1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

If Ruger Had Brains They Would Compete With SW and Taurus in the J frame Size

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by GEM, May 10, 2007.

  1. GEM

    GEM Well-Known Member

    That's it. There was a thread about popular CCW revolvers. One must admit that the forte of the modern revolver for carry is the pocket gun. Certainly something like a Model 66 is a fine gun but if you go to the belt - there are many better and reliable semis.

    For hunting - sure a revolver is great.

    So with SW and Taurus making a buck with J frame sized guns and Charter back in the business and old man Ruger at the great range in the sky - why doesn't Ruger come up with a J frame size gun?

    Come out with the long desired reasonable 9mm snubby or something fun. They are just stuck in the past.
  2. Jim March

    Jim March Well-Known Member

    Or upgrade the SP101 to 40S&W?
  3. Joe Demko

    Joe Demko Well-Known Member

    "No honest man needs a handgun smaller than a canned ham."
    Bill Ruger
  4. 1 LT MPC

    1 LT MPC Well-Known Member

    I'd rather see them duplicate Colt's D frame. I like the extra shot. Why Colt doesn't do it is beyond me.:confused:
  5. ARperson

    ARperson Well-Known Member

    As far as Ruger goes, I think they are sticking to the their largest revolver market. Cowboy Action Shooting revolvers. Why compete in a market with others who have already established market dominance when your main source of income is something else.

    The have the SP101, it is smaller, built like a tank, but weights alot too. My guess is that they are staying more true to their largest customer base, where people buy at least two guns, then use the heck out them so the need more/parts.

    In the carry market, someone will buy one, and then only use is sparingly for range practice most of their life. Why compete with Smith, Taurus, and Charter who are already competing against the smaller autos of Glock, Springfield, Kahr, Kimber, etc.....

    Ruger probablys makes more money on Mark IIIs 10-22s and Vaqueros each than all of their other produts combined.

    Just ARperson's hubby's opinion.
  6. GEM

    GEM Well-Known Member

    I think I read their sales were down. Might be wrong about that. But Ford emphasized trucks and oops. That's what I was thinking.
  7. Candiru

    Candiru Well-Known Member

    My guess is that either their castings don't hold up as well as S&W's forged frames below a certain size, or building smaller and more lightweight guns that break more than once every other lifetime doesn't fit with the profit margins of their service model.

    SAWBONES Well-Known Member

    The snubby (2 1/4" barrel) SP101 is only 25 oz, similar to some of the Colt D-frames. While not a pocket gun, it's still easily portable and concealable, plus it handles full power .357 loads with relative ease, and with much more comfort than even the all-steel J-frames. It actually fits my hand better than any of the J-frames, too, so for me its good traits outweigh the ways in which it fails to imitate the J-frames.
  9. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Well-Known Member

    Another alternative is that consistent with Bill Ruger's statement (quoted above) and the statement of one of the top management (made at the 2004 Shot Show if memory serves), Ruger has no real interest in entering the CCW market any more than they have.
  10. DawgFvr

    DawgFvr Well-Known Member

    Joe Demko:

    Now that's funny!:p
  11. JohnBT

    JohnBT Well-Known Member

    It is funny and I laugh everytime I hear it, but I don't believe Bill Ruger said it.

    Meanwhile, if Ruger won't build a pocket revolver maybe you can talk Remington or Marlin or Savage into it. They haven't been interested in that market either.

  12. Whirlwind06

    Whirlwind06 Well-Known Member

    Well there is hope.
    On the auto side they have came out with the P345.
    About the size of a 1911 commander.
    I know that is not small but it is slimmer then the other Ruger pistols.
  13. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Well-Known Member

    JohnBT, you might be right about the quote. I had it confused with this one from Ruger.

  14. Joe Demko

    Joe Demko Well-Known Member

    No, he didn't. The quote originated with me at TFL. Tamara found it amusing and repeated it. Her huge popularity caused it to spread until it took on a life of its own. I'd love to claim full credit for putting those words in Bill Ruger's mouth as payback for what he did say, but w/o Tamara a few people would have laffed and it would have been forgotten.
  15. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Well-Known Member

    Ruger has always designed and built firearms as though they are the only gun manufacturer in the world ... the concept of competing with other manufacturers seems foreign to them (and to be fair, there's times its worked for them).
  16. Fburgtx

    Fburgtx Well-Known Member

    I think Ruger might do well to enter this market. I think people would flock to an S&W alternative (that didn't have the "Lock", Sorry, someone had to start this again!!!) that's made in the USA. I also think they need to consider a 1911 variant.

    The one other glaring flaw in their lineup has to do with shotguns. I think they would do well with a moderately priced semi-auto (think $500-$650 range). A pump would be nice, but Remington and Mossberg already have that market saturated.
  17. 461

    461 Well-Known Member

    Maybe the other manufacturers should try competing with Ruger on guns that will take heavy loads and hard use and last a lifetime doing it.
  18. GTSteve03

    GTSteve03 Well-Known Member


    This is Ruger's forte, building heavy-duty pistols that can handle just about anything a handloader can put them through, and come out grinning. :cool:

    Ruger would be smart to stick with what they do best. Why get into a market that S&W and Taurus have pretty much covered?
  19. texas bulldog

    texas bulldog Well-Known Member

    +1 on this.

    i actually like the SP101 for carry. i don't want my gun to weigh half an ounce, and i like having an exposed hammer [though ruger provides a DAO]. and it's plenty portable enough for IWB, OWB, or even some pockets. and i want to be able to put hot, heavy .357 through my carry gun on a regular basis. even if i was gonna go S&W for carry [which i well might], i'd go with a 60 rather than all the snazzy featherweight shrouded, bobbed, hidden hammer stuff that dominates the market these days.

    just an opinion...YMMV
  20. nemoaz

    nemoaz member

    No honest man needs a Ruger.

Share This Page