Rusted SR1911-Ruger will not....edited...did replace my 1911
- Thread starter mapwd1702
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
JPGLSG there have been numerous posts about this issue at 1911forum.com.
Here is a link to a thread over there about it. http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=422458
I haven't had any problems with my SR 1911 but I am watching it and making a point to keep the area under the grips oiled.
Here is a link to a thread over there about it. http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=422458
I haven't had any problems with my SR 1911 but I am watching it and making a point to keep the area under the grips oiled.
Mike J said:
That is one abused gun, on your link that guy is really trying to pull the wool over somes eyes claiming its kept clean and well oiled :roll: it's been kept some place very damp by the looks of it, my guess around salt water, look how rusty the sights are can't blame those on Ruger, thems Novack sights, would like to hear the true story behind that one, he's not giving it just trying to claim it was well taken care of. :roll: :lol:
w5lx
Single-Sixer
6gun said:
6gun,
Where do you get all of these insightful revelations that you share with us? Were you there? Do you know for a fact that this guy mistreats his firearms? I thought the thread pretty much explained itself.......silly me! The rust problem on some SR1911's is widespread and is well-documented on several forums. Even Ruger has admitted to some owners that there is a problem and they are dealing with it. But thank you most of all for that surprising revelation about stainless steel firearms:
I truly did not know that. You might want to send that statement to Ruger to straighten them out.
Regards,
w5lx said:
Suppose you must have been there then if I wasn't I looked at the pictures obviously abused gun from the link to the 1911 site that particular pistol has been abused, explain the rusty Novak sights if it's a Ruger only problem, Ruger don't make the sights, these same sights are used by many other gun makers and no reports of rusting on their guns so what small clue does this give you? :idea:
Purhaps you have some revelations of your own you want to share of how Novak sights only rust when they are mounted on allegedly well taken care of Rugers. :lol:
toysoldier
Hunter
JPGLSG said:
BINGO!
I think you hit the nail on the head. It sounds like one of Ruger's new employees didn't know to change the media after processing carbon steel. From 35 years of working with stainless steel surgical instruments, I know they CAN and DO rust. Basic training for instrument processing techs includes instruction on passivation of stainless instruments. We use a mild acid solution, either phosphoric or citric.
The pitting is typical of corrosion in stainless steel. An article in American Rifleman a number of years ago addressed this. In a comparison trial of carbon steel vs stainless, the carbon steel developed overall fine rust, while the stainless steel developed pitting corrosion. What's worse, the pitting was self-perpetuating. The electrolytic difference between the surrounding passivated surface and the corroded pit caused accelerated local corrosion, leading to component failure.
It seems to me that Ruger could easily fix the problem by sending the frame back through the finishing process, blasting it with clean media and re-passivating the surface.
I suggest the message be sent to Mike Fifer ASAP............Use "Tell the CEO" on the ruger corporate website............. 8)
mohavesam
Hawkeye
Remember you did not buy a hand-finished Python, you bought a Ruger. The specs for finish may well have been met at the bench, as the "rust" you note was in a covered area.
Toysoldier hit it with the passivation comments, the pics to me looked like poor passivation of the free ferrites on the surface.
I'd ask for a new frame or ask Ruger to pay for real passivation and finishing at Robar or a gunsmith of your choice. And reference this thread in your PAPER latter to Mike Fifer.
Toysoldier hit it with the passivation comments, the pics to me looked like poor passivation of the free ferrites on the surface.
I'd ask for a new frame or ask Ruger to pay for real passivation and finishing at Robar or a gunsmith of your choice. And reference this thread in your PAPER latter to Mike Fifer.
mohavesam said:
I believe a firm subtle approach would work better with Ruger. It does with me. YMMV...
I SUSPECT AS I TYPE, THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME SERIOUS AZZ KICKING ABOUT DE-PICKLE-ING (OR WHATEVER THE HELL YOU CALL IT) ON THIS UNDEFINED BATCH OF SS MATERIAL........JUST SAYIN'....................... :idea:
toysoldier said:
I believe that is what they are doing. I saw a post on another forum from a guy who had sent his SR 1911 back to Ruger because of this issue. He was upset when he got it back because the frame looked duller than it had originally. I guess maybe they used a different media than they do in production when the tech re-blasted it. They were getting him to send it back again since he wasn't happy with it. To be honest I believe I would have been fine with how it looked. I am just trying to keep an eye on mine as I would really not have to deal with any of these issues.
6Gun....Again I am no expert. SS is SS it is either 304 or 316 with or with out the L. If they are using the same meida to blast the SS as the do the Grade 70 Carbon. They are wiping their azzes on a hoops. There will be no end to the carbon particals being blown into the surface of the SS and no end to the rust particals showing up. Does anyone know if Ruger uses two distinct production lines, carbon and stainless. Again we had had so much trouble at HT we have set a SS production area only.
toysoldier
Hunter
I think that Ruger's success may be to blame. With production ramped up and new hires working, a production slip-up could easily occur. If the blasting media were contaminated, the problem might not show up until the product is out of the factory. What's important is how Ruger deals with this.
besides the fact that the news about the gun was published in a gun mag. before Ruger was even producing the guns, which they do not do as a rule. So demand was through the roof by the time they started hitting store shelves. That is why they were so hard to get initially. At least that is what a Ruger rep. said on Tom Gresham's Gun Talk radio show awhile back. So it is understandable that there are some screw ups, just didn't think I would get 2 guns with the same condition! the Commander was manufactured in Jan. 2013, my full size gun was built in Oct. 2012.
JPGLSG said:
Thats a good question and could be the root of the whole problem if they are running cabon and stainless on the same line, only Ruger or someone working there could say, I was under the impression it was a unshared line for the SR1911 production, I remember Ruger anousing they were add more lines for the 1911 a couple years ago like they were all being produced in there own seperate area and line, but who knows.
Similar threads
