Ruger is discontinuing 6.8 SPC Ranch and Bolt rifles?!

[Ruger_rules]

I just did a caliber search for the 6.8 SPC on Ruger's web site and the only thing that popped up was the 'black rifle' upper. JMO, but if this is true, I'm really ticked off with Ruger. I can think of a few calibers that SHOULD be dropped instead.

P.S. Maybe I should change my name to "Ruger_rant."

 

[tulsamal]

Maybe they are just discontinuing them to replace them with proper SPCII chambered rifles? I was considering the Mini version until I realized they were still using the old specs. If they chamber and rifle them properly and release a Tactical version AND they produce a proper 20 round factory mag for the cartridge... I'll buy one!

Gregg

 

[Ruger_rules]

Yep, hopefully they are just replacing them. But, alas and alack, I can only think of the PC9/40 and the #3. :-(

 

[Kanook]

I was going to wait to get a 6.8 in stainless laminte Hawkeye, then I found out they had disco'd them. So I kept looking and asking some friends to find one for me.

The local rip-off gunshop said he could get me one if I pre paid. The licker charged me $775 for a firearm that all he was doing was being a middle man. I've worked in gunstores and know the routine, but if a customer came in and asked for a special order and prepaid, we only asked for 10% above dealer cost.

The 6.8 Hawkeye I got is very nice and accurate. First time out 127yds and down goes bambie. It is most accurate with SSA 110 prohunter.

I plan on reloading for this in the future.

 

[BlkHawk73]

With as much discussion I hear about the 6.8's and as much "I want a 6.8" is heard, I don't think it was an over abundance of sales surrounded them. Low sales = dropped from production.

 

[tulsamal]

Low sales = dropped from production.

I can't argue with that except that Ruger sometimes gives up on something instead of at least considering that they aren't offering what the customer really wants. It's like the whole .480 Ruger thing. People begged them to produce a five shot Blackhawk in .480... instead they just quit making the chambering entirely. I would say that a lot of the potential 6.8 SPC market is well aware that the original chambering and rifling configuration "has issues." And that SPCII is the way to go. So when they consider buying a Mini or AR or even bolt rifle from Ruger in 6.8, they ask about the chamber. And they find out that Ruger is still using the old specs. So they go somewhere else. So then Ruger says the 6.8 does't sell and they discontinue it!!

Gregg

 

[RonS]

I would already own one.


If Ruger made a 20 round magazine. Not much point in an all purpose rifle that is limited to 5 rounds.

 

[tulsamal]

If Ruger made a 20 round magazine. Not much point in an all purpose rifle that is limited to 5 rounds.

Even more true with the Tactical version. I just keep looking at the Mini 30 Tactical and feeling tempted. Decent accuracy and factory hi caps. 7.62x39 has its good points but I would rather have one in 6.8. If it had the proper chamber and rifling and a factory 20 round mag! (None of this mag stuff would be an issue if the gun had just taken AR mags from the beginning. Lots of good 6.8 mags for AR's.)

Gregg

 

[wunbe]

Ruger is still selling the AR upper in its orioginal 6.8 format. So you can discount any plans to change the profile as a cause for dropping it.

Low sales is a possible cause but then they hardly made scads of them and the marketing effort bvehind them was feeble at best. They put all their eggs in that RCH basket -- lost their shirt on that one and are still trying to revive it. And sales of other 6.8 Ars are quite sprightly elsewhere judging by the new companies getting in line to produce them and the ammo for them.

wunbe

 

[Quattroclick]

Copied off of another forum. No idea if it's true or not, but it does make sense. Sales may not have been great, and all of the non-SAAMI spec loads and chambers on the market probably gave them even more reason to pull the plug.

here is what the Ruger CEO had to say about it.

Dear Mr. Dearborn,

Please know that the so-called 6.8 SPC II "spec" is not SAAMI approved. To the best of my knowledge, Silver State Armory does not manufacture ammunition to SAAMI pressures and the solution they have come up with is to relive the throat to drop pressure. That is not the correct approach, in my opinion. The 6.8 SPC cartridge and chamber were introduced to SAAMI so firearm AND AMMUNITION manufacturers have a standard to manufacture to and everybody's products work together.

And I don't think your average deer will mind if you use 6.8 SPC.

At such time as SAAMI adopts a new 6.8 specification, we will be glad to look at chambering rifles in that new specification.

Best regards,
Mike Fifer, CEO

 

[Sugar River]

It was over 3 years ago that the military commmunity made it clear they had no interest in the 6.8.

I'm surprised Ruger stuck with it this long.


Pete

 

[tulsamal]

It was over 3 years ago that the military commmunity made it clear they had no interest in the 6.8.

They quite "having interest" in 30/06 over half a century ago. Does that mean that the gun companies should have stopped chambering it?

6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are both interesting and useful rounds for the AR platform regardless of whether any military forces adopt them. Sure, we would end up with lots more variety in components and loaded ammo if it was the military standard. But I'm quite happy with the SSA small primer cases and there are lots and lots of .277 bullets that work quite well.

Gregg

 

[Bob G]

To me, the more the merrier. But seriously, how are any of these "designer rounds" any better than the 243 and 308? For that matter, the 7.62X39 is often considered equal to the 30-30 in performance, which is simply not true.

 

[sebtool]

To me, the more the merrier. But seriously, how are any of these "designer rounds" any better than the 243 and 308? For that matter, the 7.62X39 is often considered equal to the 30-30 in performance, which is simply not true.

True. And the 6.8 improves on both cartridges. I think the biggest problem is that the 6.8 is a hunting round in a fun gun, and not exactly cheap to shoot. I own a mini in 6.8, just got it. I'll be reloading for it, so that will help. I also own a 180 series Mini 14 in .223 which is a fun gun, but the .223 isn't exactly what I'd call an impressive round. 7.62x39 doesn't do anything for me either.

I'd like to see Ruger come out with a more effective round in the Mini platform, but the design is limited. Doggone shame it won't handle a .243/7mm-08/.308 - just think how those would sell! Especially the 7mm-08! :mrgreen:

 

[chet15]

The 6.8 might be a great round, but believe it or not you guys are in such a small minority when comparing with those who don't want one in 6.8 or never ever considered it.
Sometimes I think the only way for company's to generate new sales is when they come up with new calibers or other new ideas to pique keep everybody's interest up. Most of the time, those new calibers are going to flop.
And can you imagine how many times the factory hears the phrase "I think you should make this, or I think you should make that? Ruger hears it all the time...but again...small minority for a specialized product doesn't mean Ruger could ever make any $ on the idea once the R&D is completed. It takes a bundle of $ before any new model can even get to market. And after that you have to sell a bunch of them to make it profitable.
Chet15

 

[Bob G]

The Mini 14 in .223 made sense in 1973; and it still does today. If you want an M1A, buy one. As for deer rifles, most folks go to the woods way over gunned these days. I butchered two steers the other day, and a .22 magnum was more than adequate to end things quickly. I realize you can't always make a brain shot from a few yards away in the woods, but 300 yard shots through the bush are also very unlikely. As for the Mini 30, cheap com-bloc ammo made it make sense.

 

[Sugar River]

It was over 3 years ago that the military commmunity made it clear they had no interest in the 6.8.

They quite "having interest" in 30/06 over half a century ago. Does that mean that the gun companies should have stopped chambering it?

6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are both interesting and useful rounds for the AR platform regardless of whether any military forces adopt them. Sure, we would end up with lots more variety in components and loaded ammo if it was the military standard. But I'm quite happy with the SSA small primer cases and there are lots and lots of .277 bullets that work quite well.

Gregg

Not quite the same, since the 6.8 was never adopted by any military, it has no "standardized basis of popularity" for lack of a better term.

I agree the Grendel makes sense for a long range AR platform, much better choice in bullets in .264.

 

[Buckeye Bill]

I have shot the 6.8 SPC and I like it. In a T/C Encore or Contender, it will provide a light recoiling solid rifle. My AR in 6.8 SPC hits hard and I can get effective hits out to 300 yards. The Ruger Mini did live up to the potential of this round. Time will tell if this round makes the cut. I like it and actively seek out chances to shoot it. While supporters of the 6.8 SPC are a minority, Ruger must have believed that this round had a future or they would not have produced the Mini or M77 compact in this chambering. Time will tell....

 

[russ69]

I love my 6.8 SPC mini. As a handloader, it's a great little cartridge. I'm glad I got mine while I could.

 

[Kanook]

Not that it matters, while I was trying to find a 6.8 "in stock", most dealers didn't know Ruger even made one in a bolt.

Considering I hit the stores in 3 different states and never saw one in person makes me wonder how many were made.

The 6.8 should make a great youth or recoil sensative rifle.

And as far as ammo price goes, when was the last time 45/70 was under $15 a box of 20.