Seriously, I've bought 3 new Rugers in the last year and all of them have needed "something" to get them working right. Bought my old lady an LC9, that POS had such a rough cut feed ramp that FMJ's would jam up on it with a disturbing amount of regularity. Had to polish the hell out of it to make it work right.  The Mrs. bought me a 22/45 LITE for my birthday because she knew I wanted a 22 pistol to teach my nieces/nephews with, and I wanted one with a threaded barrel to put a can on to make it fun for me. After 10 rounds the front sight fell off. The Mrs. decided she wanted to upgrade to the LC9 PRO because she hated the manual safety and wanted a faster trigger for follow up shots. I checked to make sure the feedramp was good on this one, and by god it was! She took it to the range to break it in: Every 3rd round it would only partially extract and the next round up would jam it into the hood crushing the brass. I'm never buying a Ruger again, idiots couldn't build a gun to save their lives.

Ok then.

I've bought three new Rugers in the last year and a half.  All have been perfect.  I think Ruger is making some of the best stuff they ever have.

Well if this is their best, I'd hate to see their worst!

I had to send my brand new single seven back because I had to drive the empty cases out of the cylinder with a mallet. They replaced the cylinder, but I haven't had a chance to see if the new one is better.

I've purchased two SR-556s, an SR-762, a 10/22 take down and a SR22 over the last few years.

All worked great out of the box except the 10/22. It failed to cycle occasionally.
It probably would have gotten better if I'd shot a few thousand rounds to break it in more, but I just put in a Kidd bolt and now all is well.

The fit and finish on the rifles is good. I see a lot of folks her whine about uppers and lowers not aligning correctly. All my SRs line up perfectly.

The SR22 has been a great little pistol. Never a misfire, works with any ammo I've put through it.

Can't speak for their autos. The revolvers iv bought recently have been fine. All the companies seem to compromising on quality control. The experience you had with ruger is similar to what happened to me with smith and wesson.

They're hit and miss.  I had a whole shipment of 10/22 takedowns that I had to return to Ruger because the front sights were falling off.  I also had a series of Ruger 1911s whose slide lock noses were too long, causing the slide lock to ride upward with a full magazine in, causing peening of the slide rails and failures to feed.
 

ETA: On the other hand, I also had an entire shipment of S&W SD40s whose sears wouldn't release the strikers at all, even at full trigger pull.  The sear was so rough that the striker would hang on it and not fall.  This was about 12 guns that had to be sent back.

The thing that really pisses me off is I WANT to like Ruger being made in America and what-not, I just can't seem to catch a break with them! I ended up replacing the front site on the 22/45 with a fiber optic one (which is much better than stock) but the PRO is a huge issue being it's the Mrs. off duty carry. I soaked the crap out of the slide in Slip 2000 EWL so hopefully it just was gummed up and that took care of it, I should have time tomorrow to take it to the range myself and figure out what the problem is. Luckily I kept my old BG380 as a backup so at least she has that.

So far 2 of 4 Ruger revolvers purchased new in the last 12 months have needed trips back to Ruger.

I think Ruger is putting out some of the best US-made products these days.  I have had all positive experiences, I am sorry to hear of your negative ones.  I do think it is true that all companies tend to be cutting QC these days.  As the old saying goes, they just don't make things like they used to.  I only have to compare my old school Marlin 336 to my friends new one he bought last year to see that.  It's unfortunate for sure, hope you have better experiences with your Rugers in the future.

UPDATE:

Apparently the PRO is just ammo sensitive, it jammed up once per magazine on me using UMC ammo, but not once with Winchester White box and Ranger 147gr bonded, some old Hornady critical defense I was burning up, or Federal HST. Apparently it just doesn't care for Remington brass...

I think they have room to improve. I bought a Mk3 Hunter that out of the box shot 10" groups at 7 yards. I shot a total of 100 inaccurate rounds and sent it back to Ruger. They returned it saying the barrel was heavily leaded and to clean it more often. After 2 boxes of ammo total. WTF.

Does it shoot better at least?

Back in the 60's and 70's, every Rooooger I purchased was well fitted, well finished, and worked great right out of the box.

I have not bought a Rooooger in the past ten years that didn't need something immediately.  Some have been small things, others have required smithing.

One doesn't so much "buy" a Rooooger any more.  Rather, one "adopts" a Roooooger and gives it the care and feeding necessary to bring it up to the shooter's requirements.  Most Rooooooogers I've gotten lately just stay in the box until they're delivered to the gunsmith.

Roooooogers QC seems focused on one question: "Are the spring rates sufficient to overcome the excessive tolerances of investment cast guns?".  So, if the gun goes bang, it passes QC.  Once you start opening them up and deal with the dimensional variations within and between guns, you realize quickly why Rooooooger is able to bring a product to market for the prices asked.

Not saying they're bad guns.  They can actually be the basis of good match pistols.  But, you must figure 2X the price you pay for the original gun to get them to this level of performance.  Lots of guys do that and are happy with the result.

The real benefit of Roooooooogers is that, once you get them running properly, they tend to run forever.  They are hell for stout once you get 'em working.  But, they don't come from the factory working well anymore.

Had a friend buy a 10/22 with the front sight visually off center.  I've got a mini 14 and a Redhawk that are both fine.