Most durable centerfire repeating handgun

Status
Not open for further replies.
Right - so referencing non-Ruger models as a retort to a statement about Ruger revolvers...

The Wrangler has 7 total screws, just like the Vaqueros, New Vaqueros, and fixed sight Single 6’s. 5 grip frame screws, an ejector housing screw, and a basepin retainer (which is a screw and nut). BH’s and SBH’s have 2-3 additional screws - rear sight attachment screw, rear sight windage screw, and front sight attachment screw. I’ve never seen a basepin retainer come loose, not sure how or why it would. ERH screws do come loose, and ERH’s come off, simple fix. For the 5 grip frame screws, only ONE is functional to the action - functionally, however, three of the other 4 could completely fall out and the revolver would still operate just fine. Even losing the special grip screw which retains the hammer pin, the pin will simply walk, not likely fall out without the shooter noticing, and the revolver will still run fine. These seize more often than come loose. The front sight screw does come loose, and front sights do fall off, again, a simple fix. The rear sight screw and the windage screw have spring loaded detents, and I’ve never seen one come loose on its own. I’ve seen more Glock front sights fall out than SBH/BH front sights - and folks are typically far more readily equipped to tighten a slotted screw than they are to retighten a Glock front sight.

Nothing is infinitely durable, but there’s simply far too little involved inside a Ruger New Model Single Action revolver which can go wrong or which DOES go wrong, even with sustained/prolonged use. The transfer bar is really the only point of weakness in the New Model design which I can say represents a critical failure point with a service life lower than any feasible round count.

Most of the “service work” I have ever seen for Ruger NM SA revolvers have been the common, “I took this apart and can’t get it back together,” or “I want customization/action work done.” Actual repairs have been exceptionally rare, even in high round count revolvers. By design. Semiautos simply have too many additional parts, springs, stress, and wear points - they can outlast multiple owners, but going to the absurd, there’s simply less which can and does go wrong with Ruger NM SA’s.
 
Years ago, I asked the biggest rental range in the area which of the guns they rented were the most durable. He said the Glocks did well although they would occasionally break a trigger spring, but that the winners were the Ruger centerfire autopistols. He said they just keep working and nothing on them ever breaks. This was back before Ruger started making the newer designs like the P345, so that assessment probably only goes up through the P97 on the original P-Series pistols.

Despite a rather uncommon design, which always seemed like it SHOULD be finicky, I’m not surprised at all by this - the old P series pistols were/are exceptionally reliable and durable. I still get calls and messages from past students and customers fairly frequently asking about P Series pistols they find at other shops for sale - great prices on “Like New” pistols which are 15+ years old. None are truly “like new,” but man, it’s sure hard to tell! I’m down to only one P series pistol left, a KP97DC which has something on the order of 30,000 rounds through it (haven’t shot it much in the last ~10yrs). I bought it new in 2000 for $230 after rebate. I’ve ran Glocks as hard as that P97, and even harder, but I have replaced far more parts in the Glocks and have had far more malfunctions.

The P345 was an exceptionally disappointing addition to the P-Series. I remain sad to consider it part of the legacy.
 
Patently false.

Steel and alloy frames crack with use too. You just don’t see people pointing it out as often or in the same way as the Fudd’s pointing at fatigue failures in polymer pistols. Folks trying to justify their unsubstantiated biases for metal frames will ignore reality and point at LESSER rates of failure in polymer guns as if were pandemic.

Steel and alloys will "work harden" over time due to the hot/cold cycles they go through. A pistol made from low grade steel/alloys being ran hard all the time (to the point the slide /barrel is too hot to touch) would worry me. Most manufacturers use high grade steel/alloys with a proper heat treat so you don't have to worry about that. I would not run an old "Saturday Night Special" hard and expect it to last.

Like I said in my earlier post, I personally do not count springs failures when considering the durability of a gun. Springs are wear items. Now if a spring gives out prematurely, then I would start to question the overall quality of at least the small parts used.

I have talked about some of the high round count reliability threads by Henderson Defense/Battlefield Vegas over at AR15.com. I have never linked directly to any of them since I did not want to cross link to other forums without permission. I would suggest checking out AR15.com to read all of the high round count posts by Henderson Defense. The posts are long but worth the time to read. IF anyone will wear out any type of fireman it will be them.
 
Patently false.

Steel and alloy frames crack with use too. You just don’t see people pointing it out as often or in the same way as the Fudd’s pointing at fatigue failures in polymer pistols. Folks trying to justify their unsubstantiated biases for metal frames will ignore reality and point at LESSER rates of failure in polymer guns as if were pandemic.
We haven't seen a polymer gun that's a century old yet, so it's NOT false. And you don't seem to even understand my statement.

Durability isn't just how much you can shoot something, it's also how long it will last overall. You can take a steel framed gun and put it up, properly stored, and a century later (or much longer), it will function as intended, safely. Might need new springs. We DON'T know how that polymer frame will be, in a hundred years, or 2 hundred. Polymers degrade. This is taken from a site on polymers, not related to firearms:
All polymers will undego some degradation during service life. The result will be a steady decline in their (mechanical) properties caused by changes to the molecular weight and molecular weight distribution and composition of the polymer. Other possible changes include:

  • Embrittlement (chain hardening)
  • Softening (chain scission)
  • Color changes
  • Cracking and charring (weight loss)
I've seen antiques from the 20's and 30's, not firearms, that become very brittle to the touch, despite not being exposed to harsh conditions. Metal objects from the same period, such as tools, stored in less forgiving environments, look good as new. My grandfather had a set of half inch and 1 inch Snap-On sockets and ratchets that still work great. They've always been kept in a shop, protected from rain but not in the air-conditioning. They spent the first 50 years in the Catskills in NY, the past 50 in south Louisiana. If I need a socket in that size, I still reach for one of them before a newer set, and never a problem. And I don't baby them, I treat them like any other tool- clean/wipe it down and back in the box.

In contrast, we've had some things like radios, phones etc, that we DID keep indoors, put away as keepsakes. The radio's plastic casing crumbled a bit upon handling, so we try not to touch it much. Even though it was taken care of, you see some "dry-rot", for lack of a better description.

I'm sure there have been advances, but I still don't know that I'd trust picking up a Glock in 2188 and shooting it. I wouldn't have the same concern about a 5906. Not that I'd be around then, but you get the point.
 
If you don't consider replacing springs as a durability issue---it is like saying---I have a hammer that will last forever, all I do is change the head or the handle once in a while.
 
If you don't consider replacing springs as a durability issue---it is like saying---I have a hammer that will last forever, all I do is change the head or the handle once in a while.

I don't as long as the springs last as long as the manufacturer designed them to last. I look at recoil springs like brake pads and tires on a vehicle, they are wear items that need changed on a regular basis. Just my opinion and I'm sure others will disagree with me. Now if the springs wear out prematurely, then yes there is an issue.
 
I don't as long as the springs last as long as the manufacturer designed them to last. I look at recoil springs like brake pads and tires on a vehicle, they are wear items that need changed on a regular basis. Just my opinion and I'm sure others will disagree with me. Now if the springs wear out prematurely, then yes there is an issue.
I agree, the springs are the 'weakest' link in ALL firearms. That said, if they are made of the proper alloy and properly engineered they will last A LONG TIME with normal use.
12 Bravo 20, my last MOS was 18C40, which was changed from 12B4S when SF got their own MOS.:cool:
 
I wonder why it is that so many environmental agencies warn us about the build up of non-degrading polymers in landfills, but nobody seems too terribly concerned about metals... c’mon fellas, this is freshman year materials stuff...
 
I'd guess a Glock 17 or 19 ... one of the 9mms.
Right behind it I'd put a Ruger Blackhawk, guessing that a .357 will outlast a .44 magnum with regard to MTBF.

I vaguely remember an article from many years ago about a torture test of a Ruger Redhawk in .44 magnum. I don't remember the round count, but it was impressive.
 
Glock for sure or one of the other modern service pistols because they are literally tested like that.

I think a DA revolver would last longer fired in SA. DA with heavy cylinder puts a lot of wear if fired quickly. Quick pull means more speed and more impact on the stop.
 
I don't own one, but from everything I've read BFR Magnum Research revolvers are the epitome of overbuilt single action's. A 44 mag BFR will probably last centuries.
 
I kind of take this thread not as "what gun is most durable with trips back to the armorer to replace wear items?" and more of "what gun will shoot the longest without preventative part replacement?"

There aren't many modern guns that aren't refurbishable with the right parts and talent.

Having had the Ruger P series brought up, I have to agree. I bought an old P89 years ago. That thing was an aluminum tank. My buddy bought a P95 right as they were discontinued some years ago at a gun show. Gun and 5 10 round mags for about 300 bucks. Its the only gun he owns and I dont think he's done a thing to it ahort of clean it.

I still think from a probability point, you are more likely to grab a Glock out of a box and be able to count on it working nearly indefinitely over most other pistols. As for the structural integrity of the polymer frames over a century, I still think that's up for debate. Polymer is not just one type of compound. There are thousands of blends that are manufactured to perform a specific function (some are more durable, some resist heat, some flexible, etc) I don't think any of them are DESIGNED to last 100 years without deterioration. I have no doubt a Glock pulled out of a dry basement in 2121 will most likely shoot 100,000 rounds without a hiccup. However, we pretty much KNOW how an old 1911 will behave. If you keep steel from rusting, it just stays how it is.

Im not talking about stress fractures due to shooting. I think the polymer guns most likely will outlast the steel warhorses when you pick them up and just start blasting away. The polymer just seems to vibrate the stress away instead if concentrating it to one point. Im just wondering how the polymer frames will behave given time. I dont think its going to be enough to fail or anything, but it wouldn't suprise me if a Glock from 2020 pulled out in 2120 had some sort of tacky/chalkiness to the frame. Then again, I could be wrong. Im sure it would be mostly cosmetic regardless.

That said, in said hypothetical dry basement, it may look brand new. Maybe a better test would be to leave a 1911 and Glock on the dash of a car for 100 years and see what happens. I have no idea. The sun seems to hurt everything, though.

Fun thread :)
 
I kind of take this thread not as "what gun is most durable with trips back to the armorer to replace wear items?" and more of "what gun will shoot the longest without preventative part replacement?"
Good point. There is a difference between how long a gun can be kept functional with maintenance and replacement parts and MTBF (mean time between failure).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top