Ruger???

[LDB]

And if anybody wants the names of the books, just ask.

Books are always great ideas. For an interest more in handguns what would be your recommendation of the first 3-4 books to add to a library and in what order?

[John Wayne]

I work with a guy whose dad retired from Ruger as an Engineer sometime in the last decade. He said his dad was forced into retirement when the new CEO came in, along with many other of the more experienced Engineers. We were talking about that because older people have been disproportionately included in the annual layoffs my company has had over the last decade. You will not remain employed at my company after you turn 59.5 years old - you will be in the next & upcoming layoff. Probably has something to do with Ruger’s decline.

Hey Justin,
If they fire you based on age discrimination sue them.
JW

[FergusonTO35]

I'm a big Ruger fan and own many of their products. And I'm also not shy to call them out when they deserve it. Biggest problem I have seen with them over the past 20 years is they are always in a hurry. In a hurry to introduce more products, in a hurry to discontinue those same products to introduce more products, in a hurry to grow the company and market share beyond what is sustainable.

Case in point: Ruger centerfire auto pistols. Ruger has introduced four different product lines or generations over the last 25 years: SR series, Security 9/380, American series, and now the RXM. I'm not saying they were necessarily bad guns, but the constant churning of that product line causes people not to take it seriously. Bill Ruger was an old codger who held the company back in some ways, but one thing he did right was the very conservative approach he took to new product lines, with most problems overcome before they were introduced to the public.

Nowadays, it seems like Ruger throws a product overboard right about the time they get it right and people are happy with it. For example, the SR9/40/45 series. They had some problems the first few years which were overcome and people were quite happy with them. My own SR9C was an excellent gun and a definite improvement over most others in terms of sights, ergonomics, and trigger pull. You could say, it had all the usual improvements that people make to modern carry pistols included from the factory at a lower price! And so, Ruger threw it overboard in favor of the noticeably lesser quality Security 9 and big and heavy American series that no one cared about. Now they have the RXM which seems to be doing really well, but are they going to stick with it?

[Outpost75]

I work with a guy whose dad retired from Ruger as an Engineer sometime in the last decade. He said his dad was forced into retirement when the new CEO came in, along with many other of the more experienced Engineers. We were talking about that because older people have been disproportionately included in the annual layoffs my company has had over the last decade. You will not remain employed at my company after you turn 59.5 years old - you will be in the next & upcoming layoff. Probably has something to do with Ruger’s decline.

I was with Ruger's Engineering Dept. in the 1980s, was QA manager for Newport Operations with responsibility for government and export contracts. I left the company in '87. Company went downhill rapidly after. After Bill Senior, Bill Jr., Tom Ruger and Steve Vogel died, the company went public and the family was no longer involved and the bean counters took over.

[contender1]

LDB; There are a lot of books on Rugers that many never even know about. One author (Don Findley) does limited runs of some of his due to the fact that (sadly) some do not sell enough. He did one in the last year that there were only 15 copies. And yes,, I have all of his books.

That said,, I would strongly suggest the following books;
John Dougan; "Ruger Pistols & Revolvers the Vintage years 1949-1973. Even though several of us helped John proof read it,, we all missed several things until after it was published. There is a printable copy of the corrections. But overall, an EXCELLENT reference to many things.
Chad Hiddleson. He publishes the RENE,, AND has a "Ruger Reference Guide." While it only goes to 2010,, it's a STUNNING amount of real data. It's worth it's weight in gold when chasing older guns.
Chad also published a book, "The Encyclopedia of Ruger Semi-automatic Rimfire Pistols 1949-1992." Lots of good details about boxes, magazines, paperwork etc in it.
Don Findley; "Bill Ruger's .22 Pistol." Another great one,, if you can find a copy. They are out there.

And good general history,, and easy to find cheaply,, "Ruger & His Guns" by R.L. Wilson.

There are others,, and many are outdated due to more info being uncovered after they were published. BUT,,,,, there is still a lot of great stuff in them. I have a spare copy of one by John Dougan,, "Single-Action Revolvers, 1953 - 1963" that is still very good. If you are interested.

FergusonTO35 has a good point.
Bill was very "reserved" in his releasing of new products. They would exhibit & showcase a new gun,, yet it'd easily be 1-3 years before the guns were in the mainstream of things. Very low production numbers met high demands. After Bill passed,, and the company struggled a bit, and eventually changed a few things,,, they pushed stuff out very quickly. Even when they should have slowed down some. Lean manufacturing combined with the consumer complaints about not being able to get the newest,,, latest & greatest,, allowed Ruger to put into the general market a lot more guns a lot quicker than how it used to happen.
That did create it's own problems. You mentioned the SR line. Yet,, many of the earlier ones had an issue & recall due to the barrel peening at the top of the hood. I know I had one of those. Ruger fixed it by sending a new gun. And we've seen other models that have had issues & a recall happened.
But ALL makers of anything can have issues. The early P85's failed a "test" somewhere,, (I think it was part of the military testing,) where they recalled early ones to retrofit a "MKII" safety. A friend of mine, a Federal LEO at the time got one that was returned & had the new safety installed. That happened under Bill's tenure.

I agree that they stopped several models in favor of newer models,, that maybe shouldn't have been done that way. The SR series is still an excellent firearm,, and is quietly coveted by those who have them. And yes,, the American was too big, heavy & bulky in a market time where slim, trim & lightweight was the rage.

I will say that under the CEO Mike Fifer,, he had a feature,, on their website called; "Ask the CEO" where he'd get emails. I spoke with him a few times about this little feature. He told me that yes,, he did read them ALL!" He allowed that many of them were emails that wanted stuff not practical to build in business, to make a profit. And he did say that if a real problem came up,, he'd direct it to the right person to get that item taken care of. But at least he did read & study all of the emails.

One thing that many people fail to understand or accept.

All companies,, not just gun companies are in business to make one thing. MONEY! If they do not make money,, they will not be in business very long. Even Bill Ruger had a picture in his office at one time,, showing a wooden barrel, overflowing with cash money. The PRODUCT is the route to making money. And NOBODY gets everything right every time they build something.

In today's society,, people have been kinda "programmed" by mass marketing & media stuff that they have to have the "Newest, latest & greatest" model of whatever. Heck,, look at cell phones. I know people who have a perfectly good phone,, but will trade it in when the newest model comes out. It's no different in guns, cars etc.
But educated, and thrifty types of people will stop, study what they have, and their needs, then carefully decide if the newest offering will fit their needs, followed by their desires.


Back to the OP's thoughts.

Re-read my first post. They build stuff in cycles. Now add in the fact they are moving a lot of stuff to Mayodan NC. Follow that with the need to occasionally shut down lines to rebuild machines, or even replace machines. The Lean Manufacturing business model doesn't always work when it comes to unexpected shut-downs, or other interruptions.
However,, one thing not mentioned,, are the "bean counters."
Sales. If a model is a slow seller,, it doesn't get built often,, OR gets discontinued. Bean counters are focused on the money. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't.

Another angle. Just because your local Mom & Pop's gun shop doesn't have a model you seek, doesn't mean they aren't available. Distributors allocate inventory to bigger gun shops that sell a lot more guns quicker. And if you seek a specific model,, sadly,, you can often find them for sale on the internet,, when you can't get them at the Mom & Pop's.

[justindad]

Hey Justin,
If they fire you based on age discrimination sue them.
JW

Engineers don’t have the type of coin needed to take multinational companies to court over age discrimination. When I was in college, one of my professors gave us a history lesson on patent law. The guy who invented the four-speed transmission got a patent on it, and then he tried to sell it to the Big 3. They all told him no, and then started producing the design anyways. The guy took the automakers to court, where they were able to use their many, many lawyers to delay proceedings and run other tactics that drove the man bankrupt. With no money remaining, he had to drop the lawsuit.
*
I cannot prove that story from my professor is true, but I have a similar story. My dad attempted to rent houses as part of his retirement plan. When tenants refused to pay rent, he took them to court to evict them. The court made my dad allow the tenants to stay for 6 months without paying rent before eviction was allowed. In the state and county, I was renting an apartment from a large company. One day my rent was paid a day late. There was an eviction notice on my door that day, and I had three days to pay before the cops were going to escort me out. Normal people don’t get the same “justice” that billionaires get.
*
Also, there is a small payout you are offered that includes verbiage saying you cannot be party to a class action lawsuit pertaining to your lawoff. I know one person who declined the payout.
*
Knowing that Ruger engages in age discrimination, forcing people into early retirement (it is extremely difficult to find a job as a 60 yo engineer, even as a 40 yo engineer) turns me away from their products.

[FergusonTO35]

Thanks, Contender. I really liked my SR9c, and the lady I sold it to still has it and enjoys it. I did not sell it because of any fault with the gun, but rather the fact that I shoot my carry guns more than most people and eventually you are going to need parts and maybe factory service. Especially for bottom feeders, which are sensitive to worn springs. Most of my bottom feeders nowadays are Glock. Not because they are perfect (in fact far from it) but because I can easily and cheaply hoard all the parts I could ever want and keep them going for the rest of my life and probably my kid's life as well. And I have done just that. Same with S&W revolvers, I just placed a big order of small parts for them. I'm not sure how much longer you will be able to get parts and service for the Ruger SR series, so I decided to avoid that need before it happens.

The core products made by Ruger (10/22, GP-100, SP-101, single actions) seem to be a much safer bet, and are built quite strong to begin with. I'm really enjoying the new SP-101 .38 I bought in the spring, it's my daily outside work companion. I feed the SP my personal Outdoorsman load of 3.8 grains Titegroup under a Lee 358-158-RF and it is accurate and fun to shoot. And I could probably use it to hammer fence steeples if needed!

[SSGOldfart]

"They still make all of the firearms you mentioned."

Wrong.

The M77 was replaced by a different model,, the Hawkeye.
The Security-Six series guns were replaced by a different model, the GP-100.
The OM's were replaced by the New Models with the safety transfer bar system.

Bill Ruger was ALWAYS looking at ways to increase profits. He was always looking at ways to make guns better AND not increase building expenses.

The M77 had a history of both very good or very bad accuracy. That was due to the barrels they got during some of the production times. And the expenses of building the Hawkeye using different methods & a re-design, were less than the M77.

The Security-Six series of guns was a thorn in Bills side. He got into the DA business looking for LEO contracts. It's been often spoken of how he complained that he lost money on that model. The GP-100 line was a re-design,, and it was a way to make money on the DA line.

The OM SA line,, Bill wanted a true "6-Shot" SA revolver,, and had the safety transfer bar design built. He ALSO was aware of how too many people were NOT educated in how to safely carry an OM Ruger, or a SA Colt etc. After he stopped production of the OM's,, and went to the NM design,, a few years later,, Bill got sued & lost his first case. The judge ruled that "Bill Ruger knew he had a defective design because he built the NM with the safety transfer bar." As such,, after that,, Bill had that horrendous "Billboard Warning" rollmark added to all his guns.

It's not that a design was bad,, it was often the lawyers, the lawsuits, or even just suggestions by knowledgeable shooters that created later versions of an original design. And that of course,, created different parts.

The Ruger .22 semi-auto pistol. The ORIGINAL one was called a "Standard" by the company. That was the official name for the fixed sighted, tapered barreled guns from 1949 until 1982. But in 1951,, they introduced the MK I Target Automatic Pistol. It has adjustable sights, and different barrel lengths. RUGER put the marking of Mark I on those frames. Then in 1982,,the MKII was introduced. The Standard model magazines initially had the follower button on the right side. when the stamping mold for the initial guns wore out,, they re-designed the frame a bit, and moved the follower button to the left side. The initial type of frame is called the A54 frame. When the change was done, it is called the A-100 frame. This was done in about 1971. When the frame changes were done, the magazines were cut so you could use the Later magazines in the older frames by simply swapping the follower button to the left side. I have personally seen an early 1949 built gun fired with a 10 round, double slotted magazine without a problem. You are incorrect about your info on the Ruger semi-auto .22 pistols.
BUT,, the MKIII went with a different magazine release, because people complained about the bottom magazine latch. People wanted the side release.
So a lot of the magazines built will swap around in different models. But NOT all of them, due to consumer demands & ideas. And not all of these ideas were good ones. The MKIII suffers from "lawyer devices" such as the magazine disconnect, and the loaded round indicator.
The MK IV,, addresses the consumer complaints about re-assembly.

NOTHING is wrong with many older models. The got it right to begin with. But due to consumer complaints or suggestions, as well as the need to make a profit,, designs change.
And when a design changes,, ANY company of ANY kind can not keep support parts in stock forever.

All companies keep model names as they are patented protected. But a 1970 Chevelle is NOT the same as more recent Chevelles. And GM doesn't stock parts for the older cars either.

Sorry,, just because you feel the name is the same, or that they still make that model, is just incorrect.

As a life-long Ruger collector, a founding member of the Ruger Owners & Collectors Society, a contributor to the Red Eagle News Exchange, and the owner of ALL books & publications about Rugers,, (not counting the monthly gun rags that required a subscription,) I think I can speak about Rugers with a bit of actual knowledge.
In fact,, if you wish,, you can subscribe to the RENE and get their excellent Reference Guide. It has a lot of the detailed info I just shared. That and books by Chad Hiddleson, John Dougan, and Don Findley will teach you quite a bit.

Models of everything are constantly evolving due to consumer demands as well as the necessity of making a profit to be able to stay in business. Quite often,, it's not a problem with a previous model, it's due to input by serious shooters or sadly,, the lawyers looking to sue a big company with deep pockets. It's not to "so it fixes all the previous mistakes."

But I will say that yes,, some models did need a re-design due to problems not found initially. And were discovered by consumers. The very early Mini-14's had a few problems. So that was fixed.

And let's not forget the fact that Bill Ruger built an excellent .357 Maximum Blackhawk. Yet,, due to consumers doing things that the gun wasn't designed to do,, followed by a "gun-rag" writer,, who trashed the gun, Bill stopped production completely, AND scrapped about 5000 new guns. Why? The gun was built around Silhouette shooting competition & serious handgun hunting. It was to be used with heavier bullets & slower burning powders. Reloaders started loading very light bullets & a hotter faster powder. That caused a little "Top strap, flame cutting." Well that gun rag writer TRASHED the gun. I was told by a good authority that the writer was butt-hurt because he didn't get an example to test. So, between a few complaints, and that writer's article,, Bill shut it down. Yet,, MANY different guns & models from several makers have also had top strap flame cutting but NEVER got the bad press the Maximum did.
The mistake there was Bill getting mad & being too stubborn.

My apologies for a bit of thread drift here,, but mis-information doesn't need to be spread. I challenge anyone to this; "Do not take my word for any of this. Buy the books, do your own studying. Educate yourselves on the subject. Then make a decision about what you find out."

And if anybody wants the names of the books, just ask.

Well done that needs to be saved humm sticky maybe???

[JFoster48386]

I'm still a fan boy of Ruger. I (we) started buying Ruger products over 30 years ago. They are still excellent firearms. The last Ruger I bought was earlier this year this well. A Super Redhawk Alaskan in .454 Casull. It's an absolute tank.

Jon.

[PaulH]

Ruger firearm designs are excellent, unfortunately the factories quality seems to be hit or miss, and more miss than hit lately. I have been buying and gifted Ruger rifles and handguns over the past 40 years and have single and double action revolvers, autos, bolt action and semi auto rifles rimfires and centerfires. Pretty sure I have more Rugers than other gun types combined.

As much as I appreciate the designs of the guns, it's a damn shame that they can't build a quality revolver when the designs are 40-50 years old. I worked manufacturing in the beginning of my career and understand the challenge of getting quality control in hand on a new design, but it is inexcusable when a factory has a mature design and can't hold tolerances. In the past few years I purchased three new Rugers, a 357/77 rifle, 22 lr gp-100 and 357 gp-100 and all had to go back to the factory for functional issues. Yes, true to Ruger's reputation they fixed the guns. That said, if they are capable of making them right, make them right before you ship them! I'm unlikely to purchasing any more new Rugers sad to say.

[MGySgt]

I did get my Max 9. Put some factory rounds thru it and all seems good, it is not a match grade gun, but it did shoot great for a CCW weapon. Now to get a few hundred rounds through it and a good IWB holster for it.
Until I test my carry ammo through it I will continue to carry my LC9S.