apparently cursed by Ruger

[Heliman]

Ty and Marlin, with respect to your excuses and reasoning regarding Ruger initial quality issues. What would Bill say? I'm betting there would be some permanent resolution. Perhaps new designs wouldn't be rushed to production without more R&D. I'm betting there would be more eyes on product quality before a piece would be shipped.
And what do you say to the first time buyer who saved hard earned money to step up to Ruger products only to have a functionally defective or poor fit and finish? When told to send it to Ruger to be fixed when they MAY not have had an issue with their Taurus or Charter Arms, do you think they will be a repeat customer? As I said before, I will not buy another Ruger without first being able to see it and check basic functionality in person. No matter what is said here, this is a recent problem getting worse that needs to be addressed. No more excuses.....

Dave

 

[GeezerD]

Contender is right, "hand fitting takes skilled labor,, and many workers do not want to do that kind of work,,, AND be expected to make production quantities. The consumer demands on how many are wanted by the public demands quantity". It's NOT a Ruger problem. It's an America problem. I know people don't like to here immigrants will do jobs American won't do. BUT, it's true. If you have a company that requires drug free employees, (which is a good idea around machines and other kinds of equipment) you have a tough time even finding a qualified applicant that can pass a pizz test. QC is not the most difficult part of a company the size of Ruger, it's finding employees who can pass a drug test, who will show up on time, who do a FULL DAYS work, who cares about the end product. I have told people that I want to hire them but they would need to pass a drug test. Then I would go on to tell them, that I would give them a couple of weeks to get clean and take the test, BUT, if they failed they would never get another shot at working for that company. Invariably they would deny drug use and say they are ready right now only to fail the drug test. The fact that Ruger can turn out the number of firearms they do (more than any other company in America) is proof positive of their efforts to put out quality gun. The average company in this country is lucky to get 60% effort from their workers. The kids, and young people have no sense of work ethic, or willingness to put in 100% of the work in a full day. Even professional athletes practice is broken up by an hour so they can get to their cell phones to check out texts and make phone calls. It's pathetic, and getting worse. Go ahead and flame me if you don't like hearing the truth.

Lot's of immigrants come to America, work two or three jobs to make a living and save money and go start a business and as soon as they can expand to multiple businesses. Many work 14-18 hours a day for their success. They have a desire to make it. (Excluding many that are part of the religion of peace.) A high percentage of Americans would starve to death if they had to put any effort toward the hand outs they get from government. I say let them starve.

"Even while we were with you, we gave you this command: "Those unwilling to work will not get to eat." " 2 Thes 3:10 The pilgrims found the same thing when they came to the new country.

You are right about addiction being a huge problem in America. And addiction comes in many forms. The obvious like drugs and alcohol and also money, power, control, sex, food, vanity, gambling, and others.

I have seen many in positions above the hourly workers with problem addictions. I think the issue is much more severe than just not being able to find workers that can pass a drug test. I say, " Let Them All Starve Too " ------------ GeezerD

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

Dave, I know what you are saying and I hear you. I (of course) have no idea what Bill Ruger would do, but I strongly suspect that the Ruger production would be way down from where it is now. It's not been that many years since Ruger hit the 1 million production mark, which as you already know is a milestone amount gun manufactures. Taurus and C/A are a LONG WAY from those numbers. And now Ruger is producing 2.5 million firearms. These numbers are absolutely unheard of. I know it's frustrating, but very few manufactures of any kind (but most especially firarms) produce any thing in those kinds of quantities. I'm not positive what is considered an acceptable percentage in issues in any manufacturing even I phones but I suspect Ruger is lower than that. But with the numbers they produce it seems like a lot. Truth is even the vaunted "high quality" Smith and Wesson are have the same production problems as Ruger. I'd be hard pressed to find any product actually produced by humans that don't have the same issues. Automobiles are highly computerized construction products and still have issues. Even if those issues are from parts suppliers it's hard to produce anything 100%. Freedom Arms production is WAY LESS, and still they don't have a transfer bar to keep a dropped gun from going off. Granted two different things but in my mind, the fact that the ability to do that is readily available and they haven't upgraded is a flaw. I've had several over the years and won't have another, until that changes.

After some thought, I would add, that not only do I believe that Bill Ruger would dramatically drop the production of Ruger firearms, but would also dramatically drop the number of models that are available through Ruger. If you think it takes a long time to bring a model to market now, you will be very disappointed that you may never see the model you now have because of the production and design issues that have been added. Forget the flat tops, forget 41 magnums they can't produce enough any more, forget the 480's, forget the Alaskans, forget the hunter models, forget the Type 3 and type 4 Ruger semi auto 22's, forget about the LC9, the SR series, the RAR's and probably a lot more.

Going back to Freedom Arms, they are not a production company for all practical purposes, they are a custom gun company. That's what Ruger would need to be, to have the quality control people are looking for. Lots of people would lose their jobs, (they couldn't do a good enough job anyway. Are we only going to hold Ruger to those standards?

 

[Armybrat]

Y'all make me feel very fortunate. Since I started buying new Rugers 58 years ago, only one of the dozen guns had a slight problem - the ejector housing screw on my 1959 Single Six worked loose the first week of plinking. A tiny dab of model airplane glue was all it took and hasn't done it since.
Bought a New Vaquero Talo Edition earlier this year that has near perfect fit & finish out of the box, but I don't know if they take extra care with those semi "custom" types.

 

[Dave P.]

They can use trained monkeys to build the guns, I don't care!
But they ought to have a human with half a functioning
brain and at least one working eyeball inspect them before shipment.
People seem to complain about modern CNC machining, but they can
create highly precise parts at a rate that "old school" machinists would
not believe.
At some level the company just doesn't care, it's cheaper ( short term )
to fix vs. inspect. It's a shame because their designs and material
selections seem pretty solid to build a lasting gun. They just need
better production processes to bring up the assembly quality.
Dave

 

[gunzo]

Way too many manufactured goods available from right here in the US that prove the usual excuses for Ruger's poor quality control are just that, EXCUSES.

In the US there are manufactures that produce;
-Products at a competitive price point
-Products rated high in initial quality
-Products rated high in overall customer satisfaction
-Products that are made in high quantities

AND...Products possessing all of the above, at the same time!

It's not that in can be done, it is done, on a regular basis. That is simple proof & not my opinion.

 

[Heliman]

They can use trained monkeys to build the guns, I don't care!
But they ought to have a human with half a functioning
brain and at least one working eyeball inspect them before shipment.
People seem to complain about modern CNC machining, but they can
create highly precise parts at a rate that "old school" machinists would
not believe.
At some level the company just doesn't care, it's cheaper ( short term )
to fix vs. inspect. It's a shame because their designs and material
selections seem pretty solid to build a lasting gun. They just need
better production processes to bring up the assembly quality.
Dave

That is the point. Don't let the junk out the door. I got lucky the last 3 Rugers. But I still have zip confidence in product quality based on MY past experience.

 

[Heliman]

Dave, I know what you are saying and I hear you. I (of course) have no idea what Bill Ruger would do, but I strongly suspect that the Ruger production would be way down from where it is now. It's not been that many years since Ruger hit the 1 million production mark, which as you already know is a milestone amount gun manufactures. Taurus and C/A are a LONG WAY from those numbers. And now Ruger is producing 2.5 million firearms. These numbers are absolutely unheard of. I know it's frustrating, but very few manufactures of any kind (but most especially firarms) produce any thing in those kinds of quantities. I'm not positive what is considered an acceptable percentage in issues in any manufacturing even I phones but I suspect Ruger is lower than that. But with the numbers they produce it seems like a lot. Truth is even the vaunted "high quality" Smith and Wesson are have the same production problems as Ruger. I'd be hard pressed to find any product actually produced by humans that don't have the same issues. Automobiles are highly computerized construction products and still have issues. Even if those issues are from parts suppliers it's hard to produce anything 100%. Freedom Arms production is WAY LESS, and still they don't have a transfer bar to keep a dropped gun from going off. Granted two different things but in my mind, the fact that the ability to do that is readily available and they haven't upgraded is a flaw. I've had several over the years and won't have another, until that changes.

After some thought, I would add, that not only do I believe that Bill Ruger would dramatically drop the production of Ruger firearms, but would also dramatically drop the number of models that are available through Ruger. If you think it takes a long time to bring a model to market now, you will be very disappointed that you may never see the model you now have because of the production and design issues that have been added. Forget the flat tops, forget 41 magnums they can't produce enough any more, forget the 480's, forget the Alaskans, forget the hunter models, forget the Type 3 and type 4 Ruger semi auto 22's, forget about the LC9, the SR series, the RAR's and probably a lot more.

Going back to Freedom Arms, they are not a production company for all practical purposes, they are a custom gun company. That's what Ruger would need to be, to have the quality control people are looking for. Lots of people would lose their jobs, (they couldn't do a good enough job anyway. Are we only going to hold Ruger to those standards?

Marlin, I don't care about Freedom Arms or Smith and Wesson. We are talking about Ruger. They have quality problems that are not being addressed. That is the point. I am not a brand loyalist. I just liked the way Rugers addressed my interests. Lately they are missing the mark far to often from my experience.

Dave

 

[Fox Mike]

They can use trained monkeys to build the guns, I don't care!
But they ought to have a human with half a functioning
brain and at least one working eyeball inspect them before shipment.
People seem to complain about modern CNC machining, but they can
create highly precise parts at a rate that "old school" machinists would
not believe.
At some level the company just doesn't care, it's cheaper ( short term )
to fix vs. inspect. It's a shame because their designs and material
selections seem pretty solid to build a lasting gun. They just need
better production processes to bring up the assembly quality.
Dave

I would think it better to build it correctly the first time then to do it over later.

 

[JStacy]

'Go ahead and flame me if you don't like hearing the truth" --Bear Paw. I don't want to flame you I want to shake your hand.
At one time I had 500 employees working for me and I wanted to initiate a novel raise plan . Each section would be given a gross of 5% of the salaries for their department and the raise amount would be competitive . If you were late for work more than 2% of the time, minus 1 %, if you evaluation by your supervisor was less than 80% minus 1% , if you had traceable quality control errors of more than 1 per quarter minus 1% .The money saved would be pooled and evenly distributed among the co workers who had none of the above issues. I wrote a simple software program on excel to calculate raises so all would be as fair as I could make it. HR would not let me initiate the system because they thought it might discriminate against some one. Yep PO'ed me because all I wanted to do was give raises based on job performance and HR could not understand that!
This thread should be required reading for Ruger executives !!
Rant off Ruger is sending me some return springs , no further questions asked.

 

[57springer]

Ty and Marlin, with respect to your excuses and reasoning regarding Ruger initial quality issues. What would Bill say? I'm betting there would be some permanent resolution. Perhaps new designs wouldn't be rushed to production without more R&D. I'm betting there would be more eyes on product quality before a piece would be shipped.
And what do you say to the first time buyer who saved hard earned money to step up to Ruger products only to have a functionally defective or poor fit and finish? When told to send it to Ruger to be fixed when they MAY not have had an issue with their Taurus or Charter Arms, do you think they will be a repeat customer? As I said before, I will not buy another Ruger without first being able to see it and check basic functionality in person. No matter what is said here, this is a recent problem getting worse that needs to be addressed. No more excuses.....

Dave

Yea really , W B Ruger, would not let this happen !! :roll:

 

[JStacy]

Well confession time !!! I took the rear sight off the SP101 and there were two springs in the sight. They were mashed flat and less than 1/4" tall so they were doing nothing. Who ever tightened down the rear sight elevation screw , in assembly. crushed the coil springs and they are as good as absent. Oh well Ruger parts people are sending me two new springs and should get here early next week so back to the range to test reloads and shoot the 300 BLK some to see if it works !
BTW , tightest pivot pin I have ever had to drive out of a Ruger adjustable sight. When you want them to stay in they walk out , but no this one was/is tight.

 

[contender]

"Ty and Marlin, with respect to your excuses and reasoning regarding Ruger initial quality issues. What would Bill say? I'm betting there would be some permanent resolution. Perhaps new designs wouldn't be rushed to production without more R&D. I'm betting there would be more eyes on product quality before a piece would be shipped."

Dave,,, I appreciate your thoughts. I'm not making excuses,,, as much as I'm trying to get folks to understand the differences why things are how the are right now. Marlin is also very correct in his explanation of things. I personally spoke with Mr. Fifer about 5-6 years ago, and he made the comment that he "Had everybody in Conn. hired that could pass a background check & a drug test." He was LOOKING for people who had the skills AND could pass those 2 tests.

But you are correct about Bill & what he did back in the "old days." Production was much lower,,, and hand fitting & work was more common & took more time. And yes,, there were fewer models in the Ruger line. But one of the most GLARING examples of the differences was the COMMON complaint by many, many , MANY people was when Ruger would offer a new gun,,, it might be 1-3 years BEFORE any average consumers saw that model on their gun shops shelves.
Marlin is right in how the consumer wants it now, and in quantity.
And as noted by several of us,, getting GOOD workers is a hard thing to do.

Bill was a genius,,, but he was also demanding. But so is the consumer.

And I've had the pleasure of seeing a modern manufacturing assembly line, where using CNC machining was how things were made. VERY similar to the one shown in the pics added to my other post. (The ones that CG posted the link to the Ruger factory.) At each & every machine,,, for every part built,,, there were test gauges & go, no-go gauges. If a part got built, it got tested. If it failed,,, that machine got stopped & it was worked on until the parts would pass the tolerances again. If that machine was working correctly,, they'd go to the previous machine to see if it was causing the out of tolerance parts.
I'd find it HARD to believe that Ruger is not doing the very same thing,, by checking each part as it comes off a machine.
Next,,, the assembly. If the parts are all in tolerance,,, then the assembly of them is easy & many average people can do that job, especially if trained to do so. Lastly,, test firing. If they test each gun,, which it's my understanding that the do that, then if the gun functions,,, as it should,,, then it'll get shipped. If not,,, they will find out why. But a 1-6 round test fire MAY NOT reveal a problem that extended firing will uncover.
Or,, as in the case of the OP here,,, by his explanation above, there were 2 springs in the hole. A simple human error,, and easily corrected.

As noted,,, human errors,,, NONE of us are 100% perfect,, 100% of the time.

 

[P89DC]

Bill Ruger fired his Q/A team in the 90's, the idea that he'd be angry about the junk Ruger ships these days is laughable. He believed in shipping the minimum required to get the customer to buy. His cheapness is legendary, today's product reflects his spirit.

A recent Ruger release shows great insight into Ruger's issues. I'm referring to the ill-fated GP100/44spl release, 100% of the first batch was defective. The front sight was unbelievable, that it was able get out of the factory is pathetic. Additionally, the chambers weren't even reamed to Ruger's recent standards, it displayed the lack of internal communication and engineering standards. The real victims are the buyers that don't follow the internet and don't know how bad the release was and that it can be fixed by contacting the factory.

Now that panic buying is over, American gun manufacturers will have to up their shipped quality, otherwise you can expect the same results American automobile manufacturers experienced in the 80's and 90's.

 

[Captain America]

...I'm referring to the ill-fated GP100/44spl release......The front sight was unbelievable...

I still say that 20 years from now collectors will be paying top dollar for those guns in the first run that had the gap under the sight. Contender hit upon a really important point here, tolerances, you can't say a gun is defective because it doesn't fall into your personal preference for a tolerance, especially if it shoots just fine.

 

[Prescut]

Loyalty is a hell of a thing.

It often confuses us as we talk and make decisions.

Loyalty to a friend is a requirement of character.
Loyalty to a company is just bad juju unless they earn it. I own a small business and I rely 100% on customer loyalty.

I know that the expression "What have you done for me lately" is some kind of truism. I hate it as a businessman. I can't believe my customers won't give me credit today for what I did last year. To survive, I have learned to accept it and not live on past glories. My toughest customers keep me sharp and accountable.

Relying on past performance will kill a company every time !

With Ruger,
I blame the customers for not giving stronger feedback earlier. Loyal customers believe that you just don't flame the company; and they can't tell the difference between feedback and flaming. The company then sees that it's practices are acceptable. The downward spiral has started.


Prescut

 

[P89DC]

...I blame the customers for not giving stronger feedback earlier. Loyal customers believe that you just don't flame the company; and they can't tell the difference between feedback and flaming. The company then sees that it's practices are acceptable. The downward spiral has started.

It's not the responsibility of the customer to fix Ruger's quality problem. Ruger knows their defect rate if they choose to measure it.

The fact that every new release is a disaster should be a clue to someone in the Engineering Dept. I graduated in 1985 and we learned about quality measurements and Prob/Stats or we didn't graduate. Willful ignorance is the best excuse Ruger could use. It unbelievable that Ruger doesn't understand there's an issue, the re-work charges have to be a significant portion of the operating expense. The call center alone is scaled up to cover for bad quality, that's not cheap. There's no way modern management practices allow this to go on un-noticed. So the real conclusion is Ruger thinks it's OK to operate with defect rates in the tens of percent.

When a customer has 2 revolvers latch up tighter than a frog's butt out of a 3000 piece lot it's very easy to extrapolate Ruger's defect rate exceeds 40% AT A MINIMUM. That was my experience with my last two Ruger purchases....

 

[BrotherInArms]

Maybe I've just been lucky?

I have more Ruger than anything else. Other than a minor defect in the bluing of my LCR, and my Mk I being unconscionably difficult to break down and reassemble (removing barrel/receiver from frame, and re-assy, was a stone b***h), I've never had any complaints.

I've a stainless Lipsey's Blackhawk I just received. No serious defects in fit and finish I've seen. Haven't had it to the range, yet. Cylinder indexes and the gun goes *click* like it should, very nicely, though

You want to see engineering, manufacturing and, worst of all, customer service really in the pits, wander on over to the Walther forum and look into some of the barrel peening, internal barrel surface and other issues owners are having.

Ruger may screw up, but, at least in my experience, at least they tend to make it right.

 

[contender]

"When a customer has 2 revolvers latch up tighter than a frog's butt out of a 3000 piece lot it's very easy to extrapolate Ruger's defect rate exceeds 40% AT A MINIMUM. That was my experience with my last two Ruger purchases.."

I'm trying to do the math here. 3000 pieces,, and 2 were defective. How is that a 40% defect rate? Just asking POLITELY.

 

[P89DC]

...I'm trying to do the math here. 3000 pieces,, and 2 were defective. How is that a 40% defect rate? Just asking POLITELY.

It's call Probability and Statics, if there were only 2 defective units out of 3000 pieces, the probability of the sole two defective units arriving at a single customer is near zero (not to mention they are plenty of other reports about defective flattops).

I had this very conversation one time with my factory about a customer's failed units being traced to our product. The customer had a couple failed units from the field, they pulled 10 units from the 3000 piece inventory and found 3 defective parts from my factory. Factory tried to claim the defect rate was under 1%, I told them they need to speak with the QA dept as they were clueless. I also told them if they were right we need to go purchase some lottery tickets 'cause we're on a roll.

They came back and accepted the problem was theirs and the defect rate was over 10% (it was close to 50%). We had to introduce a new test temporarily and redesign the part. Why the redesign? The most successful/accurate testing can only reduce defects by approximately two orders of magnitude (and the terrible yield made the product cost more than we sold it for). In other words, after introducing the new test, the best we could expect was a 0.5% defect rate before the redesign. Customer had to introduce extra testing and burn-in time on their side to trap the last 0.5% in the module. Very costly problem....