Ruger replacing my SP-101

Ruger called today. They've had my SP-101 for a few weeks. It's one of the new-production guns in 327 Federal. Unfortunately it had several troubles right at the start, and they told me today it is irreparable. So, they're sending a new one.

It's unfortunate that they can't fix it, but I'm pleased that they're quick & willing to replace it since they can't. Good job, Ruger!

Glad to hear they're taking care of you!

I'm just a simple English peasant, but I fail to see how shipping unserviceable products out the door and then having to replace them afterwards makes any kind of economic or marketing sense.

Enigma said:

I'm just a simple English peasant, but I fail to see how shipping unserviceable products out the door and then having to replace them afterwards makes any kind of economic or marketing sense.

Click to expand...

It does as long as the cost of repair/replacement doesn't exceed the extra cost of more internal inspection and qc. As long as the failure rate is low enough, using the customer as the final inspector is reasonable.

22/45 Fan said:

Enigma said:

I'm just a simple English peasant, but I fail to see how shipping unserviceable products out the door and then having to replace them afterwards makes any kind of economic or marketing sense.

Click to expand...

It does as long as the cost of repair/replacement doesn't exceed the extra cost of more internal inspection and qc. As long as the failure rate is low enough, using the customer as the final inspector is reasonable.

Click to expand...

Okay, that explains the economic side of it. What about the marketing aspect?

What troubles?

flyguy958 said:

What troubles?

Click to expand...

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=265700&start=15

Scroll down a little. Couple of people having problems.

[/quote]

Okay, that explains the economic side of it. What about the marketing aspect?[/quote]

Well look at the end of the original post.....good job Ruger!
Everybody gets all happy about Ruger "making it right" that
they seem to forget if they didn't ship "crap" to start with,
we as customers wouldn't need to send stuff back.
If we keep buying it they'll keep shipping it.
Dave

As long as the failure rate is low enough, using the customer as the final inspector is (profitable).

Click to expand...

As amended, I agree. I dislike the idea that companies choose to ship defective product with the intent that the customer either discovers it and sends it back, or ignores it. Nevertheless, I've yet to meet a person or a company that never made a mistake. So long as this is a very rare occurrence, I do not choose to be angry about it. It wouldn't do any good to be angry anyway. (-:

Are and going to pay the FFL and the background check?
Ron

Ruger said they will reimburse the transfer fee if there is one. However, there will not be one.

2sheriffs said:

Are and going to pay the FFL and the background check?
Ron

Click to expand...

When Ruger replaced my Redhawk, they did indeed send me a check for return shipping and my FFL transfer fee. It took a few weeks to get it, but I did get it.

Everybody gets all happy about Ruger "making it right" that
they seem to forget if they didn't ship "crap" to start with,
we as customers wouldn't need to send stuff back.
If we keep buying it they'll keep shipping it.

Click to expand...

Every company has to weigh the risks and rewards of their actions f they want to stay in business. The problems, as I read them, didn't show up until several rounds were fired through the new SP101. It would cost plenty for Ruger to do that before shipping every gun it makes.

So, what's the probability that there will be a problem when a gun is fired by its new owner? Pretty slim, I'd say, given the respect we all have for Ruger products: "Built like a tank," etc. So a company does all the checking it can afford to do before shipment, and then it must stand solidly behind it's product, should a problem occur, and they do.

I, for one, will continue to buy their products - not "crap" by any standard.

Alex

Alex said:

Everybody gets all happy about Ruger "making it right" that
they seem to forget if they didn't ship "crap" to start with,
we as customers wouldn't need to send stuff back.
If we keep buying it they'll keep shipping it.

Click to expand...

Every company has to weigh the risks and rewards of their actions f they want to stay in business. The problems, as I read them, didn't show up until several rounds were fired through the new SP101. It would cost plenty for Ruger to do that before shipping every gun it makes.

So, what's the probability that there will be a problem when a gun is fired by its new owner? Pretty slim, I'd say, given the respect we all have for Ruger products: "Built like a tank," etc. So a company does all the checking it can afford to do before shipment, and then it must stand solidly behind it's product, should a problem occur, and they do.

I, for one, will continue to buy their products - not "crap" by any standard.

Alex

Click to expand...

You should go back and read some of the threads on the GP100 in .22 also
take a look at how some front sights were fitted ( or not ) to the GP100 in .44 special.
I'll try to post a picture later of the cylinder base pin bore on my new
Turnbull Bisley .45 colt....it's a real impressive example of quality.
But hey the gun was only about $900, what do you expect.
Half of the stuff they have issues with would not even need to be test
fired, one working eyeball and half a brain would see it before it was shipped.
Dave

I wonder what the actual failure/return rate is for each model nowadays? Particularly the new ones.

A few score complaints here & the "other" board doesn't necessarily mean a massive problem at the factories, since Ruger made some 2,000,000 guns last year. Some carelessness obviously, but is it significantly increased percentage-wise?

Listen, I understand this is the RUGER forum and with that comes a lot of brand loyalty, as it should be, but they are not infallible. I have been purchasing new Rugers since the early 70's. It is a fact, borne by my own recent experience that Ruger quality has fallen of a cliff. I have witnesses here on this forum that will vouch for this as it relates to my experience. It is time to stop defending them and address this issue honestly.

When you send a firearm back to them for repair it comes back with a yellow wiping rag as a complimentary gift for your trouble. I have no less than 6 of these cloths in my gun room. These have accumulated over the last four or five years.

I still like their offerings, but have learned not to expect too much out of the box quality. It's a sad time for me as a Ruger enthusiast.

After saying this I fully expect the defenders to jump on me. So be it....

Dave

I understand your concerns and do not doubt what you say - that there are problems. I've bought 3 Ruger handguns in the past year (New Vaquero, LCP, SP101) that seem to be fine so far.

It's no criticism of you, but I'd am really curious about the return rate and if it has increased significantly. I'm not holding my breath waiting for Ruger to admit any statistics though.

Armybrat said:

I understand your concerns and do not doubt what you say - that there are problems. I've bought 3 Ruger handguns in the past year (New Vaquero, LCP, SP101) that seem to be fine so far.

It's no criticism of you, but I'd am really curious about the return rate and if it has increased significantly. I'm not holding my breath waiting for Ruger to admit any statistics though.

Click to expand...

I'm sure the number of guns returned is very small fraction of the guns produced, and even smaller number are returned because of a function problem, and an even smaller number get replaced. I agree with the comment about looking through the threads about issues with guns, read them very carefully, most complaints have absolutely nothing to do with with QC. There are many threads with countless complaints about throat size, sight mounting, finish issues, etc and the guns have never been shot, not to mention the endless diatribes about how their gun leads up but it couldn't possibly be their handloads. I'm 31 for 31 with my Ruger purchases, including 7 in the last two years. I will now quote forum member 5 of 7 again "I don't buy guns to fondle and admire, I buy them to shoot"...I'm in his camp.

I received the gun and finally got to take it out late last week for a bit. It shoots to POA now, and extraction even with the 100 grain Federal ammo is normal. Brass still is bulged, but not as much. I suspect that full-pressure 327 Fed is tough on pistol brass, though one would hope the brass manufacturers would design it properly.

Only quibble is that the dealer _did_ charge me a transfer fee, so I guess I'll send Ruger a note (they offered to cover that fee, if it was charged to me).

Good to know it's shooting ok.
Maybe the Buffalo Bore brass could hold up better than the Federal?

And yeah, Ruger should reimburse you for the transfer fee.

I haven't had to send any of my Rugers back to the factory for repair or correction of a manufacturing defect, so I must be doing something wrong.

OTOH I have had occasional feeding issues with one particular magazine for my Mark III .22/45, so perhaps a strongly-worded letter to the manufacturer expressing my OUTRAGEOUS OUTRAGE!!! is in order . . . Actually the real problem there is likely that I haven't really shot it enough.