Local store has LCR
- Thread starter ArmedBear
- Start date
- Status
outerlimit
Member
The plastic revolver? Hahaha!
They really did go through with it... funny stuff.
They really did go through with it... funny stuff.
In all seriousness, if they couldn't undercut the 642 by $100, why even do it?
I'm not saying that the 642 is the end-all, just that, if Ruger uses a new manufacturing technique (one that everyone with half a brain knows is cheaper), then shouldn't they be able to offer the same functionality as the existing market leader, at a lower price, instead of the same functionality at a higher price?
Isn't that the whole point of manufacturing innovation?
Isn't that how you become the new market leader?
Would the Remington 870 have been more than a humorous footnote if it cost more than the dominant but expensive Model 12 at the time of its introduction?
What about the Glock? Many sneer at the fact that the Glock commands a 400% markup over its production cost, but the fact is, it still undercuts most reliable auto pistols -- and when it was introduced, it offered superior function and reliability to its competition while undercutting the competition. The only reason for any shift in this picture is that the competition was forced to step up and compete with Glock to stay afloat.
I'm not saying that the 642 is the end-all, just that, if Ruger uses a new manufacturing technique (one that everyone with half a brain knows is cheaper), then shouldn't they be able to offer the same functionality as the existing market leader, at a lower price, instead of the same functionality at a higher price?
Isn't that the whole point of manufacturing innovation?
Isn't that how you become the new market leader?
Would the Remington 870 have been more than a humorous footnote if it cost more than the dominant but expensive Model 12 at the time of its introduction?
What about the Glock? Many sneer at the fact that the Glock commands a 400% markup over its production cost, but the fact is, it still undercuts most reliable auto pistols -- and when it was introduced, it offered superior function and reliability to its competition while undercutting the competition. The only reason for any shift in this picture is that the competition was forced to step up and compete with Glock to stay afloat.
Last edited:
Hawk
Member
Ruger did undercut Smith & Wesson: 525.00 vs. 600.00.
Does the dealer discount other Ruger MSRP's or does his Ruger product go for full list?
I've seen some dealers discount S&W's MSRPs more than Rugers so the question isn't all that facetious. If he runs Ruger MSRP and S&W discounted I can't see much incentive for the LCR.
But it's more likely there's just a little early production profiteering going on.
Does the dealer discount other Ruger MSRP's or does his Ruger product go for full list?
I've seen some dealers discount S&W's MSRPs more than Rugers so the question isn't all that facetious. If he runs Ruger MSRP and S&W discounted I can't see much incentive for the LCR.
But it's more likely there's just a little early production profiteering going on.
Madcap_Magician
Member
The Ruger's big selling points are less the polymer trigger housing and more the improved trigger pull and the higher position of the grip on the frame. Reviews so far seem to be comparing its trigger pull to a J-frame with a trigger job.
tackleberi
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2006
- Messages
- 182
$429 in central Connecticut, two shops.
PotatoJudge
Member
On the Ruger forum there are reports of shops selling them for $400, which is about where I think the NIB price will settle. For $400 new, a better grip, and a better trigger than a S&W J they're in the game with a solid product.
WardenWolf
member
Don't forget half the weight.
MCgunner
Member
Chachinnnnnnng. I'll keep the Taurus, thanks. I'm not averse to the gun, just too much ante. For 400, if I needed a snubby .38, yeah, I'd consider it along with the competition.
13.5 oz. vs. 15 oz.?
LOL
I know of no dealer that sells anything for full list, other than low-priced accessories involving velcro.
The LCR was sitting next to a 3-screw Blackhawk, marked $300, if that means anything to anyone.
It's only fair to compare it to a current 642 (I've felt some old J-frame DA triggers that were pretty bad). I pulled the 642 out of my pocket, emptied it, and dry-fired it a few times to make sure I was not imagining things. It's not as smooth as my 40-year-old Model 10, but it's a damn nice DA trigger -- surprising, actually. Current S&W triggers feel pretty good. I'm not saying the Ruger doesn't feel great, but while any gun could probably be improved, my bone-stock 642 really doesn't feel like it needs a trigger job.
If it really does come in at 20% less than a 642, and it feels at least as good, or better, when someone handles it at the store, the LCR should have a great future. But not at 20% more.
We'll see.
Last edited:
Fat Boy
Member
I believe waiting will prove beneficial as far as price is concerned. On quality, I think Ruger is as good as it gets. Maybe not finesse, polish, etc, but good quality and durability- Just my 2 cents, YMMV
dirt_j00
Member
$399 at Gulf States in Montgomery. Had several on the counter for sale (8+).
$399 bodes well for Ruger.
WRT quality, that may be true, though fit and finish on the same 642 is flawless. Remember, though, that this Ruger isn't built using the same techniques as they've been using to make revolvers since the 1950s, and upon which Ruger's reputation is based.
Time will tell whether this gun is as good as a Blackhawk or GP100 -- and of course it could be even better.
WRT quality, that may be true, though fit and finish on the same 642 is flawless. Remember, though, that this Ruger isn't built using the same techniques as they've been using to make revolvers since the 1950s, and upon which Ruger's reputation is based.
Time will tell whether this gun is as good as a Blackhawk or GP100 -- and of course it could be even better.
The gun is new. I'm sure some dealers are asking more than MSRP and getting it these days. Normally (not in these times), I see Rugers going for 80% or less off MSRP. That would bring the gun down to about $400 or less once the supply gets around.
Hawk
Member
With, of course, the obvious exception of the LCR which is evidently tagged at full boat MSRP discounted not one penny from Ruger's 525.00
Profiteering on low supply.
Patience should be worth about 125.00 in this specific case. If the guy were my dealer I'd be looking for a another dealer.
Free market disclaimer: I'm all for the guy having the right to mark it at MSRP or higher, I just don't particularly like it and I have a LOT of dealers that won't do it locally - just exercising my right to choose.
bdg146
Member
I respect ruger for their quick and well-handled recalls. Better than reading about a recall on a pistol that's been on the market several years ***coughS&WPPKsThatWereManufacturedIn2002cough***
Their recalls have only received more attention because they've been on new products.
I'm sure this has been discussed elsewhere, but I wonder why they didn't also chamber the LCR in .327. Seems if they want that caliber to succeed, they'd push it.
Given that Ruger needs to produce a bunch of these things quickly, and with impeccable quality, to make this a meaningful market intro, I'm sure they figured that just running the production line for a single spec, in a readily-available, trusted cartridge is the best idea (it is).
Offering the gun only in .327 would have been a bad idea -- there are many of us who wouldn't even look at it if it didn't come in .38. I'm almost certain that, when the ammo bubble bursts and we can actually buy ammo, Ruger will try to do .327. Will it work in the frame? Hard to say.
One thing Ruger learned: even if a new cartridge is objectively superior (and I'm not saying the .327 is or isn't), it's a longshot gamble that it will succeed against a much more common, multivendor, versatile chambering. Witness their now discontinued .480 Ruger chambering.
Offering the gun only in .327 would have been a bad idea -- there are many of us who wouldn't even look at it if it didn't come in .38. I'm almost certain that, when the ammo bubble bursts and we can actually buy ammo, Ruger will try to do .327. Will it work in the frame? Hard to say.
One thing Ruger learned: even if a new cartridge is objectively superior (and I'm not saying the .327 is or isn't), it's a longshot gamble that it will succeed against a much more common, multivendor, versatile chambering. Witness their now discontinued .480 Ruger chambering.
Revolver Ocelot
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,470
the only thing i like about the lcr (other then its kinda interesting from a design point) is that they gave it a tamer grip, I think it'd be a nice option on more jframes.
I won't be payin 500+ for a tamer grip anytime soon though
I won't be payin 500+ for a tamer grip anytime soon though
Revolver Ocelot
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,470
actually they brought it back as a 5 shot, though there are to many rounds with similar power that can be had more easily on more platforms to warrant getting it.
They brought it back as a 5-shot for a little while, but it is now completely gone and has been for some time. No more .480 Ruger guns are being produced at Ruger, or even listed on their website as discontinued.
Have a look: http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdRes...id=7&variation=Alaskan®&bct=Yes&type=Revolver
The .480 actually was pleasant to shoot, though. It was, objectively, a better choice than other monster magnums, for real use.
A few problems with that... Monster magnums don't seem to be bought by all that many people for real use, so it's hard to sell a cartridge based on that. The .454 was already well-established, and is compatible with the .45 Colt, whereas the .480 is compatible with the .480.
The .327 faces a very different battle. We'll have to see whether it becomes really popular, or one of the endless lists of also-rans -- AFTER the ammo bubble bursts. Right now, it's hard to say what someone might buy, since it's hard to buy anything, especially if it has to be new production. I can still get plenty of .38 Special in a gun shop if I'm willing to pay too much. A new cartridge like the .327 Federal? There's no back-stock to dig into.
It's smart for Ruger to avoid tying the fate of their big new product to something as tenuous as a new cartridge in the current ammo market.
Have a look: http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdRes...id=7&variation=Alaskan®&bct=Yes&type=Revolver
The .480 actually was pleasant to shoot, though. It was, objectively, a better choice than other monster magnums, for real use.
A few problems with that... Monster magnums don't seem to be bought by all that many people for real use, so it's hard to sell a cartridge based on that. The .454 was already well-established, and is compatible with the .45 Colt, whereas the .480 is compatible with the .480.
The .327 faces a very different battle. We'll have to see whether it becomes really popular, or one of the endless lists of also-rans -- AFTER the ammo bubble bursts. Right now, it's hard to say what someone might buy, since it's hard to buy anything, especially if it has to be new production. I can still get plenty of .38 Special in a gun shop if I'm willing to pay too much. A new cartridge like the .327 Federal? There's no back-stock to dig into.
It's smart for Ruger to avoid tying the fate of their big new product to something as tenuous as a new cartridge in the current ammo market.
lanternlad1
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2007
- Messages
- 770
Smith 642s are going for 479.00 here. Ruger has to go about 400.00 or so to get interest here. There is a guy selling one on Glocktalk for 400.00 and no one is buying. I guess they're just waiting for the recall to happen first.
- Status