Look a first year single six (The seller fixed the ad)

Here ya go folks a first year single six that is a 4 diget.
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/578511650
Man says right in his add made in 1953 so it must be true :roll: :roll: :roll:
This seller's ad has been fixed to contain the year.

don't see the serial number, except that it "looks' like 4 digits, so 'semantically' if under 10,000 would be in the "first full year of manufacturing", though in 1953 I think they only made like 49 or 50 guns. the type one ( first run) guns were under serial number #2000, and are the MORE ? collectible ( any flatgate in GOOD condition and in the box should be) add a shipper and you hit a home run.......

The gun looks to be in real good shape and I will be surprised if he doesn't sell it at the price he has on it now. If I hadn't already spent this month's gun money I would have just bid on it and told you guys about it after I owned it LOL
But no matter how ya slice it anything between 50 and 10734 is a 1954 not a 1953 as he states it to be. Yes 1954 would be the first full year of production so I guess you could call it a first year gun. But that's mostly for those of us that will never own a single six made in 1953. LOL

I have a factory letter on my single six #92 shipped December 1953 I also have #250 which I would have to dig out the letter but I don't remember the month but am sure it was 1954 I'm not sure what was the highest number shipped in 1954

Gramps

GRAMPS 51 said:

I have a factory letter on my single six #92 shipped December 1953

Gramps

Click to expand...

If that's right Gramps Ruger needs to fix there SR # history list. http://ruger.com/service/productHistory/RE-SSixSM.html
That list clearly states they started 1954 with SR #50 and shows 1955 starting with 10734
I wonder how far off the list really is on numbers? In 54 they averaged 800+ single sixes a month according to the list. Why didn't they get that many made in December of 53?

Ruger45,,, please understand that while it is the Ruger factory,,, their record keeping & putting stuff on their site is often "wrong."
We here subscribe to the RENE as it has MUCH better details about when guns were shipped & such. However,,, according to the RENE, serial numbers 1-49 were shipped in 1953. And in 1954 serial number 50 to 10733 were shipped.
That said,,, it's by getting factory letters like the one GRAMPS 51 has that allows chet15 to update the RENE with better accuracy.

contender said:

Ruger45,,, please understand that while it is the Ruger factory,,, their record keeping & putting stuff on their site is often "wrong."
We here subscribe to the RENE as it has MUCH better details about when guns were shipped & such. However,,, according to the RENE, serial numbers 1-49 were shipped in 1953. And in 1954 serial number 50 to 10733 were shipped.
That said,,, it's by getting factory letters like the one GRAMPS 51 has that allows chet15 to update the RENE with better accuracy.

Click to expand...

So who messed up? The person that wrote Gramps letter. Or the people that made the lists both Rugers and RENE?
I understand that the Ruger list is not gospel. And that Gramps gun could have been shipped out of sequence. But I also put the same amount of faith that who ever wrote Gramps letter may have messed up the date.
Honestly as someone that would buy that gun from Gramps I would want that discrepancy cleared up.
And none of this changes the fact that the gun in question with its 4 digit number was in no way made in 1953.

On a side note the ad has been fixed and the price has been raised to better represent a 1954 boxed gun.

Ruger45,,, It's generally accepted that the factory letters are the more accurate of all things. Yes occasionally there is a typo, but in general, when they do a letter, especially several years ago, you got accurate data because they actually looked the gun up in the correct books & all. When they did the factory data info on their website,,, the person(s) who entered the data didn't get it all correct. Without actually going in & getting the day books, & shipping records etc & building a perfectly correct database, there will be discrepancies in their entries.
So if I were to want to buy GRAMPS 51's gun, I'd accept the factory letter as solid proof of the ship date.
As for the RENE,,, it hasn't been "updated" in a full publication in about 6 years now. But chet15's data is much more accurate than what the factory puts out. there have been a lot of additional discoveries since the last RENE guide was done, so some of that data isn't in the easily available published book. A good example is the 44 mag SBH's with brass gripframes. John Dougan got to go to the factory & dig into records & found previously hidden data on them.

The Ruge list and letters are both created by the same department. Most likely the exact same person or people. Both also created from the same datta. So the only posable anwser is one of them is wrong. With out someone like Jim or Chad going to Ruger and doing the research we will never know which one is right.
You can put your faith in when the letter was written the person actually looked it up and copied the information correctly to the letter. But as seen here on the fourm those letters can be wrong.

What you must understand is that Ruger doesn't ship Serial number 1 first and then 2, 3, 4 well you get the message. Serial number 100 may well be shipped days or even months after serial number 2000, or 3000. You got to get a factory letter to be sure of the shipping date just as Contender said. Another thing to remember is when they say serial number, well lets just use serial number 50 for instance, is the last gun to ship in a year per the factory website, it is possible that serial number 1000 to 2000 may have been shipped before serial number 50. 50 is just the last one to ship that year. Again you got to have a factory letter to be sure. There is a .22 Standard with a 4 digit serial number that should have been shipped in 1949 or 1950 and it wasn't shipped till in the late 60s or early 70s. I could see someone selling this as a first year gun. :wink:

We have seen several instances here where it took several tries to get a "correct" letter from Ruger.

Nobody's perfect.

street said:

There is a .22 Standard with a 4 digit serial number that should have been shipped in 1949 or 1950 and it wasn't shipped till in the late 60s or early 70s. I could see someone selling this as a first year gun. :wink:

Click to expand...

I have 2 Rugers that I know of that were shipped years after they were made. They have a tendency to get lost in the warehouse. But at no time can one be shipped before it is made. .
It would also be reasonable to believe that even though the last 1953 shipped was supposedly 49 that everything shipped in the first part of January 1954 was actually made in 53. If that is the case I would guess that as many as the first couple of thousand could have actually been made in 53 but not shipped until 54.

my opinion is I would 'trust' the older letter a bit more than what we've been seeing and hearing today , BUT that being said, I have seen letters that 'used' to come out to people that said about just what the people who had "asked" inferred in their notice for a letter in the first place....all too often it was 'who' (whom) was asking for the letter... I can relate to two letters that were done many years ago as to a plated gun that was requested by one of the past presidents of the OGCA as to their SC-6 being done by the factory,, and a second letter for the SAME gun , that was done for a past officer of the RCA and it said it was NOT "factory" ?????? hhhmmmm, but he still wanted the gun..... 8) :roll: :wink:
the info is ONlY as good as to who did what at what time, and how far they had to dig for any and all proper ,pertinent, information, and heck it used to be for "free" now they charge and there is LESS info to be gotten ,put in the letter.............I'll stick for the most part with what they list and what Chad keeps us informed as to.......works MOST of the time.........yes GOOD info above,m they did NOT ship the gun is numerical order, seen and heard of the guns being piled up and the first gun is n the bottom of the pile, and the later ones piled on top, and guy in shipping did NOT always pull the bottom one out first.........kinda like the "parts bin " theory,,,all Ruger 'lore'.... :?

Hi I just dug out my letter on #92 Dec 1953 K M Pritula just a little side note the gun went to a big shot in Stamford Ct that was some sort of financial person with that city he also had subscription #225 no way for me to prove it but I was lead to believe it was a friend of Bill Ruger I cant remember where I got the information but the subscription numbers only went into the thirties when #92 was shipped
I don't think this gun was ever fired outside the factory
I got the letter in May 2010
Gramps

Ruger 45,,, I can attest to the fact that the same people who built the "list" at Ruger for the website are not the same folks who do the letters. Why? Because of discussions I've had with Mr. Fifer & a few others at the factory.
And any letter from Kim,,,is likely to be as close to correct as possible. But since she retired,,, things haven't been quite the same.
(PS; She said to pass along a big "Hi" to the folks who remember her!)

Back when Ms. Pritula ran that ship things were considerably better organized.

contender said:

Ruger 45,,, I can attest to the fact that the same people who built the "list" at Ruger for the website are not the same folks who do the letters. Why? Because of discussions I've had with Mr. Fifer & a few others at the factory.
And any letter from Kim,,,is likely to be as close to correct as possible. But since she retired,,, things haven't been quite the same.
(PS; She said to pass along a big "Hi" to the folks who remember her!)

Click to expand...

Did Fifer even know what a Ruger was when the list was made? He's only been with Ruger scene 06

Mr. Fifer did know what a Ruger was & all. While it may not seem that way, he did & does have a good working knowledge of the firearm industry. I have spoken with him on several occasions, and while we may disagree on some things, we do so in a polite manner with respect to each other.
And as for the records,,, Kim spent 30 years at Ruger, and she used to work for Steve Vogel. She understood us collectors & did her job quite well.
With all the changes over the years since Bill passed, a lot has been done differently than how Bill wanted it or allowed it to be done. But as for the records,,, they are in boxes, in storage, not in any real "order" so to speak, that would take a LONG time to sort through & organize. And due to the company requirements, as well as Federal; requirements, and all, there are different types of records about the same firearms. Ruger used a "daybook" to handle stuff & that practice continued for a LONG time. These daybooks are where much of the simple data is pulled from for the letters. Details that many of us desire are buried in boxes & boxes in storage. SOMETIMES,,,, when Kim was there, a specific firearm that had special significance, the box of records that held that info was occasionally able to be located & researched.
All that was done for FREE! But employees have to be paid & as such, the cost of running the records dept was costing the company. To cut expenses, changes were made in the records dept. It's just a fact of big business. Hopefully one day, someone will be able to afford to spend the time & money to organize & put to a readily available format ALL the records to where we can get all the data for any Ruger firearm ever made. And remember,,, there are millions of Rugers that have been made.

rugerguy said:

don't see the serial number, except that it "looks' like 4 digits, so 'semantically' if under 10,000 would be in the "first full year of manufacturing", though in 1953 I think they only made like 49 or 50 guns. the type one ( first run) guns were under serial number #2000, and are the MORE ? collectible ( any flatgate in GOOD condition and in the box should be) add a shipper and you hit a home run.......

Click to expand...

Zooming in the number looks like 6 or 8 732.