sundance44s
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,473
Maybe in 100 years give or take the Itilians will make a copy of the Ruger Old Army ....who`s Army ?
Why Was the Ruger Old Army Discontinued?
- Thread starter Timthinker
- Start date
- Status
Cowboy Action Shooting is a game, designed, developed and intended to further interest in the Frontier West and the firearms (or replicas thereof) that were used during the 19th century.
While the Ruger Old Army is (or was) an outstanding revolver - and perhaps the best of all cap & ball handguns of this kind, it was not a replica or reproduction of anything used during the 19th century - and it wasn't intended to be. As such it didn't fit into the picture CSA was trying to project. I have no problem with that, and I don't believe it reflects on the superior features that the Ruger offered.
Ed Ames
Member
Isn't that (not fitting the repro image) why Ruger went to the 5.5" barrel and topstrap rear sight in stainless/"ivory"? From a distance they look more retro?
Personally I think it's a real shame when that sort of pointless squabbling descends to the point of laughing at people. There's always the guy with $3000+ to throw down on a genuine colt or the like... should he laugh at all the guys with uberties and berettas? Should the guy with the fluted cylinder on his repro C&B laugh at the folks with roll-engraved "navy" cylinders on "army" guns? Everybody laughs at the guy with the henry lever action?
Is the competition really about how much money you have to spend? I know the guys toting genuine antiques would like to say so but is it really? Should it be?
Personally I think it's a real shame when that sort of pointless squabbling descends to the point of laughing at people. There's always the guy with $3000+ to throw down on a genuine colt or the like... should he laugh at all the guys with uberties and berettas? Should the guy with the fluted cylinder on his repro C&B laugh at the folks with roll-engraved "navy" cylinders on "army" guns? Everybody laughs at the guy with the henry lever action?
Is the competition really about how much money you have to spend? I know the guys toting genuine antiques would like to say so but is it really? Should it be?
Being in the market for two blackpowder percussion revolvers, the Ruger doesn't make the list. As good as they seem, they are pricey and not a reproduction, which is really what I am after. I want a quality reproduction revolver, not only a quality percussion revolver.
Ed Ames
Member
I have no idea where that came from.
I wanted them. I've got two.
They are still discontinued.
What did you mean?
I think the real problem is that there are so many out there after 35 years of production that Ruger now has to compete against its own used market. Look on Gunbroker or Gunsamerica and there are at least 40 ROAs on there either NIB or in excellent condition, all for much less than probably the wholesale price. I buy guns to shoot, so I'd rather buy a gun in 98 or 95% condition, since it's going to quickly end up in that condition after shooting it a bunch. What's the point of buying new? Even if a gun is popular, eventually the market is so flooded with used guns that you can't make money on them.
-John
-John
It is a shame that they are discontinued. I can see however that people were reluctant to pay over $500 for a new one. I bought two of mine used for less than the 1858 are going new and it is a much better cap and ball revolver. Maybe not accurate but better, which is what I want. I am planning to buy a brand new one to add to my collection and leave it NIB for my estate to sell some day. Over all these years, I have never seen gun prices move down for long and I am sure long term the ROA will be a nice collectible especially unshot, NIB.
Happy shooting
Happy shooting
GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL
Member.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,632
Well, every time I try to say something about a Ruger Old Army I get piled on. (Incidentally...
I don't quite believe my carbine or '58 will make it through 17 inches of solid oak, but they will shoot through the 2 inch part of a pine 2x4 at 12 yards with no problem. I figure if they'll do that then they'll knock a pretty good hole in somebody's ass if I ever had to)(hope I don't)
I know people on here love the ROA. I understand that and I appreciate it, but I still think something is not right somewhere up and down the line.
Maybe it's just me. I spend a lot of time agonizing and researching and burning up the phone line before I buy a gun. I already know everything there is to know about it before I ever even get my hands on it. I don't have many guns. I do have a lot of spare parts to take care of the ones I settled on. The idea of selling or trading one of my pieces, especially the Walker, would be like selling or trading off my son or my daughter.
The idea of lying there in bed at night thinking about how someone else had their hands on my Walker, well, they don't make enough sedatives and sleeping pills to make me rest good.
What I'm getting at here I guess is how come there's so many used ROA's for sale out there. I can understand that a few people here and there might have bought it as their first blackpowder gun and decided they didn't like shooting blackpowder and got rid of it. I can also understand that a few people here and there needed a new transmission in their car or their children was begging for a new X-Box or something. Those happenings are not enough when they're added together to equal the number of used ROA's out there by a long shot. There's something else going on here somewhere.
I read a post by someone on here (a regular) who really like's the ROA but I also read where he said he couldn't hit a milk jug with it at 100 yards. If it was the gun and not him then I consider that piss poor performance on the gun's part.
I know we (some NRA members) were firing Able Dog targets on a Marine Corps base several long years ago, and the performance of the ROA past about 80 to 85 yards was sorely lacking. Past 100 yards (we were counting in yards, not meters) it wasn't worth a s*** period, and that's the truth. The bulls-eye on these targets measured about 6 feet across. (rifle targets) There was one type of blackpowder handgun out there that day that handled those targets out to our maximum range of 200 yards like nobody's business but I'm not going there.
I read somewhere years and years ago (hell it may be in some paper work I still have put away somewhere) that someone high ranking there at the company asked Bill Ruger something about the range on the ROA. Bill Ruger got a little testy and told the person the ROA was built to 'comform to normal handgun working range' and that 'if they wanted something stronger and with better range they would automatically move up to a Blackhawk Magnum'. (quote, unquote).
Well, something's just not kosher here when everything is all added together. That saying people use about how the ROA is built so good that it is indestructable and that's why there's so many used ones out there dosen't address the question at all.
Furthermore, (although I may be wrong about this. I may have to go back and call Remington again, but I'vd got a pretty damn good memory even though I am getting a little older now) I think the Remington 1858, along with the Pietta and Uberti models of it came (come) from the factory ranged in at about 70 yards which make's good sense to me. That would explain why when people first start with one and are shooting out to 15 to maybe 25 yards they complain about the revolver shooting high.
Well, ya'll pile it on. But I wouldn't buy a Ruger Old Army with that many of them floating around out there, especially when for all I know right now the Pietta 1858 New Model .44 will shoot and carry just as well as the Ruger. Hell, it may carry a little better on out there. I know to me it look's better than a Ruger but that's just me.
That part about it being made in the USA dosen't carry that much weight nowadays. I drive a Mercury Cougar and I like it a lot, but I doubt if 25 pieces of that car was actually made in the USA.......
I don't quite believe my carbine or '58 will make it through 17 inches of solid oak, but they will shoot through the 2 inch part of a pine 2x4 at 12 yards with no problem. I figure if they'll do that then they'll knock a pretty good hole in somebody's ass if I ever had to)(hope I don't)
I know people on here love the ROA. I understand that and I appreciate it, but I still think something is not right somewhere up and down the line.
Maybe it's just me. I spend a lot of time agonizing and researching and burning up the phone line before I buy a gun. I already know everything there is to know about it before I ever even get my hands on it. I don't have many guns. I do have a lot of spare parts to take care of the ones I settled on. The idea of selling or trading one of my pieces, especially the Walker, would be like selling or trading off my son or my daughter.
The idea of lying there in bed at night thinking about how someone else had their hands on my Walker, well, they don't make enough sedatives and sleeping pills to make me rest good.
What I'm getting at here I guess is how come there's so many used ROA's for sale out there. I can understand that a few people here and there might have bought it as their first blackpowder gun and decided they didn't like shooting blackpowder and got rid of it. I can also understand that a few people here and there needed a new transmission in their car or their children was begging for a new X-Box or something. Those happenings are not enough when they're added together to equal the number of used ROA's out there by a long shot. There's something else going on here somewhere.
I read a post by someone on here (a regular) who really like's the ROA but I also read where he said he couldn't hit a milk jug with it at 100 yards. If it was the gun and not him then I consider that piss poor performance on the gun's part.
I know we (some NRA members) were firing Able Dog targets on a Marine Corps base several long years ago, and the performance of the ROA past about 80 to 85 yards was sorely lacking. Past 100 yards (we were counting in yards, not meters) it wasn't worth a s*** period, and that's the truth. The bulls-eye on these targets measured about 6 feet across. (rifle targets) There was one type of blackpowder handgun out there that day that handled those targets out to our maximum range of 200 yards like nobody's business but I'm not going there.
I read somewhere years and years ago (hell it may be in some paper work I still have put away somewhere) that someone high ranking there at the company asked Bill Ruger something about the range on the ROA. Bill Ruger got a little testy and told the person the ROA was built to 'comform to normal handgun working range' and that 'if they wanted something stronger and with better range they would automatically move up to a Blackhawk Magnum'. (quote, unquote).
Well, something's just not kosher here when everything is all added together. That saying people use about how the ROA is built so good that it is indestructable and that's why there's so many used ones out there dosen't address the question at all.
Furthermore, (although I may be wrong about this. I may have to go back and call Remington again, but I'vd got a pretty damn good memory even though I am getting a little older now) I think the Remington 1858, along with the Pietta and Uberti models of it came (come) from the factory ranged in at about 70 yards which make's good sense to me. That would explain why when people first start with one and are shooting out to 15 to maybe 25 yards they complain about the revolver shooting high.
Well, ya'll pile it on. But I wouldn't buy a Ruger Old Army with that many of them floating around out there, especially when for all I know right now the Pietta 1858 New Model .44 will shoot and carry just as well as the Ruger. Hell, it may carry a little better on out there. I know to me it look's better than a Ruger but that's just me.
That part about it being made in the USA dosen't carry that much weight nowadays. I drive a Mercury Cougar and I like it a lot, but I doubt if 25 pieces of that car was actually made in the USA.......
Last edited:
robert garner
Member
I have a brace of ROA"s First shot one in '73, been shootin'em since, my standard target for most of those yrs. was a plastic milk jug at 100 yds,
till seein the sights became a problem hitting the jugs was never one.
I do wonder where all these used ROA'S are at not around here I assure you, and if and when one doe's show up, it is at a decided premium! Yes I do admire the colt copies, have one here now,but the ROA will be here long after(hopefully) I am gone,it is the last pistol I will give up as its utility is such that there is nothing I require from a pistol that it can't cover, and well.
robert
till seein the sights became a problem hitting the jugs was never one.
I do wonder where all these used ROA'S are at not around here I assure you, and if and when one doe's show up, it is at a decided premium! Yes I do admire the colt copies, have one here now,but the ROA will be here long after(hopefully) I am gone,it is the last pistol I will give up as its utility is such that there is nothing I require from a pistol that it can't cover, and well.
robert
GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL
Member.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,632
robert garner..Understood, and respect your opinion and knowledge of the ROA.....
tkendrick
Member
I don't think that's the point at all.
I have been involved in some re-enacting clubs at various times. There are various levels of "authenticity" expected at most of these organizations, and most of it depends on the type of event. I don't think it's pointless arguing at all. If the organization is as much about history as it is shooting, then it becomes very important.
There are those people who are more vocal about it than others as well. I don't really care to get all that involved in that aspect of the game, in fact I get a little tickled at some of the antics they go through. One of my friends is DEEEEEEP into civil war re-enactment, and there are people in his group who wil get upset if the stich count on their uniforms isn't correct.
Back to the point however, the ROA is a good gun. I used to have one, but traded it off for a "real" cap and ball gun. (Read that however you want)
But it isn't representative of ANY 19th century weapon.
If you were to walk into a CW re-enactment camp with a 45-70 trap-door,
walk around one of the Williamsburg events with a cap lock of any kind, show up at a WWI event with a Garand, or anything similar, and sooner or later the "stitch-nazi's" are going to bite you.
Some people get upset at that, that's their privilege. But it's also the right of these organizations to set the rules they want their club to abide by. If they want authentic styled weapons, then they should get them.
A lot of these events feature target shooting as part of their program. Allowing an ROA in an event open for 19th century cap revolvers would be no different than allowing a target grade in-line. They are all muzzle-loaders, but they aren't the same.
It would be like showing up at a Model A collectors club with a Corvette and getting upset when you didn't win best in show.
My local CAS club decided years ago that you could compete with any gun you wanted, as long as you can prove it was something you could buy off the shelf or have made during the frontier period. They have seperate competions for ML and cartridge guns, as well as "as-issued" and "modified".
Some of the "target" 1858 repro's don't make the cut either, since those target sights were not available in that time frame.
We go through this discussion at least once a year, for various reasons and for various guns. We also have a group that shoots in 19th century dress, and believe me, some of those discussions can get heated. HINT: Blue jeans are NOT Periond Correct.
Anyway, a long explanation for a simple statement.
The ROA isn't going to cut it in most CAS programs I'm familiar with. Most of the "real competitors" don't shoot cap and ball at all, but those that do aren't going to go to that trouble and then show up with a non-traditional piece.
Ed Ames
Member
It isn't really a Corvette in a Model A competition issue
though.
It's a "we've got hot rods that are built from kits but have old ford style drive trains and you've brought a hot rod that looks simlar but uses a Chevy S10 drive train" issue.
The real problem is that different folks want different things out of a given sort of sport. Some want to dude up and have sepiatone photos taken, others want to practice the skills and participate in the sport of shootin balloons while riding a horse.
From my perspective (I have all four types of gun... antique, reproduction, kit repro done in semi-modern style, and modern C&B) once you have a bunch of people shooting at paper plates and latex balloons the whole "19th century authenticity" theme goes out the window.
But that's just me.
though.
It's a "we've got hot rods that are built from kits but have old ford style drive trains and you've brought a hot rod that looks simlar but uses a Chevy S10 drive train" issue.
The real problem is that different folks want different things out of a given sort of sport. Some want to dude up and have sepiatone photos taken, others want to practice the skills and participate in the sport of shootin balloons while riding a horse.
From my perspective (I have all four types of gun... antique, reproduction, kit repro done in semi-modern style, and modern C&B) once you have a bunch of people shooting at paper plates and latex balloons the whole "19th century authenticity" theme goes out the window.
But that's just me.
anythingelse
Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2008
- Messages
- 74
I guess I'm one of those few people here on THR that just has a thing for black powder. I'm not into CASS or anything similar (although I don't have anything against those that are, and think it's kinda cool in some ways). I've always admired the Ruger Old Army, and have always wanted one. I was about to buy a Kahr and keep the Old Army on the back burner, but the recent discontinuance prompted me to get a NIB stainless, adjustable 7.5 (which is in the mail to my house as I write this).
From what I've seen and what I've read, the ROA is the highest quality, most solid [production] C&B revolver one can get. From my perspective, it was never, ever meant to be a repo in any way (and that includes aesthetics). The 5.5" models and fixed sights were only an afterthought by the new management to appeal to the CASS crowd, and those that happen to like shorter barrel lengths, and/or fixed sights.
Thus, I think the ROA was Bill Ruger's pet project. Considering how fast firearm technology was advancing in the 19th century, the C&B revolvers had only about 50 years of evolution before they were phased out. Given what I've read about Ruger, my extrapolation centers on the fact that he had a liking for C&B, but saw many flaws in the original designs. Back in the 19th century, there was not enough time/technology devoted to C&B to perfect them. Thus, Ruger decided to market the ideal C&B, the pinnacle of evolution. It may not have been a sound business strategy (although I'm sure they turned a profit over the years), but it's what he wanted to do, and he did it.
I've been a Ruger fan for years, and always got an odd feeling when I saw the ROA in the product catalogues. Although I loved it, and thought it was a fantastic addition to their line, it just didn't seem to belong. It's hard for me to articulate this, but it just seemed strange that a major manufacturer was (and had been for years) turning out a C&B revolver...and not just one that was made by the italians and had a stamp on it, but a genuine, in-house product.
I suppose this is how Ruger's son felt when he took over, albeit without the appreciation I have for the ROA. He saw it as the odd man out. It probably wasn't making a ton of money. Plus, the resources that went into producing the ROA could have been allocated elsewhere.
Rather than cut and run, given that he had the tooling, Ruger Jr. most likely tried to garner newfound interest in the ROA with the 5.5" models. I certainly took notice, as did a few gun rags and online bloggers. However, that was, what, six years ago, maybe more? Interest has again fallen to nominal levels, and the ROA just isn't selling in bushels.
Therefore, in January '08 Ruger pulled the plug. Given the above, I can't say that I blame him. After all, I want Ruger to do well, just like the next guy. If there's a leak, you gotta patch it. But I can't help feeling the loss. The ROA was like having a libertarian in congress: you know they probably shouldn't be there, but you're glad for it just the same.
Thus, I can't say this is necessarily a sad day for the firearms community. The ROA slipped through the cracks for decades, and many people are the happier because of it. But time, progress, and the free market caught up to the Ol' Army, and those of us in the C&B community will just have to deal with it.
From what I've seen and what I've read, the ROA is the highest quality, most solid [production] C&B revolver one can get. From my perspective, it was never, ever meant to be a repo in any way (and that includes aesthetics). The 5.5" models and fixed sights were only an afterthought by the new management to appeal to the CASS crowd, and those that happen to like shorter barrel lengths, and/or fixed sights.
Thus, I think the ROA was Bill Ruger's pet project. Considering how fast firearm technology was advancing in the 19th century, the C&B revolvers had only about 50 years of evolution before they were phased out. Given what I've read about Ruger, my extrapolation centers on the fact that he had a liking for C&B, but saw many flaws in the original designs. Back in the 19th century, there was not enough time/technology devoted to C&B to perfect them. Thus, Ruger decided to market the ideal C&B, the pinnacle of evolution. It may not have been a sound business strategy (although I'm sure they turned a profit over the years), but it's what he wanted to do, and he did it.
I've been a Ruger fan for years, and always got an odd feeling when I saw the ROA in the product catalogues. Although I loved it, and thought it was a fantastic addition to their line, it just didn't seem to belong. It's hard for me to articulate this, but it just seemed strange that a major manufacturer was (and had been for years) turning out a C&B revolver...and not just one that was made by the italians and had a stamp on it, but a genuine, in-house product.
I suppose this is how Ruger's son felt when he took over, albeit without the appreciation I have for the ROA. He saw it as the odd man out. It probably wasn't making a ton of money. Plus, the resources that went into producing the ROA could have been allocated elsewhere.
Rather than cut and run, given that he had the tooling, Ruger Jr. most likely tried to garner newfound interest in the ROA with the 5.5" models. I certainly took notice, as did a few gun rags and online bloggers. However, that was, what, six years ago, maybe more? Interest has again fallen to nominal levels, and the ROA just isn't selling in bushels.
Therefore, in January '08 Ruger pulled the plug. Given the above, I can't say that I blame him. After all, I want Ruger to do well, just like the next guy. If there's a leak, you gotta patch it. But I can't help feeling the loss. The ROA was like having a libertarian in congress: you know they probably shouldn't be there, but you're glad for it just the same.
Thus, I can't say this is necessarily a sad day for the firearms community. The ROA slipped through the cracks for decades, and many people are the happier because of it. But time, progress, and the free market caught up to the Ol' Army, and those of us in the C&B community will just have to deal with it.
classicballistx
Member
Ruger and the marketplace
A few of us will probably be interested to hear what comes from the pundits who will doubtless grill the Ruger folks at the SHOT show.
Shall we start a betting pool on some aspect of the topic? It would have to be more interesting than taking a flier on the presidential nominations.
Wisent
Classicballistx.com
A few of us will probably be interested to hear what comes from the pundits who will doubtless grill the Ruger folks at the SHOT show.
Shall we start a betting pool on some aspect of the topic? It would have to be more interesting than taking a flier on the presidential nominations.
Wisent
Classicballistx.com
I don't think it will come up.
I think what WILL come up is, "What's with the 20% per year price increase on old products with lots of competition? And why would I tell a customer to get an investment cast gun when it's more expensive than a forged gun, anyway?"
Bottom line? There's not much market for a "modern" Jambalaya-style cap-n-ball revolver. Buyers of BP revolvers want something different; buyers of modern single actions do, too.
What I always wanted? Quality, affordable replicas that shoot well. And you can get plenty these days, for a lot less than the ROA cost (add 20% to the last price, if they still made them, to get current price).
I think what WILL come up is, "What's with the 20% per year price increase on old products with lots of competition? And why would I tell a customer to get an investment cast gun when it's more expensive than a forged gun, anyway?"
Bottom line? There's not much market for a "modern" Jambalaya-style cap-n-ball revolver. Buyers of BP revolvers want something different; buyers of modern single actions do, too.
What I always wanted? Quality, affordable replicas that shoot well. And you can get plenty these days, for a lot less than the ROA cost (add 20% to the last price, if they still made them, to get current price).
One thing is for sure, the price of new in box ROAs are going to go up. Best way to make something more desirable is to discontinue it. Maybe every 5 years they should run a certain number of limited ROAs and sell them at a premium.
I disagree that the ROA is the ultimate cap and ball revolver. That honor is definately taken by the 1860 Army. ;-)
I disagree that the ROA is the ultimate cap and ball revolver. That honor is definately taken by the 1860 Army. ;-)
GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL
Member.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,632
RJM, I don't have an exact number but I damn sure know of one who would agree with you. His name was John Wesley Hardin...
tkendrick
Member
Yes, I agree. Arizona should allow me to walk down to the range, deliver a gang-banger or a (gasp) indian for me to duel with, and which ever one of us is still standing after the shoot-out wins.
That's where your logic goes.
I do not now, nor have I ever intimated that the ROA isn't a good gun. Quite the opposite. I would argue that it is a far superior arm when compared to the 1860 Army, the Dragoons, etc. So much so, in fact, I would place it in the same category as an in-line rifle instead of a repro Hawken. The ROA was designed from the start to be a modern single action handgun (coil springs, adjustable sights, modern materials) that employed old ammo technology. The only thing they have in common is the ammo.
Would you put a Ruger convertable 9mm Blackhawk in the same category with a Berreta M92, or a .30 cal C96 Mauser in the same category as a CZ-52? After all, they use the same ammo.
The only way your drive train analogy works is if my model A kits are made with drive trains that are so close to the original factory specs that the parts fit in the originals. And you are still showing up with an S10 with a Model A kit body. They may look similar, but the performance isn't ever going to match, and no matter what you say, yours is not even a Model A replica.
I don't like to do the re-enactor dress-up thing, and never have. But if those who do want to, power to them. Since you obviously don't play the game, why does it bother you that they won't use your toys?
You mean it's a gimmick to attract people who resent shooting black powder to begin with?
I suppose nobody who doesn't want to shoot a BP revolver, buys one. Hence, there's no market for the ROA, compared to the in-lines.
(I'm assuming you're referring to a good repro Hawken; there's junk out there, just like there are some junk inlines.)
tkendrick
Member
I honestly don't know how you could read what I wrote and come to that conclusion. A quality Hawken repro is not the same as a quality in-line gun.
I was simply referring to the two technologies.
Take the Walker and the ROA. They both fire BP, use caps, load the same. Neither uses self contained carridges. They are similar in appearance. Close enough in caliber as to be considered identical.
So therefore they are the same gun: ergo, the Walker is equal to the ROA?
I don't think you are saying that. If you are, then why pay twice as much for the one over the other?
Someone early on said they could not understand why the ROA's sales were down with the growth of cowboy shooting in the country.
To which I made a simple statement:
They probably would not be rude, nor mean-spirited.
But none-the-less, you would be taken aside and told that your ROA is not "traditional".
And that means very few sales to the Cowboy shooters, very few of whom shoot cap and ball anyway. Which means even fewer sales.
I frankly don't understand why this bothers anyone. If you choose to compete in National High Power Matches, you would expect to shoot with a proper gun, wouldn't you? If you decided to take up skeet or trap, and got serious about it, your going to buy a serious shotgun for the sport sooner or later even if it isn't "required"
There's a lot about the CAS crowd I don't understand or agree with either. The Vaquero, which is allowed, makes the same arguement as the ROA, which isn't.
I guess I'll just say two things then move on:
I can't explain it any better than I already have. If you don't understand because of me, then sorry, my words are inadequate.
But if you understand it and want to argue with me about it, I'll tell you the same thing I used to tell my kids-Don't whine to me about how you think it ought to be...I ought to be rich...there ought to be world peace....
I'm just telling you how it is.
anythingelse
Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2008
- Messages
- 74
tk: I think the reason why Bear disagreed with you is the in-line analogy. You're essentially saying 1860 colt is to ROA as Hawken is to In-Line. Although I understand what you're getting at, the in-line is a complete departure from the hawken. They're as different as a Garand and an M-60, despite the fact that the latter two shoot a thirty caliber bullet. The ROA and the 1860 Colt really aren't THAT different. The Ruger still manages to preserve the basic firing style/mechanism, while introducing modern advantages. It's like a classic Hawken compared to a new T/C hawken with modern sights, the fire storm, the whole nine.
Regarding your local shoots: I sourced all my loading and cleaning info from this guy: http://www.curtrich.com/frontiersmen.html He seems to do quite well with an ROA in SASS, etc.
The bottom line, I suppose, is that there are repo men, and there are ROA men. Both have their reasons. Neither are wrong.
Regarding your local shoots: I sourced all my loading and cleaning info from this guy: http://www.curtrich.com/frontiersmen.html He seems to do quite well with an ROA in SASS, etc.
The bottom line, I suppose, is that there are repo men, and there are ROA men. Both have their reasons. Neither are wrong.
arcticap
Member
It's ironic that just as one company starts to roll out a new product line, another company folds a similar product line.
The U.S.F.A is about to take off at 2 or 3 times the price and Ruger is turning off the faucet.
Yet Ruger just announced a new 10/22 pistol to cut into the benchrest pistol .22 specialty "custom" market at 1/2 the specialty "custom" price.
Who can compete against the 1/2 price that the Italians charge for their reproductions?
Just look at nearly all of the TC sidelocks that have been discontinued while Lyman/Investarms and what marketplace is left goes to Traditions/Ardesa to fill the void of a shrinking traditional BP rifle market. Who really wants or needs to pay double or triple the price for an American made sidelock rifle now days anyway?
At least when the inlines came onto the marketplace, it was dominated by America's Knight and TC rifles.
It's all a competition/strategy thing. Now Ruger will start to cut into some other gun maker's line of business to make up for any loss of market share even more.
Ruger stopped making a modern .22 DA revolver, while S&W and Taurus both have 9 or 10 shot revolvers in their line up. You know what people pay for a S&W 10 shot .22 revolver? They're close to $700!
That's what I expect Ruger to come out with soon, a new high capacity .22 revolver. With the high cost of ammo, .22's are one of the most popular calibers right now.
Shooting BP revolvers is getting more and more expensive, so people buy the cheaper Italian repro. imports and switching to cheaper rimfire guns & ammo too.
Inlines aren't cheap to shoot, but people hunt with them and can still buy the basic Spanish models for much less money.
So it's the buying public who really decides which guns are going out of style and will go out of production. Younger folks like to shoot centerfire semi-auto pistols, surplus rifles, inlines and rimfires.
Guys who really want to spend the money will buy the U.S.F.A.'s or other high end European repro.'s. Ruger will find a way cut into the European or other gun lines where they have either lost to the competition in the past, or are doing well and are on the verge of doing even better.
The U.S.F.A is about to take off at 2 or 3 times the price and Ruger is turning off the faucet.
Yet Ruger just announced a new 10/22 pistol to cut into the benchrest pistol .22 specialty "custom" market at 1/2 the specialty "custom" price.
Who can compete against the 1/2 price that the Italians charge for their reproductions?
Just look at nearly all of the TC sidelocks that have been discontinued while Lyman/Investarms and what marketplace is left goes to Traditions/Ardesa to fill the void of a shrinking traditional BP rifle market. Who really wants or needs to pay double or triple the price for an American made sidelock rifle now days anyway?
At least when the inlines came onto the marketplace, it was dominated by America's Knight and TC rifles.
It's all a competition/strategy thing. Now Ruger will start to cut into some other gun maker's line of business to make up for any loss of market share even more.
Ruger stopped making a modern .22 DA revolver, while S&W and Taurus both have 9 or 10 shot revolvers in their line up. You know what people pay for a S&W 10 shot .22 revolver? They're close to $700!
That's what I expect Ruger to come out with soon, a new high capacity .22 revolver. With the high cost of ammo, .22's are one of the most popular calibers right now.
Shooting BP revolvers is getting more and more expensive, so people buy the cheaper Italian repro. imports and switching to cheaper rimfire guns & ammo too.
Inlines aren't cheap to shoot, but people hunt with them and can still buy the basic Spanish models for much less money.
So it's the buying public who really decides which guns are going out of style and will go out of production. Younger folks like to shoot centerfire semi-auto pistols, surplus rifles, inlines and rimfires.
Guys who really want to spend the money will buy the U.S.F.A.'s or other high end European repro.'s. Ruger will find a way cut into the European or other gun lines where they have either lost to the competition in the past, or are doing well and are on the verge of doing even better.
- Status
