44 Carbine Question

[Waldo Pepper]

Is there any difference between 1961 to 1974 carbines and 1975 to 1984 models? The reason I ask is Ruger has them broken into two different groupings and I figured maybe they did it because of engineering change but I didn't see any difference.

So is only difference just the year made? Mine is a '74 manufacture gun and was just wondering.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

There are some differences to the piston and the bolt. This article shows both kinds and is an excellent how-to for complete take-down and cleaning. (with pics).

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/ig/Rug ... tructions/

...Jimbo

 

[Waldo Pepper]

Thanks Jimbo, very good link. Seems there is not much in major difference except bolt face and gas valve from a quick run through.

Been wanting the 96/44 but those guns have gone nuts in price and I picked this little beauty up for $300 OTD at a pawn shop. From looking it over the stock had a few minor handling marks and there is some minor surface rust along underside of the barrel forward of the stock.

I want to clean it up and make it the trunk gun and SHF gun, like I started to do with the NIB Malin 1894P 16" ported carbine I found a year ago and then found out the $500 gun I bought would bring about a $1000 at auction and after shooting it I decided this was not a trunk gun, but an excellent hunting gun that can make a deer kill easy out to a 100 yards. Seems with the Redfield 2x7x33 scope it does 2.5" to 3" groups at 100 yards with a hand loaded 240gr HC LRNFT bullet from a rest.

 

[pete44ru]

The magazine latch area was improved/upgraded, to add an "unloading" button, which released cartridges in the magazine into the shooter's hand w/o working them through the action - which is how earlier guns w/o the upgrade had to be unloaded (except for shooting empty, of course).

.

 

[Waldo Pepper]

The magazine latch area was improved/upgraded, to add an "unloading" button, which released cartridges in the magazine into the shooter's hand w/o working them through the action - which is how earlier guns w/o the upgrade had to be unloaded (except for shooting empty, of course).

.

Wow!!! Now it took Ruger 15 years to figure out that was needed. Some times you wonder why something so essential to safe use can be so easly over looked. Not actually faulting Ruger any more then done by other mfg's be it gun, car or space craft.

I guess this is not something you could reto fit. Reminds me of trying to get a round out of the magazine of a Winchester 42 pump 410 that I had as a kid. It was hard to do and hurt the finger, often had a second shell pop out behind the first one removed, or would jam under loading gate. I finally sold it years later after it dented a primer on Winchester 3" shell. Thank goodness it wasn't a Federal with their softer primer.

 

[mattsbox99]

Heck, Remington still builds rifles that have to be cycled with a round in the chamber to unload them, and for most of the years the 700 has been in production the safety had to be off to do this. A little common sense goes a long ways in proper firearm handling.

 

[Waldo Pepper]

A little common sense goes a long ways in proper firearm handling.

That's true and nothing is fool proof.

That said a poor design that could easily get the unskilled beginner, or distracted at right moment skilled person hurt is something that should be corrected or avoided. But often mfg's don't correct problems because it's too expensive, they take into consideration the cost of law suit pay outs vs dollar loss from correcting the problem and you end up with dangerous guns or such until the buying public votes with it dollars one way or the other.

 

[wwb]

Wow!!! Now it took Ruger 15 years to figure out that was needed. .......

Not really... the magazine release button was added early on. Not sure of the exact time but I recall it being something like 4 or 5 years after introduction.

 

[Waldo Pepper]

Wow!!! Now it took Ruger 15 years to figure out that was needed. .......

Not really... the magazine release button was added early on. Not sure of the exact time but I recall it being something like 4 or 5 years after introduction.

Oh, my mistake. Thought it was the reason Ruger broke them into two groups, '61 through '74 and '75 through '85 maybe.

 

[mattsbox99]

You gotta learn sometime, not everything is going to come with football helmets and pads.

Ruger made a fine revolver to begin with, then they decided it was safer to put in a transfer bar instead of having the hammer down on an empty chamber. I'm not saying it wrecked the gun, but it sure isn't as good now. Sure some safety items are nice, but show me a series 80 1911 that commands the price or desire of a series 70, or an old model v. a new model.

Society is taught to be afraid of guns, which only leads to curiousity. Firearm safety should be taught from a young age and kids should be exposed to them so they don't go looking when the parents aren't home.

 

[Waldo Pepper]

Yup as we used to say back in the day, nothing is sailor proof. But think of the number of innocent bystanders these safeties have saved from injury or death or small children from death or injury from careless parents.

The reason all my colts are 80's is the market demand has made '70 expensive for a model that would only be of any possible consequence to maybe competition shooters, but the uneducated masses want the "better trigger" and have driven price up by demand. But if they were to do a blind test they would not be able to tell which was which was the '70 series and which the 80 series.

 

[TDF]

Yup as we used to say back in the day, nothing is sailor proof. But think of the number of innocent bystanders these safeties have saved from injury or death or small children from death or injury from careless parents.

I heard an interesting statement once that when safety caps were mandated on medicine bottles, the death rate of children who took medicines they shouldn't have went up, not down. There's no explaining the stupidity of the general public. "There's no point in putting this medicine bottle where the kids can't get it or even teaching the kids to stay out of it cause, hey, the big companies made it safe with this safety lid" Or some such nonsense. Not necesarily saying the same thing applies to guns but I do agree with the statement that the best safety (for everything not just guns) lies between your ears.

TDF

 

[Waldo Pepper]

Stupid is, as stupid does.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I have to cycle ammo through the action of my Winchester '94 to empty it, what's the big deal?

...Jimbo

 

[chet15]

Yes, Ruger made sure the '74 change was noted in serial numbering also. Guns with a 100- prefix had the old style of frontal trigger housing attachment and the old style cartridge guide that was attached by a screw.
Guns with 102- prefix and higher had the new style trigger housing attachment and the cartridge guide was attached by a rivet.
The super rare 101- prefix guns were a transition between the two changes.
Chet15

 

[buck460XVR]

The reason all my colts are 80's is the market demand has made '70 expensive for a model that would only be of any possible consequence to maybe competition shooters, but the uneducated masses want the "better trigger" and have driven price up by demand. But if they were to do a blind test they would not be able to tell which was which was the '70 series and which the 80 series.

+1

 

[buck460XVR]

I have to cycle ammo through the action of my Winchester '94 to empty it, what's the big deal?

...Jimbo

One reason I ought a 77/44 was because I get tired of ''rackin thru '' the whole magazine in my pistol caliber levers everytime I want to unload 'em. It ain't a problem at the range, I just shoot 'em empty, but when deer hunting, it gets old quick.

 

[44rugerr]

Also,the stocks were different because the plastic and metal butt plates do not interchange.