Rough machining on new 44 Redhawk

[Master Blaster]

A minor chatter mark inside the frame... Yeah In SPEC, the hammer rub because of a loose fit on the pivot is also normal. Two shims one on either side of the hammer will fix it. How many Lbs are the double and single action trigger pulls? Are they rough or smooth? That is much more important than a little cosmetic flaw. Does the gun go bang in DA every time?

 

[TTv2]

No, QC is a thing of the past during COVID.

Ruger was having QC issues before COVID, they will have issues after COVID. During high demand times all manufacturers focus more on numbers that get shipped, not numbers that get returned.

I've worked with guys who worked at Ruger during Sandy Hook, so when I see someone getting undersize throats on an SP101 it's like nothing unusual about that.

This tho, it's not like it's some imperfection that's not easily visible, this one stares you in the face each time you cock the hammer. Like, this is something i would expect to see on a Wrangler or a basic GP100, not a $900 Redhawk.

 

[TTv2]

OP, don’t feel too bad. I bought a new SP101 and the rifling had chatter marks like that on every land. The cylinder would also bind up after 40-50 shots.

I sent it back and they fixed the cylinder issue. However, they said the barrel was in spec.
I will never buy a new Ruger again.

Non LCR revolver? I agree. Ruger semi auto? Those are more often than not exceptionally well made at the price they sell for.

 

[MartinS]

If I saw that gun in a shop I would not buy it. Email those pictures to Ruger.

 

[LOLBELL]

Nope. It should not. The problem is no one is "fitting" revolvers these days - they just have poorly paid untrained employees "assembling" them. It's all about how many can we produce per hour and ship out?

I guess Ruger should hire a bunch of $75 an hour hand fitters, that way all those revolvers that have those ghastly machine marks that you can see when the hammer is cocked will be slick inside and out. Of course that Redhawk would become a $2500 revolver then.

I am not a Ruger employee nor do I own any Ruger stock but I do know a good buy when I see one. Ruger makes a quality firearm for a budget price. I do own several. I have a Super Blackhawk Hunter that cost $750 new and a Freedom Arms that cost 4 times that, in other words I could have bought 4 of the Hunters for what tha F/A cost. The Hunter will do 2” at a hundred yards, so will the F/A. Me, my boys, nor my grandsons and probably not even my great grand kids will wear either out.

The grips on the Hunter are not a perfect fit, there are some places that needed some polishing that I done myself. The recoil shield looks like hogs rump sewn up with a muscadine vine, and I can see that when the cylinder is out. Does the F/A have any of these cosmetic atrocities, no. Was it worth the extra $2250? Not buy a long shot.

I am not trying to step on anyone’s toes here, but Ruger is suppling a public request at a reasonable price. They even go so far, without a warranty I might add, to fix anything about the firearm that you don’t like at their expense, including shipping both ways and usually have it back to you in less than two weeks

 

[buck460XVR]

Ruger has always had a reputation for making the "working man's guns". Affordable, yet reliable. Fit and finish on many of their firearms has taken a backseat to keeping the firearm within a price point. Exceptions for their most part, have been their 10/22s and the #1s. My 77/44 has chatter marks on the bolt that make it look like it rolled off the truck and slid down the street. Doesn't affect accuracy or function. Both bys got Model 77s in ought-six for their 12th birthdays, which were 14 years apart. Both have some slight cosmetic issue that is not seen when looking thru the scope. While not virtual tack drivers, they are plenty accurate enough for Wisconsin whitetails. If it concerns you, I'd contact Ruger, odds are they will do something about it. Odds are, after a while, you won't notice it anyway.

 

[TTv2]

I don't think anybody buys a Ruger expecting it to look or feel like a Freedom Arms revolver nor to have the belief that it's hand fitted, but I don't think anyone is paying near a grand for a brand new gun that has a portion of it that looks like it's been finished with a chisel. Like, if you bought a TV brand new and it had dead pixels or a new car and the paint on the roof had deep scratches, you wouldn't accept it now, would you?

Don't give firearm manufacturers a pass when they ship a subpar product just because you like guns. Don't accept lower quality from them like it's some necessary sacrifice for the 2nd Amendment. If Ruger advertises a Redhawk that looks smooth as silk, then they should deliver on what the promise, not just functionally, but cosmetically. That goes for every gun manufacturer within reason.

It really isn't that difficult to do if you push your employees to do better and tell the supervisors what is and isn't acceptable. I know how Ruger operates during panics from multiple people who've worked there, I know their shift supers just want guns out the door no matter what condition because if you can't machine and polish enough guns to meet expectations, you're gone.

Ruger, and others, seem just fine with the status quo where bad guns get shipped so they can put that in their sales reports to make investors happy and fix them bad guns later because those numbers aren't going to affect the quarterly profits and projections figures, but who gets hurt from that? The consumer.

Ruger's not going to fix that willingly, the customer has to demand they do better. Staying silent changes nothing, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

[LaneP]

I like my Ruger's but I get the occasional issue here and there, especially in guns bought the last few years. One I dealt with by reducing the height of the transfer bar on my Vaquero to eliminate a small amount of binding with the hammer nose shelf. My SRH refused to set off CCI magnum rifle primers when trigger cocking (fine in SA mode). Taking a few thousands off the nose of the hammer and shimming it cured that.

Everyone that owns an SR 1911 has probably either experienced or heard of their MIM front sight shooting off, which I did twice until I cured the problem permanently with a machined/pinned steel replacement. Agree with the comments that Ruger is in the business of selling "budget" guns and their error rate is apparently an acceptable part of their marketing strategy. However across the board you'll probably find some issue with just about any brand, I just see more with Ruger because I own more of them.

 

[Dewey 68]

Shimming the hammer can stop the scrubbing on it.

The other stuff is weird, call them and ask about it.

Being stainless, it could be easily removed

If it were me I'd take care of that myself since it's stainless, but if you don't feel comfortable I'm sure Ruger will clean it up. Please keep up posted on what happens.

 

[LOLBELL]

Like, if you bought a TV brand new and it had dead pixels

Dead pixels seems to me to be a function problem, so no I wouldn’t have it. Scratches on the back of the cabinet, I could care less.


“I don't think anybody buys a Ruger expecting it to look or feel like a Freedom Arms revolver nor to have the belief that it's hand fitted”

Someone upstream definitely said something about “fitters” said all Ruger had was “assemblers”. I simply suggested that Ruger hire skilled “fitters” and adjust the price accordingly.

I’ll never agree that a tool, which is what a Ruger revolver is, should roll of of the showroom floor cosmetically perfect.It should function flawlessly. If function is affected Ruger will make it right. They’ll even fix those small chatter marks in the hammer trough free of charge to keep him happy. Try sending a claw hammer back to Stanley to get some machine chatter buffed out.

 

[DT Guy]

Dead pixels seems to me to be a function problem, so no I wouldn’t have it. Scratches on the back of the cabinet, I could care less.


“I don't think anybody buys a Ruger expecting it to look or feel like a Freedom Arms revolver nor to have the belief that it's hand fitted”

Someone upstream definitely said something about “fitters” said all Ruger had was “assemblers”. I simply suggested that Ruger hire skilled “fitters” and adjust the price accordingly.

I’ll never agree that a tool, which is what a Ruger revolver is, should roll of of the showroom floor cosmetically perfect.It should function flawlessly. If function is affected Ruger will make it right. They’ll even fix those small chatter marks in the hammer trough free of charge to keep him happy. Try sending a claw hammer back to Stanley to get some machine chatter buffed out.

I'm not one of those guys who goes over a new gun with a magnifying glass, but this issue is really obvious, and obviously due to just poor machining.
And when I buy a $900 hammer, I'd prefer it didn't have visible evidence of poor manufacturing, thank you.

Some stuff is minor (like little scratches from handling, rough triggers) and expected. Gouges (don't know what else you'd call them) aren't really acceptable *anywhere* on a modern, quality handgun; even inside the frame those would be unexpectedly poor quality.

I don't pay too much attention to cosmetics, but I'd be looking to have that repaired.

Larry

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

And when I buy a $900 hammer, I'd prefer it didn't have visible evidence of poor manufacturing, thank you.

---
There are no "$900 hammers." That's just the excuse Mil-Int and "Skunkworks Operations" used to collect and distribute black-bag funds around the globe to produce next-generation weapons systems without Congressional oversight. Ditto for $1000 toilet seats and $1M rental vehicles. Our Congress leaks like a rusty boat and can't be trusted with such information.

 

[TTv2]

Dead pixels seems to me to be a function problem, so no I wouldn’t have it. Scratches on the back of the cabinet, I could care less.


“I don't think anybody buys a Ruger expecting it to look or feel like a Freedom Arms revolver nor to have the belief that it's hand fitted”

Someone upstream definitely said something about “fitters” said all Ruger had was “assemblers”. I simply suggested that Ruger hire skilled “fitters” and adjust the price accordingly.

I’ll never agree that a tool, which is what a Ruger revolver is, should roll of of the showroom floor cosmetically perfect.It should function flawlessly. If function is affected Ruger will make it right. They’ll even fix those small chatter marks in the hammer trough free of charge to keep him happy. Try sending a claw hammer back to Stanley to get some machine chatter buffed out.

A revolver can be a tool, but more often than not today it's use is for entertainment, just like a TV. You enjoy having and using both your TV and your revolver, but when there's something wrong with either of them and it's due to a problem from the factory, it's not so enjoyable.

Again, this isn't an issue with assemblers not being fitters, there were several hands and eyes that saw that issue in the hammer slot, but they've been told by their immediate supervisors that it's good, put it together, ship it, CS will deal with it weeks/months down the road.

Other than video games (Cyberpunk 2077 the latest example) what other business/industry knowingly ships a product that has issues?

 

[ECVMatt]

To the OP: I sent a Blackhawk in last month for repair. Ruger had it for about seven days and it was back to my doorstep in less than twelve days overall. This was a gun that my family has owned since the 80's and it started to misfire. A local gunsmith told me it needed a new firing pin. As it turns out,it just needed a new transfer bar. I bet they get it back to you quickly.

 

[UncleEd]

I can't hardly wait for China to take over
the production of all our products.

 

[LOLBELL]

I'm not one of those guys who goes over a new gun with a magnifying glass, but this issue is really obvious, and obviously due to just poor machining.
And when I buy a $900 hammer, I'd prefer it didn't have visible evidence of poor manufacturing, thank you.

Some stuff is minor (like little scratches from handling, rough triggers) and expected. Gouges (don't know what else you'd call them) aren't really acceptable *anywhere* on a modern, quality handgun; even inside the frame those would be unexpectedly poor quality.

I don't pay too much attention to cosmetics, but I'd be looking to have that repaired.

Larry

If I bought a $900 hammer I too would expect it to be perfect just like I would a $2500 revolver. If I bought a $50 hammer cosmetics would not bother me no more than machining marks in the trigger trough on a $900 revolver

 

[TTv2]

$900 is LOLBELL's lunch money apparently. For most people $900 is their rent, utilities, food, and car payment for a month.

I guess everybody's got a different price for where they'll make exceptions saying poor QC is acceptable. For me that's closer to 400, not 900.

 

[LOLBELL]

$900 is LOLBELL's lunch money apparently. For most people $900 is their rent, utilities, food, and car payment for a month.

I guess everybody's got a different price for where they'll make exceptions saying poor QC is acceptable. For me that's closer to 400, not 900.

TTv2, We are going to have to agree to disagree. I do agree that folks have a different opinion where they draw the line when making purchase in what’s acceptable and what is not. To me a large frame heavy magnum hand gun that will wear out many generations of a family that cost $800(per OP’s post) is a heck if a buy regardless of one’s financial situation.

I respect you opinion and think it’s great that we can discuss our opinions in a civil manner on the High Road.

Here’s wishing you and yours a very Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year

 

[MartinS]

Guns for the working man. OK. Made by working men and women. Right?
I think American working men and women do better than what was shown on that Redhawk.
Corporate just needs to hire another working man or woman to do some quality control.

 

[entropy]

mobullets22, You'll find Ruger's Customer Service to be excellent. In a perfect world, that would never have left the factory. But Ruger recognizes that it does happen from time to time, and they are very good about making things right.

 

[mobullets22]

Seems it struck a nerve with some. I didn't expect a 2500 pistol. I did expect basic attention to detail. Ruger apparently also expects basic attention to detail as they were willing to take it back and fix it. If their expectations didn't align with mine, I don't think they would have agreed to fix it free of charge. It is still in the factory (I sent it back and it got there just before christmas). A scratch here, a less polished part here, I get it. These machine marks are the result of someone dropping the ball and I won't feel bad about asking them to fix it. For the record, the hammer scuff marks were not a gripe and I did not ask them to fix this, they just happen to show in picture. I will keep everyone updated.

 

[LOLBELL]

Seems it struck a nerve with some. I didn't expect a 2500 pistol. I did expect basic attention to detail. Ruger apparently also expects basic attention to detail as they were willing to take it back and fix it. If their expectations didn't align with mine, I don't think they would have agreed to fix it free of charge.

Mobullets22, that’s one of the things that impresses me with Ruger. They build a better budget revolver, in my book, than anyone else. However, it is not a show piece. It is a working revolver. They let things get by that might not pass the buyer’s standards and send it out the door. If you don’t like it they will do whatever it takes, within reason of course, to make the buyer happy. Repair, Replace, or Refund all this with no warranty. In a very timely manner too. Usually in less than two weeks.

I assure you no one struck a nerve with me. It’s comical that you see more bashing on Ruger than S&W, Colt, Taurus, or any other revolver maker combined. Each of those have the same Q/C issues as Ruger, why so few bashing them? It’s a mystery. I enjoy defending them just as much as others enjoy bashing them. We each have an opinion and as long as it stays civil THR is a good place state it. I’m not trying to change any bodies, just stating mine.

I know you’ll enjoy your new Redhawk and I sure Ruger will do what it takes to make you a happy customer

 

[springfield30-06]

Update. They are sending UPS to my house to pick the pistol up and will ship it back via FedEx. They are covering all shipping cost. I just hope it doesn't sit in factory for eternity.

It is likely obvious that holiday season and COVID restrictions/issues may play a factor in the turn-around time. I had always heard that Ruger customer service was excellent and the one time that I have had to use it, I was super happy with it. I do not/have not owned many Ruger firearms, but the Gunsite Scout Rifle that I purchased almost three years ago had an issue that I posted here on THR. After sending me three free magazines to see if it resolved the issue (and it didn't), they paid for shipping both ways and rectified the problem. Once I sent the rifle back to Ruger, I had it back in my hands in 8 days.

I am confident that you will receive a firearm to your satisfaction in a relatively (holiday timing/COVID issues) short time period. Hopefully only one trip back to the factory will be enough to fix the issues but if you are unlucky enough to necessitate sending it back again, Ruger will make it right. PITA- yes, but at least they stand by their product.

 

[wmgeorge]

That revolver only costs $900 because of the market place. Anyone that's been in manufacturing and around CNC know that. Material cost less than $50, machine time at the most a couple hours and 1/2 hour to put it all together does not equal $900 retail.

 

[Drail]

Ruger has always produced very good firearms for the price but I assure you that 20 years ago they were in a totally different class than they are today. I am not talking about tooling marks or rough finishing where it does not matter. Today they are all about "units per shift". And it's not just Ruger either. The S&W revolvers from 30 years ago are so much better than their current line. It's really sad when you have seen the changes over the years. I worked on S&Ws for many years and they were The Standard. You never saw one with a canted barrel or sights that were off center. Never. ALL of my S&Ws are from 30 to 40 years ago - I will not buy the new ones.