Ruger Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Read an article online about the Ruger metal in their pistols being soft and dents easily. Anyone hear this, I know I have never thought of my Ruger SR9C or my SR1911 as having softer metal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,538 Posts
There are different grades of hardness in all metals, it all depends upon the composition.

I have a hard time believing Ruger would select a grade of stainless steel that is unsuitable.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Here is the comment from a guy on that article about the 1911 and Rugers.
Don't understand how this guy could form such an opinion like that but I know I've never felt that way about Rugers and have had many of them.

Take a magnet to your Ruger – any Ruger – in many places it barely sticks to the steel Ruger uses. On my Colt and Springfield, and even on my Llama, you can barely pull a strong magnet off. Now, tap a Ruger with a BRASS hammer, and you will dent it, whereas it will only leave yellow marks the will come off with solven or elbow grease on my forged and milled guns. Not my opinion. Simply a fact. For whatever it’s worth, those are facts. This bothers me and is why I lost my lust for Rugers.
Comment from curious george
Time September 29, 2012 at 11:40 pm

I know I’ll be hated for saying so, but RUGER METAL IS SOFT. IT IS NOT NEARLY AS HARD AS GENUINE FORGED AND MILLED STEEL. CASTING STEEL IS CHEAPER THAN FORGING AND MILLING. YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR. THESE ARE FACTS. I’ve scratched and dented so many Rugers through routine handling I’ve tired of them and finally stopped lusting after them. They do work great, and they do LOOK great. But they do NOT look great for long if you used them. They scratch and dent MUCH too easily. It is almost as though they are made from aluminum. They are GREAT guns, but they are SOFT-metal guns.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
21,403 Posts
Relative Properties
WELDABILITY:
Steel castings tend to have better weldability than steel forgings.

PART GEOMETRIES:
Steel castings lend themselves more easily to complex shapes than do steel forgings.

CHEMICAL REQUIREMENTS:
Unique chemistries tend to be better (less expensively produced) with steel castings. Also, the class of steels commonly referred to as “work-hardenable steels” (13% Mn) are not forgeable, but are readily made in a casting.

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES:
Steel castings are ISOTROPIC - meaning “similar properties in all directions”. Steel forgings are ANISOTROPIC - meaning “similar properties in the direction of flow’’. Thus, in the direction of flow (material deformation), a steel forging’s strength is highest along its longitudinal axis, and decreases in the transverse direction. Whereas, in a steel casting, the properties are similar in all directions.

CORROSION RESISTANCE:
In certain stainless steels, castings tend to have better corrosion resistance than equivalent forgings this is due to controlled amounts of ferrite present in castings.

WEIGHT:
Steel castings are almost always lighter their forged counterparts “redesign from forgings to castings usually results in substantial savings in weight”. For example - a forged cannon muzzle brake weighed 600 lbs; this same part as a casting weighed 400 lbs. (and lasted over three times longer).


From the web site:

Southwest Steel Information - Steel Casting vs. Forged Part
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
67 Posts
Llama's are mad of recycled generic bean cans. That's of of very few gun brands I will NOT ever own again. They are the poster child for junk handguns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,786 Posts
He's saying that his llama is better than a Ruger? What's he been drinking , or smoking? When llamas were in gunshops inthe 70s they weren't thought of very highly because of their poor quality and performance. In the last 4 years I have only seen two in the gunshops here. I can't believe that it's because they are so loved by their owners that they just can't part with them.
In all the years that I have shot I have owned Colts, S&Ws, and Rugers. I believe that Ruger makes the best hand guns out there. and he's not going to get me to change my opinion.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
29,620 Posts
Whatever type of steel ruger uses it is durable I have 2 ruger revolvers with over 50 k each and one over 75k each. Many heavy loads and no problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,491 Posts
I don't think I've ever hit any of my firearms with a BRASS hammer, nor do I plan to.

In any case, ferromagnesian minerals tend to attract magnets and depending on the amount in relation to other steel components will show a differential attraction to a magnet. I suspect metallurgist on this board would tell us that firearms manufacturers choose certain alloy characteristics depending on the use and methods manufacture. Not too brittle, not too soft, just right for its purpose.

BTW, I try not to drop my firearms or hit them anything hard. My 30 year-old Security six still looks like new, except for the well used grips. I've never owned a Llama pistol, nor do I have "Llama Envy". Anyone who ownes one, good for you. Be happy and enjoy it.

I'm not going to hit my Glock with a hammer either.
 

·
Ruger Tinkerer
Joined
·
11,898 Posts
This bit sounds like a tired rant from decades ago.

Investment casting was the big breakthrough that allowed Bill Ruger to produce quality firearms at competitive prices while still maintaining inherent strengths that were the equivalent of, and in many cases superior to, forged metal. Ruger guns were criticized for this approach 60 years ago and apparently some want to continue to drag this tired old criticism out again. The fact is investment casting has become accepted practice throughout gun manufacturing and is widely used to varying extents by many manufacturers. It allows the manufuacturing of pieces with complex shapes that would be difficult if not impossible to mill, or would be prohibitively expensive to mill. Milling leaves tool marks and tool marks can lead to fractures. Forged metal has inherent problems of it's own. The aerospace industry is another example of the heavy use of investment casting.

The "magnet test" is really worthless. In my work with marine industry metals the high grades of stainless steel used (much higher grades than are required in gun manufacturing) are non-magnetic. In fact I chuckled when I read the "magnet test" description because the opposite is what is desireable in the marine industry. Those who hold to "magnet testing" stainless steel in the marine field are pleased when the magnet DOESN'T stick and will turn up their noses when it does. I believe the steel Ruger uses is actually chrome-molybdenum alloy steel.

Like others have said, I am not interested in hitting any of my guns with a hammer. As far as actual hardness goes there is equipment (Rockwell tester) that can scientifically measure hardness but that hardly seems to be an issue - if it was I'm sure we would see that metric (Rockwell hardness) incuded in standard gun testing and reviews. Furthermore, when I look in the used gun cases at shops there seems to be beat up looking guns from all the manufacturers.

"Without question we have used investment castings more extensively than any other gunmaker in history. From the very outset I disclosed that and emphasized it. To some extent I think that made us not a little controversial, maybe somebody thought that was not as good as all-milled parts. In my view that is the ultimate, quintessential expression of an ignorant person." Bill Ruger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
...which precisely explains why Ruger sells more guns than any other company in the U.S.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
Finely detailed bronze was cast by the lost wax process 6,000 years ago in China. Lost wax is also known as investment casting. The process has become an institution in the manufacture of modern alloys. Done well it is strong. The lost wax process enabled Ruger to develop the "solid frame" double action, which would not have happened from a forging.

Whether the following constitutes testament on behalf of lost wax casting, the reader will have to decide:

* To test the strength of the Security-Six frame, a barrel was screwed into the frame. The barrel was solid----neither drilled nor rifled. Six .357 magnum cartridges were loaded and fired. The bullets extruded in great fuiry out the cylinder gap----without damage to the frame!

* Three decades ago, Speer/CCI sent an S&W M-19 back to the factory three times in a relatively short period for repair. Speer/CCI replaced it with a Security-Six, which consumed 30,000 rounds of ammo on the test range without breakage. (The S&W frame is forged, the Ruger frame is cast.)

* Frames for Ruger and Freedom Arms single actions are lost wax cast by Ruger in Newport, New Hampshire. Does anyone think these parts weak?

David Bradshaw
 

·
Ausmerican.
Joined
·
42,767 Posts
Nothing wrong with any of mine.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,407 Posts
Plus one on Waveform's post.

From various articles I've read, Ruger uses many different alloys in a single gun. The requirements of a barrel steel are different than a frame, or a cylinder, or a trigger, etc. Ruger uses the best choice for each part.

I'm a former aircraft mechanic, and I've worked with a lot of different metals. I have no doubt as to the quality of Ruger's steels.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
21,403 Posts
We have had several replies to the OP and no response. To me that puts the thread in the trolling category and as such is closed.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top