Appreciation of the NM's

[COR]

I love the OM's, I have a .45, 41, and a .357 converted to 44Spl. I believe that an OM without recall lockwork is the way it should be, none of mine are converted. The NM lockwork was an outstanding fix to making the guns "safer" and at the time I bet the Ruger engineers had quite a few sleepless nights. They done good if you ask me. I really love my SS Bisley .45's and my 44 SBH's.


I also have been known to carry 6 in my OM's...I believe in personal responsibility.

 

[Arokcrwlr]

IMHO, a New Model big bore (.41 - .500) Bisley with a packable barrel length and adjustable sights is nearing on perfection for most purposes.

+100

I have a few OM's and while I prefer the OM action, for the type of shooting that I do (heavy loads) I prefer my Bisley's. Having said that, there's just something about an OM Super that I just can't resist.

Oh heck, forget all that - I like all Ruger SA's.

 

[maxpress]

I had one new model and I learned my lesson.
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtop ... 44818a3749

They're junk.

thats gotta be a 1/10,000 problem. ya just send it back and they will fix or replace. we had a USFA that the firing pin wasnt long enough to hit the primer. dosnt mean its a crap design. it just means one bad one made it past inspectors.

the SBH and BH are guns that i buy as tools. unlike most others that i buy for pleasure. i like the NMs for the 6shot carry. as far as the slight difference in trigger. i have never noticed it the few times i ran into something that thought i looked tasty or when getting rid of varmits. i guess i have noticed a difference at the range although it hasnt effected my shooting.

 

[TexNekkid]

I imagine preferences here depend a lot on whether your first Ruger was an OM or NM. Folks who started with an OM are more apt to consider the NM a step backwards. I came relatively late to the party, starting with a NM, so got used to their creepy triggers.

Now that I have a few OMs, I appreciate the difference and even seem to shoot a little better with them. My favorite is still a (somewhat modified) Vaquero, however.

 

[M'BOGO]

It is more of a Ford/Chevy match. They both have a place in the real world.

 

[Dave T]

I never owned a NM until I saw a 44 Special Blackhawk. I had always wished Ruger would chamber a gun specifically for the 44 Special so I was naturally drawn in. Bought it but never fired it. Just cocking the hammer and dry firing was enough to convince me that wasn't where I wanted to go with a single action revolver. Managed to sell it for what I had in it so all's well that ends. (LOL)

I don't claim others are wrong for liking the NM. If most people didn't prefer the NM I couldn't afford the occasional OM I come across. These days they're expensive enough as it is.

Dave

 

[dougader]

When I started working in law firms, I would do legal research just for the heck of it and since I wanted to know the law on firearms, and controlling opinion about it, I looked up a bunch of gun related cases.

One of the first I ran across was an Oregon Court of Appeals case involving an accidental shooting involving a Ruger SA revolver. Ruger lost that case and since it went all the way through the Court of Appeals I imagine Ruger paid out a bunch of legal fees in addition to the damages asked for in the original complaint.

I can understand why Ruger went the way they did. What I can't understand is why Colt and their clone brethren haven't been sued in a similar fashion... or do idiots only pick up Ruger OM revolvers?

Unfortunately, courts sometimes rule in favor of the lowest common denominator and this includes boneheads who pick up a gun and automatically think they know all about it. I have seen it several times myself. My cousin thought all revolvers cycled counter-clockwise simply because his Ruger SA did... so he picked up my GP100 and started to pretend to play around. I grabbed the gun out of his hand and showed him how this one cycled clockwise and if he had continued screwing around I would have been cleaning his brains off my bedroom wall.

Now think of someone getting hold of an OM and loading it up with 6, never having been taught the safe way to use the Colt or OM gun.... the potential for mass idiocy goes up fast... and, in fact, Ruger had to pay out on several of these and got tired of paying for ignorant gun handling.

All that said, I do love the 4-click function of a good Ruger OM, Colt, or the Colt clones. But I also like my NM revovlers and have been told a good smith can make the NM trigger every bit as good as an OM. I'll find out for myself when the good Mr. Harton finishes up my project in a few moons.

 

[Cholo]

I think Ruger did a good job with the NM's. Doesn't mean I like them more. I have 4 NM's and 4 OM's. Like them both.

I sure don't know about the NM's being "junk". My bought new '79 SBH is the sweetest of all of them when it comes to trigger pull and accuracy. To each his own I guess. My personal choice would be OM though. Love the clicks and nostalgia. Music to my ears, like a Python.

"When I got my first one my buddy and I did blindfolded trigger tests with our identical Old and New Models. We could pick out the Old Model every time for the lighter, crisper, more precise trigger." alienbogey

I could pick out the OM every time because, except for my Bearcat, the actual triggers are different :wink:

 

[Yosemite Sam]

... I can understand why Ruger went the way they did. What I can't understand is why Colt and their clone brethren haven't been sued in a similar fashion... or do idiots only pick up Ruger OM revolvers? ...

Can't explain Colt, but note that S&W now uses a transfer bar, when they were using a hammer mounted firing pin up until the late 70s at least. Also, there's this which (unfortunately) explains why Freedom Arms tells you to only load 4 in their 5 shot guns, even when they utilize a transfer bar...

-- Sam

 

[Stoots]

I had one new model and I learned my lesson.

They're junk.

Yeah, that's why Ruger can't sell them. Hell, they can barely give them away.


:roll: