quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
I thought Bill was looking for a 15 round limit?

Anyway, to me Ruger has redemmed itself. They sell standard capacity magazines, make evil black rifles, and even offer us civvies flashiders on the mini.

Bill may have effed up, but Ruger has passed that and is selling whatever is legal with no strings attached.

More than I can say for S&W.

I remember it as being a 10-round limit, but Wikipedia says you're right, 15-round limit. It doesn't minimize Bill Ruger's tremendous contribution to the gun world, most notably his original .22LR pistol and carbine. I wish I had at least one of each, but I never got around to buying them. My loss, for sure.

I still think occasionally about buying a Mini-14 as well, but it's not high on my priority list.

As to Glock, I see no reason the basic line of compact and full-size frames couldn't stick around as long as the 1911 has, and with just as few changes. Both are designs that work. I prefer exposed hammers and thumb safeties, but who can argue with the light, compact, reliable, large magazine capacity that Gaston came up with?

I’m in for a glock rifle

it was fifteen because his pistols had 15 and others had more like the glock/cz had more and would lose a selling point

Not cool..but its in the past.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

Ruger is/was a shitshow.

You really should spend some time with the RUGER LC9s before making a statement like that. Splendid trigger, good sights, 100% reliable, and is easily carried in a pants pocket. I'll also point out that their SR1911 series is an excellent balance between price point and feature set. While I will admit that Ruger may be over reaching with the array of their product line they do in fact make some products that are excellent.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
He's 88. How active is he in running the company nowadays?

He's been a little busy.

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

Ruger is/was a shitshow.

You really should spend some time with the RUGER LC9s before making a statement like that. Splendid trigger, good sights, 100% reliable, and is easily carried in a pants pocket. I'll also point out that their SR1911 series is an excellent balance between price point and feature set. While I will admit that Ruger may be over reaching with the array of their product line they do in fact make some products that are excellent.

Pass. Too many other great companies making products without recalls and fleas

Yeah, like Sig Sauer. Oh, Wait, doesn't Sig currently have a recall out on the P320? I also have a somewhat vague memory of your exalted Glock having recoil spring issues with the Gen 4's and also remember all those Glock 22's that had the Flexible Flyer frames that would jam if a light were mounted. I could go on and on and on because I cannot think of one single major firearms maker who hasn't dropped the ball on new releases.

Huge differences in issues on a specific product and a constant stream of recalls across an entire product line. Not to mention stealing the design from Keltec and still managing to have recalls.

I ll still pass. If I want a Keltec I ll buy a Keltec and not a Ruger clone waiting on the next recall.

If you like them fine, but a quick google search of any manufacturer as you claim, then of Ruger tells the tale far better than I can.

https://www.google.com/search?...30k1.181.nIQMkkqKXw0

quote:

Originally posted by grumpy1:


Glock is the only major SF pistol manufacturer that did not have to offer major rebates in 2017.

No, but they did drop their prices.

It really screwed me, I have more Glocks in stock than any other mfg. I had to take the hit and drop my prices accordingly. Right now im only making $15 on a standard Gen 4.

Glock hit a grand slam when he practically gave G17s and leather to police departments, AND bought back the S&Ws, Colts, Berettas, in the late 80's early 90's. Then the civilian market figured if all the cops were getting Glocks, maybe they should, too. And then came the G19, and the rest is history.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Huge differences in issues on a specific product and a constant stream of recalls across an entire product line. Not to mention stealing the design from Keltec and still managing to have recalls.

I ll still pass. If I want a Keltec I ll buy a Keltec and not a Ruger clone waiting on the next recall.

If you like them fine, but a quick google search of any manufacturer as you claim, then of Ruger tells the tale far better than I can.

I won't go to the mat to defend every move Ruger has made over the years, but if you call the company a "shitshow" and apply that across their whole product line, then I can only guess you're not into revolvers much. Ruger IMO has always had a leg up on its competition in making revolvers designed for hard use. Not to go into long stories of how my old GP100 bought in 1989 held up to heavy loads compared to my non-Ruger revolvers, I'll just say that the GP100 was indestructible. I proved this to myself using my own handloads with max pressure loads back then, not even published in any tables today (probably because they broke a lot of people's Colts and S&Ws). I regretted selling it years ago. More recently I bought a 2015 GP100 and it is better than the one from 1989. Equally rugged, but out of the box had a much smoother action than its 1989 counterpart. Smoother than my old GP100, or the 1980s Security Six I still have, and as smooth as any of my S&W revolvers. And compared to S&W, Ruger revolvers have stayed truer to their original design and still come with no stupid internal lock. If Ruger today still made nothing else but revolvers and the 10-22, I would nonetheless consider the company a valuable contributor to the gun industry.

Oh, and my LCPs (I have several) have never been subject to recall and have always worked and done what I intend them to do. It's a modern day derringer, not a range gun, so what I ask of them is mostly to ride in my pocket comfortably and work when I need to fire them. I don't stress them much at the range. I'll let patent lawyers figure out if Kel-Tec got misused, but I don't owe any company any brand loyalty so I buy what is available, most affordable, and works for my needs.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
I thought Bill was looking for a 15 round limit?

Anyway, to me Ruger has redemmed itself. They sell standard capacity magazines, make evil black rifles, and even offer us civvies flashiders on the mini.

Bill may have effed up, but Ruger has passed that and is selling whatever is legal with no strings attached.

More than I can say for S&W.

I remember it as being a 10-round limit, but Wikipedia says you're right, 15-round limit. It doesn't minimize Bill Ruger's tremendous contribution to the gun world, most notably his original .22LR pistol and carbine. I wish I had at least one of each, but I never got around to buying them. My loss, for sure.

I still think occasionally about buying a Mini-14 as well, but it's not high on my priority list.

As to Glock, I see no reason the basic line of compact and full-size frames couldn't stick around as long as the 1911 has, and with just as few changes. Both are designs that work. I prefer exposed hammers and thumb safeties, but who can argue with the light, compact, reliable, large magazine capacity that Gaston came up with?

Wikipedia is wrong Bill Ruger pushed for a 10 round mag limit in the 1994 assault weapons ban.

I get the feeling when Gaston dies, it's going to be the same thing that happened when Steve Jobs died. The Glock is the iPhone of handguns and everyone else is an Android. Other manufacturers will make the breakthroughs and have features people "demand," and then 3 years later you might see it on a Glock.

quote:

Originally posted by KML:
Wikipedia is wrong...

Wouldn't be the first time. Generally my memory of things I'm involved in is pretty good, but it's hardly worth arguing the point, which is that BR advocated capacity limits.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Ruger is/was a shitshow.

Whoa!

That's a staggering claim!

When I think of Ruger, I think of the GP100, the SP101, and the LCR for revolvers - and their price points. When I think of Ruger, I think of the 10/22!

Yeah - I'm really trippin' on someone calling Ruger a "shit show."

It all depends on the business succession plan they have in place or not. If there is no plan the heirs may fight over it until they run the company into the ground. And then no mere Glocks. Anyone know the details of the succession plan?!

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
Will they make that pistol caliber carbine that everybody says they want but will not buy. .

quote:

Originally posted by whisky22:
I’m in for a glock rifle

Shop for a MechTech carbine kit. Works with your existing frame, trigger job, and magazines. Mine is in 357Sig.

quote:

Originally posted by LtJL:
Glock hit a grand slam when he practically gave G17s and leather to police departments, AND bought back the S&Ws, Colts, Berettas, in the late 80's early 90's. Then the civilian market figured if all the cops were getting Glocks, maybe they should, too. And then came the G19, and the rest is history.

With departments trying having tight budgets, something like that goes a really long way.

People get the mentality that if the cops use it, then it must be good. Kind of like how some companies claim "military grade" in order to advertise. But those buying are not aware that a lot of the times, military grade means lowest bidder.

Mobil has been quite successful in using the give it away tactic. They are factory fill in a lot of sports cars and people think "if it's good enough for the Corvette, it's good enough for my Camry."

quote:

Originally posted by synthplayer:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Ruger is/was a shitshow.

Whoa!

That's a staggering claim!

When I think of Ruger, I think of the GP100, the SP101, and the LCR for revolvers - and their price points. When I think of Ruger, I think of the 10/22!

Yeah - I'm really trippin' on someone calling Ruger a "shit show."

I tend to agree. Ruger is no more a shit show than SIG Sauer US. I've been through both of their facilities and SIG's is no better than Ruger, and I frankly found Ruger's QC process to be superior to SIG's current QC process. Unquestionably Ruger's products aren't as refined as SIG's but they also cost less than half. I'm not a big fan of a lot of Ruger's products but I'm also not a fan of a lot of SIG's products. If either company has a product I'm interested in I would consider buying it without reservation.

quote:

Not to mention stealing the design from Keltec

Couldn't the same be said of any company making AR's or 1911's?