Now that Bill Ruger is dead, what guns do you hope they will make?

[albanian]

Hopefully now he is dead, his politics will die with him and the new Ruger will make guns for the public and not just the LEOs. Bill Ruger once said that the average person doesn't need more than 10 rds in a gun. He also refused to make small light handguns because he didn't want the public using them as CCWs. The SP101 was intended as a LEO backup.

What should they make for the public now? What about a small single stack 9mm auto? Something like a Kahr K-9 or a SIG 239 but made like a Ruger and affordable like a Ruger. I think that would be a big hit. What about an alloy framed SP-101 or smaller revolver? How about some factory produced hi-caps for the Mini-14 and Mini-30 if the AWB sunsets?

What do you want them to make that they haven't yet? How come they haven't made a pump or semi-auto shotgun yet? That Ruger Red Lable is a tired old horse that has run it's race. Ruger could take market share away from lesser gun companies that are only in business because they are making something that people want and not because they are making a good product. Kel_tec is a great example of this, they make products that people are asking for and people really want but they make a pretty poor product. It doesn't matter because people want it, if Ruger made the p-3AT, it would probably work much better and be made better.

 

[Range Ninja]

Out of the nearly 60 guns I have owned in the past 12 years, I'm glad I never purchased a Ruger - If that is the way Mr. Ruger actually felt.

 

[BerettaNut92]

As a sign of goodwill, how about TEN round .223 mags?!?!

 

[shep854]

A 1911?

 

[boing]

As of last year's SHOT show, his politics endure:

http://www.shotshowreports.com/2003pg1.html

 

[denfoote]

Ruger's new guns!!!

Boing is exactly correct!!!
Have you seen or heard of the NEW guns Ruger has come out with???!!!
Good God!!! They have been completely lawyerfied!!!
Internal locks and safeties and all sorts of gizmos designed to get in the way of you actually using the pistol!!! :banghead:
These things are a Sara Brady wet dream!!!
I would be willing to bet that these infernal do-dads will find their way into everything Ruger makes!!
Sorry, no more Rugers for me!!!

 

[BlkHawk73]

I would be willing to bet that these infernal do-dads will find their way into everything Ruger makes!!

I would be willing to bet that it won't be long before pretty much ALL manufacturers start having these so-called infernal features. People are just all too sue happy nowadays and these features are pretty much an @ss covering when litigations start. Also, with the large markets now requiring these features, it's becoming neccessary. Whatcha gonna but when the rest of the manufacturers follow suit to survive? :banghead:

Anywyas...I'd love to see a reintroduction of the Hawkeye. A pump gun was brought up in an interview with Bill once and he replied that the pump was so greatly marketed that a new design would be need for them to market thier own. Unfortunately, with the huge catalog of products they have currently that hey have difficulty keeping a supply of, I doubt well see many new products for a while unless some additional manufacturing facility space is built.

 

[RWK]

I would love to see Ruger develop and market a STRONG, three-inch barrel, 10mm revolver (that could also fire the .40 S&W), based on the GP100.

 

[clown714]

how about a mini14 that took ar mags

how about a mini30 that took ak mags

how about a carbine for the 454 or 500s&w

just some thoughts from the clown gallery

clown

 

[lee n. field]

Full capacity magazines for everything that can take them, once the ban goes away.

Do the Mini-14 accuracy mods at the factory, so we don't have to, or come out with a Mini-14 Mark II, with decent peep sight, and scope mount, with accuracy issues addressed, and full capacity magazines.

Compact autopistol intended for concealment.

 

[nero45acp]

second an improved Mini-14!!!



nero

 

[YodaVader]

Hopefully now he is dead, his politics will die with him and the new Ruger will make guns for the public and not just the LEOs.

It was my impression that Ruger was into making guns for the public since the inception of the company. Ruger produces the largest variety of firearms of any manufacturer I know of. Their vast single action revolver line , MKII target pistols , No. 1 rifles , /RedhawkSuper Redhawk revolvers , 10/22s and Model 77 bolt actions have no LEO appeal. Bash the man all you want - I am kind of glad he decided to make guns. The guns Ruger Company produced while Bill was alive were purchased by millions of non LEO personnel. None of the cops I know carry Rugers - everyone I know that shoots usually has owned at least one Ruger. To say that Ruger does not make guns for the public is ridiculous!

 

[mtnbkr]

It could be said they make guns for shooting enthusiasts, not offensive/defensive weapons.

It's not a problem for me, but it can be for others.

Chris

 

[461]

Amen YodaVader,
Ruger came up with some damn fine guns and I've yet to get a bad one. I wonder if all these Boycotters put together have done as much for gun ownership as Bill Ruger did? I wonder if anyone on these boards has given as much to the NRA as Bill Ruger did?

If John Moses Browning were making guns today there'd be liability related safeties on his stuff too.

Shoot what you can while you can and quit hating the people who are taking the heat for building guns for you!!

 

[lawboy]

finally, someone who is making some sense. YdaVader is right. Ruger has armed an awful lot of common folks with weapons of superior quality.
I constantly hear people on this board and others harping about how greedy lawyers are raping the gun industry, about how these new locks and safeties, etc., are the devil. I cannot tell you how ignorant that stuff sounds. If anyone can name me ONE industry that makes machinery that can even accidently harm people, but where manufacturers refuse to do R&R and improve the safety of the products, I will eat my shorts. The GREAT thing about this country is that we expect anyone putting things into the stream of commerce to improve the state of the art in their field. Make things strong. Make things lighter. Make things smaller. Make things more durable. Make things SAFER. Guns are no different, should be no different, and if it takes litigation from CITIZENS (not lawyers) who have been hurt by products that were not as safe as they could have been, then god damn it, so be it. I am an NRA member. I am a contributing author to some gun magazines. I how a slew of guns. I shoot WEEKLY, often several times a week. So don't think I am some anti-gun putz. But people, the bottom line is, it is simply unsophisticated, ignorant thinking that says keep making dangerous items with the design technology of 100 years ago, when we have much safer design technology today. I mean, come on!
Respectfully.
--lawboy

p.s. some will say that it is greedy lawyers fueling the lawsuits, and that folks who did stupid things should not be paid. Well, I know some of those lawyers who did get rich suing gun companies. They turn down tons of cases where the injured party did something stupid. They were not being high minded when they did it. There is a thing called comparative negligence in the law. This is where more than one person had some fault in causing the accident, usually the plaintiff and defendent. when the plaintiff's actions are so stupid that is percentage of the fault is high, most attorneys won't take the case because the damages then are too low to bother. The law is like that for a reason ... to prevent frivilous personal injury suits.

 

[Checkman]

I own a Ruger GP100 and I'm not getting rid of it. I didn't always agree with Bill Ruger, but he was not an enemy of gunowners. If he had any real fault(?) it was that he was political.

In the early 90's things were looking pretty bleak for us - remember? Bush senior had turned against us, the NRA was suffering from in-fighting, Clinton got elected and Handgun Control Inc. defintely had the upper-hand inthe political arena.

Ruger determined which way the wind was blowing and decided that he had a better chance of bending with it. Don't forget that Bill Ruger started his company and he wasn't going to be a stubborn, unflinching person which would cause his company to go down in flames. It's called survival and it isn't alwasy pretty. Most people, if they are honest, will do the unpopular thing at times, if the stake is big enough. Fanatics have a tendency to go down in flames.

Now I know that all of us here were dedicated uncompromising defenders of the 2nd Amendment back then, but Bill Ruger was trying to compromise. That is the nature of our system and we all do it. If we don't we get Gridlock and we all know how popular that is with the public.

Geez the Bill of Rights was a compromise on the part of Hamilton and others in order to get the Constitution passed by the conventions delegates in 1789. Funny how nobody ever mentions that.

Anyway Bill Ruger was not a sellout. Rather he was political and that isn't always a bad thing. I know that people like to take the moral highground when it comes to politicans, but why is it that so many incumbents are re - elected? I'm honest. I've been helped out by my senators and congressman in the past and I return the help by voting for them. So all the other politicans are worthless S.O.B's but my S.O.B. is okay. Bill Ruger was okay.

 

[halvey]

I'd like a .410 over under. Yeah, I know, the Red Label can take the tubes, but a real .410 OU on a .410 frame. Not like Bills passing helps that one.

 

[Correia]

lawboy, I've got not problem with companies changing their products to be safer. That is just good thinking. An example would be the transfer bar on single action revolvers.

However I take real exception to some of the idiotic things that are being added to firearms today. These safety devices were not designed with real safety in mind. Mag disconnect? Invented 100 years ago and discarded from most handguns since then because it is not a good idea for most users. Maybe for uniformed police officers who might be in for a serious disarm attempt, but for most of us they are just a hassle to introduce some confusion into our dryfire routines.

Internal locks? As a firearms instructor I think that is the stupidest thing ever. I can already hear the morons out there "don't worry my gun is locked." BLAM. Which is pretty similar to "don't worry, my gun is empty." BLAM.

 

[JohnBT]

As long as we're dreaming, how about an affordable royal blue Python.


"Hopefully now he is dead"

I read that he was.

John

 

[boofus]

A new and more reliable AC556 and pressure the govt to allow manufacturers to register transferables again. Mass produce 30 round mags and drums. Til then I shall purchase nothing from Ruger. Not even the suppressed Ruger MK2 I've been sorta itchin for.

 

[another okie]

A skinny 9mm would be great, as mentioned above. A longer barrelled .45 auto with high capacity with be nice.

Ported versions of their big bore revolvers would be great. I'd like to have a .454 Casull Stainless Super Redhawk in Target Gray. They make them now, but I'd like a ported version.

 

[lawboy]

I see your point and agree that not all the features being added to firearms are such a hot idea. But, what we have to understand is that all these things are a matter of opinion ... public opinion regarding what is reasonable for the manufacturer to do. So, if 100 years ago, a magazine safety was not something the public deemed better, safer, a reasonable precaution the manufacturer should take, then, it in fact was not. However, if changes in public opinion brought about by changes in the demographics of the population or whatever, bring us today to a point where the general public believes that a magazine safety is a better way to build a gun then, in fact, it is. That is something the manufacturers have to deal with, a fact of life in a democratic society. The truth be told, there is no absolute, imperical better way. In these issues "Better" simply means of "of higher social value as judged by the public." We are dealing with social concepts here, not absolutes of physics, mechanics or anything immutable.
One reason these things change is that the education level, living environment, occupational disposition, and primary use of guns has changed for the VAST majority of americans from what it was 100 years ago. Consequently, the public attitude regarding how a gun should be built have also evolved. You cannot blame Bill Ruger for understanding this and dealing with it appropriately. These are facts, because, like I said, I know personally some attorneys how took millions out of Bill's pocket in lawsuits that reulted DIRECTLY in specific design changes to some of his products. The public spoke from the jury box and Bill listened ... A true American if there ever was one.

 

[45auto]

Ruger is one of the few success stories in the American gun business that actually tries to innovate, introduce models and sell guns to the public at a reasonable price. And, they grow their business, haven't changed owners several times, and they make money...a novel thought given the likes of companies like S&W, Colt, etc.

Everyone should own at least 2 Rugers.

 

[BlkHawk73]

how about an affordable royal blue Python.

ummm...last I knew this thread was about RUGER firearms. I can say with a whole bunch of certainty that they will NOT be making/marketing a Python.

 

[albanian]

I am NOT bashing Ruger guns in any way. I like the guns and I hope to see even more offerings from this great American gun company. It always amazes me that people can find some way to twist what others say just to be able to get into an argument.

My point was and is, Ruger a good gun company that makes good guns at affordable prices without compromising on reliability or quality. Ruger guns work and they last that is why I like them. The problem is, Bill Ruger decided that the public did not need more than 10 rounds in any gun and he also decided that small handguns were not needed by the public.

Politics aside, there is a vast market for concealable handguns. I know many people that carry guns concealed and none of them are criminals. Small guns are not just for the bad guys as Bill Ruger apparently thought. If Ruger wants to keep their market share, they are going to have to come out with some guns that people are asking for.

I think I know why Ruger doesn't make really small autos. It is because of the investment castings that they use, the guns have to be bulky because of the extra steel needed to obtain the same strength as a forged steel gun. Say what you will about how great castings are, they are not as good as forged. If you don't believe me, when was the last time you saw a cast steel knife blade? They don't exist because they would break. If it could be done, it would have been done to save money and make a cheaper product.

Not bashing Bill Ruger I just hope that some of his political ideas die with him and Ruger makes whatever the public wants and not what they decide we should be allowed to have. Can't you see the difference?