The post Bill Ruger, Ruger handgun era

[MCgunner]

I just want to get some comments. Let's leave any of ol' Bill's politics out of this discussion and just concentrate on the guns, okay? Now, I've always been a Ruger fanboy, hell for stout guns, accurate, reliable to the max. Bought my first in 1978, a Security Six which I later traded away for a Blackhawk in .357 that I still have. I've got two Ruger P guns one of which is a favorite auto, the KP90DC. I've got a couple of Ruger .22 autos and a 10/22, everyone has a 10/22 or should. I have a Ruger Old Army and a favorite .45 stainless Blackhawk that is amazingly accurate and which I liked so much I spent some money on engraving for it and a set of Sanbar stag grips. I've owned, in the past, a stainless Old Army that got stolen, a P95 I traded off, and an SP101 I wish I still had, but I bought it from an ex SIL that was deployed to Iraq a second time and was going to pawn it. I told him I'd give him 250 for it and he could buy it back when he got home, which he did. Excellent little gun.

Now, the only thing that's ever broke on any of my Rugers is a magazine release spring on my P90 which, upon calling Ruger, a replacement was in my mail box in 3 days. Excellent CS! But, since old Bill passed on to the great gun range in the sky, Ruger seems to be catering more to the concealed carry market. This is a good thing, but for they seemed to have dropped some of their safety emphasis by coming out with a lot of Glock style striker fired stuff with doohickeys on the trigger. I cannot STAND safe action for a carry gun. So, those are out for me. The little LCP and even, perhaps, the LCR wouldn't have been marketed if ol' Bill were around. Both are excellent weapons IMHO. Most of the old P guns have been dropped, even my favorite the P90. I understand that, though, they don't sell like the Glock wannabe stuff now days. I don't think ol' Bill would have ever approved of a 1911, not sure, but a SINGLE action pistol even if it's well proven?

Now, when the SR22 came out, I just HAD to have one and became a bit of a beta tester. I love the gun, but for a while, I couldn't hit squat with it. I'd bench it and groups would work their was to the left. I'd adjust, still, groups would work their way left. Finally I noticed the rear sight, pooching up out of the dovetail. The friggin' sight is plastic and it'd worn in the dovetail. I "fixed" it with superglue, but understand they went to metal sights on the gun and really need to contact Ruger about that.

So, the SR22 is my only taste of the modern post Ol' Bill era. It's an excellent gun, quite accurate, not much will jam it other than Winchester 333 round bulk crap and Federal American Eagle is a little too weak for it. I carry the gun out in the woods a lot when I'm working and on fishing trips as it pockets well, it's LIGHT, and it is accurate enough to make a decent kit gun.

Lately, I'm hearing more and more gripes about Ruger QC, but hell, I own Taurus handguns (bad internet rep) and love 'em and I hear the same of Smith and Wesson whose guns are pricey and deserve decent CS and QC, I mean, if it's true. There was a post here on a SP101 in .22 that wouldn't shoot for squat. OP thinks it's improperly rifled barrel which, if so, is a MAJOR lapse of QC.

So, I'm wondering what your opinions are on the latest Rugers? Do you think QC is lacking lately? Is your faith in Ruger shaken by all the new stuff out whose design wouldn't meet ol' Bill's standards and rumors of bad quality? I really don't know WHAT to think. They dropped two of my favorite guns, the Old Army and the P90. Probably a sales decision and I understand that. I'm old, have an old fart's traditional tastes for the most part, though I do appreciate polymers if properly applied to firearms. They lower weight of a carry and that is a very good thing. Besides, I made a living in the plastics industry.

So, what do YOU see going on at Ruger? Much to do about nothing or something to worry about in the latest production runs? I hope I don't become about Ruger the way I am about Smith and Wesson, won't buy anything built in the modern era. :banghead:

 

[anothernewb]

Recently bought a Match Champion. I think my personal example is well built and well finished. Don't care much for the bilboard scale roll marks, but that's about the only gripe.

Happy to note that there's no "warning label" on it either.

Friend has bought 2 Ruger American rifles in the past year. stellar value units. shoot extremely well.

 

[jmr40]

Other than the 10-22 I can't think of another category of guns where a Ruger would be my 1st choice. But, a Ruger would be my 2nd choice in almost every category. They build good guns, and I have a lot of respect for the company. Now and then.

I have a slight preference for S&W revolvers, Glock pistols and Winchester rifles, but wouldn't feel at all handicapped with Rugers offerings. The only thing they don't have an option for is a reasonably priced shotgun.

Ruger has always done me right with repairs, but I've had to use their CS a lot. I've had a Blackhawk with the barrel screwed on at an angle. A Sp101 with a defective cylinder stop, defective P-345 and all of the 1st run of the new American rifles in 223 have defective magazines that must be replaced. My brother had to return a 77Mk-II and a 96-44 that were defective. In each case they made it right, but that is still a lot. Most of those issues were with guns made while Bill Ruger was alive The only other defective gun I've gotten from the factory was an early production S&W Sigma.

Their DA revolvers, old and new are probably the best thing they make. One of the few guns I wish I had back was a SS 2.75" Security Six I had years ago. Would rather have that any day vs a 3" Sp-101.

I think Bill was a lot like Colonel Sanders. Both had a vision for their companies and neither realized that times changed. Ruger built guns the way he wanted them and Sanders wanted to keep making chicken only the way he liked it. That is fine, but it limits your customers. When you keep the original recipe and offer other options you can reach a lot more customers and still keep your traditional favorites. Neither Ruger or Sanders understood that.

 

[Sam1911]

I'd say they're simply doing the next iteration of what Ol' Bill would have done (as a young man anyway) and that is try to stay relevant and current in a highly charged and fast-developing modern firearms market.

Bill was a businessman, despite his shortcomings, and when the market says your designs are "also-rans" and not considered (or really consider-able) by the competition crowd or military, police, or among the expanding and relevant citizens' defensive training worlds, you either try to remake yourself or you become a historic footnote.

It isn't just Ruger. As really sound and of undeniable quality as S&W's early generations of autopistols were, they don't make them any more. Those features, which were darlings of a million cops' holsters through the '80s and into the '90s have been found wanting today.

You can say that a Ruger P90 or a Smith Model 39 or a Chevy Caprice or a Sony Walkman is just as good as it ever was, but the market says most folks want something better.

And with that comes growing pains. I think most gun companies are still somewhat in shock at having to respond to the explosion in the gun market and the gun world in the last 10 years or so. Instead of having all the bugs worn out by making the same basic product for a decade or two or three or ...? they're pushing to get near the leader pack in modern gun design. If that means reacting (a million years late) to all the folks wanting a 1911 or AR15? Well, so be it.

I applaud them for keeping their own in-house pistol design team working. By many accounts the new generation of Ruger autos is pretty good, and a whole lot more in-touch than the previous generations. While we're still not seeing them hit the competition circuit in numbers, the day may not be too far off.

And, heck, Ruger isn't the LAST big manufacturer to evolve past the DA/SA lockwork. That shows that maybe they aren't so much the sleeping giant as many would have predicted. A very good thing!

 

[19-3Ben]

Huge Ruger fan here. I love my older Six series wheel guns, and have some of their newer stuff as well.

First off, I know you asked to leave Bill's politics out of this, but in terms of what he'd approve and what he wouldn't, I don't think it's possible.
I love that Ruger puts out "high capacity" pistols designed to meet the modern standard for SD/HD/CCW guns. You may not like polymer guns with striker-fired triggers, and that's fine. It's a matter of taste. But MOST of the market wants those. So bully to Ruger for coming out with the type of guns that old Bill hates.
Of course, to REALLY get into it we need to escape from the realm of handguns and start talking about the rifle where, the Mini-14 has improved by leaps and bounds in the last few years and is offered with higher capacity magazines than the 10-rounders because "no man should need more than 10 rounds." There are also the AR variants that Ruger puts out. Bill must be spinning in his grave. I'd bet if we got some copper wire ole' Bill is spinning fast enough that we could make a generator out of him that could power the entirety of Manhattan.

But now getting back to handguns, as an owner of an LCP and LCR, the quality is different than the "old timey" Rugers. You just can't compete the blued steel and wood of the old guns to the polymer and black finished stainless of new ones. It's an apples to oranges comparison. What I will say is that comparing the quality of the polymer Rugers to their polymer competitors on the market, I have found that Ruger offers comparable quality for lower cost across the board.
I would stack up an SR series pistol against Glock, M&P, and XD any day of the week, yet it costs roughly $75-100 less.
Similarly, I can't stand the S&W Bodyguard .38spl, but the LCR feels wonderful. I compared them side by side and the LCR is what came home with me, and what sits on my hip as I type this.

 

[WestKentucky]

One thing stood prominently in the "old bill" Era which was quality. The guns were well made, stronger than necessary, and unquestionably reliable. The same cannot be said today. I currently find myself looking for a single action .357 and because of my experience with ruger revolvers made in 11 and 12 I have great reservations about buying a Blackhawk. Chattered barrels and horrendous triggers are inexcusable as I experienced on two separate gp100. Looking at the new generations of ruger designs is promising however QC is what makes or breaks a business in the long run. That's why some of the big names are able to keep going...is a Remington 11 the finest shotgun around? Frankly no it isnt, and neither are the B guns but people know what they are getting when putting a thousand bucks on the counter. It's almost as if the current crop of manufacturing VIPs don't understand the difference between what a purchase is and what a gamble is. This is certainly not limited to ruger but it does stink to watch a company fall from such high standings to simply be run of the mill, especially when there is no company making up ground to replace the various top dogs across all industries from guns to cars, toys to hammers. If I buy ruger I will buy old. If I buy s&w I will buy old. If I buy colt I will buy old. I can think of one gun I prefer in new form which is a crickett rifle that was made after that stupid lock was removed...and that's just to avoid the worst positioned lock ever made.

 

[Ed Ames]

I am under the impression that Ruger's original values were to adapt and "rightsize" (not always shrink)/"right material" (cast metal, aluminum in place of steel, etc.) found designs (starting with turning a hand-crank drill into a .22 pistol and running all the way to miniaturizing an m14). That's a space that feels natural to people who have gone through economic downturns so the timing was right.

It is also a hard space to really strike out from. If your reputation is based on frugal (buy for a lifetime, sometimes downsized), and sometimes novel in a material sense (stamped sheet metal instead of machined, cast instead of forged, aluminum instead of steel, etc.) but not particularly original products (copies of TV six guns etc), how do you break out of that?

I see many ways they have tried. It may be they have succeeded too, I don't know what percentage of their income comes from each product line they offer.

Personally, where they are today isn't very interesting to me. The only products they still make that draw any of my attention (and dollars) is single action revolvers, and honestly Uberti has them beat on fit and finish (though not strength).

I tried to get onboard with the sr22 but honestly a pf9 or P11 with a .22lr conversion is only $100 more and worth every penny of the difference.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Ruger is my first choice for the following:

.22 semiauto rifle
.22 semiauto pistol
.38 DA pocket revolver
.357 DA medium frame revolver
.44mag/.454 DA revolver
all calibers for SA revolvers

I think Ruger continues to do a great job making these. I just wish they would offer more choices in barrel length/sight configuration for the GP100 and SRH.

 

[mgmorden]

I really, really like Ruger.

To a large degree they get accused of "copying". IE, the LCP from the Kel-tec P3AT. The LC9 from the PF9. The 1911 from everyone else on the planet.

However, in general Ruger seems to do good. They're conservative in that they generally stick to paradigms that are well tested, but they also tend to come out with a LOT of variety and iterations of their vairous guns. They also tend to be well built. Not overbuilt like we'd all like, but generally they build their guns so that they run, and run well, but keep the costs down. 95% of the time when I know anyone is looking for a handgun (or now a hunting rifle with the Ruger American out) I always recommend that they look at Ruger's offerings.

The only thing I haven't liked about Ruger lately would be the lawyerization of their products. Anything that could conceivably be called a safety device was included on their guns for a while there, and most of it was of little practical use. They have recently stopped their marketing efforts in California however, and their latest 9E gun has done away with at least the LCI so maybe they're reversing trend a bit there.

Overall though, I like them.

 

[george d dennis]

Ruger

I think the older ruger was better, The security six"s , The 44mag carbine.
They didnt seem to be made so cheaply and would last you a life time. Maybe
im getting old but i know of old timers that wouldnt want anything different.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I have seen a few examples of poor QC and I expected it with the gun buying craze that went on for quite awhile. It's a poor excuse, but valid. I've come to view all guns as individuals. Make and reputation don't hold as much water as they used to. Check each gun before purchase. If buying on line, the pics better be great or I won't touch it.

As far as the types of guns they are building now, I think it reflects the majority of the market. With CC laws in the news lately, and a lot of folks are choosing to arm themselves for walking around, the demand for CC guns is high right now. Once that market desire is well fed, those folks who actually realize they like to shoot will start to develope interests in range guns, and guns that are more suited to HD. I think the market will swing towards newer offerings in full size guns again.

One thing seems clear. Polymer is here to stay.

 

[stchman]

I am a pretty big Ruger fan as well. I own several Ruger firearms:

10/22 Tactical Target - very accurate rifle but pricey
SR9 - very reliable, but does not shoot laquer steel cased ammo
LCP - reliable but a handful to shoot
SR22 - very reliable,
Mark III 22/45 - exceptionally accurate, expensive, PITA to takedown
(2) P95s - inexpensive, accurate, and reliable
P90 - very accurate and reliable
Mini-14 (580 series) - decently accurate and very reliable with Ruger mags

I own 9 Ruger firearms and have had virtually trouble-free operation. Am I lucky? I don't think so.

One thing I do notice is that Ruger firearms that use detachable magazines, aftermarket mags don't work very well. The exception is the P95, you can get Mec-Gar 17 round mags.

 

[NOMI WASP]

I'm not a fan of Ruger Polymer. Seems very thin and cheap to me compared to Glock and Smith. I don't have much use for any of their products and still don't understand who they're the number one firearms manufactuer in the US. I guess because of their extensive product line. To each his own

 

[murf]

manufacturers have to follow the dollar, or go the way of the dinosaur. ruger is going plastic, going mini handgun, and going low-end bolt rifle.

i think they are doing a good job of keeping up with what the customer wants.

murf

 

[IlikeSA]

They are just responding to what customers want. There has been tremendous growth in the CC market over the past decade. It would be foolish for them as a business to pass up the potential income from a greatly expanding market.

 

[sappyg]

I have at least 10 Rugers ATM and owned that many more. Most have been good to excellent. However, 2 of the 3 that I have purchased in the past year have had to go back to Ruger. Of those 1 was actually fixed so I am 50/50 on Ruger these days. Worse, my father's new bearcat is on it's way back to them as well.

That said, I've had great luck with them also. One 10/22 broke a plunger/ extractor spring and kept running even without the extractor....

Mainly, I'm a little gun shy on Ruger these days. Most of the newer offerings seem to be designed by a comity and built by a company that only understands the consumer through surveys. They know what you want and they will make it. They just don't understand why you want it. As such, it appears there is very little innovation. There's not so much of a gun culture in Ruger as much as Ruger is a company that happens to make guns. Some are really good!

Now, if Ruger would make a nice 10 shot 22 lr in the GP100 frame I would probably buy one.

 

[splattergun]

The first handgun I ever bought new was a Ruger P89 about 17 years ago. I still have it, and it is one of my favorite shooting tools. The fit and finish are second to none. The slide is smooth and tight. Trigger breaks very well and the gun shoots better than I can. I like the sights, too.

Last year I bought a Ruger American Rifle in .243. It is not as finely crafted as my Howa 1500, but it shoots well. The bolt works like a breeze and extracts flawlessly. I am a fan of the safety trigger. It breaks clean and crisp and adjusts quickly and easily. THe magazine functions properly. I'm not the greatest fan of the rotary magazine. It is supposedly a legacy of the 10/22 mag. It has a loose fit when it is empty, It fits tighter when it is full. I think this can be improved while still meeting the price point. Is the 10/22 mag like this? Some people take issue with the molded stock. Too flexible they say. I have not had an issue with the stock. Overall, I am very pleased with the American Rifle.

This spring I bought a Ruger SR1911. I was instantly impressed with the balance, tight tolerances and features. It is a well made weapon. The machined stainless slide and guide rod, beavertail grip, and target sights make this an excellent value for price.

When I look at new guns, I always look at Ruger when available. Ruger has demonstrated to me great value for my dollar. I am in the market for a CC revolver for my daughter and a couple other handguns for myself. Other manufacturers need to demonstrate compelling reasons to convince me to pay more for their product over a Ruger.

 

[huntsman]

To me Ruger is what it's always been the cheapest brand I'll own, unfortunately nothing in firearms is cheap anymore.

But hey I can get a plastic EDC for $300.00 so I'm happy. I quit using a Zippo years ago because buying a bunch of Bic's is cheaper and more convenient.

 

[HexHead]

Happy to note that there's no "warning label" on it either.

Oh, it's there. Probably just like on their Vaqueros, under the barrel.

 

[Jim K]

Bill Ruger saw his company as making quality sporting arms in innovative ways that would keep prices within the range of the average sportsman. The Ruger Automatic Pistol, the Single Six, the other single actions, the single shot rifle, the O/U shotgun, those were Bill Ruger.

But today the market represented by the gentleman sportsman has declined and, whether anyone likes it or not, the market is in self-defense, carry guns, and "modern sporting rifles". Ruger will probably drop the single shot rifle, if they have not done so already, because there are not enough sales to keep it in the line.

Of course, the more demand there is, the more guns companies will make; that is their job. And the greater the rate of production, the greater the chance of mistakes being made. It is part of the price for being able to buy guns at a reasonable cost instead of hand-made guns at thousands of dollars each.

So those who lament the past should blame, not Ruger, or any other gun company, but their fellow gun owners and buyers. It is like praising the workmanship in antique cars. Sure, the Stutz Bearcat (a favorite of Bill Ruger and the origin of the name for his small revolver) was a beautiful car, but if it were placed on the market today, made as it was in the 1930's, not enough would be sold to pay for the tooling.

I often wonder how people who proclaim loudly that they are gun owners and Second Amendment supporters can keep spewing hatred of gun companies. S&W, Colt, Ruger, Remington, Savage, are all hated by some of those "critics", made victims of vicious lies, boycotts, and campaigns to put them out of business. How, exactly, is the goal of such "pro-gun" people different from the goal of the anti-gun gang? Aren't they really both working toward the same result, the end of gun ownership in America except by a wealthy elite? Or are they the elite? Do they resent that ordinary people can buy guns, when they feel that only they, the exalted few, should be granted that privilege by an all powerful state?

Jim

 

[Lucky Derby]

In the last 4 years, I have purchased three new Rugers. A Redhawk, a SP101 & a SR1911 CMD. I also have a few older Rugers, OM Blackhawk, Speed-Six, .44 Carbine, 10/22, Single-Six. The only one that did not work right it the SR1911. It's been back and still doesn't feed properly. Personally I'll stick to their wheelguns and older stuff.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Bring back the Ruger Charger 10/22 pistol.

 

[Catshooter]

There are only two good things I can say about Ruger. They used to make very reliable and accurate firearms and they're not under Remington's thumb.

Since you want to leave ol' Bill's politics out of the thread (it's "No honest man needs more than a fifteen round magazine") then I can say no more as I can't get past them.


Cat

 

[Sam1911]

... then I can say no more as I can't get past them.

Bwaaaahaha: he did. If he was able to move on ... one way or another ... then so can you.

(Hint: He's dead. Like really, really dead. If you have a beef with his politics, you'll have to hold onto that for a while yet. Maybe you can discuss it with him in the afterlife. Meanwhile, the company is not the man and even if you aren't strong enough to forgive HIM, you could get over it with all the people who AREN'T him who are in charge over at SR&Co, now.)

 

[Manny]

The majority of firearms I own are Rugers. When I first started shooting I was a broke as could be college student and really needed a lot of value for my money. A Ruger (5.5" Single Six)was my first gun purchased and really delivered on the value for money thing, as has my last, (4" .45 Redhawk) and quite a few others in between. I've been very happy with most of them, with the notable exception of a .22/45 MKIII which I just despised.

I have learned to carefully check new Rugers before buying however, and won't buy one sight unseen as I have found several over the years with issues new from the factory. However I also just recently passed on an S&W Model 41 due to horrible machining, and that's a gun that comes from their custom shop. I also had another horrible machining job on a pre-Remlin Marlin 1894 I special ordered and didn't discover until I had purchased it. So, not to defend poor quality, but Ruger's not the only one.