why did ruger stop making their BP revolver?

[lee2]

anyone have one of these?

 

[Slimjim]

I do.

 

[K31]

I do but it was lost in a canoing accident with all my other firearms.

Ruger seems to want to enter into already crowded markets rather than make well-made and unique firearms any longer. Maybe it's good business but maybe not, how many single actions, number ones Old Armies, mini 14s were sold?

 

[BenL]

anyone have one of these?

Because they were $$$ compared to competitors.

Yes, they were much better quality, but at 3 times the price, their market was very limited.

 

[K31]

Because they were $$$ compared to competitors.

Yes, they were much better quality, but at 3 times the price, their market was very limited.

1. They didn't really have, and still don't, a true equal. They are not a reproduction of anything like 99% of the rest of the market. The other 1% is just a reproduction plus some alteration such as a longer or shorter barrel or target sights.

2. They never cost 3 times as much as a reproduction with comparable features, such as an all-steel frame and top strap, the closest thing being a Remington 1858 clone. If you want to compare apples and apples.

3. They win more matches than any other comparable pistol so they are worth extra money.

 

[zoostation]

Plus they were running out of space for warning labels.

 

[gunconnection]

Plus they were running out of space for warning labels.

 

[BenL]

1. They didn't really have, and still don't, a true equal. They are not a reproduction of anything like 99% of the rest of the market. The other 1% is just a reproduction plus some alteration such as a longer or shorter barrel or target sights.

2. They never cost 3 times as much as a reproduction with comparable features, such as an all-steel frame and top strap, the closest thing being a Remington 1858 clone. If you want to compare apples and apples.

3. They win more matches than any other comparable pistol so they are worth extra money.

Oh, no doubt there were worth the money; I guess what I'm saying is that for the passive BP pistol shooter shopping for a BP pistol just to futz around with, they were expensive. You can get a Traditions for ~$200, and the Rugers I saw were generally around $600. I'm not saying they are the same; I'm saying they're both BP, and for most guys looking for a BP pistol just to goof around with, the Traditions is "good enough".

ETA: if anyone's in the market for one, there's a used stainless on gunbroker that is only at a $200 bid. (still has 6 days, though)

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=167123719

 

[K31]

Oh, no doubt there were worth the money; I guess what I'm saying is that for the passive BP pistol shooter shopping for a BP pistol just to futz around with, they were expensive. You can get a Traditions for ~$200, and the Rugers I saw were generally around $600. I'm not saying they are the same; I'm saying they're both BP, and for most guys looking for a BP pistol just to goof around with, the Traditions is "good enough".

Well, if that's the reason they stopped making them then Lexus, BMW, Mercedes... should stop making cars.

 

[BWomble]

Simple, lack of sales revenue.

 

[Threeband]

Well, if that's the reason they stopped making them then Lexus, BMW, Mercedes... should stop making cars.

There are millions upon millions of mainstream people around the world who would love to have a "Lexus, BMW, Mercedes".

The Ruger Old Army was a specialty product aimed at a tiny niche within a small niche market.


Also, cars wear out, and are replaced frequently.

Well made guns can last for generations, and be repeatedly resold from user to user. So new production has to compete against 30 year old production.


Ruger stopped making them because they decided, rightly or wrongly, that there was little or no further profit to be had from continuing production.

 

[K31]

There are millions upon millions of mainstream people around the world who would love to have a "Lexus, BMW, Mercedes".

There are a lot of mainstream BP shooters who would rather have a Old Army than a $200 brass framed revolver.

The Ruger Old Army was a specialty product aimed at a tiny niche within a small niche market.

How would you classify the Ruger Number 1? A single six? Mini-14? Ruger was in the niche market business aside from the 10/22.

Also, cars wear out, and are replaced frequently.

Well made guns can last for generations, and be repeatedly resold from user to user. So new production has to compete against 30 year old production.

And Ruger was making cowboy action versions with fixed sights, shorter barrels etc.

Ruger stopped making them because they decided, rightly or wrongly, that there was little or no further profit to be had from continuing production.

Maybe, but I'll wait and see how much demand there is for another AR platform. I've been watching one sitting on Gunbroker for months now.

 

[Jim Keenan]

You get one guess why any product gets dropped. If you guessed anything but "lack of sales", you are wrong. Part of the problem was that the Ruger just didn't look like a "Civil War" gun, which is what 99.99% of percussion revolver buyers want. It is hard to play R.E. Lee or Jeb Stuart when your "iron" is stainless steel.

Jim

 

[K31]

You get one guess why any product gets dropped. If you guessed anything but "lack of sales", you are wrong.

Just like New Coke.

Part of the problem was that the Ruger just didn't look like a "Civil War" gun, which is what 99.99% of percussion revolver buyers want. It is hard to play R.E. Lee or Jeb Stuart when your "iron" is stainless steel.

Jim

Not all percussion revolver buyers are Civil War recreators. It is a very popular revolver in BP revolver competitions because it wins more matches than any other. As to not "looking like" a civil war gun, what part? Except for the match sights that you could buy it without, every part could be found on some gun from that era.

There are also many people who either hunt with them or carry one as a backup during muzzleloader hunting seasons. For them, stainless steel is not an esoteric choice. It's also a lot easier to clean up which is perhaps why a lot of Civil war "looking" guns are also made in stainless like the Remington 1858.

 

[GNLaFrance]

As to not "looking like" a civil war gun, what part? Except for the match sights that you could buy it without, every part could be found on some gun from that era.

It doesn't "markedly resemble" anything from the period, which is the standard for an organization that tries to be as authentic as possible. The closest thing the Ruger Old Army resembles is a Whitney revolver on steroids, but the Whitney wasn't that common and there was no .44 caliber version.

 

[travistheone]

I think there is one up at duffys

 

[K31]

It doesn't "markedly resemble" anything from the period, which is the standard for an organization that tries to be as authentic as possible. The closest thing the Ruger Old Army resembles is a Whitney revolver on steroids, but the Whitney wasn't that common and there was no .44 caliber version.

I'm not suggesting anyone is, or should try to, pass it off as a replica, I'm only addressing his statement that it doesn't look like a civil war period revolver. His contention seems to be that no one wants a BP revolver except for re-creators.

There are plenty of other examples of revolvers based on actual firearms that have features and finishes never found on period guns and I haven't seen all of them suddenly cease production.

 

[GNLaFrance]

I'm not suggesting anyone is, or should try to, pass it off as a replica, I'm only addressing his statement that it doesn't look like a civil war period revolver. His contention seems to be that no one wants a BP revolver except for re-creators.

And he's right, it doesn't look like a period revolver. We're dealing with a matter of perspective, here; to you, if it's a cap 'n' ball black powder revolver, it's okay; to me (and NCOWS), it has to look very much like one that existed and was widely used during the period. Lots of people besides reenactors want BP revolvers; the great majority of reenactors want ones that look like they fit the period.

There are plenty of other examples of revolvers based on actual firearms that have features and finishes never found on period guns and I haven't seen all of them suddenly cease production.

And I haven't seen them on the reenacting fields or at WAS matches. The farbiest one I've seen was carried by an artillery officer at Waterford, VA; it was an 1851 Navy Colt pattern that chambered and fired brass-cased blank cartridges. Of course, Waterford is a farbfest anyway, and this officer and his crew were low-level mainstream, so they fit right in with the general zeitgeist of the event.

 

[Threeband]

A significant bloc of serious competitive shooters are NSSA (North-South Skirmish Association.) Rugers are not NSSA approved for competition.

Face it- there is not a sufficient market for them. It's called "economics", also known as "reality".


If you disagree, put up the money to manufacture a couple thousand.

 

[K31]

A significant bloc of serious competitive shooters are NSSA (North-South Skirmish Association.) Rugers are not NSSA approved for competition.

Their governance is probably composed of a bunch of old timers who bought inferior replica-type guns and are afraid of honest competition.

Face it- there is not a sufficient market for them. It's called "economics", also known as "reality".


If you disagree, put up the money to manufacture a couple thousand.

Can you convince Ruger to sell them to me for it it costs them to manufacture them? Afterall, they already have the tooling and some parts from their single action line.

Better yet, since there's an insufficient market why not give just give me a dollar for everyone sold in the next year if you disagree?