Leaked pics of the Ruger 1911

[Capbyrd]

What do you find that Ruger produces that is "mediocre"?

Their single actions, both fixed sight and adjustable sighted versions are well established as tough, accurate guns that many people, including Bowen use as the base for custom builds.

Their piston driven AR is one of the best on the market, and is by far the most affordable of the piston guns in the "they actually work" category.

Their 22 pistols are legendary for accuracy and durability.

Their double action wheelguns are very near indistructable.

The only product I might give you is their bolt guns. While not head and shoulders above the rest, they are at least on par with other decent makers.

At least in my opinion. So you make take it for what it's worth.

Indeed sir! Although the 77/22 is THE favorite 22 bolt gun in the suppressed world. If you mention integral and bolt together, the 77/22 will come up.

I'd also like to point out that the SR series is priced well below the competition and at least for me, delivers the same reliability that I expect from an Austrian or Croatian plastic piece.

[enfield]

Gollee - it looks just like a 1911. Whodathunkit?

[Guest Red5]

Love'em or Hate'em - You can say one thing about Ruger firearms....100% USA made.

I do believe some magazines on certain guns are European....so 99.96%

When I bought my 9c, I think I read on one of the reviews that the mags were made by Beretta.

As for Ruger, I'm in the "Love 'em" camp. They are rock solid and priced on par with comparable models.

[VERO1]

Gee! Another knock off!

[DaveTN]

It might target the bottom feeder market like Remington just did. Maybe they saw the prices people are paying for the junk out of the Philippines and decided that was an easy market.

[Guest bkelm18]

It might target the bottom feeder market like Remington just did. Maybe they saw the prices people are paying for the junk out of the Philippines and decided that was an easy market.

People pay those prices for the "junk" because they are well made firearms. They might not tickle your elitist sensibilities but my RIA was more reliable than my SW.

[kieefer]

Ruger makes it a practice to stamp their entire owner's manual on the slide of their pistols in very large font.

"Lawyer Language"

If Ruger has got a 1911 in the R&D Dept, I hope in time the options are as plentiful as the Mark's.

[Dolomite_supafly]

What do you find that Ruger produces that is "mediocre"?

Their single actions, both fixed sight and adjustable sighted versions are well established as tough, accurate guns that many people, including Bowen use as the base for custom builds.

Their piston driven AR is one of the best on the market, and is by far the most affordable of the piston guns in the "they actually work" category.

Their 22 pistols are legendary for accuracy and durability.

Their double action wheelguns are very near indistructable.

The only product I might give you is their bolt guns. While not head and shoulders above the rest, they are at least on par with other decent makers.

At least in my opinion. So you make take it for what it's worth.

I will give you this, some of their 22 pistols are worth the money. They are some of the better 22's on the market, as a matter of fact probably one of the best. And I never said they were unreliable or not durable. What I did say is for the money the accuarcy and, on some, the quality doesn't seem to be there.

The thing I chase the most is accuracy and most Rugers are not known for that and yes, their accuracy is mediocre. And even though they aren't as accurate as some other offerings I would still love to own a Ruger No 1. As I said before they are reliable guns but are far from the most accurate.

Dolomite

[Guest 5Legion]

I like Rugers but I already have a nice 1911 and a nice AR so I won't be getting either this pistol or an SR556, as good as they might be.

That said, I like Rugers, but too late on the ARs and 1911s IMO.

5L

[Ebow1]

I'm glad to see this. I like Rugers, I like the company, and the 1911 I have now I bought on a budget to plink and carry until it crapped out on me. Pending performance and prices, I think I just found its replacement.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Depending on where, what, when you read up on them, some are totally made and assembled in Brazil, some are partially assembled there, some from all imported parts here, whatever -- as you say, all frames come from there, etc. Lot of importation for an iconic American gun.

Frankly, I've always thought it was pretty poor form for a company to simply buy their name from a previous iconic US company to begin with. Half the folks out there think Springfield is the same company.

Didn't keep me from buying 3 XD's, though. Them Croats build a solid heater.

- OS

Good point, and it's still a good gun.

I probably ought to refer to my Springfield as "Imbel".

[Guest Ken45]

I call fake.

Unless the paragraph of safety warnings is on the other side of the slide...

I was thinking exactly the same thing, LOL.

I have never owned or shot a Ruger that I would consider better than any of its competitors, at least not without a ton of work and money.

Ruger SuperRedhawk, Security Six, Mk II. All great guns IMO. While the revolvers may not be significantly better than the S&W equivalents, they are less expensive and built better and don't have the stupid S&W locks. That alone makes them better

I haven't owned an SP-101 or GP-100 but I would assume the same there.

[323ssplt]

I will give you this, some of their 22 pistols are worth the money. They are some of the better 22's on the market, as a matter of fact probably one of the best. And I never said they were unreliable or not durable. What I did say is for the money the accuarcy and, on some, the quality doesn't seem to be there.

The thing I chase the most is accuracy and most Rugers are not known for that and yes, their accuracy is mediocre. And even though they aren't as accurate as some other offerings I would still love to own a Ruger No 1. As I said before they are reliable guns but are far from the most accurate.

Dolomite

Thanks for clarifying.

I will agree that in the past some of the Ruger products were not very accurate. However, it seems in recent years they have made a concerted effort to improve said accuracy. I know they revamped the mini 14 to improve accuracy, and I have to examples of newer bolt guns that are very accurate. I have one of their tactical 308 bolt guns that shoots 1/4 MOA all day with match grade ammo, and I recently purchased a stainless Hawkeye in 280 rem. that is shooting 3/4 MOA with good quality hunting ammo.

[McAllyn]

Yes, my post was complete sarcasm. I don't like to use smileys, so I could not express it that way.

I like Ruger firearms. I have (3) 10/22's and (5) MkII's and (1)22/45. I wouldn't shy away from any of their wheelguns or centerfire rifles either. Never particularly cared for any of their centerfire semi's, but that's just a preference, not that I found anything wrong with them.

I just second the notion expressed above that bringing a 1911 to the game 100 years late might be a bad call. There are already established manufacturers at all levels in the market, and establishing a foothold against some of them will be difficult to say the least. They do have the name to fall back on, but that's a double edged sword. If this 1911 performs well, then they could very well knock a couple of the smaller manufacturers down the ladder, but if it does not do well, it could effect their entire brand.

No one can be everything to everyone. I'll stick to DPMS AR's, Remington bolt guns, Smith wheelies, STI 1911's, Ruger rimfires, and Glock semi's. I appreciate manufacturers that pick a market and EXCEL.

Mac

Edited April 13, 2011 by McAllyn
I R bad speller

[Capbyrd]

I think its funny that people are saying Ruger is late to the game but everyone was jumping for joy when Remington announced their 1911.

[McAllyn]

FWIW, I think the same thing about Remington's 1911. Don't hate it, but not going to buy one just because it says Remington on the side.

Mac

[Jonnin]

With all the different makers of the 1911 out there I wonder if they thought a mediocre, high priced pistol would do well. I have never owned or shot a Ruger that I would consider better than any of its competitors, at least not without a ton of work and money. I suspect this pistol will be the same as every other offering they have, higher priced than anything it is designed to compete with yet no where near as nice as those same competitors. I am surprized it took them this long to make a this especially since the 1911 has been around for as long as it has.

Don't get me wrong, Ruger makes some very durable and reliable guns but the cost vs quality vs accuracy isn't there. They make good guns but the price they ask for them is more than what it should be considering what you get.

I know they haven't released a projected price but I suspect it is going to be well above any pistol that would be comparable to this.

Dolomite

Certain rugers are quite affordable and very well made, reliable guns. Their .22s for the most part are awesome (10/22, mark's, etc) and affordable. Their cheap 9 family & friends (P85/89 family and so forth) are rugged, reliable, and inexpensive (if a bit less than target-pistol accurate). Certain revolvers are good yet reasonable (others are insanely high priced). I don't think your blanket statement fits their whole product line at all, though they do have plenty of overpriced goods (lcp/lc9) and outright lemons (20 safetys on the LC9? 22 charger that costs MORE than the rifle version and is less accurate than the marks?! ).

Im sure the 1911 market will bear another model in the mix. Hopefully they made it a midrange gun, $750ish with ruger quality and hopefully good accuracy. Odds are, though, it won't be a must have item. I am honestly shocked we havent seen this from every maker, trying to cash in on some 100 year action, but so far its been a lot less 100 year stuff than I expected. WTB $200 kel tec p1911...

[Oh Shoot]

... While the revolvers may not be significantly better than the S&W equivalents, they are less expensive and built better and don't have the stupid S&W locks. That alone makes them better ...

Far as I know, all Ruger revolvers since a certain date (2004?) have an internal lock. It just happens to be inside the grip instead of behind the cylinder release. My SP101 and Blackhawk both have them.

- OS

------------------------

edit: revise that statement -- my BlackHawk has the lock, my SP101 does not.

The "Ruger J Frame" (LCR) has one.

Ruger's statement from:

http://ruger.com/safety/storageLocking.html

"By the end of 2005, all newly manufactured Ruger firearms will be shipped from the factory with a new external key-operated locking device. These will be California-approved firearms safety devices that meet the requirement of California Penal Code Section 12088 and the regulations issued thereunder.

The State of Maryland has mandated that all pistols and revolvers manufactured on or after January 1, 2003 must have an “integrated mechanical safety device” to be legally available for sale in Maryland. As a result, beginning in 2004, newly designed and manufactured Ruger pistols will be equipped with internal locks.

Maryland law also provides that pistols and revolvers manufactured before January 1, 2003 may be sold in Maryland after that date, even though they do not have an “integrated mechanical safety device," provided they are accompanied by an external lock. Please contact our Service Department for a list of serial numbers of pistols and revolvers manufactured before January 1, 2003."

I guess by "firearms" I guess they actually mean "handguns" only, though, as new rifles don't have them AFAIK.

Edited April 13, 2011 by OhShoot

[eapking]

I'm an S&W fan first and a Ruger fan 2nd. If they do come out with a 1911, I hope they don't bend over too far for Kalifornia like they did oin the LC9. Otherwise, I'll give it serious consideration.

[I_Like_Pie]

Ohshoot is right That is why the GP,SP and Super Redhawk guns wear Hogue grips from the factory....to accomidate the new lock.

....unlike the smiths the ruger revolver IL can easily be permanently defeated and will not affect the function or appearance of the gun.

[Mad_Squirrell]

I call fake.

Unless the paragraph of safety warnings is on the other side of the slide...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

Like this ?? found it on another forum thought it was funny thought id share

[Steelharp]

FWIW, I think the same thing about Remington's 1911. Don't hate it, but not going to buy one just because it says Remington on the side.

Mac

Lemme guess... you're THAT guy that would buy it if it said "DEMington," right?

[True Grit]

I wonder if it will be as hard to disassemble as the 22/45?

[Guest EYEMAN]

There are now 13 pages of post in a thread on this weapon in the Ruger Forum. Some have said they have contacted Ruger and Ruger has said they have no knowledge of the weapon or an intention of coming out with one. So, it might be as real as the warning on the slide that is posted previous on this thread. I probably wouldn't buy one if they did make it, for I think it would not be the calibre(not projectile diameter) of my Kimbers. For the handgun that it is, I love my SR9C. It has functioned flawlessly and it is probably the closest I want to get to a Ruger 1911.

[I_Like_Pie]

There are now 13 pages of post in a thread on this weapon in the Ruger Forum. Some have said they have contacted Ruger and Ruger has said they have no knowledge of the weapon or an intention of coming out with one.

That is the only thread I am allowing to occur there and we are zapping anything that shows leaked info or pictures. It is in the forum's best interest not to tick the folks at Ruger off.

We will know in a week or so who is right.