I always thought of myself as a "Colt" guy

[oldfool]

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]

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]

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]

Colts turn the wrong way anyway.

 

[Armed012002]

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 I bet they lose sales all the time thanks to their slow, almost non existent production.

 

[cyclopsshooter]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

If S&W did not exist, you can bet that Ruger's prices would be a lot higher.

 

[Old Fuff]

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]

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]

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]

“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]

“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.