Someone I work with at a gun show who I work with volunteering at the VA Citizens Defense League table, had a good idea. He stated that Ruger should go out and hire Kel Tech engineers. Kel Tech has great ideas but poor quality guns where Ruger has great quality guns but not such innovative ideas. It is outside of the box thinking, but I believe it would work and improve their cells drastically. What is your opinion?

I don't know man. Rugers american pistol and Security pistol are both well done, their SR9 was not a bad gun either. I will further add that their match champion revoler has a lot to do with other makers bringing back solid classic revolver designs, along with new innovative interpretations. Take rugers own 10mm revolver. No more does one have to pay 2k+ for a Smith 610 from the 90's. Look at rugers PRS, Their Take down 22, The ruger american series hunting and rimfires. They are Innovative in their own way.

Ruger has never really made guns to be 5k, 10, 20k guns like some manufactures. Ruger makes guns that are 10, 20 year fire arms. Its approach is this pistol, rifle, revolver will be all the buyer every needs if they can only buy 1 gun. They just work, and keep working.

Keltech is thinking out side the box, I can certaintly appriciate that. Look at the tactical 12 gauge market in the last 3 years. Look at the nice bulpup 556/308's we have now. Good on them, but having them called poor quality does them a disservice. They were never meant to be rugers, smiths, or sigs. They are keltech.

quote:

Originally posted by DSgrouse:
Ruger has never really made guns to be 5k, 10, 20k guns like some manufactures. Ruger makes guns that are 10, 20 year fire arms.

Only 10-20 years?! Try 100-200 years.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by DSgrouse:
Ruger has never really made guns to be 5k, 10, 20k guns like some manufactures. Ruger makes guns that are 10, 20 year fire arms.

Only 10-20 years?! Try 100-200 years.

Touche

I can easily see Ruger doing a better job than KelTec with KelTec's designs. There are two potential problems with that approach, though. First, Ruger's recent spate of blued 5" revolvers and the American bolt action rifles show that there's still more Ruger can do with its existing lineup. Second, if Ruger had to wait for KelTec's engineers, we'd never see any Rugers for sale.

I couldn't disagree with the general premise more.

My experience with Kel-Tec is limited to the P32 and, for a polymer framed sub-compact and for the role it was designed to serve, it is a fine gun. Fine enough that Ruger chose to clone the Kel-Tec when it needed a first entry of its own in this category.

The P32 probably won't last as long as a Ruger revolver...but then I wouldn't expect it to and it has lasted the 15 + years that I have had it with only an early break-in/ rim lock stoppage issue to blemish it's otherwise reliable function record.

I've been intrigued by several other Kel-Tec offerings as well, including the Sub 2000 and the various Bullpup designs including the new RDB. While I haven't owned or shot any of these several of them have been offered for many years now and seem to have at least some following by users.

As far as Ruger goes, I think the company has been on a roll for the last several years now in terms of innovative designs or in meeting the demands of its customers. The LCR, American pistol, new Security 9, some magazine compatibility, a commercial off-the-shelf GSR, an update of the 10/22 with a take-down backpacker design, and now a take-down centerfire carbine. The execution of these designs may be debated...or whether these designs actually satisfy a consumer need...but to suggest that Ruger hasn't offered any innovative designs is ridiculous.

I think Roger has it all under control.

The only keltecs I ever tried or owned were the P3AT's. Three of them. By far the worst firearm I've ever touched or tried.

I own Ruger redhawks vaqueros, blackhawks, the LCP (a keltec licensed knockoff), a bevy of 10-22's and rifles, and frankly I'll take the rugers over the keltecs. If keltec is "innovation" let it poison some place else.

There's a reason that hand loading manuals specify "ruger-only" loads.

I’d like to see Ruger produce a sub-$1000 5.56mm ambidextrous bullpup rifle in a sufficient quantity, because if anyone could do it Ruger could.

I am not a big enough bullpup fan do go out and pay AUG and Tavor prices but I have always been intrigued enough by the concept that I would pay 'Ruger Price' for one.

I would like to see the quality improvement on some of the SU-16 rifles. 4.5 lbs and takes AR mags. Why hasn’t someone else done this? I would like a lighter 556 option other than the AR for some stuff like a pack rifle.

Kel-Tec engineers at Ruger? You tryin' to drive Ruger's CS people to suicide? What did they ever do to you?

Ruger in my mind does take a more conservative approach to innovation. Hell, how long did it take them to come to terms with the Ruger Standard's takedown? But when they do hit on something, it's usually pretty darn good. The takedown mechanism on the MkIV. The forend/barrel release on the 10/22 Takedown. Their work on the RPR and what that gun did to help popularize the 6.5 Creedmoor caliber and chassis bolt guns in general. The composite LCR and how it to a degree tames the pocket revolver. Their take on the Kel-Tec 380 and the LCP's almost singlehanded salvation of the .380ACP caliber. Several major ammo makers were seriously talking about shuttering their .380 production when the LCP went live. Now they can't anymore, thanks to the wild popularity of that gun and its replacement, the even better LCPII. They've had some clunkers, like the American pistols (though the compact is really a sweet gun despite the reality that it's not on the radar of the gun-buying public). And the poorly conceived and worse yet, horribly executed Red Label O/U reboot that barely lasted a year before shuttering. They not perfect but they've generally pretty damned good at what they build and create. They don't need out-in-left-field designers to define that company.

I don't follow Kel-Tec closely, only from a distance. Did they have problems with their KSG, RFB, and RDB? The RDB is something I am somewhat interested in.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
I don't follow Kel-Tec closely, only from a distance. Did they have problems with their KSG, RFB, and RDB? The RDB is something I am somewhat interested in.

I agree. I think it’s important for everybody has an m4 pattern rifle that they know how to operate. There is also a need for a featherweight compact 223/556 rifle for packing, truck gun, whatever.

I’m looking at the kel tec RDB, SU 16, and the pistol version. An SU 16 without the gimmicky bipod and a modern ergonomic type foldingbutt stock would be neat.

Ruger is trying to capitalize on the sub2k success with their pc carbine. While it’s not a folding carbine it does break down for transport/storage and utilizes the same mags as their handguns plus a magwell to use Glock mags. Just like the keltec sub2k. Hmmm. If ruger would make it fold like the sub2k they’d really increase the sales of the pc carbine

I’ve had no issues with my sub2k chambered in 40 and using Glock mags. It’s a fun gun to shoot and work on. After adding the Mcarbo trigger bundle it’s really a pleasure to shoot.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
I don't follow Kel-Tec closely, only from a distance. Did they have problems with their KSG, RFB, and RDB? The RDB is something I am somewhat interested in.

Yes, the KSG had some catastrophic failures, notably the rail not holding up to use with a VFG. A guy I know had his hand blown off when the Kel-tec rail failed.

For those who think that Kel-Tec are reliable, multiple people who sell them tell me that sometimes they and sometimes they do not. If sales persons who are working on a commission are telling customer this caveat, I would not call them reliable. IMHO. Having "one" or several reliable guns from one company does not prove anything.

quote:

Originally posted by SSAreGreat:
For those who think that Kel-Tec are reliable, multiple people who sell them tell me that sometimes they and sometimes they do not. If sales persons who are working on a commission are telling customer this caveat, I would not call them reliable. IMHO. Having "one" or several reliable guns from one company does not prove anything.

I would agree that anecdotal impressions based on owning/ shooting a single example of any gun or model is statistically meaningless...just as meaningless as sales people saying sometimes they are reliable and sometimes they are not. Spend significant time in gun stores/ gun shows and you will undoubtedly get both informed and experienced opinions as well as uninformed and unexperienced opinions.

SIG, Ruger, S&W...most of the major gun mfrs have issued product safety recalls or otherwise defective guns or accessories. Hell, we've had pages of threads just on SIG's quality issues over the years...but I don't think it would be fair to say that SIGs are generally poor quality. To single out Kel-Tec for an issue common in the industry, especially when it isn't based on any statistical or factual data, is disingenuous.

Has Kel-Tec produced some products with problems...you bet. The P32 that I mentioned has a proven track record and a long following. There was a long running thread on the P32 here with a number of members posting the positive impressions of the gun...HOWEVER, the P3AT which was based on the P32 seemed to present with a lot of reliability issues based on user experiences that I've read here.

The Kel-Tec Sub2K is another model that has been around for a while and was popular enough to survive into at least one evolution. Users seem to generally like them if not pine for certain changes.

I wasn't aware of the KSG issues and catastrophic failures are disturbing, but hardly representative of the company's total product line or general quality.

There are varying degrees of "quality" in any product design and manufacturing process. I would agree that Kel-Tec generally produces products that meet a lesser standard of quality than, say a SIG or Ruger, but lesser quality doesn't necessarily equate to bad quality. A Toyota may have lesser quality than a Lexus, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a Toyota is "bad" and the Lexus is "good".

Gun owner's are free to buy any mfr. or gun model they feel meets their needs and criteria, with a price tag that reflects those.

I maintain that while Kel-Tec doesn't produce guns to the same quality level as say a SIG or a Ruger, they produce guns with generally enough quality and innovation to meet the needs of their customers while meeting a lower price point.

Ruger has plenty of innovation. Honestly,the only new to market firearms in the last couple of years that I've hadany interest in are Rugers. The 10/22 takedown, PC Carbine, the 8-shot .357 Redhawk, 10mm GP100, 9mm SP101, convertible single-actions...all building off proven designs but actually offering chamberings that people want.

The PC Carbine in particular is very innovative. Modular magazine wells that can adapt to different types of mags, and a takedown barrel and removable bolt face will accommodate easy caliber changes. A big part of the reason I bought mine is that I'm confident Ruger will be releasing all manner of options for this thing over the coming years.

Ruger is innovating in all the right places as far as I'm concerned. Kel-Tec, on the other hand, is pretty good at making kitchy plastic junk. I can't think of a single Kel-Tec firearm that I would keep if someone gave it to me. Rugers...I don't have the funds to buy all the ones I want.

Does Ruger have engineers?

They seem to only make things other people already do. I guess they're letting others do the R&D.

The LCP was pretty much a Kel-Tec.
LCP with sights, other people were making.
Take down 10/22, other people were making.
Alloy upper 22/45, other people were making.
480 Bisley, other people were making.
454 Bisley, other people were making.
44spl GP100, other people were making.
10mm GP100, other people were making.

You would be pretty lonely in a thread complaining about Rugers lacking inovation, reliability, strength, value or longevity. They didn't invent the wheel but they certainly perfected it.