10/22 stamping error

[Buckman2121]

Bought this 10/22 today and noticed that there is an error on the stamping. As u see it reads uger and not ruger. Has anyone ever seen this before?? Is there a market for misprinted firearms. Or maybe it's just my new toy for plinking. Let me know what ya think. Thanks for ur time.

 

[hittman]

Has anyone ever seen this before?? Is there a market for misprinted firearms. Or maybe it's just my new toy for plinking.

Errors in stamping are not all that uncommon.

Yes, there's a market for everything but it's very, very limited and I wouldn't expect even a modest gain in value.

I'd plink with it.

 

[Buckman2121]

Thank you

 

[BlkHawk73]

I'd have to agree. To some it would be whoa look, this is a super-de-cooper rare one and equate it with being made of platinum and gold. Just shoot it, take care of it and enjoy it.

 

[jimc00]

The federal law requires a firearm to have the manufacturers name on it. That one does not.

Colt sold Diamondbacks in 22lr but they were marked 22 Magnum. They tried to buy them back at a premium since they were a technical violation.

 

[contender]

There IS a collector market for such oddities. Especially in gun models that people collect. I'd leave it NIB.

 

[Blackhawk30]

Cool, you scored one of the ultra rare Uger copies of the 10/22.I wonder what it would go for on Auction Arms?

 

[rugerguy]

Welcome to the Forum......Heck most Americans still "think" Rugers , are 'Lugers'....that is pretty cool 'fubar' as far as I'm concerned, and I would send a picture of that 'boo boo' to the CEO and just "comment" on how you as a consumer are disappointed that QC is so "out to lunch" and "so often"...and NO you will not send it back because now it is "collectible"......

and as for those Colt Diamondbacks that were "marked 22 magnum", the two we had years ago in the shop WERE in fact "magnums" , as well as the "few" Pythons they had built for whatever reason in that caliber.......wish I had ALL of that stuff today !! Yikes they are worth a bundle !!!! Yeah, I even had a silver plated 1849 31 cal Colt Pocket pistol, engraved by Gustave Young , that was NEVER presented !! we had a couple of Colt distributors over here that came up with some awesome models, from time to time.........

I cannot believe that something THAT "obvious", got by someone, and then , "how " many did they rollmark before they actually caught it..there was NO "slipping of that rollmarker !!!! maybe it was done as a "joke" but somehow got shipped out ????

 

[Uncle Howie]

There IS a collector market for such oddities.

Absolutely. There are folks into "duplicate" serial numbers, "factory seconds," etc. Not sure what the premium is for a gun company that misspelled their own name!

I've got to think there's somebody out there who would pay a premium for such a mistake.

I'd buy another one for plinking. If you aren't sure what it's worth (I'm certainly not...) and can't afford to "sit on it," try floating it out on an auction site and see if anyone bites.

 

[Buckman2121]

thanks for the info fellas

 

[chet15]

What is interesting on that one is, if the first "R" was there it looks like at least the entire last digit of the serial number would be all over it. The entire "R" must have broken off of the rolldie??? Or a better explanation....it was never a part of the rolldie to begin with, considering the space limitations of that rollmark along with the serial number stamping area.
If there's one, there's more.

Ruger QC anyone?? Seems these issues are mounting.
Chet15

 

[HAWKEYE#28]

What ever has happened to "trained Staff' on the Build Line, as well as "final Inspection and sign off " when firearm is inspected..........Or: Someone "UpStairs" asking "How in the hell did YOU(yes, they know who built it)not see this error in stamping when YOU had it laying on your bench and assembled it?"............And remember, as well, this error occurred long before build.

 

[golferboy426]

I'm guessing you guys who blame QC have never really been in manufacturing or inspection. It's like proof reading your own stuff Your mind fills in what you expected to be there. just like those test paragraphs that leave out letters and write them backwards etc. You can easily read them..

Granted it's an embarrassing slip but in my opinion no reflection of quality control or the assembly operator. I'm sure that is not even an inspected attribute

 

[rugerguy]

well having worked at two different gun plants, fitting building and test firing at them and visiting, for a few days each , two others, all of this in the building ,fitting and service ends of it including test firing, ENOUGH people handle, look at and then FINALLY get a once over before shipping, ( and even they, in shipping ,both men and women, ) happen to look at , roll them over, and gave them a cursory inspection.....all too often things would be "picked up and out" pulled off the line, sent back to be recycled, gone over,,,and I can tell you , PLUM finishes, missing chambers, out of time spitting lead, or failing to lock up ( go click, click) were NOT accepted, they did not get shipped out, even accuracy came into play, some are proof tested and then shot for accuracy, using two different types of ammo ( Dan Wesson and High Standard) and this sort of thing just usually did not happen......as 'splitz ' alluded to, these "parts" are done aforehand, parts are inspected coming in, and in the hands of ANY fitter, looked at during the built, I can honestly say almost EVER builder, fitter that I worked with, knew in a nano second if any given part was good or bad , before they even tried to use it........sorry , NO excuse...today they are just in TOO much of a hurry to "get it out the door" and pre testing, is something out of the past?????
gee, just think if Boeing did it this way.......Yikes!! :shock:

 

[golferboy426]

sorry Dan I disagree, fit function sure but a roll stamp, obviously simple to overlook. My experience comes from running manufacturing plants with as many or more people than Ruger. As I said there is not a chance in the world that the Ruger roll is an inspection attribute. That doesn't excuse the error. I'm just stating it is almost guaranteed to be overlooked and once the part gets built it would be a fortunate occurrence to find it

 

[ArmedinAZ]

Obviously uger no longer employs a proofreader and relies on spell-check.

 

[bcam]

Still voting for imitation Ruger. Too many issues. I'll be interested in Ruger's response.

 

[Buckman2121]

That is a very clear photo. I showed my supervisor who said we can certainly replace this for you. If you would like that, you should keep the stock and we can arrange to pickup the rest of the firearm.
Just let me know what you would like to do.


That is the response I received from ruger. It's gonna be a shooter for me

 

[mohavesam]

I sent the photo to a plant manager.

With an error like that, I'd have a moment before loading and shooting it. What else did they miss - the chamber?

Amerikan manufactchuring! The best in the wurld! :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[rugerguy]

sorry Dan I disagree, fit function sure but a roll stamp, obviously simple to overlook. My experience comes from running manufacturing plants with as many or more people than Ruger. As I said there is not a chance in the world that the Ruger roll is an inspection attribute. That doesn't excuse the error. I'm just stating it is almost guaranteed to be overlooked and once the part gets built it would be a fortunate occurrence to find it

sad state of affairs when its MORE important to get it out, than to 'look/see just what you are building, and as I noted in my reply above, when I was taught, trained they "cared" about what they put out, NO plums, no missing items or procedures, they didn't call it High Standard for no reason, and ALL parts were checked and had to "pass," before they were used, NO longer today, too big a hurry, the "bean counters" run America.

 

[golferboy426]

ALL parts were checked and had to "pass," before they were used, NO longer today, too big a hurry, the "bean counters" run America.

If that were the case now, if it ever was, ( which I doubt) you could not afford to buy a gun. In no industry is there ever a 100 % inspection of anything except final functional test. Blaming the "bean counters" becomes an unjustified easy scapegoat. In this case there is one and only one person to blame. That would be the operator who at the time of a process change should have does a first piece inspection on the stamping roll only. It is possible there was a die failure after the initial set up but that would have difficult to spot. When I manged processes like this I instituted a last piece inspection at the end of the run and a first on the beginning of each shift. In retrospect those actions cost me more than they ever saved.

This error does provide an interesting question. Unless it became an illegal part (which I may be as Ruger may have to be on the receiver). Would I ship it after the defect was found.

For me, assuming, it was legal, I think I'd have shipped them with a card inside the box stating the missing R, maybe even with a small discount

 

[hittman]

If there's one, there's more.

Good point and ..... perhaps not as rare or unique as some may think.

You know, there's been a number of Ruger guns that folks paid premium dollars for only to have them rolled out again. The convertible single action 45LC/45ACP, Mini-14 in 222, etc.

 

[golferboy426]

only to have them rolled out again. .

I doubt they will roll this one out again. :wink:

 

[blackwolfe]

I had to double check and see what date this was posted. I first looked at it April 1st.

 

[eveled]

I checked the date too. I thought for sure it was a photoshop April fools joke. I think I'd keep it NIB for a while, Ed.

 

[chet15]

This would seem a pretty important QC issue. The rolldies are received from a vendor as are quite a few components for Ruger's different models. You'll note the component involved in the recall for Ruger's SR556 Target model version. Never been involved with procedure at a gun factory before, but shouldn't there have been some paperwork with the components being received saying the SR556 component was heat treated properly?? By letting these kind of things go "lax", Ruger can certainly be headed for a huge liability lawsuit.
QC is an area that should not be cut because of $ concerns, and with the issues again coming out like they did when the new management was just getting their feet wet at Ruger a decade or so ago, this does not bode well for the company or the consumer.
Chet15

 

[golferboy426]

a vendor "certification" is required stating that the parts were processed according the the specification on the drawing , usually a mil spec. Ruger only can test the hardness and the psi required to destruct on a pull test and has no way to verify the process. Finding the defect would not be expected based on an incoming inspection or test. My guess is either they had consumer returns or it showed it in the standard durability tests in the shop

 

[mohavesam]

I think we're overlooking the photo... the "UGER" letters are spaced correctly and centered between the s/n and the other marks. There is no missing "R" in the sense that the RUGER letters have a broken or lost letter. I'd love to see the stamp itself but then no one has offered yet that what we call the stamp is actually cutter-point engraved... ? That would allow a simple programming error to produce this embarrassing trademark error.

Still... way to go Ruger quality, for shipping this FUBAR.

 

[Ol'Freak]

Stamp it yourself except use the letter "B"

 

[chet15]

Well...hopefully everybody will be checking every 827- prefix 10/22 they see for this error as those guns are rapidly disappearing!!! Went through 90% of the Des Moines show this weekend before I saw an 827-. The rest of the guns were all 828- and even some 829- guns.
So what I saw was, guns up to 827-75765 were marked "RUGER".
This could turn out to be a valuable variation...when everybody knows there are UGER marked RUGER's out there!
Chet15