Egalloway said:
I've had several customers ask me to chime in to this thread.
-We've had various products for the LC9 in testing for about 6 months. They do function fine, its a guiderod, not a aircraft carrier. Steve makes a great product and just to let you know the recoil springs I'm having made will work on the stock rods, Steve's rods and of course ours.
-Most of the folks that have issues in the Keltec pistols with the SS rods custom made have had issues with the plastic one too. A burr is hell on any thing running through or over it. I believe it was a member on here that had the plastic one get destroyed really quick, due to a burr. A Keltec is also even cheaper made and sold cheaper than these Ruger pistols I believe Ruger's products are better materials and manufacturing than the Keltecs. So maybe the cheaper guns have to have a plastic GR due to poor material selection (i.e. Cheap materials). The Rugers don't seem to care. The Keltecs I have reliability worked have been good but duds happen. This Keltec 380 sitting on the bench is new and has factory metal GR, one a few months ago didn't. Who knows the factory may use both, bin A is full of plastic bin B steel, who knows?
-The biggest reason most manufactures use plastic guide rods is cost. If they make a million units off a 15000 dollar simple mold that costs them 10 cents a shot and it makes 10 units a shot, well that is going to be crazy cheap compared to say 3.00 a unit for stainless or 2.00 for a blacked cold roll unit.
-Most pro or experienced shooters use stainless after market units strictly for the ability to tune the pressure to the handloads they are using. They compensate for recoil/muzzle flip in the spring pressure very little, grip is everything. Grip is affected by everything to though. Weight of gun, bore height, grip width, trigger distance, trigger pull lbs, cartridge charge, bullet weight, shooter strength, dampness of hands, mental stress. The weight of the guiderod is on that list, somewhere. Those of us not on the pro level can use a heavier spring weight to help control muzzle flip if the loads will still cycle, a bandaid fix but still a option for us commoners.
-If I had to guess it would be pretty close to a even split between those that hate the plastic due to it being plastic and unreliable cause it's not steel and those that want to tune the spring rate to their loads. I sell to both, listen to both for ideas and respect both for their needs and mindset. The new Gen2 full size rods coming out are due to feedback and needs from both camps of end users.
-You guys and gals drive this company, your calls and emails tell us what you want. So LC9 parts are coming. Just like extended mag bases and sleeved strikers are coming for the SR poly guns...
Hope this helps and makes a few folks happy. It's my .02 cents anyways.
Eric
Thanks for the post, much appreciated, especially since your company has been doing testing on different spring rates, that was the next item i was going to be looking to get made and test for a company, i had called a couple but none were interested. Looks like you already have that going though, so it'll be nice to have the option to change out spring rates for different loads, that will help the most IMO which is why i wanted to make sure the SS guide rods worked flawlessly. It's also nice to have a professional in the field chime in and give his professional opinion since your opinion actually holds weight in this situation unlike Cheesewhiz who just blurts out whatever is on his mind, and obviously without thinking first.
I tried to get that point across about why manufacturers use "plastic" instead of "steel" on the GR to cut costs, even though it may only be 1-2 dollars per gun, after you sell 20-30k of them that really starts to add up, not to mention people with plastic ones usually buy a spare back-up just incase the stock one breaks, so they make money off of that too. But still the one-track minded person doesn't understand that a business has to be profitable in order to keep running.
Many people here have a single track mind and aren't open to improvements; they believe the designers designed the gun with the best parts possible for some reason. They don't understand that THEY ARE a business and need to make money, so using top quality products in their guns isnt their no. 1 factor in choosing the design. They have to factor in approximately how many people will be buying the gun, they have to set the price so it competes with other guns in it's class, yet not be too expensive so it turns people to the cheaper CCW guns that still function adequately. Otherwise Ruger would go under plain and simple, they have to be competitive with each gun in each class in every way.
For example wants to buy a CCW gun that's going to get holster wear, lots of rounds through it so you're proficient with it, and also pay ~$7-800 for it when other guns that aren't as well built, but still function good enough to do the job it was designed for, yet cost ~$300 instead of the ~$700?? The gun would have the highest quality parts in it, but for the average shooter it's not going to make a big difference, but the price difference is definitely going to sway people to buy the cheaper of the two, it's a less expensive gun that still functions adequately. So why would Ruger design a CCW gun with the best quality parts installed, making the price not competitive with other guns in it's class just to have "the highest quality" parts in it? Obviously they wouldnt because they didnt. Again, THEY ARE A BUSINESS, and a business needs to turn a profit.
Obviously it would be a better gun, but would it be worth double the price for all top of the line internals? IMO, i'd rather buy the LC9 as is and change out what i like/don't like about it with aftermarket parts and customize it to my liking.
Cheesewhiz: I thought you said you weren't going to participate in my thread anymore, why all of a sudden are you going back on your word? Shows what type of person you truly are. As for Galloway Precision, is all his testing and facts that he posted about reducing recoil and upgrading the gun with higher quality parts "BS" too? Because i've been saying this the whole time and so far all i've gotten as a response is "that's BS and everyone see's through it" :lol: No facts, nothing to back-up what you say.
So again, PLEASE SRICK TO YOUR WORD and stay out of my thread until you can post FACTS instead of "your point of view." because honestly after all the things you have said, your "point of view" holds no credit with me.
You also said i was wrong about the way gun powder works in another thread and said you could "tear me up and make me look stupid." well i don't mind looking stupid if i'm wrong and if i am, i'd like someone to correct me so i learn something new and learn why i was wrong, but i did look up this information in my Hornady reloading manual and also on a few reloading websites. I asked you to PLEASE enlighten me, because you said what i was saying is wrong and i have "no idea" what i'm talking about. I asked you to "please show me what part of my statement is incorrect and to please try and embarrass me, that way either you learn something new or i do." You never responded, as usual you just voice your opinion to try and make someone look bad but back it up with NO FACTS. Sorry but people see right trough your "tricks," and the more you post with NO FACTS and just your opinion makes more people realize that you have a one track mind and think Ruger designed a CCW gun with "the best possible internals in mind," not even considering cost, sales, etc. Sorry but you're FLAT OUT WRONG.
So AGAIN, please stick to your word and don't post unless it's something FACTUAL! Your "opinions" hold no weight, especially after 2 aftermarket parts companies have backed up exactly what i have said; that the LC9 WAS NOT designed with "the highest quality parts" in mind, but more to be competitive with other guns in it's class, yet be better than them, which i think Ruger did a great job on. I still havent had 1 failure after the first 50 rounds and im well over 1k now, and that first failure was because everything was still working itself in and i had a FTL within the first 50 rounds, hasnt happened since and the gun has been flawless.
Kel-Tecs don't have nearly as good of a track record and for a good reason; they're made VERY cheaply so they are affordable; why else would a gun have so many recalls/problems?? Because they didn't use the high quality machining/parts and it caused them to have a bunch of recalls/defects. Ruger on the other hand, even though the guns are similar, they put in enough quality parts to make the gun function as it was supposed to, but didn't go overboard and make the gun cost way more just so it's WAY better. They made it function without any recalls/major defects so far, and that's because the gun does cost a bit more to make because they do use better quality parts, yet not so much more expensive as to push potential buyers away because of the increase in price. They put enough money in it to make it function properly and that's it, they didn't use the best quality parts everywhere or the gun again because it would cost 3x as much and that wouldn't be competitive.
Ruger would lose A LOT of sales if they had made the LC9 a ~$700 top quality CCW gun. I for one wouldn't have bought it i would have gone with a kel-tec simply because they do work, and the problems they have CAN be fixed. They are consistent enough to do the job, yet they only cost ~$250. Because of the cheap price the QC isn't the greatest and some have defects.
This is why i went with the LC9, it was a good price, i watched some videos of people shooting them and even at distance they were impressively accurate for that short of a barrel/gun, and nobody was having any major issues with them unlike the kel-tecs. IMO this is because Ruger spent a bit more time/money designing the gun and putting in the correct parts to make it function as designed, not go overboard and make it a top-of-the-line gun that is way out of a lot of peoples price range for a CCW gun that's going to get a lot of wear/tear and beat up..