Ruger’s Investment Casting Technology?

[Rule3]

These puppies are frequently bought with the notion of pushing the boundaries. I am looking at the stainless .45 Colt. And since I reload and since I use Starline brass, which is tested to 44 Mag pressure levels, I feel I can safely go to that level.

Not in your SW Mt Gun, it is not built to take those pressures, It is not the same Frame/Cylinder as a SW M 29!

 

[MaxP]

These puppies are frequently bought with the notion of pushing the boundaries. I am looking at the stainless .45 Colt. And since I reload and since I use Starline brass, which is tested to 44 Mag pressure levels, I feel I can safely go to that level.

Are you talking about the Mountain Gun?

 

[Varminterror]

Ruger dropped their ads and slunk off.

Yeah... a quick view of the stock values for Ruger and S&W (now AOBC) shows that Ruger hasn’t been sweating S&W’s marketing, not for a long, long time.

 

[JohnKSa]

Years ago Ruger began advertising that their lost wax cast revolvers were superior to S&W's forged frame revolvers.
S&W struck back with what may be the most devastating media ad ever done with the infamous "Hamburger" ad.
Ruger dropped their ads and slunk off.

It's accepted that in order to have the same strength of a forged part a cast part needs to be slightly larger due to the more porous nature of cast metal.

The real irony is that if you read the fine print, that S&W ad is for the 686 which is the same weight as a Ruger GP100 (with the same barrel length) and will fit into the same holster.

 

[dfariswheel]

Yeah... a quick view of the stock values for Ruger and S&W (now AOBC) shows that Ruger hasn’t been sweating S&W’s marketing, not for a long, long time.

Ruger dropped their marketing campaign and slunk off.
It had nothing to do with Ruger stocks versus S&W's, it had to do with a miss-fired ad campaign where they had their ads nuked by whatever genius was doing S&W's ads.

The lost wax cast process has been around for thousands of years. It was a lost art until fairly recently, and was rediscovered by the jewelry industry.
It can be done by several methods, either with any object that will melt or burn out of a mold, or by using a wax model.
I first became familure with the process in watchmaking school watching the jewelry students using it.
They carved whatever they wanted from special waxes, coated them with a ceramic mix, then put the mold upside down in a furnace.
The extreme heat melted/vaporized the wax, then while it was still hot they used centrifugal casting to inject metal into the mold.
Once cooled they broke off the ceramic and they had a nearly finished item that needed only final finishing.

Another method is to use any object that will melt or burn.
As example one student made his wife a silver grasshopper, using a real grasshopper.
He coated the dead hopper with the ceramic and cast it.
Details were extremely fine.

The big advantage of lost wax casting for firearms is that done right little machine work is needed. About all that's needed is some threading, final sizing of holes, hardening and tempering, and final polishing of the exterior.
In some cases even larger threads like some receiver barrel threads can be cast.
Another advantage is that some areas can be cast to size without having to make clearance cuts with machine tools in order to get to that area.
This can give a stronger part.

A metallurgist will usually tell you that if you have two complex parts like a pistol frame, BOTH THE EXACT SAME SIZE AND SHAPE, the forged frame will be somewhat stronger then the cast part.

All this forged versus cast is somewhat an exercise in futility, because these days many firearms have plastic frames.

 

[AustinTX]

Does anyone know whether Ruger uses the hot isostatic pressing (“HIPping”) process in its revolver production?

 

[25-20 WCF]

Perhaps you did not notice I said "Yes, the frame needs to be able to withstand the concussion and buffeting of recoil, but that is completely different than an over pressure event destroying a cylinder.....

Actually many if us did notice, and you are still incorrect. Frames stretch due to exceeding the steel’s elastic limit, not from peening due to battering from recoil. Case head thrust pushes back on the recoil plate, stressing the top strap and lower frame. Case head thrust is caused by chamber pressure and the maximum internal diameter of the case. Poorly heat-treated frames or frames with inadequate metallurgy do stretch, while their cylinders remain perfectly intact.


.

 

[MaxP]

But generally speaking, if one is not shooting elephant gun cartridges from a revolver, it does not matter what process was used to make the frame.

That is of course unless the revolver in question is chambered in one of these so-called “elephant gun cartridges.” I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a revolver chambered in a particular cartridge to actually be able to handle a steady diet of said cartridge.

 

[forrest r]

Got an answer already:

“Ruger used Douglas barrels until 1973 when they made the transition to Wilson. They began making their own barrels in about 1992.”

Check out post #43 in this thread. There's a video talking about making the gp100's. At the 2:05 mark in the video it clearly states their bbl blanks are outsourced for the gp100's.

At the end of the day it depends on which ruger firearm your talking about as to who makes what.

 

[forrest r]

The real issue with ruger has nothing to do with how they cast their frames & everything to do with management.

IMHO:
They make an excellent frame, it's the horrid things they do to it afterwards and the lack of qc. Anyone can ask about employment at ruger, they have 1 heck of a turn-a-round. Used to be $10.75 an hour, up to $12 an hour and 12 hour shifts. A simple search on indeed will give you an idea.
https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Ruger-4/reviews?fcountry=US&floc=Prescott,+AZ

It always comes down to tooling with ruger & more specifically the reamers, drillbits, cutters. Preventive maintenance and regularly scheduled tooling changeouts are non-existent. As are qc'ing of incoming tooling.

 

[tipoc]

The real issue with ruger has nothing to do with how they cast their frames & everything to do with management.

IMHO:
They make an excellent frame, it's the horrid things they do to it afterwards and the lack of qc. Anyone can ask about employment at ruger, they have 1 heck of a turn-a-round. Used to be $10.75 an hour, up to $12 an hour and 12 hour shifts. A simple search on indeed will give you an idea.
https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Ruger-4/reviews?fcountry=US&floc=Prescott,+AZ

It always comes down to tooling with ruger & more specifically the reamers, drillbits, cutters. Preventive maintenance and regularly scheduled tooling changeouts are non-existent. As are qc'ing of incoming tooling.

A specific question was asked by the OP which had to do with casting frames vs. forged. That's the topic we've been discussing. The quality of the work at the Prescott facility and Ruger's employment practices are another matter.

 

[forrest r]

A specific question was asked by the OP which had to do with casting frames vs. forged. That's the topic we've been discussing. The quality of the work at the Prescott facility and Ruger's employment practices are another matter.

Thank you for correcting me. I'm going to have to start reading these darn threads more better!!!!
I could of swore in post #19 the op asked:
"BTW, I always assumed their cylinders and barrels were machined from forged steel. "

For some odd reason after reading that post (that's the op's post #19) I thought the op was asking about rugers machining processes. I don't know why but I've always looked at the people running the machines as part of the "machining process".

By the way post #34,#35,#36,#37,#38,#39,#40,#41,#43,#44,#45,#50,#51,#52,#53,#54 & #59 have nothing to do with cast vs forged frames. Looking forward to you responding to those posts in the same manner you did my post.

 

[jski]

Are you talking about the Mountain Gun?

Absolutely not! I was strictly referring to the Ruger. I’m fully aware of the limitations of my Mountain Gun. One of the reasons I pretty much limit the powder I use to Unique (for my Mountain Gun). You ain’t gonna chase crazy velocities/pressure levels using Unique.