space in the factory and associated workbenches and whatever.

Now let me digress and point out that Colt Pythons came with hand-polished and fitted lockwork, and you could have all that plus a high-polish blue, nickel plate or stainless steel finish for only around $1,200 bucks, give or take.

So I suspect that the MSRP (that included an extra cut for distributors and retail dealers) the ultimate increase at the buyer level could be substantial. That would discourage a lot of potential buyers that didn't give a hoot about the double-action trigger pull.

The reason the Old Fuff jumps on certain older guns like a duck after a June bug is because he knows that that have within, a certain amount of skilled hand work that is unlikely to be ever seen again, except in very expensive custom models.

Right now Ruger's prices are competitive against any competitor, in particular Smith & Wesson. But if they start hand polishing and fitting lockwork they won't be. Even suggesting such a thing would cause the company's resident number-crunchier to have a heart attack.

I once ask Bill Ruger why they didn’t have a Custom Shop to do the “little extras” that some wanted. He replied that, “This wasn’t the sort of thing his company was all about, the best possible retail prices for a reasonable product was.” He also opined that, “There was a large community of custom gunsmiths that were in business to do that sort of work for those that wanted it, that didn’t impose on others who didn’t.”

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 01:51 PM
If S&W did not exist, you can bet that Ruger's prices would be a lot higher

Without question.

They are higher than they would be WITH S&W. Ruger has always priced their guns 10-15 % lower (against competing models)

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 01:55 PM
But if they start hand polishing and fitting lockwork they won't be

So what you are saying is the if Ruger had an option for an outside company (which would have to disassemble and reassemble the gun) and would charge 100 bucks...that Ruger could not do it in house cheaper?!?!?!

Wow...they must be REALLY inefficient at Sturm, Ruger since they can't do something on an assembly line cheaper than an independent gunsmith.

CraigC
March 20, 2012, 01:56 PM
“This wasn’t the sort of thing his company was all about, the best possible retail prices for a reasonable product was.” He also opined that, “There was a large community of custom gunsmiths that were in business to do that sort of work for those that wanted it, that didn’t impose on others who didn’t.”
While it would be nice for me if Ruger had a custom shop, it's hard to fault the logic there.

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 02:02 PM
“This wasn’t the sort of thing his company was all about, the best possible retail prices for a reasonable product was.”

Of course there is no reason for Ruger to make a revolver with a better trigger...they sell all they can make.

There is no reason for S&W to build a decent quality revolver, they sell a ton.

There is no reason for S&W to take off a lock that sometimes renders a gun useless. People step up and buy them anyway.

We are living in a time of diminishing expectations.

It is we, as a people, that are flawed. We will eat chicken squeeze and say "it is the way it is"

We have no desire for excellence. And it will be our undoing.

CraigC
March 20, 2012, 03:23 PM
We are living in a time of diminishing expectations.
Ain't that the truth! It is the Walmart mentality. People 'feel' better if they have a lot of stuff, even if it is cheap Chinese garbage. Quality has given way to quantity.

Not me buddy.

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 03:34 PM
Not me buddy

nope

Not you

Not me

but the dumbmasses

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 04:08 PM
It is the Walmart mentality

Allow me to clarify.

Some things I am the cheapest guy alive and have a Wal-Mart mentality.

In others it is all about value.


I do not own a Korth or have any plans to.
Same thing with Holland and Holland shotguns.

Colt and old Smith revolvers are good enough.
My trusty Winchester model 12 does a fine job.

But I have never saved money going cheap on a tool or a gun.

Maybe the Korth, H&H folks think I am part of the dumb masses

MrBorland
March 20, 2012, 06:12 PM
Maybe the Korth, H&H folks think I am part of the dumb masses

Nah...I do too. :neener:

oldfool
March 20, 2012, 06:18 PM
"While it would be nice for me if Ruger had a custom shop"

That seems more to my way of thinking, than making every gun off the line either "lowest manufacturing cost" or "custom smithed quality". Choices, I like choices.

One shoe does not fit all. Other than the obvious "price point" marketing approach of all the big volume makers to differentiate their products from the too few other big volume makers, I don't think there is enough variance within any one brand lineup. Offering some few more 'select' models from each would be a win-win for all of them, and for us.

Arguably S&Ws Custom shop offers that, I guess, but I would not myself argue that they do (or don't). I don't know that Craig would settle for factory grade Custom Shop, for example; he invests a lot of bucks in 2nd and 3rd party custom builds because face it, the best that factory mass production can do, even when factory enhanced, cannot compete with the best-of-the-best, price 'unlimited'. Not unless they have a very sharp focus on niche market buyers, and keep that focus on a very limited number of models offered; Freedom Arms being the champion of that IMO, leastways in the revolver world.

Taurus goes for the lowest cost, highest volume, widest array product line, with shortest time from conception to shelf. It moves a lot of volume for them, but their ambition for ever higher sku count does them some harm, IMO. They are doing to themselves what GMC did to themselves, and they both did it by their own hand.

S&W looks at competition's sales volume, worries about that, and strives too mightily to reduce their cost, IMO. I do not believe they have succumbed to "low price trumps all", as some folks here do believe, but it has certainly hurt their reputation (politics and all that aside, although 'gun politics' do forever linger on, happens every time S&W's name is mentioned).

Ruger has stayed the course, IMO, having the clearest focus on what drives their market, and it shows. Much as I do admire their recent surge in adding sku to their line up, I hope they do not lose that focus. It is a double edged sword, diversification.

But... "dumbmasses", that seems to me as badly overplayed as the "elitist" rhetoric. What we all most want is champagne at beer price, but very few of us are willing to pay the bar tab, even if able, and not all of us are all that able.

I would encourage every shooter to squeeze the most bangs they can out of their own bucks. "If you got it, flaunt it", and apologize to no one. If you don't, do what most of us do, just do what you can or do without.
Like some here, I own a lot of the low price spread, and enjoy them for what they are. I sooth my own meager pride from time to time with a minty old model classic, though few in number.

Choices, I like choices.
Competition, I yearn for more than what I see in the revolver market. The revolver market has become too "price point" segmented. I would really like to see the "big three" go head-to-head on a few select revolver models, chase us 'psuedo elitists' a bit harder, the way Colt & S&W and Dan Wesson used to. I wouldn't buy six apiece now, no more than I did back when, but I would be on the hunt for one or two.

Maybe the autoloader mega-trend is just too high a hurdle to jump, but one can still wish

oldfool
March 20, 2012, 06:28 PM
nahhh...

G be a psuedo elitist (just a cheapskate elitist)
Me be a diehard propagator of the vast internet conspiracy (and cheapskate)
MrB, he just has a discerning hand and eye for picking what works great
and Craig C be the guy who knows the difference between cheap champagne and the really good stuff, and willing to pay the bar tab
:D:D:D:D

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 07:05 PM
I do too

LOL!!!

Of course you do...

I was not trying to LIMIT the people that think I am a dumbmass to the H&H, Korth crowd.

(still laughing)

Thanks for the jab Mr. Boreland...

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 07:11 PM
What we all most want is champagne at beer price, but very few of us are willing to pay the bar tab

I disagree.

Yes I am a a cheap bastard in some ways (I stick the old sliver of soap onto the new bar) but I will pay a grand for a revolver.

hariph creek
March 20, 2012, 07:43 PM
I think Old Fuff's posts, in particular #42, were about right.

I'd add that, I feel, many today would not be able to appreciate the hand fitting and polishing, suggested previously. For those that do care, a Ruger is easy and cheap to tune-up. It's one of the design factors of a Ruger that makes it, to me at least, THE modern incarnation of the double action revolver.
I wonder if a revolver manufacturer offered either:
1) A bright and shiny chrome finish, fancy engraving proclaiming ''ZOMBIE SLAYER!'' and glow in the dark grip panels, on a production quality revolver.
Or...
2) A hand fit and polished action on a ''plain Jane'' revolver.
for say an extra $50-$100. Which would be requested more?

That's the only reason I managed to acquire my dad's 1950 Colt Detective Special. My brother, who is managing my father's estate, looked at it and found it rather dull. He opted for a Taurus stainless .357 snub, instead? I, of course, was willing to settle for a virtually unfired D.S., with zero holster wear. I feel so cheated. He got the modern shiny .357 magnum. All I got is this weak, old fashioned looking .38 special. Poor me.

I liken it to the dollar store mentality. "ooo...look I spent $20 on 200 cheap piece of crap pens. Sure, most will fall apart. Yes, the rest will give unsatisfactory performance. But look, I got 200 pens!''

I didn't realize Colt even still made guns for the ''civilian'' market, until a couple years ago. They have no market presence. Having owned a couple Colts, I'm not impressed with their customer service.

357 Terms
March 20, 2012, 08:04 PM
We have no desire for excellence. And it will be our undoing.
__________________


A little dramatic there

Excellence can still be had, custom work from many available and talented gunsmiths, but, it will cost you a whole lota cash.

If you expect 'that' work to be done on modern revolvers straight from the factory and still expect to pay a reasonable price you are delusional.

BTW I own four Ruger's and I think they are great, especially since I have four for what I would have paid for a NIB Python. ( at todays prices)

oldfool
March 20, 2012, 08:17 PM
"I will pay a grand for a revolver."

Well, I held the line at $300, G... then $400.. then $500.. then $600.. then $800
but the line I am holding onto is that cheapo wallyworld "rope" (patched up with cheap duct tape from BigLots) and I think it has stretched about as it will go before breaking... breaking my wallet, that is. My badly frayed wallyworld wallet is wearing ever thinner, too :)

drunkensobriety
March 20, 2012, 08:21 PM
At this point I have two things to say.

1. oldfool is my hero. Post #55 was fantastic.

2. The following quote prompted an immediate bond villain evil laugh.
If Colt made a double action revolver that could at least match Smith & Wesson quality without a silly internal lock, I think my credit card would melt.

MrBorland
March 20, 2012, 08:49 PM
(still laughing)

Thanks for the jab Mr. Boreland...

I couldn't resist. :D Where's the [/rimshot] function? ;)


oldfool is my hero.

+1. Though he's no fool, methinks.

Old Fuff
March 20, 2012, 08:57 PM
Folks, don't believe that guy, Guillermo.

He may say:

but I will pay a grand for a revolver.

But the truth is that sometime back I offered him a nickel plated, .32 Iver Johnson top-break revolver with genuine (fake) pearl stocks...

And he didn't come up with no one thousand bucks. :neener:

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 10:00 PM
I couldn't resist. Where's the [/rimshot] function?

We heard it

+1. Though he's no fool, methinks.

NO where close. He is worthy of respect...even when he is wrong (IE: disagrees with me) Same thing for you Senor Borland. :neener:


I offered him a nickel plated, .32 Iver Johnson top-break revolver with genuine (fake) pearl stocks

I said pay a grand for A revolver...not ANY revolver.

But anytime you are near you can dip into the Blanton's :D

Guillermo
March 20, 2012, 10:04 PM
BTW

This thread illustrates why I love THR so much.

Old Fuff, Old Fool and Mr Borland are all folks worthy of respect.

We had a nice discussion. (actually Mr. Borland just came in to ding me...but that was fun)

Thank you moderators. You guys administer the best gun board on the net.

Old Fuff
March 20, 2012, 10:14 PM
I said pay a grand for A revolver...not ANY revolver.

But... but it's unique. It once belond to Wyatt Erp (yup, some spelled his name that way). :evil: :neener:

Guillermo
March 21, 2012, 11:28 AM
but it's unique

It will be no less unique after you fitz it.

Of course you want to fitz anything
:eek:



My Python

Diamondbacks

P7

Model 12 shotguns

Model 63 .22s

:what:

hand ejectors

officer's target

k-22

any of my guns you would hack up as though you were a serial killer in a b movie

Old Fuff
March 21, 2012, 11:52 AM
Since the trigger guard on these old top-break revolvers are detachable I can't "Fitz" one because there would be nothing to keep the back part on the frame after the front had been cut away.

This is one more reason you should come up with the thousand bucks to buy it. :scrutiny:

Such an opportunity... :evil:

Now so far as those other guns are concerned... :uhoh:

If you enjoyed reading about "I always thought of myself as a "Colt" guy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!