Ruger QC on Lipsey's Flat top 357/9mm

[swmetal]

Anybody else with the new Lipsey's Flat top 357/9mm Blackhawk have quality issues? After two trips to the range and careful cleaning I found several issues with my new Ruger Lipsey's Flat top 357/9mm SS Blackhawk. The good news is that it took less than two weeks for Ruger to get it back to me.

The following items were addressed by Ruger: Replaced front sight (original was the wrong height), replaced the 9mm cylinder due to machining marks on a chamber, polished 357 cylinder to remove machining marks on outside of cylinder, replaced rear sight pin as it was walking out of it hole.

The gun now looks and functions as it should and Ruger service was great, but whats up with the QC out of the factory?

 

[rjwinz]

Mine is a little rough. Trigger/hammer needs work and front sight is a tad crooked. I may just have my gunsmith do it instead of sending it back. Need some range time first.

 

[ChiefTJS]

While my front sight is definitely way too tall the rest of the gun is great. A higher level of fit and finish than the standard Blackhawk I bought last year.

 

[swmetal]

While my front sight is definitely way too tall the rest of the gun is great. A higher level of fit and finish than the standard Blackhawk I bought last year.

I had emailed Lipseys about my front sight being too high and they replied that some of the stainless had the wrong sight installed at Ruger. Its just pinned in so Ruger will send you a correct replacement or send it to Ruger for them to fix. They replaced mine, test fired and included a picture of the target when they returned the gun.

 

[WAYNO]

My New Model Flattop .357/9mm also has a front sight that's way too tall. Figured I'd just whittle it down. It does group very nicely both with 9mm and .357.

Otherwise, this model, as well as all my other New Model Flattops have been perfect in fit and finish.

WAYNO.

 

[Pistolero]

While my front sight is definitely way too tall the rest of the gun is great. A higher level of fit and finish than the standard Blackhawk I bought last year.

I had emailed Lipseys about my front sight being too high and they replied that some of the stainless had the wrong sight installed at Ruger. Its just pinned in so Ruger will send you a correct replacement or send it to Ruger for them to fix. They replaced mine, test fired and included a picture of the target when they returned the gun.

The fit and finish on mine is very good, but the front sight is also way to high. Did Ruger pay for the shipping both ways?

 

[swmetal]

The fit and finish on mine is very good, but the front sight is also way to high. Did Ruger pay for the shipping both ways?

Yes. It was very simple and fast. I called Ruger, explained the issues, they emailed me an RMA form and FedEx shipping label. I dropped it off at FedEx and it was back at my door in less than two weeks. No charge for anything. They even gave me the choice between FedEx and UPS for shipping to them.

 

[Pistolero]

That is what I call good customer service! I appreciate the info.

 

[andy p]

My 5.5" stainless flattop came from the factory with a .010 b/c gap and about .005-.006 endshake with both cylinders. I fired it and it grouped pretty well (albeit 5" low @ 25 yards), but was getting about 50-60 fps less, on average, than a 4-5/8" 'non-flattop' NM blackhawk I have, using an identical load. I called Ruger, gave my explanation, and after some reluctance on their behalf, was sent a return shipping label. I dropped it off at Fed-Ex the next day and had it back in my hands within 1.5 weeks. The note inside said the 9mm cylinder was within Ruger's spec for gap and end play and the .357 cylinder was replaced. Now 'only' a .009 feeler gage slides all the way through the gap and .010 just goes half way. End shake was reduced to .004-.005. It appears the front sight was also replaced with a lower one.

I would like to note though, cylinder fit aside, the rest of the revolver was very well fit and finished.

 

[swmetal]

So while doing a detailed cleaning on my Flat top I got back from Ruger, I did find one thing I an not happy about. There were a few machine marks on the left side of the hammer, which I noted when i sent it back to Ruger for the sight and cylinders, They kindly polished the left side of the hammer to remove the marks but in doing so eased over all the sharp edges on the hammer, which actually looks nicer than before. The problem is they didn't bother to do the same to the right side, so now it looks odd that the right side edges are sharp and the left sized eased from polishing. Not sure if I will try sending it back for this cosmetic issue or just live with it.

 

[Rclark]

Just the tall front sight on my blued gun... No biggie. A little time with the file and testing and voila good to go. Will need tuned up of course, all Rugers do. Satisfied.

 

[gtrmkr]

How does Ruger not know what the proper front sight to put on these Flat Top revolvers? They must test the guns like crazy before they start production and they should know the size of the front sight that works the best in pre production testing. After all, the sights and accuracy go hand in hand and to make a mistake on so many guns is really pretty sad in my opinion. I have a Williams Distributor Non Flat Top Stainless Blackhawk .357/9mm convertible in 4 5/8" and it was perfect right out of the box so I purchased one for my son and it too is perfect. Come on Ruger, you have been making these guns in one form or the other for so many years, get the basics down so you don't have customers needing their guns fixed because of the wrong front sight. That being said... I love my Ruger guns!!!

 

[schloss]

A lot of problems show up in any manufacturing facility. Engineering tries to eliminate as many as possible, and quality control does what it can. Unfortunately, QC is typically just viewed as additional overhead in most environments. Once it cleared engineering, there was no way for the techs to know they had the wrong sight in place. They were following their prints. It was a boo-boo. It happens. And QC will not catch all the problems. I don't know how many guns leave Ruger's factories on a given day, but I doubt that any inspector has enough time to look through them as well as the owners do.

In fact, they may have trimmed back QC even further, given their typically good product line. If any issues arise, the customers send them back. I don't know if this is what they're doing, but it certainly would be fiscally feasible. Given their warranty policy, it could be very likely.

Keep in mind that everything they make still has human error involved in it. Sure, it's not perfect, and some things get sent back periodically. I personally appreciate that this stuff passes human hands in manufacture, and I love that it's Americans building and assembling them. I can guarantee that those involved in building and assembling them are angered every time one is sent back for repairs.

QC will never be perfect. Engineering will never be perfect. These are still great guns, despite periodically needing corrections after factory mistakes.

 

[bedrockfred]

Can someone post the height of there too tall front sight, or the height of there replacement sight please?-;bedrockfred

 

[swmetal]

I am going from memory, but as I recall my too tall sight was 0.420" and the corrected sight was 0.367". I had emailed Lipseys about it and they said "some" of the flat top specials were shipped from Ruger with the incorrect sight height.

 

[bedrockfred]

Thank you! Both my stainless measures 0.350 from where sight enters the block on top of barrel to top of sight. if others here would be so kind as to post there sight height, I would appreciate it
Thank you.---bedrockfred oh yea,mine are 4-5/8" barrels.

 

[chet15]

Ruger and QC issues? Maybe the goal of building 2 million guns in a 12 month period has something to do with it?
Ruger has also had QC issues when they pushed their limits in the past.
Chet15

 

[mohavesam]

Correction: It is not a "Lipsey's Flat top 357/9mm Blackhawk", it is a Blackhawk SOLD BY Lipsey's. Let's be accurate. Lipsey's is a resale company buying Ruger guns for resale (at a higher price). Do these folks call their truck a "Honest Joe-Bob's SIlverado" ??? Hmmm?

This bothers me but I know not some others.

 

[chet15]

Correction: It is not a "Lipsey's Flat top 357/9mm Blackhawk", it is a Blackhawk SOLD BY Lipsey's. Let's be accurate. Lipsey's is a resale company buying Ruger guns for resale (at a higher price). Do these folks call their truck a "Honest Joe-Bob's SIlverado" ??? Hmmm?

This bothers me but I know not some others.

So you are saying the Buckeye Special shouldn't be called a Buckeye Special?
Personally, I think the name Lipsey's Flat top .357/9mm Blackhawk fits about perfect for a name. After all, Lipsey's will be the only one to ever have those models.
In fact...Lipsey's is the one who came up with concept...they are paying for them...why not call them Lipsey's??? It's their braintrust that is making Ruger $.
Chet15

 

[RSIno1]

but whats up with the QC out of the factory?

Seems non-existant anymore which is why I'll only buy a Ruger that is at least 5 years old. Well, I might step up for a new Lipsey's No1 just to support the continued production of the No1.

 

[mohavesam]

It is correctly a "Ruger New Model Blackhawk Convertible - Buckeye Sports Supply limited edition", according to Ruger customer service.

Everything internet isn't always the "official" version. Jus sayin'.

The thing to remember is that some "Distributor Exclusives" are mistake lots, some are over-runs of other special-configurations, and some are pre-paid special-configuration lots.
Whoever these lots are sold to (Lipsey's, Davidson's, Sports South, TALO Group, Acusport, etc.) may not indicate a pre-paid order at all, and IMWO does not make them a re-seller's gun.
It's a small point but no one I know at Ruger says "we're making (distributor's name here) guns this week".

I have other opinions yet un-posted...

And yes, production numbers still take precedence over high-quality (there is no "QC" department) and Ruger is not ISO9001-compliant. I personally know a half-dozen former inspection employees who were transferred to other duties after "over-inspecting" according to management. With more than three decades in aerospace quality management, I am not impressed with that type of practice...