Blackhawk let down

They're already better.

I've purchased Rugers made from 1953 and newer. The mystical days of glorious Ruger QC do not exist except in some imaginations. Because there were no forums or internet in those days to blast out problems like the "bullhorns" we have today. Ruger makes tens of thousands more firearms these days and no one knows what level their QC is other than Ruger, or if it's as good or better than all other firearms manufacturers in today's world of cost challenges and competition.

Forums give imperfect perceptions and seem to empower people to gripe. We can help with problems brought to the forum but not with Ruger's QC. Let's face it, if there was only one gun made by Ruger in a year that wasn't right, whoever got that gun would likely complain on a forum about Ruger's QC!

Rest assured that Ruger wouldn't be doing things as they do if it weren't to their, which is also to our, benefit. No QC at the factory can catch all the issues or match the feedback from actual shooting of their products over time by the public, like when returned (for free) and fixing them. Be thankful for their excellent and very timely customer service (faster than any other maker I know of). Their processes are constantly scrutinized, improved and changed based on this feedback. But everyone is free to hope for whatever they want.

Hondo, I absolutely agree with you on the internet giving "imperfect perceptions" & try very hard to police myself & ignore the "my brother in laws sisters boyfriends next door neighbor had a Blackhawk breakdown thingie". I did mention that what I see with my own eyes are what give me a portion of my perceptions.

FWIW, I have SS 45 Bisley that is the finest Ruger I've ever laid eyes on. I've been all over it with calipers, mikes, plug & feeler gauges, a great piece of work that proves itself on the target. It was made in 2010. The aforementioned 357 NMFT was made in 2015 & is nearly well made or equal to the 45. I see the improvements. Thinking about those two & other nice ones that see in the many gun shops I visit only adds to my confusion when I see one that is the total opposite & is so bad that a blind person wouldn't let out the door. Those are the ones that get me.. all shook up.

Have a good day! 8) Elvis has left the building.

I have heard of one other transfer bar failure, but that was a SASS competitor's gun that had been fired multiple times more than a regular owner's would have been, not to mention the astronomical amount of dry-firing it went through.
Anything man made WILL fail at some point.
And BTW, S&W's have had transfer bars for some time now.

S&Ws don't use a transfer bar, they have a hammer block bar. It moves out of the way when the gun is fired so doesn't get smacked every shot. It's also tool steel, not a cast part.

My observation of Ruger's QC over the decades is that you're about as equally likely to get a Monday morning gun in 2016 as you were in 1980.

For instance I have a late 80s Redhawk that only took about 3000 rnds to wear a proper forcing cone into it. I've got a perfect 1980 service six. I've just bought a perfect 2016 vaquero in 44 mag. I had to send a 2009 flattop 41 mag back for a canted sight. Then I had to relieve the hammer a bit to eliminate transfer bar pinch when it got back. Now it's probably the most accurate Ruger I own. The 480 Bisley I bought last year needed a couple file strokes on the pawl to get it to index properly on a couple chambers. A 2010 45 Bisley was perfect with the exception of the .450 throats but from what I read, people have been reaming them since Ruger released the 45 version in the early 70s. Then I've got a perfect 2012 flattop 44 special.

So I think the idea that QC is declining is a myth. If there has been some decline in QC, I'll gladly trade that for the wider variety and greater availability of these guns today than in past decades.

Here's an article you might find interesting:

http://www.cylindersmith.com/Transferbar.html

Rugers are an unmatched value for the price which Ruger's incredible success has proved for years. There's top quality guns for extraordinary prices for those that want them, but they'll always just be niche companies that come and go or hover on the edge of Chapter 11, and that's the bottom line.

Click to expand...

Very well said...the prime example of the other side of the QC coin is Kimber...who's corporate mission statement seems to read, "give 'em the glitz, charge like we're making custom guns, pay for the advertising budget, and let the end user sort out the problems...but only after 200+ rounds of "break-in" use!"

JMHO, YMMV, Rod