Revolver Sticker Shock

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that the confusion here is over Ruger's triple locking cylinder. On Smith and Wesson revolvers, there are two true locking point, at the bottom of the cylinder and at the rear of the cyliner. Smith and Wesson revolvers use the ejector rod as a third locking point at the front of the cylinder. This is not a particularly strong locking mechanism. I've heard of bent ejector rods and ejector rods that have actually unscrewed.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding here, but I think you're mistaking the term "internal lock" as used in this thread to mean part of the gun's normal mechanism, when the discussion has been about the keyed safety locks now being built into some guns. Your description sounds more like part of the gun's operating mechanism than a safety device.

Maybe we're discussing two very different parts of the weapon?

KR
 
We're actually on the same page.

I was suggesting that the person that thought that Rugers had an integral lock may have read about the triple locking cylinder and assumed that this was similiar to the integral locking mechanism on Smiths.
 
One Ruger double-action/hand ejector revolver does have an internal lock (blocks the hammer strut when "on") See the link in post #75.

It has nothing to do with the cylinder latching...
 
Ruger seems to be doing well with its GP-100 line, but look at what's happening to the cost of commodities. Gold and silver are skyrocketing -- as is the cost of steel. I won't generally spend a hundred dollars or more for a knife, yet knife materials are rising at frightening rates.

With guns, 1911 pistols are already a grand or more and many revolvers are right behind them. S&W is no longer producing its excellent second and third generation of autos, nor could they at today's prices.

As I stated earlier, resale bluebook prices are fiction in most cases. It doesn't make sense that a current production S&W stainless revolver retail for close to a grand or more, but for a mint version of the same revolver to sell for hundreds of dollars less -- especially when they're made of superior materials -- is ridiculous. These things aren't cars (which depreciate the instant they leave the lot).

This all keeps good revolvers from circulating in gunstores, and people who scout out auction sites frequently complain that guns are selling for higher prices than expected.

The bottom line is that things are going to get increasingly worse. Raw materials will have to be cheapened and Jim Kramer says that China is intentionally keeping its currency in tow to virtually capture all manufacuring in the U.S.

It's really scary. Gold is already over a grand (about $1,100 the last I looked). Silver is almost twenty dollars, and as it rises, you'll see industrial products increase as well.

I'm not crazy about Ruger's brand new revolvers. With taxes increasing and raw resources increasing, we're living in a whole new world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top