elhombreconnonombre
Member
Does anyone for sure know why Ruger decided to produce the Old Army model? At the end of its run why did Ruger cease production? Just wondering.
Question on the origin of the Ruger Old Army
- Thread starter elhombreconnonombre
- Start date
- Status
EljaySL
Member
They're a company. They do what they think will make them money. At some point they had a warehouse of the things that weren't moving so they stopped making more.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,778
Hey no name !!!! Good to see you on here !!
I think the ROA could be the MOST versatile Ruger ever made. If enough folks think so, they would probably start making them again.
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
I think the ROA could be the MOST versatile Ruger ever made. If enough folks think so, they would probably start making them again.
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
J-Bar
Member
From "Ruger and His Guns" by R. L. Wilson, ppg. 125-6:
"The Old Army Blackpowder Revolver: Harry Sefried Remembers
(Harry Sefried was an engineer who was hired by Sturm, Ruger in 1959 and was in on the ground floor of the development of many Ruger firearms)
'Bill and I were interested in antique blackpowder guns, and my own favorite was the Rogers & Spencer. Bill had several percussion revolvers in his collection, including the prettiest little Remington Pocket Model, on which he styled the Ruger Bearcat.
'He said it would be nice to make a percussion revolver that was a really good shooter, and as close to indestructible that could be made, with all the usual features. With the advances in our investment casting program, we had come to a point where we could do just about anything. ...
'I started to work with a clean sheet of paper. None of this stuff of no topstrap, like the Colt percussion revolvers, or simply duplicating the antique design. This sturdy revolver would be basically a Super Blackhawk in percussion, to utilize Blackhawk components as much as possible...
'One of the details we wanted was no screws (since, for one thing, they always shot loose in the percussion revolvers of the 19th century), except for attaching the grip frame and securing the hammer, trigger, and cylinder stop within the frame.'
...and it goes on to describe the Old Army's proof testing with Bullseye powder...
As to why the Old Army was discontinued; my guess is Bill Ruger died and the subsequent managers never shot cowboy action matches.
"The Old Army Blackpowder Revolver: Harry Sefried Remembers
(Harry Sefried was an engineer who was hired by Sturm, Ruger in 1959 and was in on the ground floor of the development of many Ruger firearms)
'Bill and I were interested in antique blackpowder guns, and my own favorite was the Rogers & Spencer. Bill had several percussion revolvers in his collection, including the prettiest little Remington Pocket Model, on which he styled the Ruger Bearcat.
'He said it would be nice to make a percussion revolver that was a really good shooter, and as close to indestructible that could be made, with all the usual features. With the advances in our investment casting program, we had come to a point where we could do just about anything. ...
'I started to work with a clean sheet of paper. None of this stuff of no topstrap, like the Colt percussion revolvers, or simply duplicating the antique design. This sturdy revolver would be basically a Super Blackhawk in percussion, to utilize Blackhawk components as much as possible...
'One of the details we wanted was no screws (since, for one thing, they always shot loose in the percussion revolvers of the 19th century), except for attaching the grip frame and securing the hammer, trigger, and cylinder stop within the frame.'
...and it goes on to describe the Old Army's proof testing with Bullseye powder...
As to why the Old Army was discontinued; my guess is Bill Ruger died and the subsequent managers never shot cowboy action matches.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,778
D. Buck Stopshere
Member
"and the subsequent managers never shot cowboy action matches."
Or they never shot competitively in line matches sponsored by the NMLRA and its host clubs around the USA.
If you shot on the national line like I did from 1986 till 1998, you'd have one or two Ruger OA's (an extra one for backup) to shoot the Open Revolver Pistol Aggregate, included in the three-gun (caplock, flintlock, & revolver) Pistol Championship.
In those years, one would see over 100 Ruger Old Army .44's and .36's competing at 25 & 50 yards. It was an admirable sight.
Or they never shot competitively in line matches sponsored by the NMLRA and its host clubs around the USA.
If you shot on the national line like I did from 1986 till 1998, you'd have one or two Ruger OA's (an extra one for backup) to shoot the Open Revolver Pistol Aggregate, included in the three-gun (caplock, flintlock, & revolver) Pistol Championship.
In those years, one would see over 100 Ruger Old Army .44's and .36's competing at 25 & 50 yards. It was an admirable sight.
45 Dragoon
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,778
I rest my case!
Mike
Mike
I shot the prototype at Friendship waaaay back. Ruger had one there with a bucket of balls. You provide the powder and caps and shoot til the next guy came up and wanted to shoot. I came home and had dad order a half dozen for me and the Illini buddies. It took about two years for the first one to arrive. Pop gave me a stainless one for apprentice graduation in '77. Still have it. Great design. 20 grains ffg, cornmeal to the top, .457 ball, and kick butt. A cylinder full of ffffg would give a 357 a good run.
Bill Ruger Sr. was interested in the concept, and during the years he ran the company they made what he was interested in. He was a rare example - a firearms company CEO that actually knew something about guns and related design and engineering. He sometimes would remark that if he had gotten into the business sooner, Colt and Remington (revolvers) would have never got off the ground. 
This, above all else, is what makes a "good" company Great. When a company is run by bean counters who have no passion for the product, they will fall into complacency, the products suffer and decline, and become nothing more than mediocre commodities.Bill Ruger Sr. was interested in the concept, and during the years he ran the company they made what he was interested in. He was a rare example - a firearms company CEO that actually knew something about guns and related design and engineering. He sometimes would remark that if he had gotten into the business sooner, Colt and Remington (revolvers) would have never got off the ground.
Sadly, Such companies are few and far between.
yhs
shunka
Don McDowell
Member
When they brought that out, muzzleloading and blackpowder shooting was all the rage. There were no substitute powders, plastic stocked inlines and the like. Folks dress in leather or pure cotton and wool clothes and went shooting for the weekend, and they did so in every state from border to border.
The type of shooter that gun attracts is fast disappearing, sales probably are virtually nonexistent, so it makes no sense for a company to direct time and material into something that's not selling, and take away from product that is flying out the doors..
The type of shooter that gun attracts is fast disappearing, sales probably are virtually nonexistent, so it makes no sense for a company to direct time and material into something that's not selling, and take away from product that is flying out the doors..
Most of the materials are shared with the Blackhawk so there's only a bit of the work they need to do. I'm sure the tooling for it is sitting in a box in the basement.
With the amount of interest in them now that they've been discontinued I think there'd be a surge to buy one or two at a time. However it'd likely end up back where it was in 2009 when sales eventually slowed back down in a few years. But initially I doubt they'd sit on the shelf more than a couple of weeks.
With the amount of interest in them now that they've been discontinued I think there'd be a surge to buy one or two at a time. However it'd likely end up back where it was in 2009 when sales eventually slowed back down in a few years. But initially I doubt they'd sit on the shelf more than a couple of weeks.
Ruger has never provided sales data on individual models, so how well, or how poorly, the ROA sold is pretty much speculation. However, they did provide some rationale for the decision to discontinue the ROA.
Ruger traditionally estimated the annual sales of each model and then ran the production lines until that number was reached for a given model; they then changed the line over to produce the annual allotment for a different model. The production of each gun was then warehoused, with shipments to distributors coming from warehouse stocks.
This production philosophy was fairly efficient but did involve high inventory cost. They eventually switched over to the more cost efficient philosophy of 'just in time' manufacturing, wherein you run parallel lines and produce just enough to meet current sales demands; no, or very little, warehousing is needed. The down side, of course, is that you need to have enough tooling, machinery, parts and labor to make several models at the same time. Models thus must compete with each other for production assets. Low selling models must be able to demand high prices to make it worth the cost and effort to keep their production lines open in competition with more popular models that sell better. The ROA simply couldn't command the price needed for it's lower sales numbers versus the highly popular Blackhawk models, so the Blackhawk lines became Blackhawk only.
Ruger traditionally estimated the annual sales of each model and then ran the production lines until that number was reached for a given model; they then changed the line over to produce the annual allotment for a different model. The production of each gun was then warehoused, with shipments to distributors coming from warehouse stocks.
This production philosophy was fairly efficient but did involve high inventory cost. They eventually switched over to the more cost efficient philosophy of 'just in time' manufacturing, wherein you run parallel lines and produce just enough to meet current sales demands; no, or very little, warehousing is needed. The down side, of course, is that you need to have enough tooling, machinery, parts and labor to make several models at the same time. Models thus must compete with each other for production assets. Low selling models must be able to demand high prices to make it worth the cost and effort to keep their production lines open in competition with more popular models that sell better. The ROA simply couldn't command the price needed for it's lower sales numbers versus the highly popular Blackhawk models, so the Blackhawk lines became Blackhawk only.
"Low selling models must be able to demand high prices to make it worth the cost and effort to keep their production lines open in competition with more popular models that sell better."
And with in mind, and figuring it's more work to make a percussion revolver, it simply wouldn't do as well as I doubt they'd get the numbers of people waiting in line to buy a ROA or 2 for <$729 (SS), the MSRP of a new Blackhawk.
And with in mind, and figuring it's more work to make a percussion revolver, it simply wouldn't do as well as I doubt they'd get the numbers of people waiting in line to buy a ROA or 2 for <$729 (SS), the MSRP of a new Blackhawk.
elhombreconnonombre
Member
Me thinks that despite it being a modern percussion revolver, it may hold a special spot as PERHAPS the best percussion revolver ever produced....what say ye?
I believe I read that Mike B (Duelist1954) had one with an 18" "Buntline" length barrel. Add a detachable Italian shoulder stock attached vía a long hammer screw, and you have one interesting range conversation piece.
I believe I read that Mike B (Duelist1954) had one with an 18" "Buntline" length barrel. Add a detachable Italian shoulder stock attached vía a long hammer screw, and you have one interesting range conversation piece.
Last edited:
rcflint
Member
The ROA became more expensive to produce after the rest of the revolvers became "New Models" with a completely different design of interior parts. Bill Ruger is quoted as saying that if they had invented the Old Model Conversion first, there wouldn't have been a New Model... Too bad it didn't happen that way, because the New Model Ruger has to be one of the most difficult revolvers there is to assemble and disassemble...I dislike it so much, that of the dozon or so Rugers I own NONE are New Models...
clutch
Contributing Member
I wish they would bring it back for another run. I wanted but could not afford one back in the day. Now I want one and would like to buy one NIB instead of buying a pig in a poke off a gun auction site.
Don McDowell
Member
Aside from Rugers copyright, trademark and patents,, probably not much other than the lack of market demand.
Driftwood Johnson
Member
+1
Obviously, you couldn't call it a Ruger Old Army but what pattens could Ruger have that couldn't be worked around? After all, the Ruger Old Army is an updated 1858 Remington. Ruger didn't invent the solid top frame or the cylinder pin held in place by the loading lever - the two major features of both guns. Redesign the 1858 to use madern materials, a little more robust and a Colt style gripg frame and hammer.
Don McDowell
Member
There's no shortage of Remington 58's made from modern materials, and there are even a few with adjustable sights.
Driftwood Johnson
Member
If it's so easy why don't you go ahead and do it?
Supply and demand is the answer. If there was enough demand, somebody would do it. But probably not the Italian replica makers, they are already pretty committed to making replicas of old guns, and cannot keep up the demand for them.
Don McDowell
Member
^^^^ Yessir.. If Uberti would of wanted or needed to they would of found a way to knock of the ROA 30 years ago.
- Status
