Are All Current Rugers Garbage?

Well, our GP 100 .357 is quite the shooter, albeit heavy. The American Ranch in 300 Blackout is a hoot, even more so suppressed. Neither the PC carbine or the PC charger in 9mm have had any issues (though that may be due to the Glock magwells). The Ruger Wrangler .22 is fun to shoot for what it is, hasn't been problematic at all. I guess my only real complaint is that the 10/22 we got (and shoot suppressed also) isn't a Marlin model 60. But hey, nobody's perfect... Maybe we just like cheap crappy guns too!

Ruger is responding to what the market wants and what the market wants is lower prices and ease of operation, modification, and field stripping. The Mark IV is an easier pistol for the average Joe to deal with vs a Mark III. I personally have no interest in the Mark series, if I want a striker fired .22 pistol built for accuracy Kel Tec makes one that holds 33 rds, can easily put an optic on the top rail, and a brace if desired.

As for other Ruger autoloading pistols... I think the SR22 is a very good, more carryable pistol and have no complaints. The LCP is probably the best selling .380 in the world right now, the Security 9 is Ruger trying (and failing) to compete with Taurus G2's and G3's, and the American pistol is a robust gun, but has totally flopped to gain any traction in the market and is not as likeable as the SR series was.

I feel if Ruger wants to have more of an impact in the pistol market, they should update the P series and bring it back.

They aint what they used to be, but are still better than today's S&W.

Ruger will always be near and dear to my heart....


But their pistols suck... Well not really, but they aren't ever the "complete package"

- P series were cool and reliable... But we chunky bricks and unrefined
- SR series handled great, but take down and controls were outdated before it was released
- American series had some cool features, but execution is rough and the thing looks like it was designed for an 80's dystopian movie

I've owned a bunch of the above, but never keep any long term. Great budget guns, but I would like to have a solid offering that didn't have severe compromises in one way or another.

Ruger is one of the few American gun companies that is offering price-competitive products w a stellar warranty that is capable of competing w cheaper import products.

In a world that focuses on low cost / high profit margin AR and Glock polymer derivatives that have saturated the market, Ruger is making these as well as Ruger Hawkeye Safari rifles, Single Shot rifles, single action Vaqueros / Blackhawks, SA Wranglers / Single Sixes, and Marlin levers guns for instance.

Ruger has a very strong CCW pistol market presence while making precision long range chassis rifles. Ruger is dominating the PCC market while still fielding a highly competitive AR competing design. Ruger is making pocket .22 SR22 blasters while making Bullseye grade target pistols w suppressor ready muzzles. Who else can do this?

Winchester / Browning outsourced nearly all manufacturing to Japan and Turkey. SW comes close w highly evolved revolvers, a very highly developed CCW and Duty Service Pistol lineup, and an AR clone. CZ makes a wide portfolio 1/3 of which is Turkish Huglu outsourced. On the foreign import realm Beretta makes many high end shotguns, Cowboy SAA import clones, w a widely varied pistol market w 3-4 designs such as the PX4 duty, 84/85 .380 CCW, Bobcat / Tomcat series, 87 .22 target, and 92 derivative pistols but minimal rifle or PCC presence. And yes, a good percentage are made in the US. Only Keltec has had the innovation and low American manufacturing cost to compete but not nearly the market presence or volume.

Ruger all but owned the premium BP Cap / Ball market w the Old Army, only cheaper Italian pistols could compete.

My opinion, the Ruger SR pistol series was one of the best duty pistols ever made. Three years ago $200-250 could buy a NIB example at closeout prices. Their only weak design was tiny sights and a full saturated and mature pistol market in 2007. They were offering a true Glock / SW competitor at half the price!

To bring this post back to the Autoloading Pistol forum, Ruger is now making CCW products that the American consumer is demanding that Bill Ruger refused to do in his lifetime.

Speaking mostly on the MKIV, I think they are a joke. They are thrown together knowing most that a serious shooters are going to spend a few more hundred to make the trigger usable.

I have to agree, the MKII is the best of the bunch.

After having six of my last seven Rugers needing to go back to Ruger before they could be shot, I’m very leery of then. They have hardly any new ideas, just copying old Kel Tec designs mostly. The SR and American were 15-25 years too late to make an impact. The Security 9 is so behind a G3 Series pistol, I put it in a Saturday Night Special category.

Need to stop giving Ruger a pass because of the “old days”. They aren’t that company anymore.

Skylerbone said:

My point is that I’ve yet to get a lemon or poor shooter as is so often alluded to. I’m getting better accuracy with my new Rugers than I ever witnessed with my older ones or other examples I have shot.

Click to expand...

You can't say that here!!!!!!!!!!
EVERYTHING was better back then.

I like my Mark IV, after dropping about $200 improving it.

I have the whole series. Each generation was 1½ steps forward, and one step backward. So there is an incremental improvement, if you're willing to do a little tinkering.

As far as accuracy goes they probably are as accurate as the old ones. I have old ones and new ones. My old security 6 will far outlast my GP100.
I think their design is good, the quality of the steel has been cheapened up.
My GP100 needs to be sent in for a new barrel, accuracy has gone to crap in it due to the face of the forcing cone being all burned up.
And yes, I did call Ruger about it and all the Ruger fans were all flabbergasted when I told them Ruger's response.

They pretty much said they didn't care, a new barrel will cost this amount to fix it, plus shipping.

I don't buy new Rugers anymore, I have old Smith & Wesson's that I shot the crap out of and the forcing cones on them look like new yet with the same ammo that I make.

I have a SP101 that has maybe 500 rounds through it and most of them were low powered lead loads that I cast myself and the forcing cone on it is starting to chip up and burn lines across the face of it now.

Just cheap steel in my eyes. Something has changed at Ruger. My old Security Six is still looks good.
My new Model 57 has been shot more than the Sp101 and with magnum loads and the forcing cone face still looks good on it, pretty much perfect.
I don't know how long it will stay that way.

So I have resigned myself to buying older used guns, Smiths or Rugers, that will stand the test of time rather than give me 4 or 5 years of good accuracy than go to crap.
We had better enjoy the glut of good, used, quality guns on the market now because when they are gone, they are gone for good.

In today's market, I don't know if Ruger or Smith and Wesson for that matter, can afford to build that kind of quality anymore and still compete for our business with all the cheap imports that are dumped on our market.

So I don't necessarily fault either of the companies for having to compete, but I get tired of hearing how good Ruger is when I know they aren't what they used to be.
Yes, your new Ruger's are accurate for now, but chances are if you shoot them a lot like I do, you won't be handing them down to your kids, you will be trading them off for another cheap made gun that is the flavor of the day.

But it is what it is.

I'll make my answer pretty short and sweet. People have have opinions and you know what opinions are like. Everyone has both. I have Rugers dating from the early '60's to recently. Except for the two 10/22s they have been good and I intended the 10/22s to extensively reworked when I bought them. The internet and youtube is rife with BS and hot air. It's up to you to sort it out.

I think I own more Rugers than any other make.

I've had... I dunno, maybe 20 over the years.

None of the new ones had a factory defect that I noticed.

Of the used guns, one had two missing parts, and the rest were fine.

I don't like all of the Rugers. The SP101 almost always has a bad trigger. The GP100 is clumsier than the Smiths. I disliked my SR22 intensely.

The quality of the newer ones doesn't seem much different than the older ones.

For instance, because I am stupid I bought a "newish" SP101 recently. The last one I'd owned was made in the 90's. The two revolver sucked equally. They don't fit my hand well. The trigger has a long stiff travel. I can barely hit anything shooting them double action. But they both went bang every time. The newer one even has a slightly better trigger.

Ruger seems to be doing a decent job lately, IMHO. If someone doesn't like the Mark IV, they can always just buy a used Mark II.

I own a lot of guns from alot of different manufacturers. I have had issues with Taurus semiautos, both Ruger, and S&W revolvers, and my Colt Commander.
Any mass produced mechanical device can have issues. All of my issues were resolved, weather by me or the factory.
This is just to say that I don't think Ruger has any more or less issues than any other manufacturer, but people have to complain about something.
It wasn't that long ago that it was considered sacrilegious to say anything negative about anything made by Ruger.
It must be their turn to get bashed this month. Whatever......next month they will be back bashing the S&W for the Hillary hole.
I just buy what I like anyway.
Indeed there is a new Ruger in my very near future. I hope it doesn't fall apart by the end of the first mag!

Have shot the mki, mkii, mkiii and a little bit of the mkiv. They all seem to shoot the same.

The bolt not holding open on the last shot on the mki series doesn't bother me that much. The lci and mag disconnect on the mkiii didn't bother me much either. I'd be happy with any of them. I'm shooting far more than cleaning, so breaking it down is not a big deal.

If there were 4 like model rugers sitting in a shop, but just a differt mk series, I'd just go for the cheapest one.

James Fonteneaux said:

Well, our GP 100 .357 is quite the shooter, albeit heavy. The American Ranch in 300 Blackout is a hoot, even more so suppressed. Neither the PC carbine or the PC charger in 9mm have had any issues (though that may be due to the Glock magwells). The Ruger Wrangler .22 is fun to shoot for what it is, hasn't been problematic at all. I guess my only real complaint is that the 10/22 we got (and shoot suppressed also) isn't a Marlin model 60. But hey, nobody's perfect... Maybe we just like cheap crappy guns too!

Click to expand...

The Marlin 60 has a junk trigger mechanism that’s a pinned together sheet metal mess. Very little that can be done with it other than the chore of replacing springs, which does nothing for the gritty feeling of them.

Ruger is just like every other firearm mfg. Some are good, some have thier issues. The last 3 I've bought have been fine: American Predator .308 so far is awesome, Pcc 9mm carbine is great, 10/22 Takedown has been flawless. So have my other 10/22s.
Lcp was fine for what it is.

My 22/45 lite had a few feeding issues that were more ammo and mag problem than the gun.

The last 5.56 I bought was a headache until I worked the bugs out.

I could say similar things about S&W, Savage, Win, or just about any others.

I wouldn't go so far as to call them "garbage" but I don't feel they're as well made as they use to be. With both my Mk.II and my SR9c I think have two of the better built guns Ruger has turned out in the past 30 years or so. Don't really care all that much for any of the old P Series, nor do I think all that highly of the present day Security 9 and the Ruger American Pistol.

Nowadays the only semi-autos in the Ruger line-up that catch my interest are the Max-9, LCP Max, and the SR1911.

Can't speak for the MkIV but I have two MkIII's and they have been nothing but flawless and reliable. My MkIII Target has shot many, many thousand rounds of bulk. Take down is not a problem once learned. I deleted the LCI on both my Target and Hunter, but that was more for aesthetics, as it has never given me any problems.

Ok. How about an inflammatory response to the question.

Nearly everything made in the last 30 years has been garbage, from any manufacturer spanning across all industries.

Yeah, that was a bit hyperbolic but the reasons folks nitpick at Ruger are same reasons folks nitpick about a lot of manufactured goods.

More to the point. I own a MKII. I got the MKII because between research and a bit of first hand experience, I believe it to be the best of the bunch. I HATE superfluous doo dads. That is why I buy pre-lock Smiths and other firearms that are generally older than I am. The last 20-30 years has been the era of superfluous doo dads. Be it automobiles or firearms.

I want no nonsense shooting tools built as ruggedly and simply as possible. Things built to a standard. Not built to a price point. Not built for planned obsolescence. Not built around a question no one asked. Not built to a liability lawyers standards.

I understand there are flaws in my wants and needs as it pertains to a large company trying to sell as many products as possible. I get it. I don’t have to like it and I don’t have to buy any of those products I see unfit for my wants and needs. Ruger and many other manufacturers are not providing for my needs nowadays so that is why I prefer the MKII.

The 10/22 is BP just another semi auto 22 to me. From what I understand, they are better now than they ever have been.

Ruger is very well known for the last decade or more to push out more defective product than usual compared to other gun makers. I’m sure they did a cost benefit analysis and found that is a few more products are defective and they have to fix them they can make up for it on the other end with sales volume and a less expensive price point. An interesting side of Capitalism when a populace has certain priorities.

One more anecdote. The only brand new complete firearm I have ever purchased was a Ruger American Ranch rifle. Shot patterns at 50 yds. Sent it back to Ruger and it came back shooting holes that touch at 100. I’m happy but my eyes are still rolling hard that there could be so much variance in products that make it out their door.

My last few new Rugers had some small issues. Loose front slide blade on my one black hawk. Roll pins walking on my MK4. The RAR i just got has been fine so far.

I've had 3 Ruger semi-autos. My first was a .40 caliber P94. It was reliable as anything. I don't shoot it much these days but I keep it around for sentimental reasons. I did a lot of learning with that pistol. My second is a SR-1911. No functional issue other than having to adjust extractor tension. I like it. The third was bought for my wife's use. It is a Ruger American pistol. It hasn't been shot a lot but it is a decent gun. Large & heavy but I bought it because she doesn't like recoil so a large heavy 9 with interchangeable backstraps seemed to make sense.
The Security 9 doesn't interest me. The way it is made reminds me too much of a Kel-Tec P-11 I used to have. I wanted to like the SR series pistols but the magazine disconnect safety was a deal breaker for me. I wanted a MK series pistol & I wouldn't turn my nose up at one but I wound up with a Buckmark because I got a really good deal on one.
I have no experience with Ruger revolvers or rifles other than getting to shoot a friends PC9 Carbine. I liked it a lot.
I am okay with Ruger as I haven't had a bad experience with one of their guns but I try to assess each model I am interested in on its own merits. I guess I'm not much of a brand loyalist.
FWIW the only brand firearm I've had a bad experience with was S&W. I did manage to get that pistol to run but it wasn't their fault. I am not saying I'll never buy another S&W but if I do a lot of pre purchase research will be involved.

They work, and come in at a price point under the competition, so - I own more Rugers than I would like, but - often they are the best option for a buyer.

tightgroup tiger said:

We had better enjoy the glut of good, used, quality guns on the market now because when they are gone, they are gone for good.

Click to expand...

Older guns have soul because they were assembled by hand labor and depended on the skill of the artisans making them. New guns -- at least the ones coming off CNC robotic machines -- lack soul but are precision instruments. The new Marlins that Ruger has just started producing are evidently shockingly accurate. I don't see why new Ruger pistols -- made on newer equipment -- would be anything but precision instruments as well.