Ruger Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I picked up a near used new PCC 9mm carbine. I fired 50 flawless round yesterday, during cleaning I discovered a possible flaw in the bolt head lower edge. This point is where the bolt picks a live round off the top of the magazine as it moves forward.

I have nothing to reference this against, but it appears some metal has come off. I would say if more material is lost the feeding function will start to fail.

Take a look and please reply. I have no issue with just purchasing this part straight out don't want to have to send end the entire rifle.

TY
sparx
 

· Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
I would say that there is definitely a piece of broken metal there. Try sending Ruger CS an email with those pics and ask if they could just send the part, I doubt they would charge you anything.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Called Ruger this morning, entire rifle must go back due to head space requirement.
Since the gun is over 2 years old I get to pay shipping. Hopefully Ruger will own up to the part being defective and cover that at least.

Never been a big fan of Ruger, except for the 10-22 rifle.

I do thank all of you for the post and assistance.

sparx
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Since the gun is over 2 years old I get to pay shipping.
So much for their great unstated lifetime warranty. Shipping charges to repair all the defects that Quality Control is letting out the door must have been hitting them hard in the pocketbook.

Looking at todays gun buyers and taking into account how many guns get bought by newbies for home defense. Tossed in the closet or drawer and never shot for a year or two this policy makes perfect sense.

Another great company starting the spiral.(n)

Bepe
 

· Registered
Ruger: Model 19122 pc 9
Joined
·
4,544 Posts
Called Ruger this morning, entire rifle must go back due to head space requirement.
Since the gun is over 2 years old I get to pay shipping. Hopefully Ruger will own up to the part being defective and cover that at least.

Never been a big fan of Ruger, except for the 10-22 rifle.

I do thank all of you for the post and assistance.

sparx
There are two considerations in the plus column.
1st you stated you purchased it or picked it up used.
2nd sending it in they do a complete function test.
I think for the price of shipping that ain't a total loss. But I understand the frustration.
I been around firearms a long time. I love them. I hate worrying about headspace. Both from the rifle side, and the reloading side. Somethings I just like trusting others with. And headspacing is one of them.
Hope it comes back quick!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I am not concerned about function test. Since I have re-barrelled many M1 Garand rifles, which of course includes checking and cutting chamber/head space I have no concerns there either. I think Ruger has built an excellent rifle with the PCC, but going with a MIM bolt head is not one of the outstanding ideas Ruger incorporated. This component of the bolt was most likely used to reduce costs and allow change from 9mm to .40 cal. Anyway this rifle having very light use should not have a failure like this.

Ruger has let me down in the past several times, just another incidence here. This is my own fault for purchasing a used example, I highly doubt the PO even noticed this flaw.

Sparx
 

· Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
The first time I did a disassembly of the bolt assembly on my Ruger PC Carbine, I took a really good look at all the components it has. That block of steel that Ruger calls the "Bolt Carrier", is obviously made by milling a block of solid billet steel using a CNC milling machine 👍👍

But, I was not at all impressed with the bolt head, which is obviously a MIM made component 👎👎

It wouldn't be so bad if they made the bolt head having the same consistent tolerances that quality AR component manufacturers do with their bolt heads, which are made of billet or forged steel for better strength.
I mean, if Ruger did that, the PC Carbine would have a more trustworthy bolt head, and be good to go with just a drop in replacement if needed. Spares could be purchased, just in case. But, Ruger continues with their "you got to send your gun in" for way too many parts replacements on their guns. This is nothing new, since this has been a Ruger thing forever.
I'm still very surprised that Ruger chose to go MIM for making the bolt head on these PC Carbines 🤦

Hey, just say'in.
 

· Registered
Ruger: Model 19122 pc 9
Joined
·
4,544 Posts
I am not concerned about function test. Since I have re-barrelled many M1 Garand rifles, which of course includes checking and cutting chamber/head space I have no concerns there either. I think Ruger has built an excellent rifle with the PCC, but going with a MIM bolt head is not one of the outstanding ideas Ruger incorporated. This component of the bolt was most likely used to reduce costs and allow change from 9mm to .40 cal. Anyway this rifle having very light use should not have a failure like this.

Ruger has let me down in the past several times, just another incidence here. This is my own fault for purchasing a used example, I highly doubt the PO even noticed this flaw.

Sparx
I agree, sorry if it came across wrong, I was tring to think of bright sides...:rolleyes:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
I was just thinking of something that maybe we should take a note of...
Being that the bolt head on the Ruger PC Carbine is a MIM component, I wonder if it makes even more sense to stay away from steel cased cartridge shells.
I personally only use brass cased ammo. But, I know that prices have risen enough on ammo that some may be tempted to buy steel cased ammo when the price is at a savings over the brass cased options.
It's easy to go through a lot of ammo with PCC guns, with the fun factor likely being the biggest culprit for that.
So, it may be tough to pass up on buying steel case ammo, and many will simply say, "it's made of mild steel, and I don't reload"... But, it's still steel, not brass.
So, will the steel cased ammo cause more stress on the PC Carbine's MIM bolt head?... I don't know, but maybe it's a good idea to avoid it, just in case 🤔
 

· Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Ruger did good when making the PC Carbine's barrel and receiver, but I find that their bolt assembly design, and some of the materials used to make it, were simply not as well done.
As we all know, the receiver, barrel, and bolt assembly, are where the magic happens within a gun. The bolt assembly is the weak link in this case.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Called Ruger this morning, entire rifle must go back due to head space requirement.
I think it's a bunk excuse. The headspace on a blowback gun, really? Who has ever heard of such a thing? But Ruger always ask for guns to be sent to them. And unfortunately, they are not alone in this. I know Smith & Wesson do that too. Heck, even a 3-rd rate gunmaker like Century do it; look at this thread at Arfcom:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
I think it's a bunk excuse. The headspace on a blowback gun, really? Who has ever heard of such a thing? But Ruger always ask for guns to be sent to them. And unfortunately, they are not alone in this. I know Smith & Wesson do that too. Heck, even a 3-rd rate gunmaker like Century do it; look at this thread at Arfcom:
Yea, I thought the same thing but I wasnt going to say anything. Total BS reason from Ruger.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
I am hoping a quality aftermarket firm comes out with a quality made bolt head for these guns 🤞🤞
I would prefer someone make a 1-piece bolt without a separate head. A separate bolt head is easier and cheaper, it takes less effort. You can play tricks with separate heat treatment on the head and the body of the bot, which allows you to make the body out of low quality, cheap steel. But Mauser made the one-piece bolts in 19th century. Surely we can do better in 21st century.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top