Ruger SR1911 future
- Thread starter msparks
- Start date
- Status
Skylerbone
Member
FYI all Ruger uses their proprietary 415 Stainless for the cast frame and machined the slide from bar stock 416.
floydster
Member
I am buying a new SR 1911, wait, I'm buying one for my Son-In-Law and my daughter also---and I think my Son would like one also--can't go wrong with Ruger, so that makes four we are getting
Last edited:
I dunno what the other companies use.
According to Ed Harris (a former Ruger employee and the inventor of my favorite solvent), Ruger uses 415 in their barrels and cylinders due to the strength and hardness they can get out of it (35 RC min hardness). I do know 1911 slides are supposed to be in the 40 RC hardness range. If the frame is 415 and as hard as the slide the two will gall and maybe that's the problem.
According to Ed Harris (a former Ruger employee and the inventor of my favorite solvent), Ruger uses 415 in their barrels and cylinders due to the strength and hardness they can get out of it (35 RC min hardness). I do know 1911 slides are supposed to be in the 40 RC hardness range. If the frame is 415 and as hard as the slide the two will gall and maybe that's the problem.
Look around long enough on this site...and many others on the internet, and you will find some complaints about physical for pretty much EVERY model ever sold.
I've seen complaints of the M&P rusting. I've seen complains of Glocks going Kaboom. I've seen complaints of SIGs rusting or just having overall bad fit and finish.
Magnumite
Member
Quote: "What makes you think Ruger employed a proper alloy for this gun?"
I'd say since Ruger does cast Caspian's frames, they have competent engineers, experience and tons of information and research they would know a sound alloy to use. The track record of Caspian's frame material is outstanding.
One can invent all kinds of reasons to slam a product, but the reasons may not necessarily be true.
I'd say since Ruger does cast Caspian's frames, they have competent engineers, experience and tons of information and research they would know a sound alloy to use. The track record of Caspian's frame material is outstanding.
One can invent all kinds of reasons to slam a product, but the reasons may not necessarily be true.
Usually a discussion like this gets shut down. I'm glad that is not the case this time. I'm learning from the exchange. I'm looking closely at this model. Could it be that this was an early issue and some of the manufacturing bugs had not yet been worked out?
Magnumite
Member
"Ruger frames and Caspian frames are cast from different alloys, if they are indeed cast from 415 stainless."
Ruger is cast from 415, Caspian from 416. Those are the alloys. Perhaps a metallurgist can tell us the difference.
Ruger is cast from 415, Caspian from 416. Those are the alloys. Perhaps a metallurgist can tell us the difference.
Skylerbone
Member
Unfortunately as noted 415 SS is proprietary to Ruger which means a metallurgist would have to have access to the formula. I'm sure it's out there but I'm not sure anyone having experience with the composition will happen along here any time soon.
What troubles me is not galling but the fact that Ruger is supposed to have computerized equipment to verify tolerances for all major components of the SR1911. I'm now left wondering whether a batch sample is checked instead of every pistol. Combine that with their desire to produce a tight fit minus the hand fitting and there is potential to witness many more "stuck" slides.
I hope the problem witnessed by our fellow forum member is isolated though every manufacturer has a few slip past. My issue with Ruger of late is rushing to market half-cocked.
What troubles me is not galling but the fact that Ruger is supposed to have computerized equipment to verify tolerances for all major components of the SR1911. I'm now left wondering whether a batch sample is checked instead of every pistol. Combine that with their desire to produce a tight fit minus the hand fitting and there is potential to witness many more "stuck" slides.
I hope the problem witnessed by our fellow forum member is isolated though every manufacturer has a few slip past. My issue with Ruger of late is rushing to market half-cocked.
ISO1600
Member
i think my SR's situation will wind up being either isolated or a verrrrrrry small minority. It had the most miniscule of burr(s) on the slide or frame, which i was not even able to see upon (admittedly not extremely careful) inspection. After proper lube and shooting, it is not a problem in the least anymore.
Ruger got back to me and told me that it should just be cosmetic, but if i ever have ANY problems with it again to send it their way and they'll make it right.
That is the answer i was expecting and hoping for. I'm sure had i contacted them right away before shooting it they would've said to send it in then and there.
Ruger got back to me and told me that it should just be cosmetic, but if i ever have ANY problems with it again to send it their way and they'll make it right.
That is the answer i was expecting and hoping for. I'm sure had i contacted them right away before shooting it they would've said to send it in then and there.
Great results from Ruger.
Therefore, each handgun should not be checked, but instread the process of casting, of milling, etc.
QC does not check output, but the process instead. Deming, who is the father of QC stated that, if the processes are in line, the output is guaranteed. The measurement of each process is what is important. Checking the output adds cost, and actually insures rejects, in part because you are adjusting the process after the fact.
Therefore, each handgun should not be checked, but instread the process of casting, of milling, etc.
Skylerbone
Member
By that reasoning there is a flaw in the process at Ruger. Ask a serious AR guy about his barrel and whether individual testing is important to him. He'll tell you who does and who doesn't.
It prolly won't be a problem now that you have the lube figured out. My point is and always has been that Ruger should have employed an alloy that works with any lube, butter even.
I dunno why they decided to cast the frame from barrel steel.
Last edited:
I can't and won't argue that point. There is a flaw somewhere in "A" process, which allowed poor manufacturing of that gun.
As far as barrel makers go, smaller shops do more end testing, because the owner is generally owner operator, and therefore all processes are confned to one or a few personnel. Regardless, end testing is still the less efficient way to improve quality over all, and guarantees problems to be discovered after-the-fact, and after the process has been out-of-spec for a long period of time. This also results in higher manufacturing cost due to waste.
For example, by relying upon end inspections, three, five, or mabe fifteen handguns may make it down the assembly line before a problem is discovered. At that time, the process has varied yet again, and the QC expert is not sure where to start.
By measuring the variances of the processes, the out put is almost always guaranteed.
This is the last I will comment on QC, as I don't wish to high jack the thread. If you're truely interested in QC, read Out Of The Crisis By E. Deming; other readings by Juran are also suggested.
Last edited:
El Mariachi
Member
And I agree----so many gun forums (Pro 2) are so anti Pro 1. Haven't quite figured that one out yet, because I really enjoy both 'spirited debate' and some harmless & entertaining 'stick pokin'. But whatever, taint my forum.
On a more serious note though, we went to the big Turner's Outdoors gun show in Corona, So Cal last Saturday to check everything out. Kinda cool, kinda pricey, kinda informative. But when I spied the Ruger kiosk I sped over there and asked the head guy about when the SR1911 was coming to California. And all he did was laugh. I asked what was the joke, and he told me that the 1911 will never be sold in Kali, 'cuz Ruger refuses to jump thru the hoops. So I mentioned the article I read a week ago, how Ruger wanted the NRA's help in selling one million firearms across America in one year, and how if that happened, Ruger would donate a million bucks to them. Furthermore I suggested that they could probably sell 20---40,000 SR1911's in Cali in a month, if they would just spend the little effort (and money) to get our stupid DOJ people to run the tests on them and get it listed on 'The Roster'.
He basically bid me adieu, and to have a nice day. Great. Maybe I'm missing something, but this doesn't smell right. Hell, in my business, if I knew I could invest just $8,000.00 and end up with 10 million buck plus in a year, I'd be all over it....
Last edited:
DammitBoy
Member
I agree with the Ruger Rep - to heck with California. You reap what you sow and now you're stuck with it.
I'm glad everytime I see a gun company or someone in the industry ignore California.
I'm glad everytime I see a gun company or someone in the industry ignore California.
- Status
