Ruger semi-automatic rifles

[Kenneth L. Walters]

Doesn't it seem like Ruger is steadily reducing the number of piston rifles? The varminter is gone. The SR556 is gone (but the takedown version remains). The economy version has disappeared. Think they are giving up on the piston guns?

 

[DGW1949]

What I think is that Ruger makes marketing decisions based on sales numbers and profit per item.
A don't even know what a "varminter" is/was, but it has always seemed to me that neither rendition of their .44 autoloader went over as well as they'd hoped, and that piston ARs have always been somewhat of a niche market.

You didn't mention the Mini-14/Mini-30, but it seems like this might be a good time for me to add my thoughts on those as well.
To put it bluntly.....The way I see it, Ruger is standing at a cross-road there, meaning that one of two things needs to happen:
Either they need take a few steps to turn the Mini-14 into a serious rifle AND start addressing it's all too common QC issues, or they need to go the other direction and figure a way to cut some more corners so's they can drop the price...'cause one thing is for sure and certain, folks aint going to continue paying what those things cost today only to turn around and pay more to correct it's flaws.

Just my .02 .

DGW

 

[pete44ru]

What I think is that Ruger makes marketing decisions based on sales numbers and profit per item.

it has always seemed to me that neither rendition of their .44 autoloader went over as well as they'd hoped.

While I agree, about Ruger's marketing decisions, it's beyond me how anybody can think that a firearm that sold for at least 25 years (the tube-magazine .44 Auto Carbine) didn't go over well.


.

 

[22/45 Fan]

From what I've seen and read, piston AR's were never big sellers and didn't take the market by storm as originally thought. Their perceived reliability advantage over DGI guns wasn't enough to overcome their higher cost, greater complexity, greater weight, and inherently inferior accuracy. Ruger brought out the SR556 at the height of the piston-gun hype and their quick followup with the AR556 tells me the shooting public still prefers DGI guns.

 

[DGW1949]

What I think is that Ruger makes marketing decisions based on sales numbers and profit per item.

it has always seemed to me that neither rendition of their .44 autoloader went over as well as they'd hoped.

While I agree, about Ruger's marketing decisions, it's beyond me how anybody can think that a firearm that sold for at least 25 years (the tube-magazine .44 Auto Carbine) didn't go over well.


.

I based that statement on the fact that aside from occasionally seeing a used one for sale, I've never known anyone who actually owned one, have never seen one being used at a range, have never seen one in the deer woods, and have never seen a new one for sale at a gun store.
By contrast, I have seen bunches of Remington 742's being used, once owned one myself, and presently know two people who still do. Quite-frankly though, I wouldn't consider the Remington to be all that popular neither.

But hey, I'm only 66 years old, have only lived 'n hunted in three states, and didn't spend but 12 years in the gun show business.....so heck, how much could I possibly be expected to know? :lol: .

DGW

 

[pete44ru]

What I think is that Ruger makes marketing decisions based on sales numbers and profit per item.

it has always seemed to me that neither rendition of their .44 autoloader went over as well as they'd hoped.

While I agree, about Ruger's marketing decisions, it's beyond me how anybody can think that a firearm that sold for at least 25 years (the tube-magazine .44 Auto Carbine) didn't go over well.


.

I based that statement on the fact that aside from occasionally seeing a used one for sale, I've never known anyone who actually owned one, have never seen one being used at a range, have never seen one in the deer woods, and have never seen a new one for sale at a gun store.
By contrast, I have seen bunches of Remington 742's being used, once owned one myself, and presently know two people who still do. Quite-frankly though, I wouldn't consider the Remington to be all that popular neither.

But hey, I'm only 66 years old, have only lived 'n hunted in three states, and didn't spend but 12 years in the gun show business.....so heck, how much could I possibly be expected to know? :lol: .

DGW

WADR - Settle down, youngster.......... BT, DT - NTS.


.

 

[PaulJ]

I can understand how hou haven't seen a mess of the 44 carbines be how you are in Texas, but here in the northeast I know about 15+/- guys that own them. I can count on seeing 5 or 6 on the rack at camp every November. Great brush gun, and I know my hunting buddies won't part with theirs.

 

[pisgah]

While I agree, about Ruger's marketing decisions, it's beyond me how anybody can think that a firearm that sold for at least 25 years (the tube-magazine .44 Auto Carbine) didn't go over well.


.

Feel free to check my math, but I just can't make '61 to '74 in to 25 years. And to the best of my recollection, they didn't exactly sell like hotcakes. At any rate, they quit making them because they couldn't make money on them. If they could, we'd still be seeing them.

 

[jz78817]

I can understand how hou haven't seen a mess of the 44 carbines be how you are in Texas, but here in the northeast I know about 15+/- guys that own them. I can count on seeing 5 or 6 on the rack at camp every November. Great brush gun, and I know my hunting buddies won't part with theirs.

Michigan DNR just changed the rules for the "limited firearm deer" hunting zone (basically southern lower MI) from "shotgun only" to allowing rifles "of at least .35 caliber firing a straight-walled cartridge of no more than 1.8" length." when I bought my 77/44 a couple of weeks ago, the guy at the shop said they'd just become "real popular."

 

[DGW1949]

While I agree, about Ruger's marketing decisions, it's beyond me how anybody can think that a firearm that sold for at least 25 years (the tube-magazine .44 Auto Carbine) didn't go over well.


.

Feel free to check my math, but I just can't make '61 to '74 in to 25 years. And to the best of my recollection, they didn't exactly sell like hotcakes. At any rate, they quit making them because they couldn't make money on them. If they could, we'd still be seeing them.

True that.
I'm perty-sure that the newer "Deerfield" only lasted about 5 years before it too got dropped. I can't say as to exactly why that one got dropped, but in my estimation, the "why" doesn't really have all that much to do with the OP's question anyway......point being, the Deerfield was a Ruger "piston rifle" that's not being made any longer.

DGW

 

[pisgah]

Well the "why" of any company ceasing production on a product is generally that for one reason or another they have decided they can't make money on it. There are exceptions -- some companies will continue making their "prestige" or "flagship" product as a matter of pride, but only if other profits more than make up for the losses. And even then in lean times, or whenever "bean-counters" get in position to run things, you'll end up saying goodbye to stuff you'd never think would go away (American-built Winchester 94s, for example).

In the case of the Ruger .44 carbines, the original was always expensive and complicated to make, the gun could be finicky with anything but the standard 240 gr. load, and accuracy was never exactly sterling. A useful and handy firearm in the thickets of the northeast and elsewhere, for sure, but nothing really to recommend it above, say, a .30-30 carbine in most hunters' eyes. And the second version suffered the same drawbacks, except that it was somewhat easier and less expensive to make, and in the eyes of most buyers I just don't think there was enough interest to make it viable. We've seen the same sort of thing with guns chambered for various cartridges, the .41 Magnum and .44 Special being good examples -- no one is making them, lovers of the particular cartridge raise a clamor, someone starts chambering for it and sells a few, then -- nothing. Sales drop off once the unfulfilled demand is met, and the guns disappear again.

 

[pete44ru]

While I agree, about Ruger's marketing decisions, it's beyond me how anybody can think that a firearm that sold for at least 25 years (the tube-magazine .44 Auto Carbine) didn't go over well.

Feel free to check my math, but I just can't make '61 to '74 in to 25 years.

True that.

Ya can't make this stuff up........ :roll:

FYI, this is a 25th Anniversary Ruger .44 Auto Carbine, made in the model's last year, 1985.

.

 

[DGW1949]

Hey pete44ru.......Thanks for posting the "25th anniversary" information.
I stand corrected, and offer my apologies relative to posting incorrect info on the life span of the early .44 carbine.

DGW

 

[pete44ru]

.

No harm, no foul !

.

 

[sliclee]

DGW- one subject, topic, was left out in deep right field.
Maybe, jus' maybe the govts changing calibers. Don't laugh at me, I do enough on myself.
I see a 6 something coming, the 300 doesn't have it, which one of the two fit the mag better?