azleite said:I'm not savvy on how to delete posts, if a moderator should see this I would appreciate it if they would delete this entire topic. I've learned my lesson & I do realize I opened myself up to all this.My fault-never again.
Ah, don't give up on us yet. Some of us are supportive.
What is poor workmanship to some is a non-issue to others.
Personally, a random buff job on a stainless revolver may not bother me as much as it may bother the next guy, but I believe Ruger banks on all the folks that will defend the poor workmanship. Gee. Ya spent only $700 and you expect every Monday or Friday gun to look like a gun made on Wednesday? That is a cop out, and if this was Ruger's business model in 1949 and thru the next decades, they would not be as successful as they are.
Rossi and Taurus come to mind. I don't own them. For the same reasons you've discovered with your Ruger. But folks then think it's okay for Ruger to cut the same corners.
Finally, if Ruger cannot afford to spend an extra couple minutes on fit and finish, or other quality control, maybe they oughta raise their prices a little bit, and spend just a little more time.
I would further offer this...If Ruger offered a premier grade in any of their offerings, with better polishing and/or bluing, and with a truly fitted stock or grips, and for arguments sake, it cost $200 more, but, you still had the option of purchasing the standard grade, would they sell enough of the nicer guns to be worth while?
The Remington 870 comes to mind. I believe it to be the best shotgun ever. Nice wood and lustrous bluing. I've owned many. But for half the price, the Express model with a very rough utility finish is the only 870 model I now own. And it's not just because it was much cheaper, but because it's a shotgun that I just never have to worry about, in the harshest of conditions.
WAYNO.