[originalBB]

I've had many Rugers and Smiths and a couple Colts. Even several Taurus 85s and a Rossi M68.
The best for me are vintage Smiths in good mechanical condition.
As far as Ruger and Colt, the issues I've had to deal with are too many to confidently recommend them to anyone.
The only Ruger I have now is an older Vaquero. I will say I've had a few GP100s that were nicely made; great shooters. But I can't stand the narrow triggers even so.

Not to call you out or derail my own thread here but would you care to elaborate on the issues you dealt with and why you can't confidently recommend Ruger to anyone?

 

[0311INF]

Not to call you out or derail my own thread here but would you care to elaborate on the issues you dealt with and why you can't confidently recommend Ruger to anyone?

Sure, thats fair enough on a Ruger forum. I recall I've owned over the years 6 GP100s, 6 SP101s and 1 Security Six.
My first GP100 had to go back for a sticky cylinder and was replaced for some unexplained reason.
I've sent back at least 4 SP101s that had either cylinder fitment (usually b/c gap) or trigger problems (hammer dog). One had no carry up on 2 chambers. One that went back was a replacement, it was worse than the original.
Another new GP100 5" was very loose at lockup, and would spit lead.
I have seen a Security Six cylinder crack a chamber open from factory .357 ammo, which was a big nasty surprise.

Granted the others (I have a 50/50 bad luck track record) were fine. And it isn't exclusive to Ruger...I have a horror story with the new Colt Python. And of the 10 or so vintage Smiths I've owned, at least half had some kind of issue...but usually based on wear rather than build quality, and somewhat easy to fix with a shim or new part.

 

[Brettg]

Sure, thats fair enough on a Ruger forum. I recall I've owned over the years 6 GP100s, 6 SP101s and 1 Security Six.
My first GP100 had to go back for a sticky cylinder and was replaced for some unexplained reason.
I've sent back at least 4 SP101s that had either cylinder fitment (usually b/c gap) or trigger problems (hammer dog). One had no carry up on 2 chambers. One that went back was a replacement, it was worse than the original.
Another new GP100 5" was very loose at lockup, and would spit lead.
I have seen a Security Six cylinder crack a chamber open from factory .357 ammo, which was a big nasty surprise.

Granted the others (I have a 50/50 bad luck track record) were fine. And it isn't exclusive to Ruger...I have a horror story with the new Colt Python. And of the 10 or so vintage Smiths I've owned, at least half had some kind of issue...but usually based on wear rather than build quality, and somewhat easy to fix with a shim or new part.

I’m a first time Ruger owner who has owned several other firearms over the years. Based on my experience, I couldn’t in good conscience recommend Ruger either. I received a brand new SP101 on Thursday 5 May and immediately discovered that the trigger wouldn’t reset consistently, sticking at the back of the cycle at least 3 times out of 10. I also noticed that the external finish was average at best. I broke her down and found that the trigger spring channel was so poorly finished that I had to push the return plunger out with a punch. I cleaned it up carefully, tidied the hand, pawl, transfer bar and mainspring rod, thoroughly cleaned the pistol, lubed and reassembled. It seemed ok, but I then discovered that dry firing in single action saw the hammer drop to a sort of half cock position. I called Ruger and they told me to send it back as the hammer was dropping to the double action sear. So, the gun wasn’t functional from the factory with at least two separate problems and an overall poor finish. Based on my gun, the SP101 is badly made and Ruger’s QC seems to be hit or miss. In 42 years of gun ownership including, Taurus, Walther, CZ, S&W, Astra, Mossberg and Glock, the Ruger is by far the worst in terms of workmanship. I’ve coveted a Ruger since handling and firing a Security Six back in the early 80’s. That gun impressed me very much. My SP101 looks like it came from a 2nd grade factory in Eastern Europe or the Far East. Very disappointing.

 

[LimaCharlie]

I learned to shoot with a single-action revolver with .22 short ammo when I was six. My first owned handgun was a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 magnum when I was nineteen and just back from Viet Nam in 1966. That was my plinking, hunting, and self-protection gun for several years.

My current single-action and double-action revolvers include Colt Anaconda, Colt New Service, Colt Python, Colt SAA, NAA MiniMag, Ruger Blackhawk, Ruger Super Redhawk, S&W 29-2, and Uberti SAA. Barrel lengths vary from 1 5/8 inches to 8 5/8 inches. Calibers include .22 magnum, .357 magnum, 10mm, .41 magnum, 44 special, .44-40, .44 magnum, .45 ACP, .45 Colt, and .454 Casull.

Uses include fun at the range, rural self-protection, woods self-protection, and hunting. I usually carry a five-inch 1911 in either .45 ACP or 10mm in the local area.

 

[ATP]

Ruger Blackhawk, Single Six, or similar quality that will last for generations with proper care, and cleaning.

These models are top-of-the-line in my view, and the most suitable for many of us.

 

[taters613]

I bought my mother a 6” Single Six a couple years ago, and that made me realize how friggin’ fun Rimfire revolvers are! I followed this up with a S&W k22 Masterpiece, which has quickly become one of my all-time favorite firearms.
If I lost all my firearms and had to rebuild my collection from scratch, I think a 6” Single Six would be one of my first purchases.

 

[FergusonTO35]

I love wheelguns, but my single biggest gripe about them is that most of them have sights firmly stuck in the last century. Either a front post and a notch in the rear of the frame, or click adjustable target sights. If your eyes don't get along with them, or the POI doesn't match your favorite ammo, then tough luck. Most auto pistols today have some interchangeability of sights, even small concealed carry pistols. Most of my handguns are autos for this simple reason, not because I think they are dramatically better in every way. I was really hoping Ruger would give the LCR (a fine gun overall) interchangeable rear sights, but no, it has the same take it or leave it setup that nearly every other snubby has. There is some merit to the argument that a small revolver isn't a target weapon, but why shortchange it by not giving people options? My S&W 637 is capable of fine accuracy, and I could do even better with it if I could get a sight picture that was easier to see. Nothing drastic, maybe just a small dovetail with a replaceable plastic sight like Glock uses.

 

[MPGunther]

Part of the herd...

 

[Wee Hooker]

This will be looked upon as blasphemy by many, but I don't keep my revolvers as serious fighting weapons--not when semi-auto offerings provide so much more capability in that category. I'll say the next thing in bold, though, so that the angry ones will read it, too: I train with my revolvers as if I were going to fight with them because any weapon you own could end up being pressed into a fighting role. As such, I keep only double-action revolvers and never even shoot them single-action.

For barrel lengths, I have a GP100 with a 6" barrel and a .44 Magnum Redhawk with a 7.5" barrel. My own take is that the full capability of Magnum rounds is wasted in shorter barrel. A 4" barrel is as short as I would go.

I have two single-action revolvers--a Remington 1858 NMA and a Colt 1860, each of which has an 8" barrel. Those are range toys, but I do shoot them with full-power loads (30gr Pyrodex P) for the training effect, in the event that I ever have to fight with them.

To each their own but IMHO, not everything in the safe has to be ready to go to war. Some of us just enjoy the mechanics and shooting experience of a revolver. Thankfully, otherwise their would be no point to a .22 revolver. I have my SHTF guns ( and fully believe in staying proficient with ANY gun that could be used for personal defense) but 90% of my collection is there for pure enjoyment.

 

[Redhawk100]

To each their own but IMHO, not everything in the safe has to be ready to go to war. Some of us just enjoy the mechanics and shooting experience of a revolver. Thankfully, otherwise their would be no point to a .22 revolver. I have my SHTF guns ( and fully believe in staying proficient with ANY gun that could be used for personal defense) but 90% of my collection is there for pure enjoyment.

I look at things from the perspective of having either limited choices because circumstances have prevented me from getting out with my favorite defensive weapons or from the perspective of being in a location or circumstance where I have to go with something I've just picked up. For these reasons, I try to be prepared to fight with anything I can get my hands on.

 

[Jhawk@1261]

It's amazing how this went from a simple question to a Ruger bash. If you feel this way about Ruger why do you have them and why are you on this forum? Sell them, buy your super gun and post on that forum.

 

[Brettg]

It's amazing how this went from a simple question to a Ruger bash. If you feel this way about Ruger why do you have them and why are you on this forum? Sell them, buy your super gun and post on that forum.

It’s a forum, by definition a place for discussion, including strengths, weaknesses and opinion. I think Ruger’s revolver designs are outstanding. However, the older guns seem to have been built better. Maybe someone from Ruger reads these pages and uses the feedback productively.

 

[originalBB]

OP here. It was I who asked 0311INF to expound on his statement that he couldn’t recommend Ruger.

Anytime anyone makes a claim like that on a forum I take it with a grain of salt and ask for an explanation of their issues and experience.

Name one firearms manufacturer that has a perfect record with every make and model they produce. I’ll wait. With mass produced guns there will be lemons and designs that need tweaked along the way.

To me what differentiates the companies is their customer service. If my Sig has a problem and Sig customer service tells me to pound sand then that’s the last Sig I’ll own.

I have read a lot of negativity about Ruger lately but what sticks in my mind is the praise their CS gets. If they make it right do you give them a pass? I would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UTShooter71]

I'm a revolver fan and like both the SA as well as the modern DA. Not a fan of longer barrels (under 5").

Most of mine are Taurus. I've had really good luck with them. I would consider a Ruger but I can't afford them. I wouldn't buy a S&W or NAA. I have had terrible luck with both brands.

I think they make solid items but my experiences have been enough to sour me on buying any more outside of a tremendous deal or similar.

 

[Jhawk@1261]

OP here. It was I who asked 0311INF to expound on his statement that he couldn’t recommend Ruger.

Anytime anyone makes a claim like that on a forum I take it with a grain of salt and ask for an explanation of their issues and experience.

Name one firearms manufacturer that has a perfect record with every make and model they produce. I’ll wait. With mass produced guns there will be lemons and designs that need tweaked along the way.

To me what differentiates the companies is their customer service. If my Sig has a problem and Sig customer service tells me to pound sand then that’s the last Sig I’ll own.

I have read a lot of negativity about Ruger lately but what sticks in my mind is the praise their CS gets. If they make it right do you give them a pass? I would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree and it's a shame that customer service has to be top notch to cover for lack of quality control.

 

[0311INF]

OP here. It was I who asked 0311INF to expound on his statement that he couldn’t recommend Ruger.

Anytime anyone makes a claim like that on a forum I take it with a grain of salt and ask for an explanation of their issues and experience.

Name one firearms manufacturer that has a perfect record with every make and model they produce. I’ll wait. With mass produced guns there will be lemons and designs that need tweaked along the way.

To me what differentiates the companies is their customer service. If my Sig has a problem and Sig customer service tells me to pound sand then that’s the last Sig I’ll own.

I have read a lot of negativity about Ruger lately but what sticks in my mind is the praise their CS gets. If they make it right do you give them a pass? I would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My posts were based of course on my own experiences with approximately a dozen examples, which is by no means statisically significant.
I also called out new Colt production which I have less experience with, but has been far more atrocious.
Based on my limited view (maybe 30 revolvers of various makes) I would say the new production revolver market in general is a shadow of its former self as far as quality. So I'll amend my statement a bit and say that I would not necessarily recommend a less informed prospective buyer to any newly built revolver, unless someone knowledgeable could assist with a thorough inspection before the purchase was finalized.
Granted I have benefited from Ruger's CS. Colt's CS by comparison is a pitiful mess. So if someone were to buy sight unseen, there is something to be said of Ruger I suppose.

It's amazing how this went from a simple question to a Ruger bash. If you feel this way about Ruger why do you have them and why are you on this forum? Sell them, buy your super gun and post on that forum.

The problem is I like many Ruger firearms. But among the various product lines, I see much less QC than say 10 years ago. This isn't just my perspective. Back in 2015 when Ruger decided to do the "2 million guns in 2 years" thing, quality took a dive and never seemed to recover. This and other forums are rife with complaints. I beleive it would behoove the customer base to let Ruger know how we feel about that, rather than jump ship.

 

[Ranger514]

The first handgun I shot was my dad's Ruger Standard semi-auto .22 LR when I was 12 years old. As I grew older, my preference turned to revolvers. My first revolvers as an adult were a S&W Mod. 15 and 19, both gone now, unfortunately. When I became a LEO, I bought a 4" Mod 686 as my duty carry, and a Mod. 66 snubby that I still use for cc. When my agency transitioned to Sigs, I turned to collecting semiautos, but I never lost my interest in revolvers.

Today, my common carry handguns around our place and for trips to town are revolvers: a snubby SP 101, snubby Mod. 66 , or a pocket carry 642. I have a choice of New Vaquero Montado or 686+ for backcountry hiking, and for plinking, I have a Mod. 60 Kit Gun, Single Six, and a Uberti Model P Jr. (10 shot) all in .22 LR.

If I still wore a badge, or lived in a part of the world with a lot of violent crime, I'd be packing a high capcity, double-stack semiauto every where I went, but that's not my world any more. Nowadays I rely on high capacity semiautos for home defense or travel that takes me into heavily populated urban areas. Regardless, I enjoy shooting revolvers as much as semiautos, and both handgun styles have their uses, whether that be recreational or self defense.

 

[originalBB]

My posts were based of course on my own experiences with approximately a dozen examples, which is by no means statisically significant.
I also called out new Colt production which I have less experience with, but has been far more atrocious.
Based on my limited view (maybe 30 revolvers of various makes) I would say the new production revolver market in general is a shadow of its former self as far as quality. So I'll amend my statement a bit and say that I would not necessarily recommend a less informed prospective buyer to any newly built revolver, unless someone knowledgeable could assist with a thorough inspection before the purchase was finalized.
Granted I have benefited from Ruger's CS. Colt's CS by comparison is a pitiful mess. So if someone were to buy sight unseen, there is something to be said of Ruger I suppose.


The problem is I like many Ruger firearms. But among the various product lines, I see much less QC than say 10 years ago. This isn't just my perspective. Back in 2015 when Ruger decided to do the "2 million guns in 2 years" thing, quality took a dive and never seemed to recover. This and other forums are rife with complaints. I beleive it would behoove the customer base to let Ruger know how we feel about that, rather than jump ship.

I don’t think Ruger is the only one in this boat either. Read on the Sig forums. There are instances of front sights falling out on the first magazine and so on. The gun makers are working at warp speed and with that there will be mistakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LocoTex]

I have a few revolvers, but my hands-down favorite is my S&W Model 65 6". Best trigger on a revolver I've ever fired. Scary accurate as well.

 

[Ranger514]

I don’t think Ruger is the only one in this boat either. Read on the Sig forums. There are instances of front sights falling out on the first magazine and so on. The gun makers are working at warp speed and with that there will be mistakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Count me as one of the Sig customers who had the SigLite front sight insert fly out of a .40 cal. P229 when firing the first magazine. That was the only issue I've ever had with a Sig firearm that came straight out of the factory, and I have owned many. Currently, I have five Sigs, including a used P938 with problems that I inherited from a family member. I sent it in after talking to a Sig CS rep, To my suprise, Sig replaced a number of parts with upgrades, and didn't charge me a dime. Wish I could say the same about Ruger Custormer Service.