57springer
Buckeye
Yea really , W B Ruger, would not let this happen !! :roll:Heliman said:
apparently cursed by Ruger
- Thread starter JStacy
- Start date
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.
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
Ruger Guru
"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.
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.
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.
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
Hunter
P89DC said:
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.
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
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
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.Prescut said:
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
Bearcat
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 75
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.
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
Ruger Guru
"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.
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).contender said:
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....
RSIno1
Hunter
Mercedes cars are junk today - look at the resale value. Their quality took a big hit when they owned Chrysler and saw how bad a car the American's would buy. A friend bought a 300 MB for his wife. Engine took a dump at less than 5,000 miles. Dealer couldn't get to it right away as there were 3 ahead of him for new engines. I have no problem with bean counters and efficency experts finding a better way to build something as long as they don't destroy the product in the process - the Red Label comes to mind here. Big companies pay a bonus to employees who come up with cost saving ideas. My uncle got the max award from Ford ($25,000 in the 60s) when he came up with the simple idea of not wasting paint on the tops of cars that were going to be covered by vinyl tops anyway.wolfee said:
"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 " It would be .00004% and if the error rate held up Rugers, which makes 5,000,000 guns a year would only produce 3,333 guns per year that are defective and I bet it is a lot higher than that. The odds of same person getting two guns in the same month that are defective is truly small!
But when it happens to you it seems more important.
But when it happens to you it seems more important.
I don't know the percentage of faulty Rugers that make it out the door. Common sense will tell you that it is very small. Ruger is still in business and growing. I don't know what " Bill " would do, I didn't know the man. What I do know is that Ruger make a very fine firearm at a very good price. I AM NOT taking anything away from those who have received firearms that had to go back for repairs, but to think that nothing should get by QC is a far stretch of the imagination.
I am 57 years old and looking back I can not remember buying anything that I was 100% satisfied with. Most things I was satisfied I made a good purchase, but a handful of times I was not happy. I am thankful Ruger makes as good a product at a very affordable price as they do. I CAN NOT afford a Custom revolver. And yes new Freedom Arms revolvers do go back for repairs. I personally know of one that was sent back 2 times before a shot was fired. It was not back in a couple of weeks either time like a Ruger
I own 2 Rugers that needed work when new. A Single Seven got a new base pin and a 45 Vaquero got the throats reamed to .4525. Even after I made the repairs out of my pocket I was satisfied I made a very good purchase.
I am 57 years old and looking back I can not remember buying anything that I was 100% satisfied with. Most things I was satisfied I made a good purchase, but a handful of times I was not happy. I am thankful Ruger makes as good a product at a very affordable price as they do. I CAN NOT afford a Custom revolver. And yes new Freedom Arms revolvers do go back for repairs. I personally know of one that was sent back 2 times before a shot was fired. It was not back in a couple of weeks either time like a Ruger
I own 2 Rugers that needed work when new. A Single Seven got a new base pin and a 45 Vaquero got the throats reamed to .4525. Even after I made the repairs out of my pocket I was satisfied I made a very good purchase.
bigbill
Single-Sixer
I was a class A machine tool builder I am a perfectionist when it comes to my trade. I built CNC lathes from 36" chucks to 144" chucks. My point is that quality also comes from the machine operators. Most companies let there QC department close. The machine operator does the first piece inspection. It's very sad to see errors when it could of been corrected.
Major T
Blackhawk
Call me lucky! My small group of Rugers have been mostly trouble free. Not to say that a little polishing in tHe triggers did pay off on a couple. My fleet: a couple of Mk I .22 pistols, a Bearcat about fifteen years old (trigger polished), a ss Single six convertible, an early ss .44 Special FT, a .44 Mag 50th Anniversary (fit and finish rivals 1910 era Colt SAAs with that one), and my stainless synthetic 580 Mini-14 shoots darn close to the magic inch with a good scope and a trigger job, using factory ammo.
I am stubborn and want to like No 1s. Over the years I have had six, maybe more. Fit and finish was fine. They just do not fit my physique. I can't get scopes back far enough, even with the ugly extension rings. I surrender on those. My only 77 experience was a tang safety .270 that I gifted my BIL. It was his only rifle. Every time he pulled the trigger, something, usually a mule deer or coyote, died.
Are my Rugers perfect? Close, but the two FT models could use fuller grips. I need to work on that. I do not think that any of my Rugers were made in the last eight years. The Mini and Single Six may be newer than I recall. Also, all except the Anniversary model, were purchased by me after looking them over at a retail store. The anniversary was a gift from my wife, selected with help from my SIL.
My experience with Ruger's CS has been good. New rear sight for a Mk I and ring swaps has been excellent.
Looking at new products, and not just from Ruger, I do understand what you guys are complaining about. Fit and finish has largely gone to pot from most makers. My only new gun purchase in the last couple of years is a CZ 527 .223. So far so good. New Marlins, most Remingtons, and S&W makes one barf just looking at them. Needless to say, my used gun selection usually put me back into the sixties and seventies, if not older. Guns were better then. Cars were not. The Japaneese made US auto makers mostly do better. Mercedes? Daughter and grandson both drive S550s. I would choose a Toyota Avalon or Lexus LS over the MB any day. My limo is a top of the line Toyota Van. My bride drives a baby Lincoln SUV. Almost 3k cheaper than a comparable Ford. Ford or Lincoln dealer, one screwed up, as list prices were close. No matter, she is happy.
Jack
I am stubborn and want to like No 1s. Over the years I have had six, maybe more. Fit and finish was fine. They just do not fit my physique. I can't get scopes back far enough, even with the ugly extension rings. I surrender on those. My only 77 experience was a tang safety .270 that I gifted my BIL. It was his only rifle. Every time he pulled the trigger, something, usually a mule deer or coyote, died.
Are my Rugers perfect? Close, but the two FT models could use fuller grips. I need to work on that. I do not think that any of my Rugers were made in the last eight years. The Mini and Single Six may be newer than I recall. Also, all except the Anniversary model, were purchased by me after looking them over at a retail store. The anniversary was a gift from my wife, selected with help from my SIL.
My experience with Ruger's CS has been good. New rear sight for a Mk I and ring swaps has been excellent.
Looking at new products, and not just from Ruger, I do understand what you guys are complaining about. Fit and finish has largely gone to pot from most makers. My only new gun purchase in the last couple of years is a CZ 527 .223. So far so good. New Marlins, most Remingtons, and S&W makes one barf just looking at them. Needless to say, my used gun selection usually put me back into the sixties and seventies, if not older. Guns were better then. Cars were not. The Japaneese made US auto makers mostly do better. Mercedes? Daughter and grandson both drive S550s. I would choose a Toyota Avalon or Lexus LS over the MB any day. My limo is a top of the line Toyota Van. My bride drives a baby Lincoln SUV. Almost 3k cheaper than a comparable Ford. Ford or Lincoln dealer, one screwed up, as list prices were close. No matter, she is happy.
Jack
tomgun
Bearcat
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2017
- Messages
- 3
My first LCR .357 had to go back a month ago, the cylinder was not always locking after a fired round.
Apparently they couldn't fix it because they sent me a brand new one I haven't fired yet, it arrived yesterday. The lockup is way tighter on this one than the first gun. Hopefully it's a good one.
At least customer service is good...
Apparently they couldn't fix it because they sent me a brand new one I haven't fired yet, it arrived yesterday. The lockup is way tighter on this one than the first gun. Hopefully it's a good one.
At least customer service is good...
It is interesting that Ruger did not want to send my Ruger American Ranch rifle back to me. They said they "prefer" to refund my money. I asked about the replacement that had originally been mentioned and was told that was not an option. When I asked why the CSR told me that I would not be happy with the rifle even if they replaced it ! Odd response. ? I may buy another 300BLK Ranch rifle ,because no one lese makes one for a reasonable price, but I will function at least the ejection problem in the gun shop before I purchase it.
The 327 turned out good when Ruger sent me a new set of springs ,installed them and all is good ?
I think there is more to the 300 BLK story than they are telling me !
I watched a video of Jeff Quin(Gun Blast) do a test run on a American ranch in 300blk . He fired the same ammo my gun would not fire consistently or eject at all. His gun fired and ejected every round of the Remington 120 HP ? Something fishy about mine ?
The 327 turned out good when Ruger sent me a new set of springs ,installed them and all is good ?
I think there is more to the 300 BLK story than they are telling me !
I watched a video of Jeff Quin(Gun Blast) do a test run on a American ranch in 300blk . He fired the same ammo my gun would not fire consistently or eject at all. His gun fired and ejected every round of the Remington 120 HP ? Something fishy about mine ?
I like S&W (no lock) and Ruger. Ruger are rough and robust, S&W refined but not so robust.
A wise old man once told me that S&W was the triumph of engineering over design, while Ruger is the triumph of design over engineering.
By 'engineering' I am sure that he meant machining and QC.
I think that Ruger quality is declining as the years roll by - almost at the stage where GP100 / SP101 (in particular) series revolvers are 80% finished kit guns that you always have to finish up at home, and sometimes must return to Ruger so they can get it right. At least they are faster than Taurus.
A wise old man once told me that S&W was the triumph of engineering over design, while Ruger is the triumph of design over engineering.
By 'engineering' I am sure that he meant machining and QC.
I think that Ruger quality is declining as the years roll by - almost at the stage where GP100 / SP101 (in particular) series revolvers are 80% finished kit guns that you always have to finish up at home, and sometimes must return to Ruger so they can get it right. At least they are faster than Taurus.
Armybrat
Hunter
^^^^Dog Rough said:
Now that's pretty funny! (but sad, as it might be getting close to the truth).
I think it's a result of Ruger's zeal to expand at too rapid a pace and the QC is getting slipshod. Surely the Ruger execs know what is going on, particularly out here in the customers' world with all the criticisms online?
