Delete

[gunsbam69]

I don't know if it's always been this way, but I've dealt with some serious idiots there lately. I would tell them they have no right to keep your property that you paid for, and that if they don't return it to you, you're going to sue them. I am an FFL dealer who deals mainly in Ruger revolvers. If you'd like me to get involved, I will gladly. I absolutely would not take that.

 

[paulmark3010]

I would not take that either. Collectors should not have to give up a new model revolver just because some idiot said they could not fix it. Tell them to send it back and you will not take no for an answer. :twisted:

 

[mrs50sls56]

I predict that they will not send it back. They cannot verify the safety of the weapon, to their satisfaction, and it will end up in the burn barrel. That has been my experience. Good luck to you and pick wisely.

 

[rdf009]

That's pretty sad.

Too bad this didn't happen a few years ago.....you could have demanded that your replacement gun be a Gold Label. Now you can't even get one of those.

Good luck. I hope you get your Buckeye back.

 

[tek4260]

And why exactly can't they fix it? Because it is discontinued? Huh?

 

[98Redline]

I seriously doubt you will get your gun back.

If the gun is currently not in shooting condition or is not safe AND they don't have the parts to fix it, they will not send the gun back, regardless of how much you beg, plead or threaten.

With the litigious society that we live in today, firearms manufacturers have become ultra protective about insulating themselves from getting sued. When it comes to this type of thing all of the manufacturers are pretty much the same. If they can't fix it, you don't get it back, regardless of how collectible it is or what you paid for it. They will offer you a new gun of your choice but they will not send back a gun that they can not return to 100% factory firing conditions.

I don't mean to be the bearer of bad news, but I have heard the same story about S&W and Springfield Armory.

 

[Wyandot Jim]

So the only reason they can't fix it is because it has been discontinued???
I don't think it is any different than the Large frame Blackhawks that they now make.
Sounds like BS to me along with the cylinders not being correct. Says Caliber on the cylinder how can that not be correct for gun. I can't remeber if mine had the last 3 of the S/N on them or not. Don't think they did.
Yea your probably screwed when they have that kind of an attitude

 

[xtratoy]

I only hope that they decide to keep and destroy my Mini 14 that wouldn't eject and load the next round. I purchased it as brand new a couple weeks ago, but it turns out it was 5 years old and I suspect it was a returned gun that somehow ended up in some warehouse corner until it was sent to me.

 

[Hondo44]

gunsbam69 can probably help you pick the most expensive Blackhawk currently made like one of Lipseys or Williams Shooting Supply exclusives. After all your Buckeye was an exclusive!

Ask Ruger for one of them and sell it. Then buy a Buckeye; they show up for sale quite often even brand new ones in the box.

If you do get yours back: I have replaced firing pins and touch-up rebluing is not needed.

Although the end of the retaining pin is contoured and polished flush to the recoil shield, just score a line across it with a fine point permanent marking pen so you can match up the pin with the contours; align and drive the pin back in with a piece of toothbrush handle and it won't be deformed on the end. It's not that tight of a fit. On the last one I did, the owner didn't believe I had removed the pin.

We're pulling for ya and hope it turns out the best for you!

 

[caryc]

Maybe I'm not understanding this. You are the legal owner of the gun. You sent it to them for repairs. If they can not repair it they are legally obligated to return it to you. It's your property.

What if I took my 1955 Ford T Bird in for repairs and they said they could not fix it but would give me some other car?

Tell them you will file a law suit against them for conversion. They may have gotten away with this in the past because no one held them accountable. But that gun is totally legally your property. Unless you signed something stating otherwise it is still your property.

Even if the gun is defective it's still your property. I would send them a registered letter telling them you want your original property back. As soon as you send them the letter give them a call and tell them "do not destroy your gun" because that letter is on the way.

I can see them doing a recall on a gun model and notifying the owners saying please return the guns to us and we will replace them but to just refuse to return your property is just not legal. I don't care if it's a gun or a lollipop. It's your property.

 

[Ethang]

I agree with Cary. Whatever the reasoning is it is your handgun and without you consenting to have it replaced they should send it back. If they want to draft a letter covering them legally fine. But to just tell you to pound sand and pick another Blackhawk is BS.

 

[5of7]

I would have my attorney call them and if necessary threaten to sue them for the return of the gun.

This is bulls*** and it should not be allowed to stand. 8)

 

[MOUNTAIN WILLIAM]

From what I've been reading this is typical Ruger for the last few years. Usually they keep your "unrepairable" gun and only offer a discount for a similar new model.
Theft is theft in my book, I don't care how you couch it.

 

[rdf009]

Just a thought, but perhaps a (polite) email to Ruger's CEO explaining your situation might help. There is a link on Ruger's website that allows you to email him directly, and he supposedly reads them himself. If it were me I would try this before threatening to unleash the law dogs.

 

[w5lx]

I would really like to see the outcome on this issue. The results should be published on every gun forum in the country. Ruger has no right to confiscate your property without your permission.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I would really like to see the outcome on this issue. The results should be published on every gun forum in the country. Ruger has no right to confiscate your property without your permission.

You guys are really getting wound about this. This has been their policy for a long time. Ruger has been offering replacement guns and not returning the original for those they cannot repair . Sometimes there is a cost involved if the problem was the owners, such as a botched trigger job or a blown up gun.

That is why you don't send rare or out of production guns back to the factory without first determining that they can repair it. The 357 Maximum Revolver is a good example. They say it is unsafe. If you send it to them it will not come back.

How can it be theft if you voluntarily sent it to them for repair? :shock: :shock:

 

[mrs50sls56]

This has been a Ruger policy since at least the early 70's. Don’t get me wrong; I was equally outraged when it happened to me 35 years ago, but it is no different than expecting a car company to return defective parts that have been recalled. If they cannot verify the safety of their product, to their satisfaction, they will not return the weapon, period. In this litigious society, any other policy could threaten their very existence. Thus far, the anti-gun lawyers (and the U.S. Justice Department) have been unable to defeat Ruger's legal staff; to think that you (or your lawyer) can bully them into breaking their internal safety policy seems unlikely.

 

[caryc]

How can it be theft if you voluntarily sent it to them for repair? :shock: :shock:

I'll tell you how. It's called conversion. It doesn't matter how they received it. They are converting it to their own use whether it be selling it or destroying it.

Now let's get right down to brass tacks here. To the original poster...did they say they absolutely refuse to return your gun? Or are they just trying their best to talk you into a trade?

Have you actually said "I don't want a trade, I want my original gun back"? If so what was their reply?

 

[gunman42782]

Well, that sounds a whole lot better.

 

[flatgate]

FWIW,

I've changed out a firing pin on a .357 Maximum Blackhawk shooter I purchased at a gun show. I got the "retaining pin" back in place "good enough" for my needs. It shot just fine for several years until I found something else I needed worse than a 7-1/2" Maxi :roll:

flatgate

 

[caryc]

Yes, that makes more sense. I think those stories going around the net are just bunk. As I said anything you send to them for repairs remains your property. They can not simply refuse to return it to you.

I still do not believe that if you send them a 357 Maximum Revolver they can just say sorry, we are not returning your property.

No matter what people think they have heard, there is always more to the story, like people signing over the gun to them for something else.

 

[RugerHound]

I think it's all in who you talk to, their level of knowledge and experience. They surely have a policy against shipping guns out untested and for good reason. The liabilities would be HUGE if something terrible were to occur.

It sounds like this is going to turn out alright which is good to hear. Cooler heads prevail!

 

[caryc]

I think it's all in who you talk to, their level of knowledge and experience. They surely have a policy against shipping guns out untested and for good reason. The liabilities would be HUGE if something terrible were to occur.

It sounds like this is going to turn out alright which is good to hear. Cooler heads prevail!

Sure cooler heads prevail when we have all the facts. Most people here were going on the assumption the Ruger flat out refused to return the mans property which sounded questionable throughout the whole thread which is why I asked the question in my post above this one.

Even those rumors with the Maximums can be worked around by Ruger to exempt them from liability. All Ruger would have to do is ask the owner to sign an affidavit stating that he is aware that Ruger declared his gun to be unsafe to fire before returning it to him.

Even if he refused all they would have to do is have one of their lawyers attached a registered letter with the returned gun explaining that the gun is unsafe for firing. Once he signs for the letter they are in the clear.

Don't believe all those rumors you hear floating around on the net about Ruger stealing peoples guns.

 

[RugerHound]

Well I had to go look! I have a few unfired Buckeyes, and they are scribed on the cylinders, although VERY lightly. I can imagine after shooting a few rounds it might be very difficult to recover the scribe marks. When I say lightly, I mean so lightly that there is barely any metal showing through the bluing. Whoever scribed the marks must have been using a light touch.

 

[mhblaw]

I have both Buckeye's purchased new when they came out in late 80's early 90's. 38 WCF had a recoil shield that was slightly recessed and primers would back out and tie up the gun. Sent to Ruger and was returned fixed. Why then and not now? Still is a basic Blackhawk gun.

 

[lfpiii]

Ruger sucks when it comes to getting spare parts. Most dealers in my area try to stop people from buying Rugers unless they are willing to purchase a spare gun for parts.

 

[tmullanejr]

Use this link
http://www.ruger.com/resources/tellTheCEO.html
It goes to the CEO's office directly.... I wrote him recently about a problem with my daughter's 10/22 stock... I received a call back 2 days later from the head of tech support offering me a brand new walnut deluxe sporter stock to replace here synthetic...
He said his boss got a call from the CEO's office telling him to make me happy.... THEY DID...

 

[powder smoke]

As mentioned a bares repeating, That is your property and needs to be returned. Cut and dry IMO'

This policy of theres offering a replacement is just that a policy and has NO legal foundation!

Insist! Also a email to the CEO may help! ps

 

[mohavesam]

Ahhh... good for you!

 

[ndcowboy]

Ruger sucks when it comes to getting spare parts. Most dealers in my area try to stop people from buying Rugers unless they are willing to purchase a spare gun for parts.

Can we nominate this post for some kind of end-of-the-year RugerForum award?