I'm starting to lose a little confidence in Ruger

I know a gunsmith that knows more about Mini-14's than Ruger does, and he does much-much better work than they do, even without their fancy, high-dollar machinery. Too bad they don't offer the gun as a parts-kit to bonafied gunsmiths.

Just sayin'.

DGW

It's been a very long time since I've bought a Ruger and not considered it to be a kit gun. And yes I do agree that Ruger leaves one out in the cold when it comes to customer service. There is more to service than fast turn around you also need to address the problem between the back and forth shipping process. It's luckily for us that the after market parts available help to by pass Ruger service and have a proper firearm. I have already accepted that when I buy a Ruger product that some parts will have to be replaced and others properly fit, polished and or refinished. That said in the past they were hell of a buy but at today's prices it's best to buy used. I fine it disappointing that Ruger is now starting to head chop after the after market providers.

Thank you for the suggested solutions and well wishes on a positive outcome, Passtime. They didn't suggest a replacement revolver and I didn't ask. Frankly, there wasn't enough time as CS didn't really seem to want to hear anything. I appreciate the effort you have put forward in replying in this thread.

Thread: Yeah, I'll still probably buy Ruger but I just don't believe that the CS and fit/finish is what I've experienced from Ruger in the past. Thanks for the replies. I can at least see that I am not alone in this impression of Ruger as of late. Monday the transfer bar should arrive. I'll see how things go from there.

I really don't want something for nothing from Ruger. I just want a functional, dependable everyday carry sidearm. One of my best friends and an excellent gunsmith passed away a while ago and I've not been able to find someone to do the work locally that Ruger should have done and I really am not in a financial position to send it out to most gunsmiths. I'll muddle through.

Considering the entrenched position at this point, belaboring solutions won't be fruitful, but alternatively, I'll pose this question...

As a bit of a gun hoarder, I think it's a very simple question to ask this: Even with Ruger's moderate decline in QC and CS in recent years, considering the same trend on a longer historical cycle at other companies, can anyone name a brand with LESS issues and BETTER service than Ruger in their same ballpark? The Italian SAA clones have issues as well, S&W seems to have a higher rate of failure even than Taurus these days... Sure you'll never have these issues with an FA 83, but you're talking about a semi-custom revolver that cost ~2-4x.

I'll also comment that I think there is a lot higher ratio of issues with "non-standard" models. The "Exclusives" seem to have a very high rate of issue, so I'm less surprised to hear this issue with a Convertible than a standard NV. Even though they're all cut on the same equipment, it sure seems like the 'limited models' have a lot higher rate of failure, so it makes me question what state Talo/Davidson's/Lipsey's buys the 'blanks' before they get assembled.

Varminterror said:

Considering the entrenched position at this point, belaboring solutions won't be fruitful, but alternatively, I'll pose this question...

I'll also comment that I think there is a lot higher ratio of issues with "non-standard" models. The "Exclusives" seem to have a very high rate of issue, so I'm less surprised to hear this issue with a Convertible than a standard NV. Even though they're all cut on the same equipment, it sure seems like the 'limited models' have a lot higher rate of failure, so it makes me question what state Talo/Davidson's/Lipsey's buys the 'blanks' before they get assembled.

Click to expand...

You make a very good point. I would think that with all of the changes to the platform the new Single Sevens are being made on new tooling. What is causing the QC issues with this platform. I am following reports on several forums and the examples are either nearly perfect, or just plain poor. I would think on new tooling there would be little or no poor examples. Or are the acceptable tolerances just too large?

Varminterror, if a revolver comes from the factory and locks up the cylinder every so many rounds, then it was not ready to ship. This is not a cosmetic issue. I believe Ruger to probably be one of the best manufacturers, if not the best, out there, but that still cannot excuse them if they, with any regularity, release a product that is actually not functional all of the time. Reliable function out of the gate is the lowest criteria.

The transfer bar was binding. I talked with them about it when I had discussions about the tight/shallow chambers. They told me that it wasn't an issue and it wouldn't increase the chance of the transfer bar failing. They had the revolver in their repair shop twice and chose not to address the transfer bar misfit. IMHO, the transfer bar issue fits into the relative quality concept in your post but the locking up cylinder does not.

Through customer base feedback, a manufacturer can be encouraged to make improvements to get them out of a slump. Without people sharing their bad experiences, a manufacturer might continue on the downward trend indefinitely.

I build a lot of customs on many different makes.

What I have seen since the buying rush with ruger is not good.

What it looks like to me is the allowable tolerance has been increased.

Okay, check this out. The transfer bar came in today. I disassembled the revolver and reassembled it with the new transfer bar. The revolver binds. I called Ruger only to get dumped out of the queue. I called back and waited again on hold. I finally got to speak with someone. She insisted that I must have an older revolver and that the transfer bar wouldn't fit until the revolver was "converted." After a little discussion, she understood that this was a newer revolver. She then put transfered me to "someone who could help me figure it out." It went to a recording that gave a telephone number to call but it was too fast for me to write down. So, I call back and bingo, they are closed.

Praise Jesus, I got it! I had a screw in the wrong hole. It works pretty good. Now it's time to learn about the transfer bar binding fix and see if I can do it. I'll do a good cleaning while I have it apart this next time. At least I'm learning how to disassemble and reassemble this revolver. I like to know the workings of my EDC better than I did on the New Vaquero.

So you are saying the binding problem & all was due to your improper assembly of the revolver?

This latest binding problem was my doing. I didn't mean to leave the impression that the latest binding was in any way Ruger's fault. I knew that I probably had something assembled improperly. I had been trying for a significant amount of time to get in touch with someone at Ruger to see if they had any idea what in my mis-assembly might cause those symptoms.

The original binding, a good while back, was due to shallow or tight chambers and it was eventually fixed by Ruger. I apologize if my writing left the impression that the binding the other day was due to anyone's actions other than my own. It was not my intention to in anyway give the wrong impression. I guess that since I was reassembling the revolver, everyone would assume, as would I in such a circumstance, that the assembly was the most likely source of issue.

On a positive note, I did get the opportunity to try the free spin modification and I got to learn a whole lot about the innards of the New Vaquero. I've worked on old school single actions before but the Ruger design seems somewhat more complex. I like the design! The free spin modification works great, of course. I opted to reinstall the plunger as I speed load from a 1911 magazine and the click-stop makes it easier for me.

Oh... if one were to put the bottom frame screw that retains the hammer pin in the top (left I believe) backstrap screw hole, they might experience the binding that I did. I wouldn't recommend anyone trying it.

CLARIFICATION: I think I see where some might be confused. I've mentioned "cylinder binding", "transfer bar binding", and just binding. The cylinder binding was an old issue due to improperly cut cylinders. The transfer bar binding is where the transfer bar or hammer has too much material and, while it functions, some believe that it might lead to premature failure of the transfer bar. My transfer bar broke prematurely and it did drag (or bind). The simple binding I was experiencing the other day after multiple reassemblies was in the hammer, trigger, and cylinder operation. It was an overall systemic bind that locked the action up. It was, as I was assuming, due each time to my improper assembly.

I'm probably misusing terms and anyone is welcome to correct me as the only way I stand a chance of learning is if someone lets me know the proper terminology.

I have to admit that when I ordered my SP101 this year I was a bit skeptical of what I had heard was coming out from Ruger. I heard the finish could be rough or it would have a horrible trigger pull etc. When I did get it though I was very surprised with the gun, and while it didn't have the DA pull of the Smith & Wessons I was used to, it was better than I expected. I did a trigger job anyways (I always do one on my DA revolvers, even a light one). I hope their quality never does go downhill, but it makes you wonder with all the stories we hear about Marlin and Remington (don't even get me started on Taurus) what could become of Rugers firearms if they did have to implement cost cutting. I hope you do get the issue resolved, a had a battle that lasted over a year once with an Uberti revolver and it was never taken care of right. Been there.

Poor quality results from hiring only "temp" workers, paying them low wages, and requiring them to run multiple machines at once (often with minimal training). The Ruger plant in Newport, NH has done exactly this, and we are seeing the result.

Pump the guns out, QC standards lowered, and Ruger expects to see a certain percentage come back for repairs.

The fat cats at the top continue to get richer, the working man can barely feed his family, and the product quality goes downhill.

On the other hand.....you might get lucky and get a good gun!

chet15 said:

Received a new stainless Bearcat the other day...the right recoil shield has massive polishing ripples in the right recoil shield up to the hammer slot (looks like they took a grinder to it) and the edge on the loading gate is like a knife.
Chet1`5

Click to expand...

My Shopkeeper came through the same way. It also had grips that had enough gap that you could honestly look through the grips to the other side. I fixed the marks by doing my own polish job but I contacted Ruger concerning the grips. I asked if they could send me a new set WITHOUT the alignment pin hole. The lady I spoke with said that they would . A few days later a new set of grips arrived...complete with alignment holes. These fit worse then the original set. I 'modified' and carved on the originals till they were close.

Well, with less guns going out Ruger's doors because of overall falling industry demand, maybe they can have their employees spend a little more time on quality. :mrgreen:
Chet15

I hope so, Chet15. I really like Rugers so I want success for Ruger's line of products.

Yup the last few years have been crazy now that things have settled down some
quality may get better. Truthfully I have never had a quality issue my problems were with
the Vaquero and that darn case coloring. I had Turnbull do a couple and Ruger Blued a couple
that issue is done. ps