Old Bill is rolling over in his grave

[buckandaquarterquarterstaff 5]

Clean your gun every 500 rounds or so, and buy a $700 AR.

 

With Ruger's recent spike in recalls and lousy customer service, their claims of legendary reliability are running quite thin.

[Ronswin 26]

For the last week or so, Ruger.com has been hinting that a new firearm is coming.

 

Well, today, ol' Bill is doing a 6500 RPM roll . . . .

 

 

There was evidently a trade show today somewhere and this was announced:

 

 

 

 

 

If they can sell these at a reasonable price point, they're gonna sell the sh** out of 'em.

 

Edited to add:

 

The site just went live a few minutes ago: http://www.ruger.com/SR556/

 

MSRP $1995.00 !!!! (looks like they're gonna be keeping a lot of 'em)

 

Knowing Ruger's quality control, the Ruger Customer Service Department has probably already drafted the Recall Notice for the Ruger 556 and just waiting for the release date to send it out!

[aresv 49]

At least it's a new Ruger that's not made of plastic But honestly if I wanted a turnkey AR from a big name manufacturer, I would look no farther than S&W.

[nalioth 405]

At least it's a new Ruger that's not made of plastic But honestly if I wanted a turnkey AR from a big name manufacturer, I would look no farther than S&W.

. . . which isn't even made by S&W.

[superA 289]

At least it's a new Ruger that's not made of plastic But honestly if I wanted a turnkey AR from a big name manufacturer, I would look no farther than S&W.

. . . which isn't even made by S&W.

 

 

 

 

Superior Arms, correct?

[nalioth 405]

At least it's a new Ruger that's not made of plastic But honestly if I wanted a turnkey AR from a big name manufacturer, I would look no farther than S&W.

. . . which isn't even made by S&W.

 

 

 

 

Superior Arms, correct?

I heard DPMS.

 

Bottom line: S&W don't make 'em.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

At least it's a new Ruger that's not made of plastic But honestly if I wanted a turnkey AR from a big name manufacturer, I would look no farther than S&W.

. . . which isn't even made by S&W.

 

 

 

 

Superior Arms, correct?

I heard DPMS.

 

Bottom line: S&W don't make 'em.

 

Got any links to where you heard that DPMS is making S&W AR's?

 

CMT/Stag used to make most of the parts for S&W when the M&P15's started coming out. But that stopped quite awhile ago. I've heard that since then, S&W is indeed making their own AR parts (or at least the majority of them).

 

I've definitely never heard that DPMS is making the M&P15's for them.

Edited June 10, 2009 by 22_Shooter

[Ronswin 26]

This I found at Answers . Com:

 

In January 2006, Smith & Wesson entered into the AR-15 market with its M&P15 series of rifles. Unveiled at SHOT Show 2006, the rifle debuted in two varieties; the M&P15 and the M&P15T. Both are basically the same rifle, chambered in 5.56 NATO, with the T model featuring folding sights and a four-sided accessories rail. At its debut, the M&P15's suggested retail price was $1,200, while the M&P15T retailed for $1,700. Their current line consists of four models, ranging in price from $1,049 to $2,200. These rifles were first produced by Stag Arms, but marketed under the Smith & Wesson name.[9] Currently Smith & Wesson makes the lower receiver in house while the barrel is supplied by Thompson/Center, an S&W company.

 

In May 2008, Smith and Wesson introduced their first AR-variant rifle in a caliber other than 5.56 NATO. The M&P15R is a standard AR platform rifle chambered for the 5.45x39mm cartridge.[10]

 

Smith And Wesson

[22_Shooter 1,560]

This I found at Answers . Com:

 

In January 2006, Smith & Wesson entered into the AR-15 market with its M&P15 series of rifles. Unveiled at SHOT Show 2006, the rifle debuted in two varieties; the M&P15 and the M&P15T. Both are basically the same rifle, chambered in 5.56 NATO, with the T model featuring folding sights and a four-sided accessories rail. At its debut, the M&P15's suggested retail price was $1,200, while the M&P15T retailed for $1,700. Their current line consists of four models, ranging in price from $1,049 to $2,200. These rifles were first produced by Stag Arms, but marketed under the Smith & Wesson name.[9] Currently Smith & Wesson makes the lower receiver in house while the barrel is supplied by Thompson/Center, an S&W company.

 

In May 2008, Smith and Wesson introduced their first AR-variant rifle in a caliber other than 5.56 NATO. The M&P15R is a standard AR platform rifle chambered for the 5.45x39mm cartridge.[10]

 

Smith And Wesson

 

That info pretty much goes with what I thought. I guess they used to get their BCG's from LMT. Not sure where they're getting them now, or if they're making those in-house too.

[broadkil 0]

Then again, a piston driven AR for 1995, is that expensive?

Yeah, for what it is, it's way overpriced.

 

With Ruger's manufacturing capabilities, a sub-$1000 AR of this type AR would have cornered the market and still made money for Ruger.

 

Absolutely. Otherwise why not just get the SIG? It's cheaper by several hundred dollars.

 

I guess we'll have to see but Ruger seems to have screwed the pooch on that price point.

 

or my thought is...why the high cost for the ar-15 with pistion drvie when you can get a kel tec su-16 for easily under $600

hell they have a kit to make a su-16e with a m4 stock and the PLR-16 pistol grip....

i agree.. ruger making an AR type rifle is a little underwhelming.

in my minds eye id like to have seen a mini 14 with a AR mag well and a better desighend floating barrel and stock combo.

or hell if they would make a SKS type rifle that would retail for less than $500 would be a great way to go. IMO

[22_Shooter 1,560]

Then again, a piston driven AR for 1995, is that expensive?

Yeah, for what it is, it's way overpriced.

 

With Ruger's manufacturing capabilities, a sub-$1000 AR of this type AR would have cornered the market and still made money for Ruger.

 

Absolutely. Otherwise why not just get the SIG? It's cheaper by several hundred dollars.

 

I guess we'll have to see but Ruger seems to have screwed the pooch on that price point.

 

People are getting the Ruger in their hands now, and are reporting paying $1,500. $1995 is the retail, and we all know, end users never end up paying MSRP.

 

If you start adding up all the things it comes with, the actual price people are paying is not bad at all, IMO. (Still too rich for my blood )

 

It comes with a Hogue grip ($15), 3 PMags ($45), Troy front/rear Battlesights ($250 for the set), Troy rails ($250) and lastly, it's piston driven (let's figure $350ish for a piston conversion kit). That's a tad over $900, just in the included accessories alone.

 

If you were start with a quality DI-operated AR, and add on those parts, you'd be WELL above Ruger's asking price.

 

Obviously, this is a brand new product from a company that hasn't been in the AR game, so who knows if there's going to be any "bugs" to work out. But putting that aside...........for what you're getting, the price is good, IMO. There's no way this could have been "a sub-$1000 AR".........ya know, if they intended to make any money.

[aresv 49]

At least it's a new Ruger that's not made of plastic But honestly if I wanted a turnkey AR from a big name manufacturer, I would look no farther than S&W.

. . . which isn't even made by S&W.

 

Superior Arms, correct?

I heard DPMS.

 

Bottom line: S&W don't make 'em.

 

Doesn't matter. Everybody makes everybody else's stuff these days. I only meant that if I had to place an order for a bunch of complete AR rifles (say, for a police department) I'd go to S&W. For a personal rifle I'd just order the parts online and built one myself. No need to take it through official channels.

 

Anyway... I didn't realize the new Ruger rifle was piston. Bandwagon jumping much?

[let4570 0]

For the last week or so, Ruger.com has been hinting that a new firearm is coming.

 

Well, today, ol' Bill is doing a 6500 RPM roll . . . .

 

 

There was evidently a trade show today somewhere and this was announced:

 

 

 

 

 

If they can sell these at a reasonable price point, they're gonna sell the sh** out of 'em.

 

Edited to add:

 

The site just went live a few minutes ago: http://www.ruger.com/SR556/

 

MSRP $1995.00 !!!! (looks like they're gonna be keeping a lot of 'em)

 

Just wanted to say I have never been a fan of the AR platform or the .223 for a combat rifle. I prefer the 308 with 150 to 180 grain bullet that will put an enemy down with one shot and keep him down. The .223 55 grain is too under powered for combat. I have a CBS video News Clip showing a Major who served two tours in Nam talking about how our troops were having to hit Insurgents 6 to 8 times to bring them down with the .223 FMJ. For those who think the .223 is a good combat round I challenge you to do the following. This hunting season take a .223 rifle with you and one Full Metal jacket 55 grain bullet to your favorite hunting ground. Now I challenge you to shoot the deer thru the lungs only behind the shoulder one time and see if you drop that deer in his tracks. I garrantee you that deer will die somewhere far away from where you shot him. The point I am trying to make is that if it won't drop a deer quickly it won't drop an enemy either. During WWII the 30/06 Garand would drop an enemy with one shot and keep him down. When an enemy is aiming an RPG at your Hummvee and all your buddies seconds count. If you do not drop that enemy with one shot he may have time to pull the trigger on that RPG. Most State Hunting regulations forbid using full metal jacket bullets for hunting simply because they do not kill well or quickly other than a head or heart shot. I will take any 308 any day over the .223. and the issue about being able to carry more rounds with the .223 well duh you do not need all those extra rounds with the 308..one shot one kill. My Saiga 308 carbine will throw a 180 grain soft point which pacts one hell of a wallop! You know when our local law engages enemies they are free to use hollow point ammo of their choosing for quick kills but our Troops have to use Full Metal Jacket garbage that does not kill quickly because of some Geneva or Hague Convention that no one obeys but the US. If I was a soldier I would probably be Court Marshalled soon for grinding the tips of my bullets down until the lead was exposed so it would expand and actually kill an enemy with one shot!

 

lthomas2

[banshee 69]

I have been reading on AR15.com about excessive receiver wear due to carrier tilt in as little as 400 rds. It appears that Ruger hasn't figured out how to get rid of it in piston ARs either.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

I have been reading on AR15.com about excessive receiver wear due to carrier tilt in as little as 400 rds. It appears that Ruger hasn't figured out how to get rid of it in piston ARs either.

 

I thought they beveled the back edge of the BCG to combat this . I guess it didn't work.

[banshee 69]

I have been reading on AR15.com about excessive receiver wear due to carrier tilt in as little as 400 rds. It appears that Ruger hasn't figured out how to get rid of it in piston ARs either.

 

I thought they beveled the back edge of the BCG to combat this . I guess it didn't work.

 

must not have worked, The poster claims this is after 400 rds

 

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&...18&t=449061

 

 

 

 

 

 

another poster's Ruger

 

 

Edited June 27, 2009 by Banshee

[22_Shooter 1,560]

Damn. I hope they get this figured out.

 

That's a decent amount of wear/rounds down the tube. More than I'd rather see on my $1,500 gun after 400 rounds!