orangeninja
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2003
- Messages
- 3,117
my .02.....I would LOVE to see the Deerslayer in .44 magnum with a highcap mag. Make it in sythetic stock and I'd replace one of my shotties with it as a LEO gun.
Now that Bill Ruger is dead, what guns do you hope they will make?
- Thread starter albanian
- Start date
- Status
knife blades are cast from dentritic steel every day.
I forget the name of the maker, but I have several years worth of Blade Magazine and could easily find out for you. Others also are making knives from castings. I believe some of the custom makers are using castings in order to offer blades in mass and reasonable prices. Like I said. I'd be glad to look it up in the magazines I have as I specifically recall reading this at least 3-4 years ago.
Cheers.
I forget the name of the maker, but I have several years worth of Blade Magazine and could easily find out for you. Others also are making knives from castings. I believe some of the custom makers are using castings in order to offer blades in mass and reasonable prices. Like I said. I'd be glad to look it up in the magazines I have as I specifically recall reading this at least 3-4 years ago.
Cheers.
I don't think we'll see a metrosexual Ruger anytime soon.
Let's review, shall we?
Ruger is by far the number one domestic gun manufacturer. That would seem to indicate that they are doing something right. If it ain't broke, you don't fix it. However, they could tweak it.
Mods to the existing product line:
1) Redo the M-77 scope system.
2) Make a GP-100 in .44 Special and 10mm.
3) Reissue the 9mm SP-101.
4) Make a line of Super Redhawks that are not pre cut for scopes and better integrate the look of the barrel and the frame. Offer a .45ACP, .41 Mag and a full range of shorter barrels.
5) Completely re-engineer the Mini and Ranch rifles, put real barrels on them, and adapt them to take USGI or AK mags depending on caliber.
6) Develop a pump shottie.
7) Build P-309s, 3357s, 340s and 310s.
8) Offer carbon steel SP-101s
9) Expand the offerings for left handers in bolt guns.
10) Shamelessly copy the idea of S&W's Performance Center. Execute anything the customer wants in a vision of Ruger firearm that doesn't endanger the user or company.
11) Get some shooting sports teams going with factory sponsorship.
After all that, get into chopping down autopistols or casting titanium revolvers.
Let's review, shall we?
Ruger is by far the number one domestic gun manufacturer. That would seem to indicate that they are doing something right. If it ain't broke, you don't fix it. However, they could tweak it.
Mods to the existing product line:
1) Redo the M-77 scope system.
2) Make a GP-100 in .44 Special and 10mm.
3) Reissue the 9mm SP-101.
4) Make a line of Super Redhawks that are not pre cut for scopes and better integrate the look of the barrel and the frame. Offer a .45ACP, .41 Mag and a full range of shorter barrels.
5) Completely re-engineer the Mini and Ranch rifles, put real barrels on them, and adapt them to take USGI or AK mags depending on caliber.
6) Develop a pump shottie.
7) Build P-309s, 3357s, 340s and 310s.
8) Offer carbon steel SP-101s
9) Expand the offerings for left handers in bolt guns.
10) Shamelessly copy the idea of S&W's Performance Center. Execute anything the customer wants in a vision of Ruger firearm that doesn't endanger the user or company.
11) Get some shooting sports teams going with factory sponsorship.
After all that, get into chopping down autopistols or casting titanium revolvers.
BHPshooter
Member
It is for reasons like this that I hesitate to buy a Ruger. It really is a shame too -- I'd love to have an SP101 and a Vaquero.
Wes
Wes
I've bought a number of Rugers over the years and I'll likely buy more.
I'd like to see a centerfire Ruger auto that doesn't look like it was carved from a brick. IE slim, trim, blued steel with some styling cues from the mark1 target pistol.
I'd like to see a centerfire Ruger auto that doesn't look like it was carved from a brick. IE slim, trim, blued steel with some styling cues from the mark1 target pistol.
stevelyn
Member
I love my Ruger #1 RSI, in fact no one makes single-shots like Ruger. Their M-77s are the best production bolt guns on the market. Just wish there were more left-hand caliber and barrel options available. Their revolvers are the best in the world. Truth is they make great sporting rifles and revolvers.
My fighting guns are not and never will be Rugers. There are too many other manufacturers out there that make guns designed for fighting and are better suited for self-defense. Ruger dosen't want to manufacture standard cap mags for their guns? That's fine, someone else will and Ruger will lose out on the revenue. That's what free market capitalism is all about.
As for the LE market, last I checked Glock already had that one sewn up. Need a .223 sporting anti-personnel or LE patrol rifle? Hmmm........Bushmasters, Olympic, Rock River, Colt and the list goes on. A .308? Need a sporting or fighting shotgun? Too many choices to list here. As for the Mini-14, it's a piece of junk. Toss it and get an SKS.
Point is, there are too many other choices and manufacturers out there to try and make Ruger something it is not. Ruger is hunting rifles and revolvers, not combat/SD guns.
As for their politics and policies, they are stupid, they think they can breeze by without having to put up a fight on bwehalf of 2A and gun owners.
Reality is they'll pay for and learn a very hard, irrevokeable lesson for their complacency if the grabbers ever have their way.
My fighting guns are not and never will be Rugers. There are too many other manufacturers out there that make guns designed for fighting and are better suited for self-defense. Ruger dosen't want to manufacture standard cap mags for their guns? That's fine, someone else will and Ruger will lose out on the revenue. That's what free market capitalism is all about.
As for the LE market, last I checked Glock already had that one sewn up. Need a .223 sporting anti-personnel or LE patrol rifle? Hmmm........Bushmasters, Olympic, Rock River, Colt and the list goes on. A .308? Need a sporting or fighting shotgun? Too many choices to list here. As for the Mini-14, it's a piece of junk. Toss it and get an SKS.
Point is, there are too many other choices and manufacturers out there to try and make Ruger something it is not. Ruger is hunting rifles and revolvers, not combat/SD guns.
As for their politics and policies, they are stupid, they think they can breeze by without having to put up a fight on bwehalf of 2A and gun owners.
Reality is they'll pay for and learn a very hard, irrevokeable lesson for their complacency if the grabbers ever have their way.
ROAshooter
member
New Ruger
Politically correct......eight shot.....enbloc....Ruger Mini Garand.....whooooo hooooooo
Politically correct......eight shot.....enbloc....Ruger Mini Garand.....whooooo hooooooo
sfhogman
Member
How about simply improving Ruger QC across the board?
Leadbutt
Member
Ole man Ruger was a twit, hell he was left handed and it took him 30 years to bring out a left handed bolt gun.
But they are nice rifles, I would like to see them gear up and produce the express rifles in a left handed action, and bring out the 77 in more calibers
But they are nice rifles, I would like to see them gear up and produce the express rifles in a left handed action, and bring out the 77 in more calibers
Old man Ruger was a twit.? Wow! That is the most lame statement on this board since I began here. What he did for the gun world will live on forever. What he did for Newport, NH. where one of his factories is, I don't think could ever be added up. 1100 employees there alone.What he has done as far as keeping LE in donated weapons is incredible. He maybe did not make a gun for everybody but, he did do alot for hunting and shooting.
He was far from a twit and don't forget there is still a Ruger at the helm.
He was far from a twit and don't forget there is still a Ruger at the helm.
BHPshooter
Member
What he did for the gun world was to help get the AWB passed (didn't he also have something to do with the Brady Bill?).
I can only HOPE that what he did will die. The man was a traitor to the people who made his business a success. He does not deserve a shred of our respect.
Wes
JohnBT
Member
Let me get this straight. You want a perfectly good gun manufacturer to go out of business because its late founder did something years ago?
Why? What purpose would be served? Would it make you feel good?
John
Why? What purpose would be served? Would it make you feel good?
John
horge
Member
I was under the impression that Sturm, Ruger & Co. were partly responsible for restoring some sanity to skyrocketing handgun prices decades ago, by offering well made revolvers to compete with the big names.
I was under the impression that Sturm, Ruger & Co. built decent-quality firearms that successfully found a market in the United States and worldwide.
I was under the impression that a man could make up his own mind about what he could do with his property and business.
While William Ruger Sr. may have adopted a philosophy not in line with some of yours, that was his call to make. He worked hard to build his company, and had the right to determine what philosophy that company would espouse.
If Ruger doesn't make the guns you want, then buy elsewhere.
If you strongly disagree with Ruger's policies, then buy elsewhere
However, calling Ruger a 'traitor' is pretty astonishing:
Was he breaking a written contract, treaty or deed with you?
Was he breaking a pledge or a bond with you?
Was he breaking familial loyalty to you?
Call it compromise or call it calculation, but Ruger's decisions on what his company would make were and remain squarely within a company chief's right to determine his company's future direction and profitability. Ruger's personal beliefs on firearms ownership were his own. Last time I checked, we allowed for differences of belief.
Just this foreigner's P1.00.
If I am misunderstandicating the situation, I sure as heck wouldn't mind an edumacation on why so much spitting on a dead man is so popular.
BluesBear
member
There, in a nutshell, is the reason that the Ruger policies haven't changed and probably won't in the near future.
The fact is that this is still America and people are entitled, repeat ENTITLED, to their opinions and beliefs.
Just because you don't like someone elses politics or beliefs doesn't mean they should change them to suit you.
How many here would be the first to get their hackles up if someone else tried to tell you how you should think or how your business should be run?
I see some of you saying Ruger should do this and stop doing that and then in the next breath you whine about how the politicians and the lawyers are forcing the companies to do something else you don't like. You can't have it both ways.
If you don't like Ruger or their policies then don't buy them. It IS just that simple.
Write them a letter if you feel strongly about it. Perhaps they'll listen eventually. Until then ****. We're tired of hearing the same tired old bewitching and moaning.
Just don't forget that Bill Ruger made his mark by making guns that no one else would make;
Heavy duty single action revolvers with coil springs. Back when Colt was making the SAA unaffordable in only 2 or 3 calibers and the Europeans were inporting clones of questionalble quality, Ruger debuted the Blackhawk. You could buy a Ruger .44 magnum before you could buy a S&W. And it was stronger and cost less money. Ditto the .41 Magnum. How many custom gunsmiths make a living hotrodding the old girl? The basic gun hasn't changed in over 40 years! Has Ruger had to redesign them so they'll withstand Buffalo Bore type loads? Is there a Super Blackhawk-10? Hell no there isn't. And just why do you think that is?
The Single-Six. When Colt was attempting to convince us that the 7/8 size Scout was an entry level .22 Ruger announced the Single-Six and then the Super-Single-Six with sights that actually held up. With interchangable cylinders more or less standard at a price that even a 15 year old boy with a small paper route could afford.
And don't forget the Bearcat. Bill Ruger showed us all how sturdy a small single action revolver could be. His coil spring "experiment" worked. It worked so well that 20 years later they had to bring it back.
Fixed sight, centerfire, Cowboy revolvers. When SASS started how many suitable revolvers were there? Who answered the call? Go to any Cowboy shoot today and see how many Rugers there are compared to all of the others. Sure they'll be other brands but compare the prices. Count the number of after market parts for those other brands. Next to the 1911 the Ruger SA is the most fiddled with handgun out there.
An affordible .22 semi-auto pistol. Which by the way has remained in constant production ever since. Many other famous and well built .22 pistols have gone by the wayside but the Ruger Mark series is still going strong.
A reliable .22 semi-automatic carbine. Look at the number of self loading .22s that were on the market when the 10/22 was introduced. How many are still in production? Name ANY .22rimfire rifle in history that has as many after market options available for it!
The Mini-14 was an affordable alternative to the AR-15. It was designed to be a continuation of the Garand/Carbine/M14 action. It was meant to be a ruggedutility rifle not a match rifle. Hells Bellsâ„¢ they even adapted it to 7.62x39. Who else in America has jumped on that bandwagon?
Ruger made the very first semi-automatic .44 magnum rifle. I believe they are the only ones who still do? Yes they dropped it for a while but they improved it and brought it back to be better than ever. They even made it itno a lever action model. WHo else has designed a new lever action in the past 40 years? Except for Browning who has designed a new lever action in the last 100?
The Ruger #1 has become THE single shot rifle. Show me any single shot stronger, more reliable or made in as many variations.
The Ruger 77 rifle. When other manufacturers were cutting corners on their established bolt action rifles along came Bill Ruger. While others were dropping calibers Ruger was adding them. Everything from .17 Remington to .458 Lott. [/i[
The Security/Service/Speed-Six line was a viable/cheaper alternative to S&W K-frame revolvers. In fact they're partly responsibile for the creation of the S&W L-frame and the demise of the Colt double action line. S&W had to keep up and Colt couldn't/wouldn't)
The SP/GP series of revolver took the medium DA revolver to a new level in strength/sturdiness. And they're still affordable.
The Redhawk. Does anyone here know of a stronger DA revolver? Does any revolver adapt to scope mounting for hunting as readily? Does it need an "upgrade package" to handle hot hunting loads?
The Ruger P-series pistols for all of their ungainly charm seem to be able to go bang each and every time you pull the trigger fresh from the box. Do you hear people complaining that they don't work? Rarely. What you will hear is how they look. Just remember the prettiest girl doesn't always make the best wife.
The PC Carbine line. It accepts their pistol magazines. It works. Marlin tried and failed with the same concept.
Stainless Steel/ Ruger was one of the first to embrace the technology. AND they haven't forgotten that many of us still prefer Blued firearms. {i]Can you buy a blued .44 Magnum from S&W? Can you buy a blued .357 from S&W?
I could go on but you should have gotten the point by now.
Why should Ruger make a small revolver? S&W, Taurus and Rossi already do.
Why should Ruger make a pump shotgun? You already have such a loyal following in cheap 870/500/1300. Could Ruger recoup the cost of designing and tooling up?
Remember there have been very few Ruger failures.
The Hawkeye is the most well known and it was really Ruger's fault as much as the cartridge just didn't catch on.
Speaking of chamberings, Ruger has always be quick to champion a new cartridge. In some cases designing or redesigning a gun for it. Exapmles are .44 Remington Magnum, .41 Remington Magnum, .454 Casull, 17 HRM, 7.62x39, .40 S&W and .32 H&R Magnum.
Ruger didn't make guns to be pretty even though some of them are graceful and nice to look at. Their goal was to make guns that could be used for generations. That will fires untold thousands of rounds and beg for more. In the 1960s and 1970s, while Colt was making Commemorative revolvers that were works or art to be gazed upon like a Rembrandt, while S&W was trying to decide which gun to manufacture each month and creating an artificial shortage, Ruger was churning out rugged, dependable affordable guns that you could shoot! When is the last time you saw a Ruger that had been "shot to death?"
If it sells Ruger will keep it in the Catalogue forever. Look at a Ruger catalogue from 10 or 20 years and even 30 years ago and try to find a gun made then that isn't made today.
Look at a Colt or S&W or Remington or Marlin or any other big name gunmaker and see what has come and gone.
If you don't like Ruger products or their politics that's fine. Don't buy any.
Just stop being a cry-baby about it.
Ruger has some great arms. Built solid and reliable. But I only own one. I own nine more of other brands. Ruger is missing a paradigm shift. The way people use arms is shifting from a rural and recreational to an urban and defensive use. Our population now exceeds 280 million and growing. Land plots are getting smaller and more expensive. The need for the types of arms Ruger makes is in a slow steady decline. Lets look at the different markets to see if Ruger is gaining market share.
Police \ LE : no, Rugers are affordable but that's all , advantage Glock-Sig
Military: no one's using a mini 14/30
CHL\CCW: a huge growing market, Ruger has opted out
Home Defense: Ruger treading water with lower prices but mossberg and Glock are still the standard and gaining
Recreational includes hunting, cowboy, plinking: Ruger is steady, Remington undercuts them on price, competition on 22 autos is stiff. Ruger owns cowboy and SAS but that's it.
Let's revisit this in 10-15 years to see how many factories they still have or if there philosophy has changed. As licensed ownership and carrying becomes the standard. What will be more likely, filling out forms and fees to get that Ruger or just buy the compact Glock and use it for everything.
Police \ LE : no, Rugers are affordable but that's all , advantage Glock-Sig
Military: no one's using a mini 14/30
CHL\CCW: a huge growing market, Ruger has opted out
Home Defense: Ruger treading water with lower prices but mossberg and Glock are still the standard and gaining
Recreational includes hunting, cowboy, plinking: Ruger is steady, Remington undercuts them on price, competition on 22 autos is stiff. Ruger owns cowboy and SAS but that's it.
Let's revisit this in 10-15 years to see how many factories they still have or if there philosophy has changed. As licensed ownership and carrying becomes the standard. What will be more likely, filling out forms and fees to get that Ruger or just buy the compact Glock and use it for everything.
denfoote
Member
Don't get me wrong.
I own a lot of Rugers.
I was lucky enough to get my P95 right after the AWB along with a bunch of the then plentiful 15 round mags.
My main complaint with Ruger, aside from the irksome support of that silly ban, is that his guns, with the exception of the SP revolver series, are to fat for comfortable concealed carry. Therein lies the rub, as it were. Bill Ruger apparently did not think that ordinary peons like you and me deserved, needed...take your pick, to carry a concealed weapon!! Now, given the fact that he indeed had the right to do so, he alienated his company from almost all of the post ban gun buying public. Other manufacturers saw which way the market was headed and designed guns to meet the expected demand. Glock, Sig, Beretta, HK, Taurus all saw that a small concealable pistol was what the gun buying public wanted. The acceleration of "shall issue" concealed carry laws anongst the various states was the coup-de-gras!!! Ruger, however, "stayed the course" and was left in the dust, having no entry in that booming market!!
The above little expose' leads to what I would very much like Ruger to make. A small pistol suitable for comfortable carry!!
I also know that there real engineering problems that tend to make this difficult, having to do with their investment casting process. However, Ruger does have other factories that could be retooled to produce such a gun.
Maybe it's to late for them to enter this market. I don't know. But, even a Glock 19 size version of the P95 would be nice to at least see!! I'm not sure if I would buy it. I would have to see and fondle it first!!
I own a lot of Rugers.
I was lucky enough to get my P95 right after the AWB along with a bunch of the then plentiful 15 round mags.
My main complaint with Ruger, aside from the irksome support of that silly ban, is that his guns, with the exception of the SP revolver series, are to fat for comfortable concealed carry. Therein lies the rub, as it were. Bill Ruger apparently did not think that ordinary peons like you and me deserved, needed...take your pick, to carry a concealed weapon!! Now, given the fact that he indeed had the right to do so, he alienated his company from almost all of the post ban gun buying public. Other manufacturers saw which way the market was headed and designed guns to meet the expected demand. Glock, Sig, Beretta, HK, Taurus all saw that a small concealable pistol was what the gun buying public wanted. The acceleration of "shall issue" concealed carry laws anongst the various states was the coup-de-gras!!! Ruger, however, "stayed the course" and was left in the dust, having no entry in that booming market!!
The above little expose' leads to what I would very much like Ruger to make. A small pistol suitable for comfortable carry!!
I also know that there real engineering problems that tend to make this difficult, having to do with their investment casting process. However, Ruger does have other factories that could be retooled to produce such a gun.
Maybe it's to late for them to enter this market. I don't know. But, even a Glock 19 size version of the P95 would be nice to at least see!! I'm not sure if I would buy it. I would have to see and fondle it first!!
You know, i bet that if one were to add up all the guns owned by americans that less than 1% of those guns would be carried on an even occassional basis. I hardly think that Ruger is "missing the boat" by catering to ONLY 99% of the gun needs of Americans.
JohnBT
Member
So Ruger doesn't make itty-bitty handguns for concealed carry.
Neither does Marlin.
Neither does Henry.
Neither does Remington.
Neither does Winchester.
Etc., etc. & etc.
What's the big deal?
John
Neither does Marlin.
Neither does Henry.
Neither does Remington.
Neither does Winchester.
Etc., etc. & etc.
What's the big deal?
John
BHPshooter
Member
What he did was act as an accomplice to restricting our Second Amendment rights. I don't give a damn if he did it "years ago," we are still fighting to reverse the effects of it.
I never said I wanted them to go out of business. I like many more Ruger firearms than I don't. I just wish that I could buy their products in good conscience, instead of knowing that the money that they get from a gun sale will go to restrict my gun rights.
No, he is indeed a traitor. We, the 80,000,000 gun owners, made his business a success. What does he do to say thanks? He pushes for the piecemeal destruction of the very rights that made him rich.
Yeah, that's his right to do that... but it's pretty stupid.
Stop reading things that aren't there. I never said that he had to tow my line, I said that I will not give my money to a company who will use it to fight my rights (while posing as an ally).
What's the matter, can't handle the facts? Let's look at them, thus far: Ruger makes fine firearms; Bill Ruger helped pass one of the most blatantly unconstitutional and disgusting anti-gun laws to date; Ruger Jr. is now at the head of Sturm-Ruger; and while thier politics *may* not be as bad as they once were, they aren't doing much to correct it.
I hold Bill Ruger in the same light as Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Kennedy, and Clinton. What do they all have in common? They think that you and I -- the serfs -- shouldn't be allowed optimum weapons. After all, "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in his gun."
As far as SingTFU, I will when people wake up and realize what's going on around them. Fighting anti-gunners is hard enough without giving them our money, or without one of our supposed "allies" working against us.
Wes
Feanaro
Member
We DO allow for differences, which is exactly why I, or fumegator or you can NOT buy from Ruger. If I or anyone else disagrees with their policy, the founder's policy, his history or anything else then I can avoid their products. He dug his grave(Pun intended) and his company still suffers for it. There seems to be a perception that freedom of speech means you are free from the CONSEQUENCES of your speech. This is most certainly not true.
BluesBear
member
Please enlighten me.
Just how is a company NOT making a certain type of gun that YOU think they should be making restricting our Second Amendment rights.
What kind of convoluted logic is that?
Oh I get it now. Duhhh.
Damn those rats at Taurus. Since they won't make a 2" barreled blue-steel .41 Magnum revolver WITHOUT barrel ports they're restricting MY Second Amendment rights.
Damn Smith & Wesson! Since they stopped making the Model 58 .41 Magnum Military & Police Revolver they are restricting MY Second Amendment rights.
Gee this trampling on my rights thing is easy.
And here all along I thought that it was the politicians who were screwing us.
Just how is a company NOT making a certain type of gun that YOU think they should be making restricting our Second Amendment rights.
What kind of convoluted logic is that?
Oh I get it now. Duhhh.
Damn those rats at Taurus. Since they won't make a 2" barreled blue-steel .41 Magnum revolver WITHOUT barrel ports they're restricting MY Second Amendment rights.
Damn Smith & Wesson! Since they stopped making the Model 58 .41 Magnum Military & Police Revolver they are restricting MY Second Amendment rights.
Gee this trampling on my rights thing is easy.
And here all along I thought that it was the politicians who were screwing us.
The entire gun industry is severly restricting MY second ammendment rights by not making a 5 shot light weight .45acp snubbie
And now that i think about it, shoudlnt guns be FREE? I mean it says right in the constitution that i have a right to have them. These companies are CHARGING me to use my rights? ANd why do i have to pay for newspapers and books? THis is absurd, we need to fix this whole "free enterprise" thing before we end up with no rights at ALL!
And now that i think about it, shoudlnt guns be FREE? I mean it says right in the constitution that i have a right to have them. These companies are CHARGING me to use my rights? ANd why do i have to pay for newspapers and books? THis is absurd, we need to fix this whole "free enterprise" thing before we end up with no rights at ALL!
- Status
