Ridiculous call to Ruger about 1958 Single Six

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, you lost me at "240gr". That's even worse, the half jacket Speer bullets have a soft nose/core. No 240gr is the "right bullet" for bear.

I'll ignore the needless jab about reading comprehension.

I never said it was the "right" bullet for bear. It is what I used. Ignore the comment as you wish. It was not needless as you conjecture. Some folks, like you, decide your opinion is the only right one on the planet. You seem not to entertain any other opinions unless they fit within your mindset. Have fun in your world.

I am gonna go back to the BP forum and leave this place. It reminds me of Calguns (ever been there? You would fit right in) with all of the snide comments.

At least in the THR BP forum folks listen to each other, actually read the posts, and ask questions of one another for information.

Goodbye.
 
Last edited:
I never said it was the "right" bullet for bear. It is what I used. Ignore the comment as you wish. It was not needless as you conjecture. Some folks, like you, decide your opinion is the only right one on the planet. You seem not to entertain any other opinions unless they fit within your mindset. Have fun in your world.

I am gonna go back to the BP forum and leave this place. It reminds me of Calguns (ever been there? You would fit right in) with all of the snide comments.

At least in the THR BP forum folks listen to each other, actually read the posts, and ask questions of one another for information.

Goodbye.
Don't be so dramatic. The only one who has made snide comments here is you. You easily could have "asked a question for information" and I would have gladly extrapolated but instead you chose to get defensive and snarky.

You made an absolute statement that was patently false, that a handgun can't penetrate a bear's skull. You seem to have made that judgement based on experience with a bullet that should never be used on bear in the first place. The bullet you referenced is a relic of the 1950's, we have much better bullets available. I'm sorry that my retort, suggesting that there are far better bullets appropriate for bear, caused you so much turmoil.
 
I am confused about what is ridiculous here. Is it asking Ruger for parts for a gun they made 60 years ago, or is it Ruger's response to the question?
It was about Ruger's response,....though I understand the "why" now...as several have pointed out their "butt saving" tactic...and in today's sue happy country, I really don't blame them. As far as I'm concerned, the thread has been satisfactorily answered.

I didn't get to the point of whether or not they actually DO still have a fixed rear sight for a 60 year old gun, and on that, I'll have to remain ignorant.
 
You might try to get your gun dealer to try to order the part you need. I tried to order something (can’t remember what part it was) from them a few years ago and they said no. I had my gunshop owner call them and they sent it no questions asked. Also you might try Numrich Gun Parts Corp and see if they have what you need.
 
It was about Ruger's response,....though I understand the "why" now...as several have pointed out their "butt saving" tactic...and in today's sue happy country, I really don't blame them. As far as I'm concerned, the thread has been satisfactorily answered.

I didn't get to the point of whether or not they actually DO still have a fixed rear sight for a 60 year old gun, and on that, I'll have to remain ignorant.

Thanks for your reply, Orion8472. I was looking around my home, trying to think of any 60 years old products I might reasonably expect the manufacturer to still have parts for, and I could not think of anything. Guns are remarkable in that respect.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget to check ebay now and then. I've been amazed by some of the esoteric stuff I've found there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top