Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/24/2017 4:44:23 PM
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 10/23/2004 8:55:37 AM EST


Hi

I have heard some rumors that the tooling for the Mini-14 has been worn out and that Ruger now is replacing it.
From what i have heard they will do a couple of modifications to the Mini-14 during the replacing of the tools can anyone confirm these rumors and what modifications are they planning to do??
A thicker barrell would be nice to see....

/Magnus
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 9:17:49 AM EST
I think this an urban legend. There was a rumor going around during the pre-ban period that Ruger was redesigning the Mini-14 to accept only their five round magazines.

Then there was a another rumor a couple of years ago that the new Mini-14's would not accept high capacity magazines.

I'll start believing it when I see it in an official Ruger press release.

Dennis Jenkins


Originally Posted By magnus308:

Hi

I have heard some rumors that the tooling for the Mini-14 has been worn out and that Ruger now is replacing it.
From what i have heard they will do a couple of modifications to the Mini-14 during the replacing of the tools can anyone confirm these rumors and what modifications are they planning to do??
A thicker barrell would be nice to see....

/Magnus

Link Posted: 10/23/2004 9:18:15 AM EST
Is it possible to polish a turd? Sorry, the devil made me say it.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 12:23:21 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 2:30:51 PM EST
My predications:

1: A super-size loaded chamber indicator about 4-inches long, that automatically renders the weapon useless when loaded..

2: An internal fixed four round magazine to prevent use of standard capacity magazines.

3. An internal key locking safety that must be unlocked before each shot.

4. Tactical light rail welded with a steel plate welded in front of it to prohibit use of an aftermarket bayonet lug or LEO flashlights.

5. Available only in Non-military calibers like .22 rimfire blanks, roll caps, and revolver caps.

6. A three page write-up in Guns and Ammo, and how happy the writer is he's going to keep his Mini-14.




I would be very anxious to see what another company could do with the design to make it more “M-14 like”. It needs a chrome lined barrel, and better (available) magazines, and a two stage trigger. If that happened, my AR’s would be covered in dust.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 4:54:59 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/23/2004 4:57:30 PM EST by Dawg180]

Originally Posted By tfod:
My predications:

1: A super-size loaded chamber indicator about 4-inches long, that automatically renders the weapon useless when loaded..

2: An internal fixed four round magazine to prevent use of standard capacity magazines.

3. An internal key locking safety that must be unlocked before each shot.

4. Tactical light rail welded with a steel plate welded in front of it to prohibit use of an aftermarket bayonet lug or LEO flashlights.

5. Available only in Non-military calibers like .22 rimfire blanks, roll caps, and revolver caps.

6. A three page write-up in Guns and Ammo, and how happy the writer is he's going to keep his Mini-14.




I would be very anxious to see what another company could do with the design to make it more “M-14 like”. It needs a chrome lined barrel, and better (available) magazines, and a two stage trigger. If that happened, my AR’s would be covered in dust.



7. The heat of Bill Rugers soul burning in gun rights hell used create the forgings.

In all reality, beef up that soda straw of a barrel and make it take M16 magazines. While they are at it they should improve the MKII pistol so you don't have to jiggle that stupid f**king lever into place every time you reassemble it.

Sorry, I once wasted an entire afternoon trying to help my brother reassmbel his new MKII. I was not a big fan of Ruger after that!
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:33:08 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:38:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By raf:
....starting a business and taking it to the head of its industry.



Ruger is ahead of who? Who are the top ten? Source? Criteria?
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:46:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dawg180:

Originally Posted By tfod:
My predications:

1: A super-size loaded chamber indicator about 4-inches long, that automatically renders the weapon useless when loaded..

2: An internal fixed four round magazine to prevent use of standard capacity magazines.

3. An internal key locking safety that must be unlocked before each shot.

4. Tactical light rail welded with a steel plate welded in front of it to prohibit use of an aftermarket bayonet lug or LEO flashlights.

5. Available only in Non-military calibers like .22 rimfire blanks, roll caps, and revolver caps.

6. A three page write-up in Guns and Ammo, and how happy the writer is he's going to keep his Mini-14.




I would be very anxious to see what another company could do with the design to make it more “M-14 like”. It needs a chrome lined barrel, and better (available) magazines, and a two stage trigger. If that happened, my AR’s would be covered in dust.



7. The heat of Bill Rugers soul burning in gun rights hell used create the forgings.

In all reality, beef up that soda straw of a barrel and make it take M16 magazines. While they are at it they should improve the MKII pistol so you don't have to jiggle that stupid f**king lever into place every time you reassemble it.

Sorry, I once wasted an entire afternoon trying to help my brother reassmbel his new MKII. I was not a big fan of Ruger after that!



Forgings?

You aren't talking about a roogler. They're all cast junk.
Bill roogler's soul should burning in the casting furnace fires of hell.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:51:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By raf:
....starting a business and taking it to the head of its industry.



Ruger is ahead of who? Who are the top ten? Source? Criteria?




I think you have the wrong impression about Ruger. They do not JUST MFG firearms.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:53:15 PM EST

Originally Posted By FatCobra:

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By raf:
....starting a business and taking it to the head of its industry.



Ruger is ahead of who? Who are the top ten? Source? Criteria?




I think you have the wrong impression about Ruger. They do not JUST MFG firearms.



Funny, we are talking about a FIREARM that Ruger manufacturers. We can expand the scope, but those would be separate markets that a group of gunnuts may or may not care about.....

Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:54:15 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 5:57:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By raf:

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By raf:
....starting a business and taking it to the head of its industry.



Ruger is ahead of who? Who are the top ten? Source? Criteria?




Ruger is the largest domestic firearms manufacturer. By quite a margin, actually. It is also never operated at a loss, unlike a number of existing firearms companies. Read "Industry Report" in "Gun Week", any firearms trade publication, or the annual BATFE summaries of firearms produced by manufacturer. You did not know this? No kidding?



Ruger's 'market position' is due to 2 products:

10/22

MkII series
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:03:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/23/2004 6:03:26 PM EST by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By raf:

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By raf:
....starting a business and taking it to the head of its industry.



Ruger is ahead of who? Who are the top ten? Source? Criteria?




Ruger is the largest domestic firearms manufacturer. By quite a margin, actually. It is also never operated at a loss, unlike a number of existing firearms companies. Read "Industry Report" in "Gun Week", any firearms trade publication, or the annual BATFE summaries of firearms produced by manufacturer. You did not know this? No kidding?



Snippy tripe bullshit.....how typical.

From their 2003 Annual Report:


Company Overview
Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. (the “Company”) is
principally engaged in the design, manufacture, and sale
of firearms and precision investment castings. The
Company’s design and manufacturing operations are
located in the United States. Substantially all sales are
domestic.
The Company is the only U.S. firearms manufacturer
which offers products in all four industry product categories—
rifles, shotguns, pistols, and revolvers. The
Company’s firearms are sold through a select number
of independent wholesale distributors principally to the
commercial sporting market.
Investment castings manufactured are of titanium
and steel alloys. Investment castings are sold either
directly to or through manufacturers’ representatives to
companies in a wide variety of industries.
Because many of its competitors are not subject to
public filing requirements and industry-wide data is
generally not available in a timely manner, the Company
is unable to compare its performance to specific current
industry trends. Instead, the Company measures itself
against its own historical results.

The Company does not consider its overall firearms
business to be predictably seasonal; however, sales of
certain models of firearms are usually lower in the third
quarter of the year.



They don't compare themselves because they feel the comaparsions may be inaccurate, but of course the layman may choose to do so at his leisure. Thanks for providing the comparison.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:05:13 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:14:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/23/2004 6:16:08 PM EST by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By raf:

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By raf:
....starting a business and taking it to the head of its industry.



Ruger is ahead of who? Who are the top ten? Source? Criteria?




Ruger is the largest domestic firearms manufacturer. By quite a margin, actually. It is also never operated at a loss, unlike a number of existing firearms companies. Read "Industry Report" in "Gun Week", any firearms trade publication, or the annual BATFE summaries of firearms produced by manufacturer. You did not know this? No kidding?



Ruger Financial Data

Note: 2003 $147.9M Annual Sales -- 2003 $12.4M Net Income

Remington Financial Data

Note: 2003 $383.1M Annual Sales -- 2003 $13.7 Net Income

That is just picking one competitor. Maybe they are tops in NUMBER of firearms manufactured, but then again Kia may lead that for the car sector, but you wouldn't buy a Kia either.........

BTW, I tend to like Rugers....so save your tripe attacks for others. I'm just not sure that characterizing them as "head of their industry" is the way I would put it.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:22:00 PM EST
Ruger firearms could eaisly be described as quality and robust. Comparing them to a KIA is not even close. You would NEVER describe a KIA in that manner. The only legitimate reason ANYONE has to slam Ruger is their former Presidents (Bill) politics, and even that would be a questionable stance.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:29:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/23/2004 6:30:28 PM EST by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By FatCobra:
Ruger firearms could eaisly be described as quality and robust. Comparing them to a KIA is not even close. You would NEVER describe a KIA in that manner. The only legitimate reason ANYONE has to slam Ruger is their former Presidents (Bill) politics, and even that would be a questionable stance.



My point, is that a manufacturer can lead the sector in which they participate, in PRODUCTION and unit sales, but be at the middle, bottom, or top in sales depending on price point. In financial terms, this would be a good start and show a stable business base, but the real "bottom line" is total annual sales and net income and by extension, earnings per share if the company is public. My example of KIA is talking directly to the Mini-14 which I have universally disliked.

The total annual sales of Remington is over twice that of Ruger, with a higher net income. While not very efficient the sales and income speak for themselves.

All that being said, I love their revolvers and I really like their bolt rifles. In fact I am considering one of those 22lr/22mag single action revolvers.
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:51:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/23/2004 6:55:45 PM EST by raf]
Link Posted: 10/23/2004 6:56:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By raf:

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:
BTW, I tend to like Rugers....so save your tripe attacks for others. I'm just not sure that characterizing them as "head of their industry" is the way I would put it.



For some reason, perhaps because of some differences of opinion in the past, you seem to feel that my remarks were some sort of attack.

Please allow me to assure that that was not my intention.

As far as Ruger is concerned, as I recall, the "head of Industry" remark was based on total number of firearms, of all categories, produced within a given year.

As you note above, their total sales were half that of Remington within the same period. However, that stat does not quantify Remington's sales, which extend far beyond firearms.



Yes, it's obvious that we were talking about different angles of qualifying "head of the industry".

As to total annual sales not breaking out firearms, does it really matter? It doesn't to me. The MAIN industry for both is firearms manufacture. Ruger could/can engage in other revenue generation, such as others in the industry do. My background leads me to the figures I quoted, you were obviously considering other criteria -- hence my HONEST, INNOCENT and FIRST question.

As to the last issue:

Your comments in dissention are almost always condscending, which is fine with me, so long as my rebuttal of same is OK with you.

Link Posted: 10/23/2004 7:02:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By raf:
Originally Posted By Dave_A:
Ruger's 'market position' is due to 2 products:

10/22

MkII series



Now, DaveA, how can that be? Why we have above testimony from one of our members that he and his brother could not re-assemble a MK II pistol in an entire afternoon. How can Ruger possibly sell so many of these infernal devices once word gets out?

AHHH! I get it! The volume in sales is accounted for by the fact that users of the pistol have to buy a new one once they realize they cannot re-assemble their old one. [/quote

The same reason that people buy 30-30 lever rifles for deer hunting...

Dad's first guns were a 10/22 and a MkII, so when it's his son's turn...
Link Posted: 10/24/2004 10:08:24 AM EST
Regardless of what you think, Ruger makes some pretty damn good firearms. Their revolvers are some of the strongest available, and are just as nice as more expensive S&W or Colt revolvers. Their 10/22 is one of the most popular .22s ever produced, as is their Mark I/II pistols. Rifles are also very good, especially the No. 1 series. What about shotguns? I have handled few guns that feel better than a 20ga Red Label. The P95 is one of the strongest pistols made, and I would put it up against a Glock or Sig any day in terms of reliability. While the Mini-14 isn't the most accurate gun, they are still very reliable.

I really don't understand the negative attitudes and attacks on Ruger. High cap magazines will be offered by other companies, so complaining about 10rd mags from Ruger is pretty much a moot point. Its kind of like the Hesse/Vulcan bashing threads. If you don't like the product, don't buy it. Pretty simple, huh?

Ruger offers a broad range of guns and good prices, and their customer service department is top notch. Try that with Colt.

Link Posted: 10/24/2004 11:22:15 AM EST
It's like a buncha damned WOMEN arguing over drapes in here. Enough of this hen house bullshit. When we were in 3rd grade we used to put down our buddies dad's car because it was a Chevy or Ford or whatever. Those of us who were farm-boys quibbled over John Deeres vs. Farmalls and so-forth. Now, do we have to apply the same mentality to each other's guns?

horse.gif
Link Posted: 10/24/2004 12:26:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2004 12:28:10 PM EST by raf]
Link Posted: 10/24/2004 12:36:32 PM EST
I like Ruger revolvers. Their rifles are OK, for sporters only, I have switched to Sako though. I don't like any of their rifles save the 10/22, and that one is second to an AR dedicated for .22. Their O/U shotguns seems OK, but I like my Franchi. The MK2 22/45 is a nice piece, but with all that MK3 crap I'll never buy one of those. I don't like their centerfire autoloading pistols.

Link Posted: 10/24/2004 5:02:08 PM EST
I have a Ruger MKII and it is a good product on its own.

Neither the mini-14 nor the 10/22 would have ever been as successful without other companies producing the accessories. Ruger which still silently seeks to avoid selling 20-30rnd magazines for the mini-14 owes many sales to aftermarket magazine companies, especially the old PMI. The 10/22 became legendary because people would buy the rifles and keep the receivers. After market magazines also aided the sale of 10/22’s.

Now that the betrayer is dead, I am considering buying Ruger products again.
Top Top