MachIVshooter
Member
I'm thinking their estimate on AR numbers is close to a decade out of date. There have probably been 5 million sold or built in the last 5 years alone. AR popularity absolutely exploded after the ban sunset.
Ruger's AR 556
- Thread starter TarDevil
- Start date
- Status
I'm thinking their estimate on AR numbers is close to a decade out of date. There have probably been 5 million sold or built in the last 5 years alone. AR popularity absolutely exploded after the ban sunset.
henschman
Member
I wouldn't buy one. They don't list the materials or testing, so you can bet that it uses something lower grade than 5150 steel in the barrel, that it isn't chrome lined or nitrided, and that it isn't high pressure tested or magnetic particle inspected; and something lower grade than Carpenter 158 and HPT/MPI for the bolt, and 8620 for the carrier. In my experience if it had these features, they would advertise them. When they don't, it is almost certain that they are using substandard stuff. I also don't like how heavy the barrel profile is... you can bet it will be front-heavy. Plus I don't like carbine-length gas on a 16" barrel.
But of course as y'all have been discussing, it isn't marketed toward the serious AR buyer who is wanting a rifle for hard use and serious purposes... it is meant for the "low-information gun buyer" that makes up much of the gun-buying public, and a category that all of us once fit into. It will be interesting to see how it does.
But of course as y'all have been discussing, it isn't marketed toward the serious AR buyer who is wanting a rifle for hard use and serious purposes... it is meant for the "low-information gun buyer" that makes up much of the gun-buying public, and a category that all of us once fit into. It will be interesting to see how it does.
They do list the materials
http://ruger-hosted.s3.amazonaws.com/email/8500-Sell-Mt92d8ha1p5g.pdf
...and you meant 4150 steel not 5150....I already posted they use 4140 steel..just like the S&W M&P 15 Sport and the S&W M&P 15 Tactical
they use 9310 steel on the bolt, just like the JP Enterprises High Performance bolt. It is shot peened and PT tested
They stated that the barrel is PT tested...
Buzznrose
Member
Not true IMO...I think their price point will be a huge eye catcher. I agree, it's not a "better mousetrap", but for folks looking for an 'inexpensive, quality mousetrap", it's priced $200-$300 less than its competition.
My biggest question to SR leadership regarding this rifle is really just "why in the world didn't you make it with a mid-length gas system? Otherwise, it's a great gun for under $600
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
This accusation has ZERO basis in reality. Do you really think Ruger would buy magazines from Magpul and then copy their rear sight? Whatever your issue is with Ruger, it is blinding you to the truth.
You do understand that a great many of Ruger's firearms had to be designed to be compatible with investment casting? Anyone who says Ruger has not been innovative in design is either completely ignorant of their history or has an axe to grind. Or both.
Ruger builds a better KelTec than KelTec does. Period. No laws were broken. Get over it. A thousand different companies produce AR's and 1911's, yet we need to burn Ruger at the stake for copying the KelTec??? Get a grip.I'm sure that very few here are using IBM PC's. Same concept. IBM invented the PC but they did not copyright it. Now a thousand makers produce PC's based on the IBM design. Nobody cares.
I guess I just don't understand the need some people have to bash Ruger at every turn and often for imagined grievances.
chicharrones
needs more ammo
USBP379
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 709
[emoji1]Well, lookie there. With some parts already changed out, too.
I'm curious to see what other handguards will fit. So far I have tried several different plastic handguards to include Colt M4 with the double heat shield and they've all fit without issue. And, as can be seen in my photo, the Troy 7" drop-in quad rail fits just fine.
If I can find a good deal on either the Troy Delta or the VTAC Delta I'll buy one and give it a try. Maybe I'll scour GunBroker, Bud's, etc today to see what I can find.
Welding Rod
Member
Finally a gun where a standard Ruger trigger pull won't seem so out of place.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
According to the marketing material I read, they felt the carbine length offered better balance and weight.
USBP379
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 709
I disagree. Moving the gas block and accompanying parts another few inches down the barrel might change the balance point but it wouldn't add more weight. Not really anyway. The additional 2" of gas tube and plastic handguard wouldn't add up to anything most people would notice.
I mainly think Ruger should have used a mid-length system to help set the AR-556 apart from the Oracle, Sportical, etc. Everybody's entry level gun is carbine length so there's no option for those who might want something different.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Some folks are picking a big bunch of fly poop out of not much pepper.
USBP379
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 709
True. But I think Ruger could have included the mid-length gas system and a chromed bore without a dramatic increase in price. I think a nicely formatted rifle that retails for $799 and sells for $629ish in most shops would still be a hit. Wouldn't most consumers pay an extra $25-$50 for chrome lining?
Just one guy's opinion...
herkyguy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 1,409
Just out of curiosity, what did you pick it up for?
USBP379
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 709
I don't want to disclose dealer pricing. Let's just say you shouldn't have too much trouble finding one for $575 with a little shopping around. I imagine we'll eventually see these on dealer's shelves for $560 or so once the newness wears off.
HoosierQ
Member
For what probably 80% of AR owners want, I suspect this fits the bill nicely. The other 20% are folks that make the AR such an interesting platform. These folks are the AR-15 hobbyists! This is no dig. What a great hobby! More power to you all. Simply put, Ruger made this rifle for the more generic AR-15 buyer, quite frankly the guy like me, who wants one for a good price, that will shoot well at the range and in the field, and who may from time to time upgrade a component or two. I fulfilled my purchase desire with the S&W M&P15 Sport. This offers two additional features: The dust cover and the forward assist. I wish S&W had split the difference and put a dust cover on just like the first generation of M-16. I am, however, no less happy with my purchase and won't be getting one of these. My next AR, if there is one, will be a rifle of more interest to the hobbyist.
The Ruger sight is clearly a different sight than the MBUS. They have it for sell individually in their online store. It looks similar to the MBUS and copies some of the features (but lacks the dual apertures). However, saying it is a wholehearted MBUS copy is like saying every plastic sight is a copy of the MBUS.
http://shopruger.com/Ruger-Rapid-Deploy-Rear-Sight/productinfo/90415/
It has been my experience that there is a wide chasm between a rifle selling above and below $600. $560 means you paid about $500 for it, $629 means you paid more than $600...that is why things are priced at $9.95, rather than $10.
For someone just getting into a modern sporting rifle, a mid-length gas system and chrome lined bore's impact on pricing would be a huge negative.
$50 extra on 10k pieces would be half a $million you could have saved
USBP379
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 709
Again, I disagree. But that's only with price being the ultimate motivator.
If I were shopping for an AR and there were two similarly priced models on the shelf, I would likely buy the one that represents the best investment of my money. Ruger saw some of this in their decision to go with a 1x8 twist and using conventional uppers and lowers that include forward assists and dust covers and pinned trigger guards. These are a step in the right direction and are something missing on many of the entry AR's.
Spending an extra $15-$20 (and passing the increased cost to the consumer at $30-$40) would have yielded a rifle that was still affordable but not a budget Wal-Mart product.
Anyway, it is all for naught at this point. But who knows? Maybe Ruger has plans for a "professional" level rifle at some point down the road.
For the vast number of buyers, that is the ultimate motivator.
You're looking at the wrong end of the market. They are marketing to people who look at the bottom line...who would choose the $9.95 item over the $10 item. That is why MagPul still offers their MOE stock when they have the CTR in their lineup...$20
Using your example, Wal-Mart has built an empire from an understanding of, "Better is the enemy of Good Enough"
USBP379
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 709
You and I are on the same page. I am just saying I think Ruger has made a product that really doesn't separate itself from the pack.
I speculate that Ruger could have made a product that offered a few more features above and beyond those offered by the competition without pricing the new gun too far above where it is now.
Don't get me wrong. This gun will sell and it will sell well based on name recognition and price.
Hammer forged barrel, and the proprietary delta ring. I think they should have nitrided the barrel at least.
I am kind of wondering how companies like Daniel Defense and Bravo Company are going to fare now that the AR market has kind of reached saturation. I guess Daniel Defense has its military contracts.
In the world of Toyotas and Hondas, there are always people who will want a BMW or a Porsche.
They live in the part of the market that folks, who don't want to build their own, can upgrade the quality of their rifles
Except that DD and BCM are reliable
I build my own and still use DD and BCM parts.
I was talking more about a couple of gun companies who only sell ARs, AR accessories and nothing else. Daniel Defense obviously has a lot of capital tied up in machines like hammer forges.
- Status
