I don't know if this counts as gunblogging...
But Ruger. Yeah, the Ruger guys who design their automatics? GREAT job, guys, on shootability. Those (in my experience) are some seriously nice guns.
I've used them to teach several newbies; they're really great.
But you really ought to break one down and clean it once in a while... in case you haven't, it's a PAIN IN THE ASS.
No, I'm not saying Ruger design engineers should be up against the wall... they might be better shots than I am.
But guys, please... try breaking them down and cleaning them once in a while, and then study the designs by Saint John Moses Browning. And learn something. Please.
I've used them to teach several newbies; they're really great.
But you really ought to break one down and clean it once in a while... in case you haven't, it's a PAIN IN THE ASS.
No, I'm not saying Ruger design engineers should be up against the wall... they might be better shots than I am.
But guys, please... try breaking them down and cleaning them once in a while, and then study the designs by Saint John Moses Browning. And learn something. Please.
posted by Aaron Neal at 11:26 PM
2 Comments:
They must have their revolver engineers at a different plant, because their revolvers are a dream to disassemble, and they take down farther for better cleaning than any of their competitors do (in a detailed field strip).
I don't own any Ruger autos, but I do note that they copied the design of the Kel-Tec p3AT in their LCP, and the P3AT is likely the easiest semi-auto to take down.
The Ruger P-85 (9mm) has a hidden, secret catch to take it down - and you PROBABLY won't find it without the owner's manual.
The Ruger MKII .22 is just an overly-complicated PITA to take down for cleaning, and also overly-complicated to reassemble. IMHO, orientation of the gun (to use gravity to put pieces in place) should not be part of an assembly process.
I repeat, both guns are dreams to shoot. They are just both a PITA to maintain.
(Bitch, Gripe, Moan, Complain done)
Post a Comment
<< Home